FireChan Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 (edited) You realize the defense is responsible for preventing the opponent from scoring right? In the 15 games outside the NE anomaly that was missing Brady, we were 26th in the NFL at allowing points to be scored. If we have to average 30 points to barely win, then we wont win many games. We averaged over 26 under TT...thats MORE than enough to win in the NFL and better than most the playoff teams this year. But when your D gives up over 25, thats a narrow margin and you have a lot of close losses like how we lost 6 of our 8 games with TT by 6 points or less. in 10 of TT's 15 starts, we scored at least 25 points...thats enough to win all 10 of those games if the D is even average. The defense let up 23.6 PPG. Not insurmountable to win games, unless you do lots of your scoring on bad teams when you don't need it. Or in garbage time. Edited February 15, 2017 by FireChan
Homer Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 Instead of the 2013 draft Im worried it will be more like the 2004 draft where we traded up for Losman and lost our shot at Aaron Rodgers the following year.
Alphadawg7 Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 The defense let up 23.6 PPG. Not insurmountable to win games, unless you do lots of your scoring on bad teams when you don't need it. Or in garbage time. In the 15 games that werent the freak anomaly of a Brady less Pats team (as even you know full well NE doesnt score zero against us if Brady plays, especially since Brady put up 41 a couple weeks later on us) we gave up over 25 points per game. So what do you think is the better barometer for the team...looking at the year end total or using logic and reason and realize that the 15 games outside that NE game were a more accurate portrayal of our week to week defense? And in those 15 games we were at the bottom of the league at 26th in most points allowed. And if Brady does play week 4, they certainly don't shut him out and we actually drop further in a 16 game season to 27th or 28th depending on how many points he scores on us. So, surrounding her 25 points per game in 15 of your seasons games is not good or even average by any stretch of the imagination. You can keep down playing how bad we were at preventing scores all you want, but the facts are the facts, this team was one of the worst in the NFL at doing so all season.
yungmack Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 Is it me, or does the lead up to this year's draft have a remarkably similar feel to the situation at one Bills Drive in 2013? We have a General Manager that is determined to find the Bills' "franchise quarterback" in a draft year where the conventional wisdom is that no qb is worthy of a 1st round pick. Many mock drafts have the Bills reaching for one of the top three qbs of this draft with the first pick. To me, this seems like the EJ Manuel decision all over again. I am not sure if I can go through another failed qb experiment. I have supported Whaley so far because he has made some good moves. My feeling is that you take the good with the bad. My feelings are beginning to turn. If he is foolish enough to turn loose TT without having a solid plan in place to replace him with veteran leadership, he should be gone, no questions asked! Where have you heard that Whaley is "determined" to find a franchise QB in this years draft? I think he's a fine GM but even if he was as much of a knucklehead as a vocal minority around here thinks, I believe he has brains enough to see there isn't a franchise QB, or even a ready-to-start QB, in this draft. Nor has he said a single thing that indicates he's desperate seeking one. You're worrying about fantasies and phantasms. As to what a bunch of lazy draft pundits think he's going to do, who cares? By and large, these are guys who haven't got a clue what's going on with the Bills year to year, they just tune in once a year, take a cursory look at the roster and contracts without regard to whatever else the front office may be doing and pull it out of their keesters.
