What is the one spot on the roster that still has a hole?

[WiGGy]

Weakest spot on the Bills is absolutely QB. Allen had 20 passing TD's 9 picks and was sacked 38 times. He ran for 9 TD's yes but he can't hit the side of a barn passing the ball. Allen as a starter was 23rd in yards per game, near the bottom of the league at 58% completion rate, 21st in TD's, 16th in interceptions and the 9th most sacked QB in the league. How can that totally be ignored? Cam Newton would be a great pick up for the Bills and would be an instant upgrade. As long as Allen is the QB the Bills have no realistic shot at beating the likes of Baltimore or KC. Stidham could potentially have a better season or on par with Allen BUT with a better a coaching staff. Vegas tends to agree considering Belichick is favored for HC of the year and the Bills are even with the Pats to win the AFC East. 

[ny33]

5 hours ago, matter2003 said:

 

We just signed AJ Klein to fill that role. How is that a hole?

 

I don't see the OLine as a hole...I see it as likely trending sharply upward if only for continuity.  In a pretty wide ranging analytic study the highest correlation found in relation to good OLine play was continuity.

1) AJ Klein isn’t very good

2) I agree that continuity is the most important thing, and that the o-line should improve and probably be above average. We still need some elite talent, but that’s probably for next year’s draft. 

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, WiGGy said:

Weakest spot on the Bills is absolutely QB. Allen had 20 passing TD's 9 picks and was sacked 38 times. He ran for 9 TD's yes but he can't hit the side of a barn passing the ball. Allen as a starter was 23rd in yards per game, near the bottom of the league at 58% completion rate, 21st in TD's, 16th in interceptions and the 9th most sacked QB in the league. How can that totally be ignored? Cam Newton would be a great pick up for the Bills and would be an instant upgrade. As long as Allen is the QB the Bills have no realistic shot at beating the likes of Baltimore or KC. Stidham could potentially have a better season or on par with Allen BUT with a better a coaching staff. Vegas tends to agree considering Belichick is favored for HC of the year and the Bills are even with the Pats to win the AFC East. 

Hope that it was worth the signup process to make one trolling post. ??? take bot

[LABILLBACKER]

1 hour ago, WiGGy said:

Weakest spot on the Bills is absolutely QB. Allen had 20 passing TD's 9 picks and was sacked 38 times. He ran for 9 TD's yes but he can't hit the side of a barn passing the ball. Allen as a starter was 23rd in yards per game, near the bottom of the league at 58% completion rate, 21st in TD's, 16th in interceptions and the 9th most sacked QB in the league. How can that totally be ignored? Cam Newton would be a great pick up for the Bills and would be an instant upgrade. As long as Allen is the QB the Bills have no realistic shot at beating the likes of Baltimore or KC. Stidham could potentially have a better season or on par with Allen BUT with a better a coaching staff. Vegas tends to agree considering Belichick is favored for HC of the year and the Bills are even with the Pats to win the AFC East. 

So under this utterly brilliant deduction, we should've dumped Jim Kelly who was only 59% his first 4 years in the league? Or maybe KC should dump Mahomes who had less tds last year (28) then Josh Allen (29)? And I'm sure all those 38 sacks had nothing to do with our mediocre oline? If you want to be impatient and bail on Allen now after only 2 years fine. But most intelligent Bills fans will hang in there another few years. Happy trolling Wiggy....

 

[Kirby Jackson]

Now, that that is out of the way, the weakest position on the team is punter. That’s the only position group near the bottom of the league. That speaks to the Bills depth. With that being said, it could end up being a big problem. Bojo can hit some bombs but he also hits some 25 yarders. With as good as the Bills roster is they need consistency there above all else.
 

They need that position to be neutral (and ST in general). The Bills cannot lose games on weird ST mistakes. They need ST to be a wash. If that happens the Bills will have a really good record. There aren’t many teams that can match them on defense and offense. The Bills are a complete team and a deep team. 

[ColoradoBills]

1 hour ago, WiGGy said:

Weakest spot on the Bills is absolutely QB. Allen had 20 passing TD's 9 picks and was sacked 38 times. He ran for 9 TD's yes but he can't hit the side of a barn passing the ball. Allen as a starter was 23rd in yards per game, near the bottom of the league at 58% completion rate, 21st in TD's, 16th in interceptions and the 9th most sacked QB in the league. How can that totally be ignored? Cam Newton would be a great pick up for the Bills and would be an instant upgrade. As long as Allen is the QB the Bills have no realistic shot at beating the likes of Baltimore or KC. Stidham could potentially have a better season or on par with Allen BUT with a better a coaching staff. Vegas tends to agree considering Belichick is favored for HC of the year and the Bills are even with the Pats to win the AFC East. 

