Helpmenow Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 It's interesting to see Terry sat down with a real journalist(JW) as opposed to the clowns that work for the local media. That can't sit well with them. Maybe that is why he is being criticized as an owner. Because he know tough questions he just spoke
dave mcbride Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 Seahawks, Bengals, Ravens, and Browns, but hey, don't let a point that you can make out of context hold you back. Based on what you and others have written, Rex was the only impediment to the Bills going to the Super Bowl with our 11-5 roster. Now that he is gone, I fully expect that we will be competing for Super Bowls for years to come beginning next season. Philly finished 4th in defensive DVOA this season and Buffalo 26th. Pretty much game over, Peter. Give it up. Philly played the hardest offensive schedule in the league. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef
Peter Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 (edited) You keep making this same point over and over again...and it makes no sense, no matter how many times you say it. I keep making this point because when I read all of the criticism from the anti Rex brigade, there is no consideration given to injuries, suspensions, QB play etc. Given that he was the only supposed impediment (because no-one wants to consider anything else apparently), we apparently should be competing for Super Bowls now that Rex is gone. It is a very simple point and should be easy to understand. DVOA - Defense Pettine/Schwartz 2013 - 4th 2014 - 2nd Rex 2015 - 24th 2016 - 26th Game over. My original post responded to this. What could be more apples to apples than common opponents. There is no need to do any "adjustments." Game over. Steelers don't count? They do and they were in my original post on the subject. I was responding to your post that claimed that the Browns were the only common opponent that the Bills' defense out performed the Eagles. Edited January 3, 2017 by Peter
May Day 10 Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 It's interesting to see Terry sat down with a real journalist(JW) as opposed to the clowns that work for the local media. That can't sit well with them. Maybe that is why he is being criticized as an owner. Isn't JW more of a 'reporter', who typically just reports what is seen and told and readers can accept or reject the information? While Sullivan, Gleason, etc are "columnists", who take the information and interpret it in their way and the reader can accept or reject their points of view? They would be obligated to ask tough questions of Pegula (which I would appreciate). I can understand why Pegula wouldn't go to the wolves. I am sure they weren't keeping their fingers crossed.
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 The Bills were actually a bad 7-9. They were lucky to play the 4 worst teams in the NFL (cleveland, la, sf, and jax) and a Pats team that was starting a 4-fingered rookie third stringer. Also, cincy lost their best player (by far and away) on the first play from scrimmage. The bills do NOT win that game with a healthy AJ Green - the Bills CBs aren't good enough to handle him (no one was this season). Don't lose sight of that. This could easily have been a 4-5 win team if they played next year's sked this year instead of next. It was that good. They gave up some rushing yards but more than compensated in every other category. From what i can tell - they had a ton of turnovers. Recovering 23 of 32 fumbles (unsustainable rate), and had a bunch of picks. That's not always the most sustainable result but i'm sure it massively increases your DVOA. Oh - and they only twice allowed fewer than 20 points. Whereas this bad defense did that 7 times.
Helpmenow Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 Isn't JW more of a 'reporter', who typically just reports what is seen and told and readers can accept or reject the information? While Sullivan, Gleason, etc are "columnists", who take the information and interpret it in their way and the reader can accept or reject their points of view? They would be obligated to ask tough questions of Pegula (which I would appreciate). I can understand why Pegula wouldn't go to the wolves. I am sure they weren't keeping their fingers crossed. Exactly, Wilson also spoke with John as well
Peter Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 Philly finished 4th in defensive DVOA this season and Buffalo 26th. Pretty much game over, Peter. Give it up. Philly played the hardest offensive schedule in the league. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef There is no need to do any adjustments. How the Bills defense did against these common opponents (with players ranked lower by PFF) is telling. Once again, I have nothing against Schwartz, and I would not even bring him up but for the narrative pushed by the anti Rex brigade that Rex ruined Schwartz's defense. People made this point incessantly without consideration to any outside factors ( injuries, suspensions, Mario going on strike, etc.)
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 Philly finished 4th in defensive DVOA this season and Buffalo 26th. Pretty much game over, Peter. Give it up. Philly played the hardest offensive schedule in the league. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef They were good - but it didn't get them any further than our bad defense got us.
