This franchise has no ambition to win if they keep Dennison

[buffalo2218]

18 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

Like I said, they'll give him a QB who can run his system and then his evaluation will begin.

Taylor isn't a good passer, so blaming the OC for the QBs obvious short comings seems foolish. 

Taylor may not be a good passer in Dennison's system, but that doesn't excuse Dennison's god awful play calling and far too conservative and predictable approach when the Bills had a lead. The defense really bailed him out quite a few times

[Nihilarian]

19 hours ago, jrober38 said:

Dennison isn't going anywhere.

They'll give him a QB who can actually run his scheme, and then his evaluation will begin. 

Who might that be?

 

I really don't like what I've seen from Peterman under this OC. Nor do I like the run game coordinator/line coach in Juan Castillo as both took steps backward. 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

I think people are making the mistake with Dennison of only asking "was the offense good?" rather than once they determine that the answer is "no" following up with "why was the offense not good?"

 

I have to tell you other than the last three games I have watched every single Bills game this season 3 times over.  The original TV broadcast, the condensed game version and the all22 coaches film.  My personal view remains that execution has been a bigger issue than scheme and playcalling all year.  It is also not true to say that Rick Dennison has not adapted.  The percentage of shot gun snaps for Tyrod has been higher after the bye and they definitely incorporated some more Greg Roman esque run concepts into the playbook after the bye too.  That isn't to say the scheme has been hugely varied or creative.... it hasn't.... it's been a pretty standard WCO with the stretch zone base concept.  But I have always been of the view as a coach that until your players have mastered the basics it is hard to get too far away from it - and this group never really mastered the basics.  

 

I know people will say "but last year!!" Of course.  But once the coaching change was made they were never going to have last year's playbook and be able to run last year's offense.  I the criticism of Rick Dennison is he didn't run Greg Roman's whole offense.... well duh, he was never going to.  If you wanted Greg Roman's offense you should have hired Greg Roman.  

 

That isn't to say I want Dennison to stay.  I question the offensive coaching this year more for its teaching ability than its schematics.  Why didn't the players seen to master the fundamentals of the offense?  In fairness to Juan Castillo who I have been very critical of before and since his hiring his unit did show growth towards the end of the year after a bit of a horror show at the Jets.  By the end of the season our line was closer to its 2016 form.  The receivers, however, got worse as the year went on.  Some of the depths in their route running was frankly shambolic.  Leaving aside Zay's hands for a moment (which I think are a confidence issue more than a coaching one) the play of our wideouts has been atrocious.  Behind Shady we know we have lacked talent so it is hard to be to critical there and I think Tyrod's play has been inconsistent.... not that dissimilar to '15 and '16.  The receivers coach would be my first firing if I was starting on the offense, but then I think it is absolutely fair to ask whether the Quarterbacks coach and Coordinator are the type of coaches you want working with a highly prized rookie Quarterback in 2018 and beyond.  It is in answering that question rather than in answering questions about our 2017 offense that I find the most persuasive argument to make a change.   

[Shaw66]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I think people are making the mistake with Dennison of only asking "was the offense good?" rather than once they determine that the answer is "no" following up with "why was the offense not good?"

 

I have to tell you other than the last three games I have watched every single Bills game this season 3 times over.  The original TV broadcast, the condensed game version and the all22 coaches film.  My personal view remains that execution has been a bigger issue than scheme and playcalling all year.  It is also not true to say that Rick Dennison has not adapted.  The percentage of shot gun snaps for Tyrod has been higher after the bye and they definitely incorporated some more Greg Roman esque run concepts into the playbook after the bye too.  That isn't to say the scheme has been hugely varied or creative.... it hasn't.... it's been a pretty standard WCO with the stretch zone base concept.  But I have always been of the view as a coach that until your players have mastered the basics it is hard to get too far away from it - and this group never really mastered the basics.  

 

I

Gunner -

 

Yours is the beginning of the analysis that makes me conclude that none of us knows whether Dennison should be replaced. 

 

I'm assuming you're correct that the fundamental problem with the offense this season was execution, not scheme, creativity, play-calling, etc.   Now, I don't know that's true, but it's certainly one reasonable explanation for what was the most important problem.   

 

That then leads to the next question, the age-old question:  Was the execution problem bad teaching and preparation (coaching responsibility) or players who for physical or mental reasons, or both, just don't get the job done?   And if it's the latter, what did the coaches do to correct those problems?   I don't know the answer to any of those questions, and I don't think we can answer the Dennison stays or goes question without knowing those kind of things.

 

However, I DO think that at least some, and maybe a lot, of the problem is, as you say, execution.   I'll focus on one example that I've wondered about for a year or two now, and I've actually started thinking I don't like the answer:   How good is Eric Wood?