FireChan Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 (edited) In the 15 games that werent the freak anomaly of a Brady less Pats team (as even you know full well NE doesnt score zero against us if Brady plays, especially since Brady put up 41 a couple weeks later on us) we gave up over 25 points per game. So what do you think is the better barometer for the team...looking at the year end total or using logic and reason and realize that the 15 games outside that NE game were a more accurate portrayal of our week to week defense? And in those 15 games we were at the bottom of the league at 26th in most points allowed. And if Brady does play week 4, they certainly don't shut him out and we actually drop further in a 16 game season to 27th or 28th depending on how many points he scores on us. So, surrounding her 25 points per game in 15 of your seasons games is not good or even average by any stretch of the imagination. You can keep down playing how bad we were at preventing scores all you want, but the facts are the facts, this team was one of the worst in the NFL at doing so all season. Cherry pick city. You throw out the defense because they played a Brady-less Pats, but TT still gets those points even though our defense shut them and got him the ball back 1 million times. We had them 1-12 on third down with almost 10 more minutes of possession, and TT still couldn't do more than kill them slow with FG's. Also, are the TD's with EJM under center also being counted as Tyrod points? I doubt you threw those ones out either. TT lives to inflate his point total anyway. How many games did we have this year were we scored late in losses to pump the totals with the game never in doubt? Jets 1? Miami 1? NE 2? Pittsburgh? Thank god EJ got us to 25 points when we were down a billion versus the Pats. Or else your TT stats wouldn't sound so great when you cherry pick the hell out of them. TT getting us to 17 in 3 Q's should've been enough to win, per your stupid stat. Edited February 15, 2017 by FireChan
Wayne Cubed Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 (edited) Cherry pick city. You throw out the defense because they played a Brady-less Pats, but TT still gets those points even though our defense shut them and got him the ball back 1 million times. We had them 1-12 on third down with almost 10 more minutes of possession, and TT still couldn't do more than kill them slow with FG's. Also, are the TD's with EJM under center also being counted as Tyrod points? I doubt you threw those ones out either. TT lives to inflate his point total anyway. How many games did we have this year were we scored late in losses to pump the totals with the game never in doubt? Jets 1? Miami 1? NE 2? Pittsburgh? Thank god EJ got us to 25 points when we were down a billion versus the Pats. Or else your TT stats wouldn't sound so great when you cherry pick the hell out of them. TT getting us to 17 in 3 Q's should've been enough to win, per your stupid stat. As an aside to this, PPG isn't the end all be all statistic anyways. Team A plays 3 games and their defense allows 40 points on 40 total drives. Team B plays 3 games and their defense allows 50 points on 60 total drives. Team B's defense allowed more PPG, but they also faced 20 more drives against. Is that because their offense kept turning the ball over? Or because the offense couldn't sustain drives? Is Team A really the better defense considering they faced less opportunities against? It's the same with offense. People keep pointing out that the Bills offense finished 7th overall. Sure, in PPG they finished 7th but in terms of the percentage of drives ending in points, they finished 15th. Edited February 15, 2017 by Wayne Cubed
PromoTheRobot Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 Is it me, or does the lead up to this year's draft have a remarkably similar feel to the situation at one Bills Drive in 2013? We have a General Manager that is determined to find the Bills' "franchise quarterback" in a draft year where the conventional wisdom is that no qb is worthy of a 1st round pick. Many mock drafts have the Bills reaching for one of the top three qbs of this draft with the first pick. To me, this seems like the EJ Manuel decision all over again. I am not sure if I can go through another failed qb experiment. I have supported Whaley so far because he has made some good moves. My feeling is that you take the good with the bad. My feelings are beginning to turn. If he is foolish enough to turn loose TT without having a solid plan in place to replace him with veteran leadership, he should be gone, no questions asked! Right off the bat you are making an assumption that has no evidence. Nowhere is Whaley quoted as having to find a QB this draft. People thinking that's the case doesn't make it so.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 As an aside to this, PPG isn't the end all be all statistic anyways. Team A plays 3 games and their defense allows 40 points on 40 total drives. Team B plays 3 games and their defense allows 50 points on 60 total drives. Team B's defense allowed more PPG, but they also faced 20 more drives against. Is that because their offense kept turning the ball over? Or because the offense couldn't sustain drives? Is Team A really the better defense considering they faced less opportunities against? It's the same with offense. People keep pointing out that the Bills offense finished 7th overall. Sure, in PPG they finished 7th but in terms of the percentage of drives ending in points, they finished 15th. However they finished 9th in points per drive and 6th in TDs per drive (including the week 17 abomination). (per Football Outsiders 2016 Offensive Drive Statistics) I'd be curious where they ranked going into week 17, but I don't feel like digging into cached pages and such right now.
Wayne Cubed Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 However they finished 9th in points per drive and 6th in TDs per drive (including the week 17 abomination). (per Football Outsiders 2016 Offensive Drive Statistics) I'd be curious where they ranked going into week 17, but I don't feel like digging into cached pages and such right now. Hmm some of those #drives is off. Pro football reference has the Bills with 177 drives.
FireChan Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 Hmm some of those #drives is off. Pro football reference has the Bills with 177 drives. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/buf/2016.htm Offense 14th in score percentage. Defense 11th in score percentage.
Wayne Cubed Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/buf/2016.htm Offense 14th in score percentage. Defense 11th in score percentage. Yup, exactly.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 Hmm some of those #drives is off. Pro football reference has the Bills with 177 drives. Only thing I can think of is if they eliminated drives at the end of games where we were winning and kneeled it out? (SF, LA, & ARI) Otherwise IDK what would cause the discrepancy. The site says they used the official NFL Drive Charts to update their stats every week.