Wayne Arnold Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 The Pettine Defense was that good? I seem to remember getting gashed in the run game quite a bit. #2 against the pass, #19 against the run
dave mcbride Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 (edited) From what i can tell - they had a ton of turnovers. Recovering 23 of 32 fumbles (unsustainable rate), and had a bunch of picks. That's not always the most sustainable result but i'm sure it massively increases your DVOA. Oh - and they only twice allowed fewer than 20 points. Whereas this bad defense did that 7 times. If the fumbles come on sacks, then that rate is sustainable. And the bills had 58 freaking sacks. There is no need to do any adjustments. How the Bills defense did against these common opponents (with players ranked lower by PFF) is telling. Once again, I have nothing against Schwartz, and I would not even bring him up but for the narrative pushed by the anti Rex brigade that Rex ruined Schwartz's defense. People made this point incessantly without consideration to any outside factors ( injuries, suspensions, Mario going on strike, etc.) Mario didn't go on strike; he got slower and became a worse player as a result. He fell off a cliff, physically speaking. And yes, you do need to make adjustments to get the true tale. Wishing this away doesn't help one's case at all. Philly faced a far tougher sked than Buffalo did. That is inarguable. Edited January 3, 2017 by dave mcbride
plenzmd1 Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 I keep making this point because when I read all of the criticism from the anti Rex brigade, there is no consideration given to injuries, suspensions, QB play etc. Given that he was the only impediment (because no-one wants to consider anything else apparently), we apparently should be competing for Super Bowls now that Rex is gone. It is a very simple point and should be easy to understand. Such a simplistic view. Bills could hire a worse coach, and go 4-12, does not mean Rex was the answer. QB could be awful next year instead of just mediocre.Does not mean Rex was the right coach.
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 If the fumbles come on sacks, than that rate is sustainable. And the bills had 58 freaking sacks. I suppose - i just have no idea how DVOA is calculated so to me it means nothing. Philly lost 7 of 8 and allowed 26+ in all the losses. I don't know how you can say that's the 4th best defense.
dave mcbride Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 I suppose - i just have no idea how DVOA is calculated so to me it means nothing. Philly lost 7 of 8 and allowed 26+ in all the losses. I don't know how you can say that's the 4th best defense. Just look at their schedule - it was brutal. Every team in the nfc east is good. They also had to play atl, NO, GB, pitt, ... Plus a couple of bad offensive teams. The bills had a very soft sked in comparison.
Peter Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 Such a simplistic view. Bills could hire a worse coach, and go 4-12, does not mean Rex was the answer. QB could be awful next year instead of just mediocre.Does not mean Rex was the right coach. Actually, you have illustrated the point that I was making - much of the Rex criticism is "simplistic" because it does not consider other factors. Your response begins to now consider other factors. For example, if we did not have the depth of injuries etc., we would have had a better record. It makes a difference when your "best" players and the leaders of your team are hurt and unable to play or when your highest paid defensive player is suspended or out of shape (or is not smart enough to learn the playbook). Or, if we had "Tom Brady" (or a top third QB), we would have a better record. But hey, let's just blame it all on the HC, not consider the injuries and suspensions, and pretend that all is going to be better now that Rex is gone and Doug Whaley is in charge.
4merper4mer Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 There is no need to do any adjustments. How the Bills defense did against these common opponents (with players ranked lower by PFF) is telling. Once again, I have nothing against Schwartz, and I would not even bring him up but for the narrative pushed by the anti Rex brigade that Rex ruined Schwartz's defense. People made this point incessantly without consideration to any outside factors ( injuries, suspensions, Mario going on strike, etc.) Please don't count me among the group promoting Schwartz. The only comparison I've ever made comes right from Rex when he said the #4 defense had been a disappointment and that we needed to be #1. He did say that. You do remember that right? In your humble opinion did we have the best defense in the NFL in either of the last two years? Because that was the standard by which Rex said we needed to be judged. Rex sux all on his own without being compared to Bowles, Schwartz, the era gone by when his scheme actually worked, or anything else. He is a great dude and it would have been AWESOME to see him win here but he was terrible. How many good teams did we beat while he was here? Maybe 3 wins total if you give major benefit of the doubt...in two years. Actually, you have illustrated the point that I was making - much of the Rex criticism is "simplistic" because it does not consider other factors. Your response begins to now consider other factors. For example, if we did not have the depth of injuries etc., we would have had a better record. It makes a difference when your "best" players and the leaders of your team are hurt and unable to play or when your highest paid defensive player is suspended or out of shape (or is not smart enough to learn the playbook). Or, if we had "Tom Brady" (or a top third QB), we would have a better record. But hey, let's just blame it all on the HC, not consider the injuries and suspensions, and pretend that all is going to be better now that Rex is gone and Doug Whaley is in charge. Plus sometimes we only played with 10 players when the other teams were using 11. Imagine if we used 11.