 

It's seemed to me over the course of this season particularly that I've seen a lot of plays where Wood has not made the block, not gotten to the place he needed to be, just not been very effective.   Beaten in pass protection, neutralized in the run game.   It's bothered me for some time now.   I've noticed during broadcasts of other games that replays show the center making the early double-team block on an inside run, then sliding to the next level and screening (or, even better, drilling) the linebacker or safety.  It's obvious how important that play is to an inside running game.   Atlanta has an All-Pro center, and when you watch him, you can see how valuable the guy in that position can be.   I don't see Wood making that kind of play consistently and effectively.   And I see him getting beat on pass plays.  

 

Let's say I'm correct in that analysis, and let's say there are two or three other offensive positions where the guys just isn't very effective.   You mentioned Zay Jones, and he's a second obvious example of someone who played a lot and was less effective than a decent slot guy ought to be.   If you're the OC and you have three or four guys underperforming and no amount of teaching and coaching makes them better, you're probably not the problem.   

 

And, of course, if no matter how much studying Tyrod does he doesn't make the decisions he needs to make fast enough or correctly enough, you're probably not the problem.  

 

I don't know the answer to any of these issues that relate to evaluation of the coaches and players.   I have my opinions, others have theirs.   But I distrust ALL of the opinions (mine included) because the professionals - McD and Beane and the people who work for them, have a lot more experience doing those evaluations and have a lot more information at their disposal.   

 

Bottom line:   I don't think any of us knows, and I think McD and Beane probably do.   I certainly hope they do.    If they do, next season's team will be improved over this season; if they don't, the Bills stay mired where they've been.  

[BuffaloHokie13]

16 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Just thinking out loud, does anyone think that McDermott is working behind the scenes to get a guy before canning Rico? Remember there were rumors of Beane before he was hired. 

I think Dennison is still one of McD's top 5, potentially top 3, choices. Because of that he will talk to the other guys ahead of Dennison before he lets choice #3, for argument's sake, get out the door.

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Gunner -

 

Yours is the beginning of the analysis that makes me conclude that none of us knows whether Dennison should be replaced. 

 

I'm assuming you're correct that the fundamental problem with the offense this season was execution, not scheme, creativity, play-calling, etc.   Now, I don't know that's true, but it's certainly one reasonable explanation for what was the most important problem.   

 

 

I won't quote the whole of your post for sake of repetition but it is a very sensible series of considerations.  I think scheme and play calling have a share of the blame for a poor offense - they always do but the execution was the bigger problem that I saw based on my study throughout the year.  

 

In conclusion you are certainly right that the picture is far more complicated than many on here have painted it and there are a multitude of factors that need to go into this decision on Dennison. I would be less surprised than many here if he was retained... and less outraged by that decision too.... though I probably lean towards replacing him. Too many have simplified it to "offense bad, regression, fire Dennison".

[Mat68]

its a passing league and we all know that there are huge plays left on the field this year.  Last year When Taylor was making those plays its a little different.  For whatever reason he was not able to make those plays.

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

On 1/10/2018 at 9:10 AM, Yeezus said:

No more excuses. OC's are being fired left and right and there is plenty of good choices out there.

 

The fact that we haven't fired Dennison yet worries me. He was piss poor this season, prob the worst OC I've seen here since the Jauron era. This guy has no idea what it takes to run a successful offense in this league. Him and his staff ruined our #1 run game and top 10 scoring offense. Yes the QB play was underwhelming this season but there were still so many bad games Dennison had. 

 

Not to mention, pairing your franchise QB with a quality OC is one of the most important things towards their development. I do not trust Dennison for one second to develop a young QB. I want him far away from Buffalo as possible right now.

 

Go get Bevell or make John DeFilippo from the Eagles the highest paid OC in the league. DeFilippo is part of the reason why Wentz is so good, this guy knows his stuff. 

 

So the better choices are Bevell, who was fired for lack of offensive consistency and Defilippo who's up for HC positions but he's going to quit as the Eagles OC with a stud at QB like Wentz for an unproven QB situation for the Bills? Ok I'm not going to blast you but I'd like some better options than those because the one is far fetched and the other doesn't seem like an upgrade so I ask, what other options do you think would be realistic/better in your opinion?

[Kirby Jackson]

6 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

I think Dennison is still one of McD's top 5, potentially top 3, choices. Because of that he will talk to the other guys ahead of Dennison before he lets choice #3, for argument's sake, get out the door.

The only place that we disagree (slightly) is that he “was” one of his top 5 or 3. After a year working with him, presumably he is no longer in the same place. I would think that by now he is either more or less comfortable with him than he was a year ago. The same holds true for other candidates to a lesser extent. 

[BuffaloHokie13]

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The only place that we disagree (slightly) is that he “was” one of his top 5 or 3. After a year working with him, presumably he is no longer in the same place. I would think that by now he is either more or less comfortable with him than he was a year ago. The same holds true for other candidates to a lesser extent. 

