Josh Allen's "awful" 1st half...THIS is the article to read

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, mrags said:

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

I'm a believer that 33-50% of all back shoulder throws are actually front shoulder misses.

[Chuck Wagon]

Allen missed on both interceptions.  But they aren't the type of picks to raise concern.  The Beasley play is complete fluke, the ball COULD have been put in a better spot but that needs to be a catch, getting popped up into a defenders arms is the type of thing to happen with any QB.

 

It would be one thing if Josh badly overthrew someone over the middle of the field and there was a defender waiting, or if he stared down a receiver and didn't see a breaking DB.  Unfortunately a lot of the national people aren't going to any sort of level of nuance and are knee jerking to what they see on a stat sheet.

[eball]

5 minutes ago, mrags said:

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

 

Smoke and Josh both said the route was supposed to go over the top but the DB had good coverage and took that away.  What happened next is why you hear so much about QBs and WRs needing to build chemistry.  Both players knew that if the coverage was taking away the deep shot Josh would intentionally underthrow it because the receiver almost always has the advantage there.  It worked perfectly, and Smoke even drew the DPI had he not come down with the ball.  And Josh absolutely looked off the safety before throwing, which kept him from being able to make a play on the ball.  These things are actually practiced and it's not "dumb luck" most of the time.

 

3 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

I'm a believer that 33-50% of all back shoulder throws are actually front shoulder misses.

 

The game is 90% mental and the other half physical.

[Warcodered]

8 minutes ago, mrags said:

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

I mean Allen was locked in that drive he didn't really miss going 8/10 and the two uncompleted being a throwaway and a perfect pass dropped by Beasley. It's possible it was off but it'd have to of been off in a way that coincided with reading the defender perfectly.

[yungmack]

47 minutes ago, BuffaloBillsGospel said:

I've said this in another article but to me Allen has Brett Favre's gun slinger mentality (which I love) but with that mentality you are going to make mistakes, we should not make excuses for him since there is no need to, as long as he can come back from those mistakes and win games which he did. If we have the next Brett Favre with more athleticism, do we really give 2 ***** about whether or not he makes mistakes as long as were getting to the playoffs or Superbowls?

Go back thru all the Super Bowls and I think you'll find that the by-the-book, system-type classic QB, with but a couple of outlier exceptions, wins. The more exciting pull-it-out-of-your butt "gunslinger" QBs get the fan mania but tend not to get the brass ring. Two of that type - Tarkenton and Kelly -- alone count for 8 losses and no SB wins. Compare Stabler & LaMonica with Bradshaw in the 70s, or think of Favre, the ultimate gunslinger who, for all the raves, managed one SB win in an era that overlapped with the dull Troy Aikman and the highly "system" QB John Elway. 

 

What's winning me over with Josh Allen is his growing competence as a system QB who retains some fine gunslinger ability. That just might be the secret sauce for major success.

[Prickly Pete]

5 hours ago, Ta111 said:

So you believe we will have balls bouncing off receivers hands, hitting their thigh and going straight into the arms of a linebacker going forward?

 

No, read my prior post... I think Allen will be fine. I think those were aberrations.

[VW82]

1 hour ago, Nextmanup said:

I agree a few of the actual turnovers were bad luck and unfortunate bounces.

What concerns me much more are the 2 turnovers which are not included in the box score.

You know, the two glaringly bad throws for INTs when Allen started to panic and play hero ball for a while there.

 

One was erased by a defensive holding call away from the play (thank God) and the other INT to be was dropped when it hit the Jets player in his hands.

 

If you want to look at the whole game and try to understand what happened, look at the entire thing, not just the feel good parts.

 

 

 

Pretty much this. I don't understand why we have to perform all these mental gymnastics trying to convince ourselves that he was actually good on Sunday. He did a lot of good things, yes, but overall? Way too many mistakes. Remember that pass to Knox on the crossing route that was so far behind him he got completely spun around?

