3rdand12 Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 6 hours ago, hondo in seattle said: It's not just a Chan thing. It's been a long time since we had good coordinators on both sides of the ball. That's been a problem with every head coach since Marv. Because Mr Wilson ran a budget. This is what Bills suffered from the last decade of his ownership. Bills would likely have to spend mightily to put together a 4 star staff. Love The Chan. McBeanes have the Pegulas now. day and nite with Staff budget. saw that with Rex and Roman Lets hope it is no longer a financial issue. 5 hours ago, Gordio said: Good post. With that being said though it is all about the QB. We have all seen the aerial shots of receivers running open throughout the year & Taylor flat out missing his read or throwing the ball 10 yards over the receiver's head. Is it Dennison's fault his QB can't complete a pass farther than 10 yards? Give Dennison a good QB & he will be fine. so when you have a certain set of checks to go through. Pre snap post snap. and because you need to create passing AND sight lanes ? Aerial view means little. I watched some other games just to see what "good " qbs were doing. WRs and players running open happens each game, each play. if receivers are doing the job ? they are either setting up a block or running free ideally. the trick is to pick the correct one. design or processing. or both ?? 27 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: Those who chose not to learn from history’s mistakes are doomed to repeat them!! Oh Man I hate when that happens..
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 16 minutes ago, BuffaloBillsGospel said: We've had 2 different OC's by 2 different HC's and Tyrod Taylor has not been able to take his play to the next level, I believe it's safe to say that is who he is by now. With that being said, would Dennison be a solid OC with a better QB? He lead us to the 3rd best rushing attack, if we had a QB worth a damn I think he could be a very good OC, just my opinion. Maybe he just needs to be relieved of playcalling? Seems like it wasnt him in most of most of his prior OC stints. Maybe for good cause? 1
2003Contenders Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 The problem with Gailey was that he never really saw himself as anything other than a glorified OC. He said as much in his inaugural press conference, when he said he would hire an OC who would have the the job in title only since he would call all the plays. He then went on to say that he would hire a DC that he specifically wanted to run a 3-4 -- but that the DC would NOT be a "household name". That guy turned out to be George Edwards who was in over his head at that point in his career. I believe that McD is more of a true CEO. Yes, his expertise is on the defensive side of the ball, but he appears to have a lot of faith in a veteran coordinator like Frazier to actually manage the D. Based on what we heard in the press conference yesterday, it sounds like he is weighing his options at the OC position. 1
Drunken Pygmy Goat Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 6 hours ago, Buddo said: I don't think it's the same, at all. Edwards had next to no experience in running a D, whereas Dennison has been involved in Offenses, for years, although his play calling stints have been very limited. People talk about changing OCs like it doesn't matter. It does. Something that has been commented on, a lot, this year, that I've rarely heard from commentators before, was how well some plays have been designed. That's Dennison. It's also been commented on, especially by Romo, that Taylor simply wasn't either seeing the opportunities, or in effect, not having the guts to take them. Yet we still won more games than we lost. Dennison's biggest weakness is in play calling, not iin the design of the offence. His second biggest weakness, is in the personnel he's been given to run the offense. As they aren't that good, Shady, and maybe Benjamin aside. I was going to chime in with something like this. It's no coincidence that the one major knock on Dennison is his play calling, given his lack of experience in that role. He has been a part of successful offenses, but hasn't really been the one in charge. And while I'm sure some of the play calling issues this year have had something to do with the talent on the field, I think in most cases, he was simply guilty of over thinking things. But there have been plenty of plays left on the field as well this year. Give the Bills a QB that does a better job of diagnosing pre-snap and post-snap, throws guys open a time or two, and knows when to throw the ball away and not take unnecessary sacks for big losses, and those missed opportunities should be minimized. Fewer dropped passes, and a more consistent rushing attack would help, too. 1
cba fan Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 16 hours ago, BuffaloRush said: With the speculation swirling about Rick Dennision, this situation made me remember back to 2010. It was Chan Gailey's first year as coach of the Bills. Now there are many difference between Gailey's first year and the inaugural season of Sean McDermott. McDermott has way more power at OBD that Chan ever did. Also overall his first year was successful, whereas Chan's way not. However there is one similarity in regards to coordinators. In Chan's first year, the Bills sucked big time and finished 4-12. However, Chan was able to get surprising production on offense from a talent level that was average to below average. While their record was dreadful, the Bills fought hard and lost 6 games by 1 score of less. As you know Chan's background was offense and he was regarded as having a good mind on that