If he isn't still one of the top 5 there's no reason for him to be employed. Unless you think we'll swing and miss on all 5+ ahead of him.

 

If I had to guess, the list is something like:

McCoy

Chudzinski (not yet available officially)

Bevell

Dennison

Dorsey

Edited January 11, 2018 by BuffaloHokie13
Added Stuff

[PolishDave]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I think people are making the mistake with Dennison of only asking "was the offense good?" rather than once they determine that the answer is "no" following up with "why was the offense not good?"

 

I have to tell you other than the last three games I have watched every single Bills game this season 3 times over.  The original TV broadcast, the condensed game version and the all22 coaches film.  My personal view remains that execution has been a bigger issue than scheme and playcalling all year.  It is also not true to say that Rick Dennison has not adapted.  The percentage of shot gun snaps for Tyrod has been higher after the bye and they definitely incorporated some more Greg Roman esque run concepts into the playbook after the bye too.  That isn't to say the scheme has been hugely varied or creative.... it hasn't.... it's been a pretty standard WCO with the stretch zone base concept.  But I have always been of the view as a coach that until your players have mastered the basics it is hard to get too far away from it - and this group never really mastered the basics.  

 

I know people will say "but last year!!" Of course.  But once the coaching change was made they were never going to have last year's playbook and be able to run last year's offense.  I the criticism of Rick Dennison is he didn't run Greg Roman's whole offense.... well duh, he was never going to.  If you wanted Greg Roman's offense you should have hired Greg Roman.  

 

That isn't to say I want Dennison to stay.  I question the offensive coaching this year more for its teaching ability than its schematics.  Why didn't the players seen to master the fundamentals of the offense?  In fairness to Juan Castillo who I have been very critical of before and since his hiring his unit did show growth towards the end of the year after a bit of a horror show at the Jets.  By the end of the season our line was closer to its 2016 form.  The receivers, however, got worse as the year went on.  Some of the depths in their route running was frankly shambolic.  Leaving aside Zay's hands for a moment (which I think are a confidence issue more than a coaching one) the play of our wideouts has been atrocious.  Behind Shady we know we have lacked talent so it is hard to be to critical there and I think Tyrod's play has been inconsistent.... not that dissimilar to '15 and '16.  The receivers coach would be my first firing if I was starting on the offense, but then I think it is absolutely fair to ask whether the Quarterbacks coach and Coordinator are the type of coaches you want working with a highly prized rookie Quarterback in 2018 and beyond.  It is in answering that question rather than in answering questions about our 2017 offense that I find the most persuasive argument to make a change.   

 

Really great post!

 

I find myself questioning how bad Dennison really is.   It could be that his one major blunder was not understanding how poorly this roster would be able to execute what he was about to ask them to execute.   I have to fault him for that.   It is his job to evaluate that and adjust accordingly.

 

And I have to fault him for piss poor halftime adjustments which I think separates good coaches from bad ones.    He seems very bad in that regard also.

 

I wish we could get an in-depth explanation of how they saw things at the beginning of the year, why they chose to do things that way and what their thoughts were when they started changing back to what worked last year.

[Kirby Jackson]

I know a lot of people have a problem with Dennison’s creativity. That’s an area I take no issue with. He’s one of the most creative offensive minds that I can remember. I mean who would think to split Tolbert out wide on 3rd and goal from the 17 and throw a slant to him? It takes a lot of creativity to draw that up!! 

[Shaw66]

5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I won't quote the whole of your post for sake of repetition but it is a very sensible series of considerations.  I think scheme and play calling have a share of the blame for a poor offense - they always do but the execution was the bigger problem that I saw based on my study throughout the year.  

 

In conclusion you are certainly right that the picture is far more complicated than many on here have painted it and there are a multitude of factors that need to go into this decision on Dennison. I would be less surprised than many here if he was retained... and less outraged by that decision too.... though I probably lean towards replacing him. Too many have simplified it to "offense bad, regression, fire Dennison".

I'll be surprised if they go away from him, but not disappointed, because that will mean they're quite sure he can't do the job.   I'd guess that the most likely reason they'd dump is if, as someone suggested earlier, the guy or guys McD really wanted are now available.   I don't think that will happen because I believe that McD has studied and is a believer in all the truisms about team excellence, including the one about continuity.   I haven't heard McD on the subject, but I would be amazed if he didn't think that continuity of scheme and coaching is critical to team success.   I think that will make him reluctant to make a change unless he believes there's a clear and indisputable better choice out there.   

 

In other words, he won't fire the guy because he's concluded he can't do the job.   He'll fire him if there's a clear upgrade available.  

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

If he isn't still one of the top 5 there's no reason for him to be employed. Unless you think we'll swing and miss on all 5+ ahead of him.

