D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 What's more likely? Getting a top 10 QB, or finding an OC who can work with the deficiency of talent on offense? Finding the OC for sure.
C.Biscuit97 Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 What's more likely? Getting a top 10 QB, or finding an OC who can work with the deficiency of talent on offense? Well said Dork. That's been my problem all along with Hackett. Too many players have regressed. Could Hackett be a top OC with Rodgers? Of course but how is that good coaching. The offensive coaches failed to develop Manuel so far (Hackett being his QB coach and OC was awful), the oline has seriously regressed, and the use of Spiller was so misguided. At some point when you struggle to score 17 points consistently in a league that begs you to score, it's a major problem. Especially when you have a SB caliber defense.
Gordio Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 Well said Dork. That's been my problem all along with Hackett. Too many players have regressed. Could Hackett be a top OC with Rodgers? Of course but how is that good coaching. The offensive coaches failed to develop Manuel so far (Hackett being his QB coach and OC was awful), the oline has seriously regressed, and the use of Spiller was so misguided. At some point when you struggle to score 17 points consistently in a league that begs you to score, it's a major problem. Especially when you have a SB caliber defense. It is all about the QB Biscuit. Unfortunately the Bills don't have one. There is not an offensive coordinator in the league that would look good with manuel or Orton as their QB.
Dorkington Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 (edited) It is all about the QB Biscuit. Unfortunately the Bills don't have one. There is not an offensive coordinator in the league that would look good with manuel or Orton as their QB. But are there OCs who could improve us from a 25th ranked offense, to a 15th ranked offense? That's really all we need if our defense is ranked #1. Edited December 19, 2014 by Dorkington
TH3 Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 I can't believe the HC didn't come on and criticize his OC - in the middle of the season before a huge game - and let on that he was going to fire him after the season was over.
BmarvB Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 Give Hackett a better QB and upgraded OL to work with for year 3. If no improvement then, bye bye birdie. And if Marrone wants to go too, I'd be certain to keep Schwartz around as Plan B.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 It is all about the QB Biscuit. Unfortunately the Bills don't have one. There is not an offensive coordinator in the league that would look good with manuel or Orton as their QB. Interesting about the OC (current)-I wonder what Bill Walsh could do with them. I can't believe the HC didn't come on and criticize his OC - in the middle of the season before a huge game - and let on that he was going to fire him after the season was over.
Maddog69 Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 But our there OCs who could improve us from a 25th ranked offense, to a 15th ranked offense? That's really all we need if our defense is ranked #1. This is Marrone's offense. I don't think expect him to hire someone with a different offensive philosophy to run it. The problems with the offense are on Marrone as much as Hackett. I don't get why people can't understand this. Even if Hackett were forced out by Whalley or Pegula, Marrone would hire another yes man and the offensive system and game plans would be the same. If you want a different offensive philosophy, you will need a new HC.
The Big Cat Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 But our there OCs who could improve us from a 25th ranked offense, to a 15th ranked offense? That's really all we need if our defense is ranked #1. I think it's folly to assume that top-tier OC's grow on trees. Don't kid yourself, to engineer an offense substantially better than the one we have now, it'll take an excellent OC. So this supposition that an excellent OC is easier to find than a top-15 QB, I'm not buying it.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 It is all about the QB Biscuit. Unfortunately the Bills don't have one. There is not an offensive coordinator in the league that would look good with manuel or Orton as their QB. Didn't the Cardinals win a few games with Drew Stanton and Ryan Lindley? We don't even need the OC to make the offense look good, or the QB to play good. We need them to just look decent.
Maddog69 Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 I think it's folly to assume that top-tier OC's grow on trees. Don't kid yourself, to engineer an offense substantially better than the one we have now, it'll take an excellent OC. So this supposition that an excellent OC is easier to find than a top-15 QB, I'm not buying it. This^Plus, successful OC's tend to be short term. Look at how many guys were great for a year or two and then sucked at other times. It has to do with Quality QB play, chemistry and luck. A few names come to mind: Joe Pendry - sucked when he was here. Won a superbowl elsewhere. Kevin Gilbride - Had a few successful stints and several bad ones. Marty Schettenheimer's kid: Had a really great year with NYJ and then sucked and got fired. Bottom line, find your self a great QB and you will be a great OC (same with HC). It's all about QB. Didn't the Cardinals win a few games with Drew Stanton and Ryan Lindley? We don't even need the OC to make the offense look good, or the QB to play good. We need them to just look decent. Cardinals won in spite of the offense.
C.Biscuit97 Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 nd But our there OCs who could improve us from a 25th ranked offense, to a 15th ranked offense? That's really all we need if our defense is ranked #1. Exactly. Andy Reid works with Alex Smith , who can't throw passes to wrs. Bruce Arians had a career scrub like Stanton look productive. Chip Kelly is making Sanchez look as good as Sanchez can possibly look. All of those guys would have our offense much better off with the same qbs. It's such a cop out to say Hackett just need a QB. He wasn't even a special college OC in a crappy Big East. Teddy Bridgewater got Norv Turner as an OC. Manuel got Hackett as an OC and QB coach. That's awful. And it's not just the QBs. It's the oline and rbs. Everyone is regressing. But let's just try ourselves that Hackett is fine. Then, we'll all be shocked when our offense sucks again and we're 7-9. It's ok to try and get better. And we can get much better than Hackett. He's just not ready for this position yet.
Dorkington Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 I think it's folly to assume that top-tier OC's grow on trees. Don't kid yourself, to engineer an offense substantially better than the one we have now, it'll take an excellent OC. So this supposition that an excellent OC is easier to find than a top-15 QB, I'm not buying it. I don't think they do, I asked which is more likely.