 

Did someone leave the screen door open?  Please close it, your letting all the bugs in!

[Yantha]

5 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Both players IMO are good depth.

 

The 1 hole on OL I see is starting RT. Hopefully someone can solidify that position. Everyone else is at least average for their role. 

Hey there.  I think we are actually on the same page.  I wanted to add an upgrade at RT (backup) in the draft, that could push to actually start (and upgrade starting RT).  I thought the draft would ahve been a good way to upgrade RT.

6 hours ago, matter2003 said:

 

We just signed AJ Klein to fill that role. How is that a hole?

 

I don't see the OLine as a hole...I see it as likely trending sharply upward if only for continuity.  In a pretty wide ranging analytic study the highest correlation found in relation to good OLine play was continuity.

I agree.  CONTINUITY is a big factor with O-line.  Players need to build trust in one another and know how to switch off etc.  However, if a guy isn't performing.  They need a replacement.  Our OL is not a glaring problem, but it can be improved.

[LABILLBACKER]

41 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Now, that that is out of the way, the weakest position on the team is punter. That’s the only position group near the bottom of the league. That speaks to the Bills depth. With that being said, it could end up being a big problem. Bojo can hit some bombs but he also hits some 25 yarders. With as good as the Bills roster is they need consistency there above all else.
 

They need that position to be neutral (and ST in general). The Bills cannot lose games on weird ST mistakes. They need ST to be a wash. If that happens the Bills will have a really good record. There aren’t many teams that can match them on defense and offense. The Bills are a complete team and a deep team. 

Bojo ranked 31st last year in net punting. I lost track of how many 35 yarders he shanked down the sidelines. Why they haven't invited Michael Turk in for a workout is ridiculous. Hopefully Bojo gets upgraded this fall?

Edited May 5, 2020 by LABILLBACKER

[Kirby Jackson]

22 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

Bojo ranked 31st last year in net punting. I lost track of how many 35 yarders he shanked down the sidelines. Why they haven't invited Michael Turk in for a workout is ridiculous. Hopefully Bojo gets upgraded this fall?

I’m hoping so too and Turk seems like an obvious long-term answer. Colquitt could be a short-term answer.  Marquette King would be my first choice I think.
 

Perhaps they try to deal some of their OL depth for a punter? I remember the Browns traded a 7th or something for Andy Lee a few years back. The Bills might be able to turn Spencer Long or someone like that into their punter? 
 

There are avenues to fix the problem but right now I see it as a problem.

[NewEra]

RT is the weakest starting position on the team imo.  Hopefully Cody can make a nice leap in year 2

[Scott7975]

5 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Now, that that is out of the way, the weakest position on the team is punter. That’s the only position group near the bottom of the league. That speaks to the Bills depth. With that being said, it could end up being a big problem. Bojo can hit some bombs but he also hits some 25 yarders. With as good as the Bills roster is they need consistency there above all else.
 

They need that position to be neutral (and ST in general). The Bills cannot lose games on weird ST mistakes. They need ST to be a wash. If that happens the Bills will have a really good record. There aren’t many teams that can match them on defense and offense. The Bills are a complete team and a deep team. 

Kind of strange though.  We used to have an utterly crap team where the punter was the best player haha.

[Kirby Jackson]

9 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

Kind of strange though.  We used to have an utterly crap team where the punter was the best player haha.

Ha ha, it’s like a bizzaro world. I hate to jinx it but with the Bills luck they’ll lose 3 games on special teams and we will all hate life. lol 

[Bills!Win!]

If we have a linebacker have a season ending injury will we be able to recover from that anf still have a top 5 defense? That’s our only hole - backup LB

[Bookie Man]

I love the potential there with Knox and Sweeney but they're still relatively unproven and inexperienced. Wouldnt call it a hole but there's some opportunity there. 

[Thurman#1]

I said no holes for starters and I still think it's true. But the more I think the more I believe the closest thing we have to a hole is big nickel.

[Thurman#1]

On 5/5/2020 at 1:23 PM, MOVALLEYRANDY said:

 

100 % agree. Throwing guys open is something he learns quickly and processing is the perfect word for what he can't do very well, yet.