 

One game doesn't make him a bad QB or mean he's going to bust. He had a bad game against a soft Jets D where many of his bugaboos resurfaced. Why is it so hard to admit that? I expect he'll be much better this Sunday.

 

Edited September 10, 2019 by VW82

[Thurman Kelly]

Like almost everyone here, I was glad the Bills were able to pull out this win, and Allen deserves a lot of credit for composing himself at the half (it certainly helped that the defense played great and the Jets made very little out of all those turnovers by half) and for playing an excellent 4th quarter.  Also, I don't expect a 2nd year QB who didn't start every game of his rookie season to be perfect.  I'm just looking to see enough improvement in seeing receivers open downfield, avoiding foreseeable interceptions, improved accuracy (particularly in short passing), and better decision making (particularly when it comes to throwing the ball away when nothing is there).

 

Notwithstanding that outlook, a reasonable description of his performance in the first half is "Petermanesque".  The Beasley interception was largely his fault.  He threw it behind him, if only slightly, but it was off target enough that at that range and velocity a bounce of some kind was foreseeable.  The pick 6 is entirely on him.  The first fumble was a little sloppy and little unlucky (he felt the sack coming, but didn't secure the ball to his body, or get rid of it), but the fumbled snap was on him (he left the exchange too early - I don't buy the explanation that the exchange failed because the centre was pushed back by the defense).  He wasn't to blame for the safety (unless you think he should have pushed into Gore's back when it looked like he was stacked up at the line - frankly, I don't want the starting QB to risk injury by getting involved in line play).  Let's remember that Peterman, similarly, also wasn't entirely to blame for his 5 first half interceptions, but his performance is now legend.

 

The difference is that Peterman was benched after his nightmare half, the Bills were out of the game by the time he left, and so Peterman never got the chance to "redeem" himself with a better 2nd half performance.

 

I think that Allen is much more talented than Peterman and has a much higher upside, but his performance in the first half was one of the worst ever by a Bills starting QB.

[section122]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If we get 1st drive Josh and 4th Quarter Josh for 4 quarters next week.... then the Giants better watch out. I feel like he needs a day like that. A real complete performance to change the narrative. I thought Sunday showed real progress in those spots in the short and intermediate game. 

 

I thought week 17 last year was a complete game from him but agree with you.  It is easy to see the 4 turnovers without context and think that it is the same pre-draft Allen.  What we saw watching the game was much improved accuracy and overall grasp of the game and what the defense was throwing at him.  

 

If we were doing heat maps though... 

 

This win is one for the defense to hang their hat on.  They kept the team in the game until the 4th quarter.  They only gave up 8 points on the road to a division rival.  Josh is getting a lot of credit for the comeback but that defense should be getting more play this week.

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

I thought week 17 last year was a complete game from him but agree with you.  It is easy to see the 4 turnovers without context and think that it is the same pre-draft Allen.  What we saw watching the game was much improved accuracy and overall grasp of the game and what the defense was throwing at him.  

 

If we were doing heat maps though... 

 

This win is one for the defense to hang their hat on.  They kept the team in the game until the 4th quarter.  They only gave up 8 points on the road to a division rival.  Josh is getting a lot of credit for the comeback but that defense should be getting more play this week.

 

And week 17 is always a bit odd you are never sure who is already running for the bus. Doing that week 2 in New York against a storied franchise would make people stand up and take notice. 

[MDH]

46 minutes ago, mrags said:

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

 

Yeah, it wasn't really back shoulder, it was too far inside to be that.

 

He still gave his best playmaker a chance to win a one on one battle which is what I want to see.

[BillsfaninSB]

5 hours ago, 32ABBA said:

 

 

I think the way Allen plays the next few games will let us know if it was just a string of bad luck, or if he is actually the guy that the rest of the stats imply.

 

I believe it will be the latter.

 

I suppose you expect 3 or 4 turnovers game?

