GunnerBill Posted November 29, 2016 Author Posted November 29, 2016 When you're up in the fourth quarter you run to put the game away. They couldn't. Would it surprise you to find out that against Baltimore they ran for 65 yards and against Miami 67? Against Baltimore they couldn't run. Against Miami they could... they just didn't for some unkown reason. Gilleslee had a productive day they just didn't feed him.
bobobonators Posted November 29, 2016 Posted November 29, 2016 When you're up in the fourth quarter you run to put the game away. They couldn't. Would it surprise you to find out that against Baltimore they ran for 65 yards and against Miami 67? Good point. Speaking of which the playcalling that game may have been the worst of Lynn's short career. It had no flow. Against Baltimore they couldn't run. Against Miami they could... they just didn't for some unkown reason. Gilleslee had a productive day they just didn't feed him. Yup
The Big Cat Posted November 29, 2016 Posted November 29, 2016 Against Baltimore they couldn't run. Against Miami they could... they just didn't for some unkown reason. Gilleslee had a productive day they just didn't feed him. 67 yards on 22 carries isn't exactly good...for them. I remember and agree taht they got away from it and they limped out a half-healthy shady to start the game. but they weren't exactly burning it up when they did try. Good point. Speaking of which the playcalling that game may have been the worst of Lynn's short career. It had no flow. Yup tough to argue sounds to me like the outcome was gravely impacted...by the offense that day
GunnerBill Posted November 29, 2016 Author Posted November 29, 2016 That was because they limped out Shady though. Gilleslee was running fine but they only gave him the ball 5 times.
GunnerBill Posted December 6, 2016 Author Posted December 6, 2016 After week 13: Yards per game allowed: Rank - 12th (Down 2)Pass YPG allowed: Rank - 8th (unchanged) Rush YPG allowed: Rank - 26th (Down 5)Points per game allowed: Rank - 17th (Down 5)3rd down %: Rank - 22nd (Down 1)Sacks: Rank - 3rd (Down 1)Takeaways: Rank - 18th (Down 4)Points Per Drive: Rank - 17th (unchanged)% of drives ending in scores: Rank - 17th (unchanged) No green on the board this week.
Dopey Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 After week 13: Yards per game allowed: Rank - 12th (Down 2)Pass YPG allowed: Rank - 8th (unchanged) Rush YPG allowed: Rank - 26th (Down 5)Points per game allowed: Rank - 17th (Down 5) 3rd down %: Rank - 22nd (Down 1)Sacks: Rank - 3rd (Down 1)Takeaways: Rank - 18th (Down 4)Points Per Drive: Rank - 17th (unchanged)% of drives ending in scores: Rank - 17th (unchanged) No green on the board this week. No worries, Rex is taking that #4 defense he inherited and making a bully out of them. He's not done yet. Give him time, it's hard fitting those square pegs into those round holes. He's got fully pregnant Rob to help. We'll get there. Continuity... #4 defense...and now... Not putting it all on the defense, but come on now...we are a shell of that defense.
hondo in seattle Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 No worries, Rex is taking that #4 defense he inherited and making a bully out of them. He's not done yet. Give him time, it's hard fitting those square pegs into those round holes. He's got fully pregnant Rob to help. We'll get there. Continuity... #4 defense...and now... Not putting it all on the defense, but come on now...we are a shell of that defense. Hard to disagree.
Dopey Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 (edited) Yea but that number 4 defense was an aberration that folded in crunch time. Ahh, the Devil's advocate...would you take the current defense over what we had? Not I. If you say yes, I call bull ****. This Defense folds even in non crunch time situations. Edited December 7, 2016 by Dopey
bobobonators Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 Yea I was being sarcastic. The apologist defense mechanism for hiring Rex over Schwartz was that the 2014 defense folded in crunch time which was obviously extremely exaggerated to fit their narrative. If we are to apply the same logic to that Defense as we do the current Offense around here, that #4 Defense wasn't good enough.