 

 

I'd disagree. He processes well plenty of times. Just not as consistently as you'd like. Which is not uncommon for a guy as young as him. A lot of what we call processing comes about when you have the correct inputs, which often come from knowledge that comes from experience. I'm not convinced on Allen yet, but definitely hopeful and convinced he's got a chance.

[Thurman#1]

On 5/5/2020 at 9:49 AM, Nihilarian said:

When you look at the drive charts you see the Bills started the game by running. Attempting some deep passes to counter that known Ravens 50% of defensive snaps blitzing. 

 

First series, Singletary one yard, Singletary 5 yards so 3rd and 4. Incomplete deep pass. PUNT

 

Second series, Singletary -2 yards, sack, 3rd and 12 incomplete deep pass, PUNT

 

Third series, pass complete 10 yards, short pass incomplete, deep pass incomplete, 3rd and 10 deep pass incomplete, PUNT

 

Fourth series, Gore 2 yards, short pass incomplete, 3rd and 8 sacked, fumble recovered by Baltimore.

 

Six series, 2nd quarter. short pass incomplete, penalty roughing the passer. 1st and 10. Singletary 6 yards, Singletary 3 yards, 3rd down and 1, Singletary 8 yards... First down!

Singletary 3 yards, Singletary 14 yards... First down! Singletary 9 yards, Allen run 2 yards... First down!

First and 10 at the Ravens 13 yard line. Short pass -4 yards, Singletary -1 yard. 3rd down and 15, Pass incomplete deep, FG.

 

Alright, in my view this series proved that the run game will work if you commit to it, 7 straight runs all leading to first downs and score with a FG. 

 

The next series, pass incomplete deep, Gore gains 6, pass complete 6 yards, pass complete no gain, Gore no gain, Allen sacked -7 yards.PUNT

 

With the run game showing that it can work with Singletary, the Bills started utilizing Gore for some reason in this series and in the next in the 2 min drill they started passing more again. FG. We know Singletary wasn't injured because he had that 38 yard run in the 4th. 

 

It seemed to me that the Bills OC was determined to make that passing game work against that Ravens defense, regardless. What happened after the half was that the Bills went pass happy with 26 pass drop backs vs 8 only runs the entire second half. At this point in the game that Ravens defense had really taken over the game and had the Bills linemen on their heels. Hence, Singletary in the second half,  2 yards, 1 yard, 5 yards, 2 yards, 38 yards, no gain, -3 yards, 2 yards. 

 

As we all know, that usually, the more a team runs the ball the better the RB does over the course of the game. Also, the weaker the opposing defense is against the run later in the game as it wears them down. Most NFL running backs want to see 20 plus runs.

It's my contention that Devin Singletary was underutilized in the run game all season in comparison to other teams starting RB's like Minnesota's Dalvin Cook, Tennessee's Derrick Henry. Singletary with an yard per carry average as good as Henry's at 5.1 per. 

 

The way the Ravens had stepped up their blitzing to 65% of every offensive play after the first few series it made no sense to me to keep asking Allen to keep throwing the ball. Josh Allen is not at the level of an elite pocket passer and shouldn't be asked to carry the team with his arm. When a defense is blitzing this much I just can't wrap my head around why an OC would not pound the ball more to counter that blitzing. I don't see this game as a QB fail given his limited playing experience. A lot of veteran players on that O line and an experienced OC. You tell me! 

 

This has me somewhat perplexed as the Bills did have that one very productive series by running the ball with Singletary, then went to Gore for some reason who had 4 carries for 6 yards. Then back to Singletary sporadically over the course of the second half. 

 

If looking at this game doesn't have you very concerned about the Buffalo Bills offensive line play with the current starters, I don't know what would. Spain, Dawkins, Feliciano, Ford, Morse all 100% snap count. Allen 6 sacks, 12 QB hits. The QB under constant pressure all game. The Bills got the run game working for one series and then went away from it. Can't sack the QB if you are running the ball. 

 

 

 

 

I didn't just look at the drive charts for that Ravens game. I looked at the play-by-play. Every single play.

 

And then I read your post. And it said a lot more about your point of view than it did about that game. Your argument doesn't hold up.

 

Take out that 38-yarder and Singletary had a really bad game. Now, it's not fair to take out whatever play you don't like ... but that 38 yarder didn't happen till about halfway through the 4th quarter (specifically, 8:47 remaining in the 4th, down by 15). So right up until then, he'd gone 13 for 52 and nearly all of those 52 came on that one drive. Outside of that he'd been completely contained. And after that big 38 yarder seemed to indicate they might have success running him? Three carries for -1.