Which may or may not be the case. The point was that it is fluid. Thoughts and opinions today are different than a year ago regarding all candidates but especially Dennison after working side-by-side for 12 months.

[BringBackOrton]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Which may or may not be the case. The point was that it is fluid. Thoughts and opinions today are different than a year ago regarding all candidates but especially Dennison after working side-by-side for 12 months.

Did you see that O'Leary wrinkle versus Miami?

 

Dennison's star is bright. Not a lot of OC's would have success with Tyrod.

[kota]

LOl ok where do people come up with this stuff.

 

[MiltonWaddams]

I do not believe he is getting fired, regardless of what many hope for here and amongst the general Bills fan base. If the assessment started Monday, multiple firings and hirings of OC's have happened since, and Dennison still has a job, we should all just live with the process. I love a good off season coaching thread, but Rico's employment has been beat to death here.

[dave mcbride]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I think people are making the mistake with Dennison of only asking "was the offense good?" rather than once they determine that the answer is "no" following up with "why was the offense not good?"

 

I have to tell you other than the last three games I have watched every single Bills game this season 3 times over.  The original TV broadcast, the condensed game version and the all22 coaches film.  My personal view remains that execution has been a bigger issue than scheme and playcalling all year.  It is also not true to say that Rick Dennison has not adapted.  The percentage of shot gun snaps for Tyrod has been higher after the bye and they definitely incorporated some more Greg Roman esque run concepts into the playbook after the bye too.  That isn't to say the scheme has been hugely varied or creative.... it hasn't.... it's been a pretty standard WCO with the stretch zone base concept.  But I have always been of the view as a coach that until your players have mastered the basics it is hard to get too far away from it - and this group never really mastered the basics.  

 

I know people will say "but last year!!" Of course.  But once the coaching change was made they were never going to have last year's playbook and be able to run last year's offense.  I the criticism of Rick Dennison is he didn't run Greg Roman's whole offense.... well duh, he was never going to.  If you wanted Greg Roman's offense you should have hired Greg Roman.  

 

That isn't to say I want Dennison to stay.  I question the offensive coaching this year more for its teaching ability than its schematics.  Why didn't the players seen to master the fundamentals of the offense?  In fairness to Juan Castillo who I have been very critical of before and since his hiring his unit did show growth towards the end of the year after a bit of a horror show at the Jets.  By the end of the season our line was closer to its 2016 form.  The receivers, however, got worse as the year went on.  Some of the depths in their route running was frankly shambolic.  Leaving aside Zay's hands for a moment (which I think are a confidence issue more than a coaching one) the play of our wideouts has been atrocious.  Behind Shady we know we have lacked talent so it is hard to be to critical there and I think Tyrod's play has been inconsistent.... not that dissimilar to '15 and '16.  The receivers coach would be my first firing if I was starting on the offense, but then I think it is absolutely fair to ask whether the Quarterbacks coach and Coordinator are the type of coaches you want working with a highly prized rookie Quarterback in 2018 and beyond.  It is in answering that question rather than in answering questions about our 2017 offense that I find the most persuasive argument to make a change.   

Gunner, I respect your opinion a lot, so I'm going to ask you this: the offense was capable enough to score reasonably consistently early in games, which suggests execution worked at some level. Yet in their final seven games including the Jags game, they scored all of three points in the 4th quarter. That strikes me as nearly impossible to do. They also generally sucked in the second half of games. While I can't pinpoint anything Dennison did in particular, it did seem to me that the game plan was repetitive and after 30 minutes pretty damn predictable. Just look at McCoy's rushing numbers in the early parts of games vs. the later parts of games. Some of that has to fall on the coordinator. 

[Kirby Jackson]

8 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Did you see that O'Leary wrinkle versus Miami?

 

Dennison's star is bright. Not a lot of OC's would have success with Tyrod.

Not sure if that’s sarcasm? It’s tough to tell on here. 

[McBean]

On 1/10/2018 at 8:10 AM, Yeezus said:

No more excuses. OC's are being fired left and right and there is plenty of good choices out there.

 

The fact that we haven't fired Dennison yet worries me. He was piss poor this season, prob the worst OC I've seen here since the Jauron era. This guy has no idea what it takes to run a successful offense in this league. Him and his staff ruined our #1 run game and top 10 scoring offense. Yes the QB play was underwhelming this season but there were still so many bad games Dennison had. 

 

Not to mention, pairing your franchise QB with a quality OC is one of the most important things towards their development. I do not trust Dennison for one second to develop a young QB. I want him far away from Buffalo as possible right now.

 

Go get Bevell or make John DeFilippo from the Eagles the highest paid OC in the league. DeFilippo is part of the reason why Wentz is so good, this guy knows his stuff. 

The title should read: “This franchise has no ambition to win if they don’t do whatever it takes to address the QB position.”