Wayne Cubed Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 Only thing I can think of is if they eliminated drives at the end of games where we were winning and kneeled it out? (SF, LA, & ARI) Otherwise IDK what would cause the discrepancy. The site says they used the official NFL Drive Charts to update their stats every week. Meh, don't care that much to look into it. Atlantas is way off though, according to PFR, they had 209 drives. With that offense I find it hard to believe they had less drives than the Bills, which football outsiders is saying they had 166.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 Meh, don't care that much to look into it. Atlantas is way off though, according to PFR, they had 209 drives. With that offense I find it hard to believe they had less drives than the Bills, which football outsiders is saying they had 166. Seems PFR is off by more than FO in Atlanta's case. I checked on footballdb and sporting charts, both have Atlanta at 175 Drives. Both have Buffalo at 177 though.
FireChan Posted February 15, 2017 Posted February 15, 2017 Seems PFR is off by more than FO in Atlanta's case. I checked on footballdb and sporting charts, both have Atlanta at 175 Drives. Both have Buffalo at 177 though. I don't believe sporting charts. PFR is the truth.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 16, 2017 Posted February 16, 2017 I don't believe sporting charts. PFR is the truth. the 209 probably includes the postseason vs 175 in the regular season
FireChan Posted February 16, 2017 Posted February 16, 2017 Seems PFR is off by more than FO in Atlanta's case. I checked on footballdb and sporting charts, both have Atlanta at 175 Drives. Both have Buffalo at 177 though. the 209 probably includes the postseason vs 175 in the regular season Doubt it, because FBO has them at 166 drives.
#34fan Posted February 16, 2017 Posted February 16, 2017 (edited) the white QB search WKU's Mike White actually looks pretty decent for the 2018 draft. Edited February 16, 2017 by #34fan
Thurman#1 Posted February 16, 2017 Posted February 16, 2017 Is it me, or does the lead up to this year's draft have a remarkably similar feel to the situation at one Bills Drive in 2013? We have a General Manager that is determined to find the Bills' "franchise quarterback" in a draft year where the conventional wisdom is that no qb is worthy of a 1st round pick. Many mock drafts have the Bills reaching for one of the top three qbs of this draft with the first pick. To me, this seems like the EJ Manuel decision all over again. I am not sure if I can go through another failed qb experiment. I have supported Whaley so far because he has made some good moves. My feeling is that you take the good with the bad. My feelings are beginning to turn. If he is foolish enough to turn loose TT without having a solid plan in place to replace him with veteran leadership, he should be gone, no questions asked! A team without a franchise QB thinking about taking a QB in the draft, if one's available, who's not a sure thing? Some similarities to 2013, maybe, but really that should probably remind you of maybe a third of all seasons of all NFL teams. Teams without a franchise guy are always trying to figure out if someone they can get in the draft could be that franchise guy. And no, he shouldn't be blamed for letting Tyrod go without a plan in place anymore than the Jets should be blamed for letting Fitz go without a guy who's as good. Letting your best guy go - if he's not good enough to get you to your goal of a championship and especially if he's very expensive and you're having cap problems - makes a whole ton of sense. I mean unless you're willing to sacrifice your long-term future to achieve the magnificent achievement of another seven-, eight- or nine-win season.
Thurman#1 Posted February 16, 2017 Posted February 16, 2017 (edited) That does not change the fact that its still not a great class to self inflict desperation and make yourself go all in on a rookie high in the draft. That is the point. We were 5th in the NFL scoring under TT this year...we are not desperate at QB unless we self inflict that desperation by not keeping Taylor. Why not fix the D which is loaded with Elite prospects at the top of the draft and then worry about the QB position next year if TT or Cardale don't step up and cease the job for good. 1) Points is NOT a QB stat. It is a stat that is probably 75 - 80% from the whole offense and the rest from defense and STs. Trying to use it to big up Tyrod doesn't make sense. Our running game was terrific on offense. Our pass game wasn't. 2) I notice you left finance out of the discussion. And for good reason. However they finished 9th in points per drive and 6th in TDs per drive (including the week 17 abomination). (per Football Outsiders 2016 Offensive Drive Statistics) I'd be curious where they ranked going into week 17, but I don't feel like digging into cached pages and such right now. Must've had a lot of game-winning drives and 4th quarter comebacks then, right? We scored a lot of points against bad teams and didn't score many when it counted. Clearly the defense was very bad. Equally clearly, the offense was terrific when running and substandard when passing. Edited February 16, 2017 by Thurman#1
Recommended Posts