Simple poll. Is Josh Allen improving as a passer?

[Kirby Jackson]

Is he improving? That’s obvious and if you vote otherwise you are wrong. Does that mean he’s where he needs to be? Nope. Those two things can be both, and are both, true.

[Augie]

18 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Is he improving? That’s obvious and if you vote otherwise you are wrong. Does that mean he’s where he needs to be? Nope. Those two things can be both, and are both, true.

 

He’s making progress. He’s better than where he was last year, and he’s cut down on the stupid throws that lead to interceptions lately. Ball security, reading the D pre and post snap and deep ball accuracy are still high on the list of things that need to improve. As long as he continues to make progress, I’m good. I’m not SOLD, but I’m the optimistic type. 

 

I’m not shocked if he’s not where he needs to be 19 starts in. He’s honestly better than what I expected at this point, so I hope he continues to surprise me. I was an “optimistic doubter”. 

 

 

.

Edited November 7, 2019 by Augie

[JoPar_v2]

33 No’s huh? Not what I expected. By almost any measure he’s playing better. Not sure what people were expecting.

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

If he can’t start hitting those intermediate and deep routes his windows will get smaller and smaller on the short routes. Defenses are already starting to stack the box and force Allen to throw the football. 

[PUNT750]

12 hours ago, Ramza86 said:

Just wanted to get a gauge of what people around here think.

 

Follow up question.

 

Do you think hes going to get even better?

He's improved as a QB in general.  If you don't need 300+ yards passing why make that your game.  He will improve more in all aspects of his position.

[JoPar_v2]

1 hour ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

If he can’t start hitting those intermediate and deep routes his windows will get smaller and smaller on the short routes. Defenses are already starting to stack the box and force Allen to throw the football. 

Depends on how you define “intermediate” vs “deep” but he has been pretty good on 10-15 air yard passes. It’s the very long balls, the 9 routes, where he’s struggled.

59 minutes ago, PUNT750 said:

He's improved as a QB in general.  If you don't need 300+ yards passing why make that your game.  He will improve more in all aspects of his position.

Pretty much. Again, talking about wins and much more goes into that than just QB numbers and QB “style” but Lamar and Allen seem to be examples of molding a new way to win (so long as most other things are buttoned up as well.) maybe Murray is the next one. Not so much success yet, but he hasn’t come in full spread air raid. He has looked decent at times though.

[TwistofFate]

9 hours ago, teef said:

i don't think this is as extreme as you're making it out to be.  that being said, i don't know what the coaches plan for josh is.  are they bringing him along slowly?  is this just the offense they intend to run regardless of the qb?  i'm not sure what you're talking about having allen "let it rip" and finding out it was a disaster.  can you elaborate?

Sure.   What is the identity of this offense?   Does anyone really know?   Are we a running team?  Are we a passing team?  

 

McDermott made an interesting comment this week.  He was questioned about game planning and what the identity of the team is.   His response was, its a week to week thing depending on the team we face.   So that tells me we really don't have an identity on offense.  We are letting the defense of the opponent dictate how we want to operate, not the other way around. 

 

As far as letting Josh sling it, look at the game logs.  The first 5 weeks of the season he was playing "hero ball."  He was averaging 33 pass attempts per game over that stretch. In that window came 7 ints. 

 

Move on to the last 3 weeks. He's averaging 26 attempts per game and no ints. (and if it weren't for a comeback attempt against philly, this number would be drastically lower.)

 

In the first couple of weeks he was letting it rip.   It seemed like they were going to really let rip it this year and sink or swim.  They surrounded him with Wrs, linemen, TEs and two new running backs.  All signs pointed to a legit passing attack. 

 

Then, because of those turnovers the offense began to really crawl in a shell.  It's like they put him on a leash to protect him.  IMO its because we were winning and they know you cant sustain wins with that amount of turnovers. 

 

So what initially looked like a legit attempt at a passing offense this year out of the gate, has morphed into a protectionism offense that really has no identity. 

 

I like winning, but have said it here before, I'd rather see a loss with growth (from Allen) then sqeaking by with a win with little to no growth. (against bad teams) 

 

His college stats are not really impressive and he's a huge project.  They need to stop holding his hand, prepare him, coach him and let him play.  If I have to watch this kind football for the next 4 years, Ill vomit repeatedly. 

 

Let him sink or swim. 