side of the ball. He basically ran the show and called plays - he was coach and OC. The obvious problem with the Bills throughout the 2010 season was the defense. There were some talented players on defense (Byrd, Whitner, Poz, Kyle) but by the end of the year it was clear the defense was costing the team games. They were ranked toward the bottom of the league in defense (#24) and were blown out the last two games of the year. It was painfully obvious that Chan knew offense but needed more help with the defense. It was also clear change needed to made. Chan should have fired George Edwards( the current "defensive coordinator" with in Minnesota - notice the air quotes), but instead, being the loyal person he is, Chan stood by his coordinator and brought him back in 2011. The result? An even worse defense ranked 26th in the league. By that time, his hand was forced and he fired George. Sadly, rather than reaching outside the organization to someone with fresh ideas and a difference perspective, he gave the reigns to Dave Wannstedt who was an assistant defensive coach. It was an uninspiring choice and the results were barely better (22nd overall). And so, because Chan never could get competent people to run his defense he was fired and squandered away his last head coaching position in the NFL. Back to 2017 The current situation with Rick Dennison reeks of the Chan/Edwards dilemma. Like Chan, McDermott knows defense but it definitely appears he's going to need a stronger coordinator to run the other side of the ball. I think most fans/media that know this team well, realize Dennison's overall uninspiring offense this season. Like with George Edwards, you can point to a few factors that worked about Dennison (Tyrod, WR's) but overall the results this year were especially bad. I just hope that McDermott makes a better choice that Chan Gailey did with Edwards. Because if the move isn't made this, there's a good chance they'll be making the move on season later. Lets cut to the chase. Are you advocating hiring Chan Gailey as OC then?? 1
corta765 Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) Sorry but this is a pretty poor take for a few reasons the biggest being McD does not call the defense anymore he stopped after week 3 or 4 and Frazier really does run the show. He has said himself it was too much and his job is the coach of the team not one specific side. So he isn't just specializing in one area as a coach. He may have more skill with defense but his focus is the team and the defense is Frazier. Second Gailey didn't have his number #1 WR traded before the season which resulted in his #2 WR retiring in frustration. That is 100% not on McD that was all Beane and they still made the playoffs. Before the trade the Bills were lauded for what they had to the WR corp by having Watkins & Boldin and Jones to learn from them. Would the offense have been that much better with them? Probably not in terms of being a Top 10 type unit but even as a lower 20s passing game that would've been much better. Third Gailey never got the team over 7-9 and never won a big game when it mattered. Yes the Patriots was nice in 2011 but that looks more like a fluke in retrospect. Gailey's squad couldn't beat a crappy Rams team at home in December. Say what you want about the offense but he had them do enough that the team made the playoffs. Comparing him to Gailey is just a really poor stretch, I get what your trying to do but McD making the playoffs with a rag tag roster minus Shady/TreWhite puts him in a whole different place compared to any drought coach. The offense does need to improve he and Beane said as much yesterday and the focus should be on what pieces potentially will be slotted in for this next season. Edited January 10, 2018 by corta765 1
BigDingus Posted January 11, 2018 Posted January 11, 2018 5 hours ago, VaMilBill said: Well it's my opinion. The Raiders severely regressed this year. The Bengals regressed this year. The Browns regressed. I make this point because I think this roster overachieved and normally games we lose (Atlanta, TB, Indy) we happened to win. On pretty lucky plays mind you. Even throughout the season you could see regression. Our defense stopped getting all the turnovers and we went into a slump. Our offense was abysmal pretty much since the Raiders game. Exactly. This isn't even the best team the Bills have had over the drought, there's even articles written about it. We got very lucky in a number of ways to make it to the playoffs (many teams do), but that doesn't mean we'll automatically improve record-wise next year. Every team gets upgraded, every team goes through FA, every team goes through the draft, every team makes trades... Tyrod has regressed since his first game as a starter, and this season he's been below even his low standards. If we draft a new QB, I'm fine with getting a new OC even though I'm not really anti-Dennison. As long as we have a capable QB coach & have a good surrounding staff to develop him, I'll be happy. However, it's very likely our record dips a couple games with a rookie QB.
reddogblitz Posted January 11, 2018 Posted January 11, 2018 Just now, BigDingus said: We got very lucky in a number of ways to make it to the playoffs (many teams do), but that doesn't mean we'll automatically improve record-wise next year. Every team gets upgraded, every team goes through FA, every team goes through the draft, every team makes trades... Luck is part of the game. One of the NFL's most storied franchises get all kinds of love and adulation and praise for a very squirely play. The Immaculate Reception McCoy was below his standards as well. 5.4 ypc in 2016 and 4.0 in 2017. A lot of offensive guys regressed this year for some reason.