The Jokeman Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 (edited) I've asked these questions in other threads. 1.) How is it that both QBs have exactly the same issues? 2.) I thought Marrone's offense was no huddle, up tempo, what is this offense? I agree it seems in this offense we look to throw the ball to RBs a lot as we've seen it both in EJ and Orton. The struggles in the red zone etc. To me it screams a poor offensive line and the WRs/TEs aren't good enough. I will give our WR a small "benefit of the doubt" because it's relatively inexperienced yet I am maddened by the play of Scott Chandler. As he's a seasoned vet and you'd think he'd be more consistent but he's not and that's why I let Lee Smith walk this offseason and bring in another TE who can push and/or start over Chandler who I then move to the #2 spot to replace Smith. The guy on my target list is Jordan Cameron with Julius Thomas a s a close second. Jermaine Gresham is another name I'd consider but not sure he good enough to supplant Chandler but would be an improvement over Smith. In terms of the up tempo, it be foolish to play that style with the current D we have as it would cripple it especially since we can't sustain drives so instead we have to sustain clock and hope in the end we can score enough points to beat the opposition. It's a tride and true formula that can win in the NFL. Seattle's doing it right now as our the Chiefs. The only issue is we have to avoid turnovers as our offense isn't good enough to make them and win. Edited December 19, 2014 by The Jokeman
Kelly the Dog Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 Cardinals won in spite of the offense. So do we. If we had Arians running this offense we would be in the playoffs. I don't think we should hire him, but I think if we had Chan running this offense we would be in the playoffs. Probably 10 other OCs around the league counting HCs who are offensive guys like Peyton.
Augie Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 (edited) I've made both of these statements in other thread but they are worth repeating 1.) If we had a competent QB who could make simple throws, we would be easily in the playoffs and this conversation about the OC would not be happening 2.) The offense is Marrone's offense. I don't think Hackett has autonomy, therefore he does not deserve the blame. Unless Marrone is willing to give up control of the offense to a new OC, I think Hackett stays. These are great points. Throw in the need for a better OLine, which could improve the QB play. This whole thing reminds me of Marrone insisting special teams were not the fault of Crossman. He stood by his guy and got some new players to fix it. It seems to have worked. I hope he can do the same with the offense, but every time I see CJ stuffed up the middle on first and second, my skepticism grows. Edited December 19, 2014 by Augie
thebandit27 Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 26CB posted this in the game prep thread for the Raiders, and I think it belongs in this discussion: http://www.buffalorumblings.com/buffalo-bills-analysis-all-22/2014/12/19/7416833/buffalo-bills-offense-third-down-kyle-orton-sammy-watkins-fred-jackson Hackett might make some frustrating decisions, but he's doing just fine designing plays that get our best players open.
Cash Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 These are great points. Throw in the need for a better OLine, which could improve the QB play. This whole thing reminds me of Marrone insisting special teams were not the fault of Crossman. He stood by his guy and got some new players to fix it. It seems to have worked. I hope he can do the same with the offense, but every time I see CJ stuffed up the middle on first and second, my skepticism grows. I agree with all of the above. I think we can all agree that neither the talent level on offense nor the offensive coaching is where we'd like it to be. I don't get how some posters seem very confident in their assessment of how much blame lies on one side or the other, or how easy/hard it is to find a better OC. (It seems like a lot of you have extensive rolodexes of NFL and NCAA offensive assistants, and know that most of them are nothing special?) The best argument I've heard for "keep the coaching staff, try to upgrade talent" is Maddog's that Hackett's offense is really Marrone's offense, and to change the offensive coaching, you need to fire the head coach. Marrone/the team has shown enough positives at this point that I don't want to have to start over with a new staff. Two-thirds of the team are really good, and one third is terrible. But firing Marrone could easily lead to another Gregggggggg situation, where he dismantled our elite defense because "fat guys" didn't fit his dumb scheme that mostly relies on luck to be good. Having said all that, I could see Hackett replaced this offseason, but I agree with Maddog that if Hackett is replaced, he'll be replaced by another lackey whose job it is to install/coach Marrone's offense. I'd be very surprised if Hackett was replaced by an offensive equivalent to Schwartz.
Robert Paulson Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 26CB posted this in the game prep thread for the Raiders, and I think it belongs in this discussion: http://www.buffaloru...ns-fred-jackson Hackett might make some frustrating decisions, but he's doing just fine designing plays that get our best players open. orton blew all 3 plays
The Jokeman Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 Well said Dork. That's been my problem all along with Hackett. Too many players have regressed. Could Hackett be a top OC with Rodgers? Of course but how is that good coaching. The offensive coaches failed to develop Manuel so far (Hackett being his QB coach and OC was awful), the oline has seriously regressed, and the use of Spiller was so misguided. At some point when you struggle to score 17 points consistently in a league that begs you to score, it's a major problem. Especially when you have a SB caliber defense. I say having the OC because what happens if your top 10 QB gets hurt? Arizona is proving that if you have a good OC then you can win with other QBs besides your number 1. I've always and will stand by that franchise QBs are made not born. I mean have we forgotten that Kelly struggled early on but when we added parts like a developing Andre Reed and guys like Thurman and Lofton only then did our offense become better? I know people love Freddie but the truth is he is no Thurman, he might have been for one season but not close for his career. Sammy is still a rookie and Robert Woods is still developing. This team could be scary next season if we can find another RB to compliment to Fred Jackson next year as long as we also improve our OG and TE play.
Recommended Posts