Nihilarian Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 Just looking at the games that Ryan's defense has played for Buffalo haven't been able to slow down a QB with a winning record that year in 2015 or so far in 2016. Last years Bills defense couldn't get to the QB at all and was second to last in sacks. This year the team leads the NFL in sacks and yet can't seem to stop those average to better QB's. Not Fitz, Not Brady, Not Tannehill, Not Russell Wilson, Not Flacco. The Bills still face Blake Bortles 2-8, Derek Carr 8-2, Ben Rothlisberger 5-5, Josh McCown 0-2, Tannehill 6-4, Fitz 3-7. At 5-5 past history says the Bills will win 3 and lose 3. At #12 overall in both PA-Yards is a step up from last season. Blake Bortles W, Derek Carr, L, so now 6-6. Still awaiting this year's defense to beat a team that has a QB with a winning record. To those that keep wailing on about how one lost to safety to IR in week 7 that ruined the entire defense this year needs to remember what happened in week two this season. That Buffalo Bills defense was dominated by a what we now know is a very crappy 3-9 NY Jets offense to the tune of 493 yards given up. Jets QB Ryan Fitzpasspick threw for an astonishing 374 yards with one TD and no INT's and he was only sacked once. Jets RB Mate Forte rushed for 100 yards and had 3 rushing TD's. To any that claim it was all the Bills offenses fault need to recall that Bills QB's threw for 307 yards, and 3 passing TD's this game. The Bills offense scored 31 points this game. The NY Jets scored on their first four possessions of the game. Granted the team didn't run the ball well in this game and the OC was fired after the game because of it. Now the entire world knows that if the Bills can't run the ball successfully it slows their offense and the defense isn't nearly as effective too. A one-dimensional offense and a one-dimensional defense that if you stop one aspect of the team it holds back the entire team's chances of winning. So, everything is dependent on the run game being effective and then at times the team stops running the ball while calling more passing plays and everyone wonders why the team lost the game. I'd say this style of coaching philosophy isn't working very well...or even very smart.
The Big Cat Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 Ahh, the Devil's advocate...would you take the current defense over what we had? Not I. If you say yes, I call bull ****. This Defense folds even in non crunch time situations. Do we get all the same players and none of the injuries too?
BringBackOrton Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 Do we get all the same players and none of the injuries too? You forget that in 2014, Aaron Williams wasn't the keystone piece.
The Big Cat Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 You forget that in 2014, Aaron Williams wasn't the keystone piece. Right, the only game he missed was the track meet New England ran in RWS. So, yeah. Not that important then either.
BringBackOrton Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 (edited) Right, the only game he missed was the track meet New England ran in RWS. So, yeah. Not that important then either. Schwartz' system is much less predicated on safety play and "QBing" back there. That's undeniable. So the injuries would've affected us less. Edited December 7, 2016 by jmc12290
The Big Cat Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 (edited) Schwartz' system is much less predicated on safety play and "QBing" back there. That's undeniable. So the injuries would've affected us less. That's twice now, based solely on your gut, a whim and a finger in the air that you've downplayed AW's presence under any coach in any scheme. Unfortunately, any/all actual evidence would suggest otherwise. But whatever, let's keep pretending there was some kind of pre-Rex legacy that he demolished on defense, that the 2014 defense wasn't a fluke in hindsight, let's ignore the fact that we haven't had a back end play maker since Byrd's rookie year, and let's keep demanding new coaches every 36 months. It's worked great so far. Edited December 7, 2016 by The Big Cat
BringBackOrton Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 That's twice now, based solely on your gut, a whim and a finger in the air that you've downplayed AW's presence under any coach in any scheme. Unfortunately, any/all actual evidence would suggest otherwise. But whatever, let's keep pretending there was some kind of pre-Rex legacy that he demolished on defense, that the 2014 defense wasn't a fluke in hindsight, let's ignore the fact that we haven't had a back end play maker since Byrd's rookie year, and let's keep demanding new coaches every 36 months. It's worked great so far. Huh? AW's play was average in 2014, along with Searcy. Are you actually attempting to argue that S play in Schwartz's Wide 9 is as important as Rex's scheme?