[JoPar_v2]

Perhaps the offensive “identity” is being dictated by the Bills’ opponents, week-to-week? Obviously with acknowledgment of the rosters’ strengths and deficiencies? Maybe that’s why we don’t see a more consistent suite of plays or strategies from Daboll? Is that a bad thing? 
 

I don’t really care if Allen throws for 400 or 100 yards. I’d like to see penalties reduced on offense and for the team to keep winning. They’ve already cut down turnovers.

[TwistofFate]

9 minutes ago, JoPar_v2 said:

Perhaps the offensive “identity” is being dictated by the Bills’ opponents, week-to-week? Obviously with acknowledgment of the rosters’ strengths and deficiencies? Maybe that’s why we don’t see a more consistent suite of plays or strategies from Daboll? Is that a bad thing? 
 

I don’t really care if Allen throws for 400 or 100 yards. I’d like to see penalties reduced on offense and for the team to keep winning. They’ve already cut down turnovers.

 

I think it is.  What is the strength of this offense?  Are we playing to it?  What kind of offense does this regime want, passing? Running? Balanced? 

 

If your identity is passing, you design plays to attack mismatches in the secondary.  You scheme guys open and attack.  Think patriots, saints, any passing offense really.  They do it week in and week out regardless of the opponent.  Why?  It's their identity. 

 

If your identity is running, you design plays and blocking schemes to create running lanes for your backs.  Think Ravens.  They didn't change their identity against the Patriots top ranked defense, did they?  No, they smashed them in the face with smash mouth running football and are on pace to break an NFL rushing record. 

 

You don't change your identity to face opponents, you attack the weakness of that team and create plays to suit the strength of your offense.

 

There is no identity on offense at this point, but it sure as hell looked there was one the first couple of weeks.

[JoPar_v2]

1 minute ago, TwistofFate said:

 

I think it is.  What is the strength of this offense?  Are we playing to it?  What kind of offense does this regime want, passing? Running? Balanced? 

 

If your identity is passing, you design plays to attack mismatches in the secondary.  You scheme guys open and attack.  Think patriots, saints, any passing offense really.  They do it week in and week out regardless of the opponent.  Why?  It's their identity. 

 

If your identity is running, you design plays and blocking schemes to create running lanes for your backs.  Think Ravens.  They didn't change their identity against the Patriots top ranked defense, did they?  No, they smashed them in the face with smash mouth running football and are on pace to break an NFL rushing record. 

 

You don't change your identity to face opponents, you attack the weakness of that team and create plays to suit the strength of your offense.

 

There is no identity on offense at this point, but it sure as hell looked there was one the first couple of weeks.

yeah I get you and that’s the right counterpoint to what I was suggesting (again, I don’t know what Daboll’s cooking up.) 

 

But what you’re saying, I think, is the sort of offense that is imposed on the opponent’s defense, no matter what. I agree with you I don’t think that’s been established and I don’t think even the coaches may know at this point. 
 

I think it is an improvisational effort at this point for McD and Daboll. The offense is, in contrast to the defense, in the early stages of coalescing with all the new starters. We may not see some sort of consistent “strategy” all year on offense. But I do got to give daboll credit for operating on the fly.

[LOVEMESOMEBILLS]

3 hours ago, Meatloaf63 said:

I don’t care about 300 yards. I care about execution. I will say it may only have been one game, but that offense is directly designed to accentuate his strengths and it did what nobody else could do to the New England defense. I can’t say that Daboll is Always doing the same thing here, Yes we are 6-2 but there are long stretches where you just say WTF Daboll. I guess the second half of this season will tell more of that tale.

I think part of it is Daboll, 9 new starters this year with even more new back ups & a talented, but young and unpolished QB. I said before the season that they would struggle on offense the first half of the year and start clicking the second half of the season.  

[Buffalo Barbarian]

All NO s just like being miserable.

 

 

[Doc Brown]

I said no because he still has the same arm strength.  As far as on the field performance there's been a great improvement on short and intermediate throws.  The long ball needs work.

[Thurman#1]

How could you say he's not?

 

Fewer INTs, more TDs, fewer absolutely dumb throws, rising passer rating ....

 

Of course he's getting better. The real question is whether he's getting enough better.

Edited November 7, 2019 by Thurman#1

[reddogblitz]

3 hours ago, TwistofFate said:

Sure.   What is the identity of this offense?   Does anyone really know?   Are we a running team?  Are we a passing team?  