Jerome007 Posted January 11, 2018 Posted January 11, 2018 In some games here and there the schemes were pretty good. In others, really vanilla. And as mentioned, didn't seem to always fit the players, which what matters most IMO. And the reason I don't think he's good is what happened the last game, which happened quite often this year. In the first half the Bills offense really moved the ball well, the designs played to the strength of the team and on and on. In the 2nd half, the Jags seem to guess every play. Sure THEY made halftime adjustments, but that's a given! As an OC you have to make some too! Not having the same patterns for the whole game come week 18!
Saxum Posted January 11, 2018 Posted January 11, 2018 14 hours ago, Thurman#1 said: I just want them to coldly analyze their problems and not make decisions out of loyalty. I'm not convinced that the problem is Dennison, but if they decide that he's a problem, let him go. I do NOT think they coldly analyzed the staff which was on hand before they let them go or fired them so I do not think they will do same with coaches they brought in. It seems a lot easier to let go / sign players.
baskingridgebillsfan Posted January 11, 2018 Posted January 11, 2018 didn't the defense get worse after Edwards was fired
reddogblitz Posted January 11, 2018 Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) 13 hours ago, Gordio said: Good post. With that being said though it is all about the QB. We have all seen the aerial shots of receivers running open throughout the year & Taylor flat out missing his read or throwing the ball 10 yards over the receiver's head. Is it Dennison's fault his QB can't complete a pass farther than 10 yards? Give Dennison a good QB & he will be fine. Do y'all ever watch other games? I see this in EVERY game I watch. ALL QBs miss open WRs at times. Hotrod does It more than perhs, true, but they ALL do it. I heard Tony Romo castigate Tommy for missing an open WR a few weeks back. I think it was the Pitt game Edited January 11, 2018 by reddogblitz
Manther Posted January 12, 2018 Posted January 12, 2018 On 1/10/2018 at 7:55 AM, Doc said: A better QB will make Dennison look better. That being said, they can do better than Dennison. Agreed and agreed!
BuffaloRush Posted January 12, 2018 Author Posted January 12, 2018 On 1/10/2018 at 8:50 PM, baskingridgebillsfan said: didn't the defense get worse after Edwards was fired Nope slightly better
ganesh Posted January 12, 2018 Posted January 12, 2018 On 1/10/2018 at 5:14 PM, Maine-iac said: I'm honestly not sure. That could be the case except the same team had done reasonably well with the Jets just a season earlier. TBH I think Pettine did most of the heavy lifting for Rex in the Jets best seasons and Rex as actually a little better than mediocre without him. The biggest problem we had was stopping the run and Mario was all but laying down, Williams was hurt and Graham was a good man corner who they moved to safety. The reason they could have done well at Jets (even though they finished 6-10 and fired) is that they had the right personnel to run their scheme. On the BIlls, they had a defense that was ranked 4th but played exclusively 4-3. They tinkered that defense, sent Kiko to Philadelphia and put Preston Brown instead. Just like how average players don't adapt well to a new scheme, average coaches have no ability to adapt their schemes to the personnel.
LA Grant Posted January 12, 2018 Posted January 12, 2018 I'd love to see them replace Dennison. I think he was one of the biggest factors in the offense's regression. Even so, my prediction is they will make the mistake and keep him.
Mr. WEO Posted January 12, 2018 Posted January 12, 2018 On 1/10/2018 at 8:23 AM, Gordio said: Good post. With that being said though it is all about the QB. We have all seen the aerial shots of receivers running open throughout the year & Taylor flat out missing his read or throwing the ball 10 yards over the receiver's head. Is it Dennison's fault his QB can't complete a pass farther than 10 yards? Give Dennison a good QB & he will be fine. More passes for 20+ yards than Dalton, Winston, Flacco, Manning, Prescott. this year.
Recommended Posts