 

 

 

I agree.  The Jets game was weird and made it hard to truly evaluate QB play.  It felt kind of like a pre season game with how uneven it was.  But we did see how he handled himself under pressure.

 

We need a couple more data points. 

 

 

[Success]

I was thrilled with Allen’s game.  The turnovers were generally flukey.  Not entirely, but I didn’t see him misread coverages or make dumb throws.

 

And accuracy?  Such an overblown concern about Allen.  

 

He’s such a gamer.  I feel like it’s been a long time since we had a QB who was this kind of leader, and who just seemed like a winner.  

 

[teef]

the only real thing i worry about with josh is his playing hero ball.  i'm not sure if he gets panicky or what, but when he starts to force plays, that when the nonsense starts.  i think the turnovers threw him a bit, hero ball came out, and once he settled down, we saw how effective he can be.  i'm not worried about accuracy at this point, but i'm sure he'll miss some easy plays a couple of times a game.  all qbs do.  i know everyone loved the heavy passing, but i'd love to see the run game help him out more.

[oldmanfan]

29 minutes ago, VW82 said:

 

Pretty much this. I don't understand why we have to perform all these mental gymnastics trying to convince ourselves that he was actually good on Sunday. He did a lot of good things, yes, but overall? Way too many mistakes. Remember that pass to Knox on the crossing route that was so far behind him he got completely spun around?

 

One game doesn't make him a bad QB or mean he's going to bust. He had a bad game against a soft Jets D where many of his bugaboos resurfaced. Why is it so hard to admit that? I expect he'll be much better this Sunday.

 

Why do we say this.  Because you're being ridiculous.  See my post above, and then see what you wrote here.  You claim he made way to many mistakes and then cite ONE PASS. 

 

Do this.  go back and actually watch the game.  Go back and chart each throw, hen tell me he made way too many mistakes.  Tell me he was inaccurate.  If you do, it will confirm you simply want to slam the kid for no reason. 

 

 

[oldmanfan]

52 minutes ago, Thurman Kelly said:

Like almost everyone here, I was glad the Bills were able to pull out this win, and Allen deserves a lot of credit for composing himself at the half (it certainly helped that the defense played great and the Jets made very little out of all those turnovers by half) and for playing an excellent 4th quarter.  Also, I don't expect a 2nd year QB who didn't start every game of his rookie season to be perfect.  I'm just looking to see enough improvement in seeing receivers open downfield, avoiding foreseeable interceptions, improved accuracy (particularly in short passing), and better decision making (particularly when it comes to throwing the ball away when nothing is there).

 

Notwithstanding that outlook, a reasonable description of his performance in the first half is "Petermanesque".  The Beasley interception was largely his fault.  He threw it behind him, if only slightly, but it was off target enough that at that range and velocity a bounce of some kind was foreseeable.  The pick 6 is entirely on him.  The first fumble was a little sloppy and little unlucky (he felt the sack coming, but didn't secure the ball to his body, or get rid of it), but the fumbled snap was on him (he left the exchange too early - I don't buy the explanation that the exchange failed because the centre was pushed back by the defense).  He wasn't to blame for the safety (unless you think he should have pushed into Gore's back when it looked like he was stacked up at the line - frankly, I don't want the starting QB to risk injury by getting involved in line play).  Let's remember that Peterman, similarly, also wasn't entirely to blame for his 5 first half interceptions, but his performance is now legend.

 

The difference is that Peterman was benched after his nightmare half, the Bills were out of the game by the time he left, and so Peterman never got the chance to "redeem" himself with a better 2nd half performance.

 

I think that Allen is much more talented than Peterman and has a much higher upside, but his performance in the first half was one of the worst ever by a Bills starting QB.

This to me is way, way off base.  I refer you to my previous post above, but to comment on stuff here I'm sorry, but when you hit an NFL receiver in the hands - in the hands- and he pops it up that is not a pick that is entirely on the QB.  It simply is not, and claiming it is is just dumb.  The fumble on the snap.  Morse hiked the ball into himself it appeared; it is not a fumble if you never even touch the ball.  The fumble on the sack entirely on Allen; he has to learn to take the sack and protect the ball.  And the other pick was a deflection and it's a crap shoot when that occurs.