 

Our identity is winning.  By any means necessary.    One week it's Josh in a come from behind win.  One week it's feeding Singletary and throwing 20 passes.  Same result. A W.  What's wrong with that?

 

What do you propose. Decide this week we are by golly a passing team so we de emphasize the run going against the 30th rank run defense?

[SydneyBillsFan]

Even blind Freddie can see there has been a dramatic improvement in his play and decision making. 

 

Still more work to be done though. I'm backing him in.

[Thurman#1]

3 hours ago, TwistofFate said:

 

I think it is.  What is the strength of this offense?  Are we playing to it?  What kind of offense does this regime want, passing? Running? Balanced? 

 

If your identity is passing, you design plays to attack mismatches in the secondary.  You scheme guys open and attack.  Think patriots, saints, any passing offense really.  They do it week in and week out regardless of the opponent.  Why?  It's their identity. 

 

If your identity is running, you design plays and blocking schemes to create running lanes for your backs.  Think Ravens.  They didn't change their identity against the Patriots top ranked defense, did they?  No, they smashed them in the face with smash mouth running football and are on pace to break an NFL rushing record. 

 

You don't change your identity to face opponents, you attack the weakness of that team and create plays to suit the strength of your offense.

 

There is no identity on offense at this point, but it sure as hell looked there was one the first couple of weeks.

 

 

Nonsense. You could make that a reasonable statement by changing "you" to "some teams."

 

"Some teams don't change their identity to face opponents, and some teams attack the weakness of that week's opponent and create plays to suit the strength of your offense." That would be reasonable. Some teams use balanced, flexible and varied as their identity. The best example of that is the team that's been the best in football over the last 20 years. Which ain't a bad team to model. The Pats are very varied and tailor their offense to suit the opponents. They mostly pass one week, mostly run the next and are balanced the third. They switch all the time.

 

More, when you look at the teams with an identity, they tend to be teams with established personnel. They aren't generally teams with nine new starters on offense. The idea's kind of laughable, really.

Edited November 7, 2019 by Thurman#1

[GunnerBill]

I think he is improved from last year. His best game this season - at the Giants in week 2 - I thought he looked really primed to break out. It hasn't quite happened since. The next step for me is for him to win a game where the defense really struggles. Against Philly he couldn't do it but the excuses in those games are running out. When the Bills need their QB to keep up with opponents in a higher scoring game he has to show he can get it done. 

 

Will he keep improving? I don't know. I certainly think it is possible so I hope he does. 

3 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

The best example of that is the team that's been the best in football over the last 20 years. Which ain't a bad team to model. The Pats are very varied and tailor their offense to suit the opponents. They mostly pass one week, mostly run the next and are balanced the third. They switch all the time.

 

Go back 2 or three years this was definitely who the Pats were. I think we are starting to see less of that now as Brady comes to the end. They are at the very least a balanced offense every week now. 

[TwistofFate]

40 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Nonsense. You could make that a reasonable statement by changing "you" to "some teams."

 

"Some teams don't change their identity to face opponents, and some teams attack the weakness of that week's opponent and create plays to suit the strength of your offense." That would be reasonable. Some teams use balanced, flexible and varied as their identity. The best example of that is the team that's been the best in football over the last 20 years. Which ain't a bad team to model. The Pats are very varied and tailor their offense to suit the opponents. They mostly pass one week, mostly run the next and are balanced the third. They switch all the time.

 

More, when you look at the teams with an identity, they tend to be teams with established personnel. They aren't generally teams with nine new starters on offense. The idea's kind of laughable, really.

The only thing nonsensical is you trying to explain to me that the Pats change their identity based on who they play. 

 

The pats identity is Tom Brady and the passing game. To say otherwise is nonsense.  That is their identity until he retires or goes to another team. 

[Protocal69]

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I said no because he still has the same arm strength.  As far as on the field performance there's been a great improvement on short and intermediate throws.  The long ball needs work.

What are you talking about

1 hour ago, TwistofFate said:

The only thing nonsensical is you trying to explain to me that the Pats change their identity based on who they play. 

 

The pats identity is Tom Brady and the passing game. To say otherwise is nonsense.  That is their identity until he retires or goes to another team. 

Really its not. That what makes Tom Brady the GOAT. He never had to do it by himself and was happy with that. If the best chance of winning was running the ball that is what the game plan was.

 

Who you were referring to was Peyton Manning. I don't care what the other team was doing Peyton was going to pass the ball 30-50 time almost guaranteed.