plenzmd1 Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 Actually, you have illustrated the point that I was making - much of the Rex criticism is "simplistic" because it does not consider other factors. Your response begins to now consider other factors. For example, if we did not have the depth of injuries etc., we would have had a better record. It makes a difference when your "best" players and the leaders of your team are hurt and unable to play or when your highest paid defensive player is suspended or out of shape (or is not smart enough to learn the playbook). Or, if we had "Tom Brady" (or a top third QB), we would have a better record. But hey, let's just blame it all on the HC, not consider the injuries and suspensions, and pretend that all is going to be better now that Rex is gone and Doug Whaley is in charge. No, what my point says is that over two years with the Bills, Rex coached them to 2 wins over teams with winning records, and one of those is an iffy win at best. It means his teams tended to mentally melt down and make mental errors continually throughout the 2 years, especially when put under pressure by better teams. And yes, Bills teams have done that for 17 straight years, does not mean we should accept it any more now with Rex as coach as we did with Chan, Dick, Doug etc. The Bills can and should be better at coach. To say the exact same personnel and conditions and schedule will exist next year so you can judge side by side is "simplistic" .
Coach Tuesday Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 There is no need to do any adjustments. How the Bills defense did against these common opponents (with players ranked lower by PFF) is telling. Once again, I have nothing against Schwartz, and I would not even bring him up but for the narrative pushed by the anti Rex brigade that Rex ruined Schwartz's defense. People made this point incessantly without consideration to any outside factors ( injuries, suspensions, Mario going on strike, etc.) OMG you've become fully myopic, Peter. This is nuts.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 (edited) I keep making this point because when I read all of the criticism from the anti Rex brigade, there is no consideration given to injuries, suspensions, QB play etc. Given that he was the only supposed impediment (because no-one wants to consider anything else apparently), we apparently should be competing for Super Bowls now that Rex is gone. It is a very simple point and should be easy to understand. Peter, with respect, I think now you are going off a bit. I see considerations to injuries and suspensions, and Whaley and everyone else say "we weren't good enough". The thing with Rex is that under him, there was a certain lack of discipline to the players, stupid penalties, and game management issues. They were there last year, new assistants were hired, they were still there this year. Rex questioned about Jerry Hughes headbutting a Dolphins coach "not a big deal". Now you're translating this into people thinking "we apparently should be competing for superbowls" without Rex and calling that "a very simple point" "easy to understand"? SMH. How about this: our offense, with our QB, was 6th in the league for scoring points (which wins games) as of week 16 and finished 10th. Our defense, which was 4th in the league in 2014, finished 16th. Last year we were 12th on Offense (improved from 18th) and 16th on Defense. That's consistent, and consistently mediocre. Rex was hired to improve the team and especially the D. He didn't. That's a simple point, easy to understand. Edited January 3, 2017 by Hapless Bills Fan
Mr. WEO Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 (edited) In your own mind maybe. Fired another HC Probably will let their starting QB go, and their #1 backup. 7-9 Defense worse then a year ago Yes, it's all in my mind.... It's interesting to see Terry sat down with a real journalist(JW) as opposed to the clowns that work for the local media. That can't sit well with them. Maybe that is why he is being criticized as an owner. Phone call. Edited January 3, 2017 by Mr. WEO
Dan Posted January 3, 2017 Posted January 3, 2017 Seahawks, Bengals, Ravens, and Browns, but hey, don't let a point that you can make out of context hold you back. Based on what you and others have written, Rex was the only impediment to the Bills going to the Super Bowl with our 11-5 roster. Now that he is gone, I fully expect that we will be competing for Super Bowls for years to come beginning next season. I've read most of this thread and you are repeatedly defending Rex based on these stats. But the primary issue I think you're overlooking is that you're assuming Rex was fired based on the performance of the Defense alone. Rex was a HC. Schwartz is a DC. Two completely different jobs with different responsibilities, demands, and performance measures. The Bills, as a team, were disorganized and undisciplined. The team's record did not improve at all, but more so, neither did the individual attitudes, performances, or apparent understanding of what they needed to do. Add to that the poor game plans, the poor game day management, and probably discord behind the scenes (i.e. private meeting with the owner that gets you fired). That's just a few of the reasons a HC gets fired before his contract is up. Had the Bills won 10games, I'm sure a lot of stuff gets washed away. But, when you're not winning and you're dealing with all that disorganization? Something has to give. By all accounts, Rex was given all he asked for in terms of coaches, players, and control. And the result was not a better team. If anything, this team seems less cohesive than when St. Doug left! And lastly, I don't think anyone thinks that ...just plug in a new HC and we're Super Bowl bound. And few have complete faith in Whaley to get it right. But, Pegula is giving him the reigns, it appears. If he doesn't, guess who's gone next? And it doesn't seem like Pegula is going to give him 3-5 years to see. So the pressure is on him to deliver. All any of us can do.. Is hope he does. Just like we all hoped Rex would deliver. But I will applaud our owners for recognizing that the current direction wasn't the right one and making a decision based on that, and not on how much money they were about to lose.
Recommended Posts