 

To compare that half to Peterman, to claim it is one of the worst halves ever by a Bills QB, is so over the top it's ridiculous.  Bad breaks are not poor performance.  You ignore the fact that they were moving the ball down the field for most of the half is simply looking for reasons to be negative.  You claim you want to see improvement in seeing receivers open downfield (checked, although he could get the ball out sooner sometimes), avoiding foreseeable interceptions (the throw to the corner where it should have been picked is a throw he can't make-see my commentary above), improved accuracy (anyone who watched that game and can't see how accurate he was is either blind or refuses to see), better decision making (he went through progressions and di throw it way more - even Gannon commented on how he was doing that).  So for the most part he showed improvement in the areas you wanted to see, and that makes him Petermanesque???

 

The kid did a lot more good than bad the other day.  He  did some bad things, he'll continue to do some bad things as young QBs do, but hopefully at much lower frequencies. Yet some around here want to apparently crucify the kid for reasons that remain a mystery. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by oldmanfan

[teef]

26 minutes ago, BillsfaninSB said:

 

I agree.  The Jets game was weird and made it hard to truly evaluate QB play.  It felt kind of like a pre season game with how uneven it was.  But we did see how he handled himself under pressure.

 

We need a couple more data points. 

 

 

it was one of the more bizarre games i have seen in a long time.

[dakrider]

 I watched game late on dvr and cheated and checked the halftime score/stats (not final score though).  So yeah watching the game it wasn't near as bad as the stats made it out to be.  Josh did have a hand in the turnovers, no doubt but as the article points out was not result of poor decisions.  The 2 almost ints were worse than the actual turnovers. 

 

One thing too, which I doubt anyone argues, is last year's Allen / Bills team would not have won this game. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by dakrider

[Thurman Kelly]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

This is kind of absurdity that I find laughable around here.  I refer you to my previous post above, but to comment on stuff here I'm sorry, but when you hit an NFL receiver in the hands - in the hands- and he pops it up that is not a pick that is entirely on the QB.  It simply is not, and claiming it is is just dumb.  The fumble on the snap.  Morse hiked the ball into himself it appeared; it is not a fumble if you never even touch the ball.  The fumble on the sack entirely on Allen; he has to learn to take the sack and protect the ball.  And the other pick was a deflection and it's a crap shoot when that occurs.

 

To compare that half to Peterman, to claim it is one of the worst halves ever by a Bills QB, is so over the top it's ridiculous.  Bad breaks are not poor performance.  You ignore the fact that they were moving the ball down the field for most of the half is simply looking for reasons to be negative.  You claim you want to see improvement in seeing receivers open downfield (checked, although he could get the ball out sooner sometimes), avoiding foreseeable interceptions (the throw to the corner where it should have been picked is a throw he can't make-see my commentary above), improved accuracy (anyone who watched that game and can't see how accurate he was is either blind or refuses to see), better decision making (he went through progressions and di throw it way more - even Gannon commented on how he was doing that).  So for the most part he showed improvement in the areas you wanted to see, and that makes him Petermanesque???

 

The kid did a lot more good than bad the other day.  He  did some bad things, he'll continue to do some bad things as young QBs do, but hopefully at much lower frequencies. Yet some around here want to apparently crucify the kid for reasons that remain a mystery. 

 

I disagree, but I'll be a bit more respectful than you. 

 

NFL receivers typically have a large catch radius, but on the perimeter of that radius receivers stand an equal chance of either catching the ball or just deflecting it.  No point is made by stating that the pass hit Beasley's hands.  The fact is that the pass was behind him.  It was inaccurate, even though it was a short pass.  It was thrown into the middle of the field where there is less forgiveness for inaccuracy.  The best QBs don't make this mistake very often.  They make their short passes to the center of the catch radius, or at least outside of the catch radius of coverage.  That's why their INT totals are low (at least relative to their TD passes).