The Big Cat Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 Huh? AW's play was average in 2014, along with Searcy. Are you actually attempting to argue that S play in Schwartz's Wide 9 is as important as Rex's scheme? No. And if that was your takeaway then we have confirmation on a couple of things.
BringBackOrton Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 No. And if that was your takeaway then we have confirmation on a couple of things. Maybe you're not understanding what I'm saying. Because my first point was exactly that if the 2014 defense had lost the same players the 2016 defense had, namely Aaron Williams, it wouldn't have felt the loss nearly as much.
The Big Cat Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 (edited) The Bills defense was successful in 2014 because it played fast, physical and kicked the **** out of the opposing QB. A simple, wide nine attack. It worked great. AW is an above average safety. Not an all pro. Are you suggesting they were a top 5 defense in 2014 largely because AW stayed healthy? I'd strongly disagree. I don't think hiring a coach every 36 months is a good idea either, but when you hire a dud to begin with well then your just spinning your wheels. As we've been over a million times now, the 2014 stayed freakishly healthy. It was talked about even before the 2015 season. Analysts from PFF (I think? May be Football Outsiders) were on the John Murphy show in the off season before 2015 saying that their data showed regardless of who the coach was (by then we knew it was Rex), the defense should have been expected to slide because the 2014 injury rate (or lack there of) was both unprecedented and completely unsustainable. Having said that, there's no denying how dominant they were, and especially how punishing they were. I think we went on like a seven week streak wherein we injured opposing team's quarterbacks. No doubt that was due in large part to Jim Schwartz being one hell of a defensive coach and running a scheme that was tailor made for personnel that is mostly talented up front. There's no denying any of this. But you also can't deny that the success of his scheme benefitted tremendously by all (literally all) those key pieces staying healthy. Now, to the detriment of this conversation, and of just about any conversation about professional football in general, we have a very very small sample size from which to draw conclusions. In 2014, the worst game the defense played (by far) was at home against New England. That was the only game AW missed that season. Flash forward to 2015-16 in a system which is much more dependent on the back-end of the defense, and by the looks of this year alone, AW's absence has had a severe impact on the defense efficacy. Is there really anyone who's denying this? It sucks because he should probably hang it up for good after this season, and that will leave us with a giant hole in the secondary in the form of BOTH safety positions, but that's another topic for another day. But to say that the Bills defense, under Jim Schwartz, Rex Ryan, Wade Phillips or anybody else was destined to repeat the performance of 2014 is utter nonsense. It simply wasn't. They have regressed. Because of injuries? Surely. Because of scheme? Probably. Because they've played better QB's? Perhaps. The Rex Sux crowd likes to sneer and ask how many first rounders does his defense need? How many playmakers does Pete Carrol's defense need? Who is our Richard Sherman? Earl Thomas? Cam Chancellor? Michael Bennet? Bobby Wagner? Then, on the flipside, how many playmakers did Schwartz get? Answer: more than Rex. His stayed in the lineup the entire time. I don't know what the solution is moving forward, but this incessant pining for 2014 manages to grow more pointless as the weeks go on. On a side but tangential note: anybody else notice that the Schwartz's Philly defense and their rookie quarterback both hit a skid around the same time?? Hmmm... Edited December 7, 2016 by The Big Cat
The Big Cat Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 Fair enough. In my opinion, Rex and the scheme are a big part of the problem. And if the "problem" is being a defense that will probably finish somewhere 9-15 this year, then I don't disagree. I think we just differ on how big of a "problem" that is. And yeah, may be he shouldn't have promised a 1 defense, but get over it, ladies. Sometimes Rex says some **** into a microphone. Welcome to Earth. If the "problem" is that we finished 4 two years ago (having finished 22 and 26 the two years prior), then I don't know what to tell you. If that was your expectation, I think I've exhausted all avenues for explaining why that expectation is/was/will forever be faulty. This defense needs playmakers on the back end, period. Eric Berry has single-handedly won what? three games for the Chiefs so far this year? In this league, they change the complexion and the outcome of contests and we have none. This is not an excuse, it's an observation, and no one here can deny it.
Recommended Posts