 

I watched the replays of the snap as well.  I saw a snap lifted to the right position.  It wasn't fumbled on the way up by the center (which you also seem to have noticed).

 

You seem to miss my point somewhat.  I didn't say he's a lost cause, or that his entire game was Petermanesque, just that the first half was.  He  did some things well during that half (just as Peterman did against the Chargers), was a little unlucky (as Peterman also was), but made far too many errors for one half of football.  If that performance had been against the Patriots and not the Jets, and had the Bills been trailing by 30 at the half, he might have found himself on the bench.  Fortunately for him, the defense gave him a second chance, and fortunately he took advantage of that opportunity and played well in the second half (and eliminated his 1st half errors).

 

I think he's still the best chance we have to win, both now and in the immediate future, but let's not pretend he didn't have an awful first half last week.

[oldmanfan]

13 minutes ago, Thurman Kelly said:

 

I disagree, but I'll be a bit more respectful than you. 

 

NFL receivers typically have a large catch radius, but on the perimeter of that radius receivers stand an equal chance of either catching the ball or just deflecting it.  No point is made by stating that the pass hit Beasley's hands.  The fact is that the pass was behind him.  It was inaccurate, even though it was a short pass.  It was thrown into the middle of the field where there is less forgiveness for inaccuracy.  The best QBs don't make this mistake very often.  They make their short passes to the center of the catch radius, or at least outside of the catch radius of coverage.  That's why their INT totals are low (at least relative to their TD passes).

 

I watched the replays of the snap as well.  I saw a snap lifted to the right position.  It wasn't fumbled on the way up by the center (which you also seem to have noticed).

 

You seem to miss my point somewhat.  I didn't say he's a lost cause, or that his entire game was Petermanesque, just that the first half was.  He  did some things well during that half (just as Peterman did against the Chargers), was a little unlucky (as Peterman also was), but made far too many errors for one half of football.  If that performance had been against the Patriots and not the Jets, and had the Bills been trailing by 30 at the half, he might have found himself on the bench.  Fortunately for him, the defense gave him a second chance, and fortunately he took advantage of that opportunity and played well in the second half (and eliminated his 1st half errors).

 

I think he's still the best chance we have to win, both now and in the immediate future, but let's not pretend he didn't have an awful first half last week.

I will respectfully disagree.  I have said here many times, and some disagree, that there is a difference between accuracy and precision.  The pass that was the pick 6 is a perfect example.  It was accurate, it hit the WR in the hands.  Accuracy is how close you are to a given target, , and by any measure that pass was accurate.  It could have been more precise, i.e. hitting a specific spot.  Now from my measure that throw could have been maybe 4 inches more to the left.  But I'm sorry, NFL WR's who get hit right in the hands (and the pass was low, where it should have been away from the defender)  get paid to catch that pass.  To somehow conflate that with some of the terrible Peterman picks is just looking to be overly negative, in my opinion.

 

The bad snap.  Snaps are between a C and QB.  It looked  to me (and to Gannon) that the snap was on the C. But again to place all the blame on Allen when, at the least, a poor snap involves both parties. 

 

The other pick.  A tipped ball which is a crap shoot.  And the other fumble that was on him as a said above.

 

Three fo the four issues were not truly his, but if you watch the half objectively you see that the team was moving very well offensively, and some dumb luck and dumb penalties such as Feliciano kept them from scoring.  Your conclusion that he was Petermanesque, that it was one of the worst halves of football ever by a Bills QB, and so on, is just over the top.  I go back to 1960 with this team and there have been plenty of QBs that have had worse halves.  If you can, go back and watch the replay, look at every throw he made, then tell me he was inaccurate and so on.  If you're being objective you'll find he wasn't.

Edited September 10, 2019 by oldmanfan