 

You look at the one productive drive he had ... exactly one and no more ... and you say that in your view this drive proved that the run game will work if you commit to it.

 

You can't back that contention up. I'd argue that's confirmation bias. You ignore the rest of the game and look at the one time he was successful. That didn't prove squat. Ups and downs is how things work in life. One short success doesn't prove things will work. Only thing it proves is that things CAN work ... under certain circumstances.

 

Till that one drive, they'd run Singletary three times, for 1 yard, for 5 yards and for -2 yards. Three runs for a total of four yards. Then the drive on which he was successful. The first play was for six yards. Then three, then eight, then three, then 14, then 9, then -1.

 

That didn't show that if you commit to it, he'll succeed. Just the opposite. The first play on that drive was successful, far before they "committed" to using him. If anything, that showed that if he was successful, they'd commit to continuing to use him. Most likely the Ravens tried a defensive variation that the Bills liked Singletary against, or the Bills tried a variation to work Singletary that the Ravens couldn't handle. And when things worked, they continued running him.

 

After that drive, though, Singletary's next run went for two. Hmm. His next was for one and the one after that was for -2. Not surprisingly, they didn't run him consistently after that.

 

When he was successful, they handed it to him. When he wasn't, they didn't. This makes a lot of sense. Most likely the Ravens adjusted after that good drive to work much harder on taking Singletary away, and they were successful till late in the game and prevent defense time.

 

 

 

You say, "As we all know, that usually, the more a team runs the ball the better the RB does over the course of the game." We don't all know that, by any means. It's a pretty common thought, but it's likely a great example of the logical problem of confusing correlation with cause. More, where are the numbers that even show correlation? It's a common cliche, but what's real is that sometimes that's true and sometimes it's not. And that if there is some correlation, it's probably more result than cause ... if a guy's having success early, he's likely to get it a lot late, and if a team's winning, they're more likely to run the ball late to burn clock.

 

Singletary was underused and Gore was overused all season? Yeah, fair enough, that's a very reasonable feeling. This FO absolutely loved Gore. And late in the season it got hard to see why when you looked at his production.

 

But in terms of the OL, well, yeah they looked bad, but the Ravens D was killing everyone, all year, especially when they were able to take away the run and make teams one-dimensional, which they mostly did in this game.

 

Again, more than half of Singletary's carries went for two yards or less. Any OC is going to be affected by a lack of success like that. And up till that long run near the end of the game, it was even worse.

 

 

 

Anyway, I've said enough on this. Nice to talk to you.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Thurman#1

[Nihilarian]

18 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

I didn't just look at the drive charts for that Ravens game. I looked at the play-by-play. Every single play.

 

And then I read your post. And it said a lot more about your point of view than it did about that game. Your argument doesn't hold up.

 

Take out that 38-yarder and Singletary had a really bad game. Now, it's not fair to take out whatever play you don't like ... but that 38 yarder didn't happen till about halfway through the 4th quarter (specifically, 8:47 remaining in the 4th, down by 15). So right up until then, he'd gone 13 for 52 and nearly all of those 52 came on that one drive. Outside of that he'd been completely contained. And after that big 38 yarder seemed to indicate they might have success running him? Three carries for -1.

 

You look at the one productive drive he had ... exactly one and no more ... and you say that in your view this drive proved that the run game will work if you commit to it.

 

You can't back that contention up. I'd argue that's confirmation bias. You ignore the rest of the game and look at the one time he was successful. That didn't prove squat. Ups and downs is how things work in life. One short success doesn't prove things will work. Only thing it proves is that things CAN work ... under certain circumstances.

 

Till that one drive, they'd run Singletary three times, for 1 yard, for 5 yards and for -2 yards. Three runs for a total of four yards. Then the drive on which he was successful. The first play was for six yards. Then three, then eight, then three, then 14, then 9, then -1.

 

That didn't show that if you commit to it, he'll succeed. Just the opposite. The first play on that drive was successful, far before they "committed" to using him. If anything, that showed that if he was successful, they'd commit to continuing to use him. Most likely the Ravens tried a defensive variation that the Bills liked Singletary against, or the Bills tried a variation to work Singletary that the Ravens couldn't handle. And when things worked, they continued running him.

 

After that drive, though, Singletary's next run went for two. Hmm. His next was for one and the one after that was for -2. Not surprisingly, they didn't run him consistently after that.

 

When he was successful, they handed it to him. When he wasn't, they didn't. This makes a lot of sense. Most likely the Ravens adjusted after that good drive to work much harder on taking Singletary away, and they were successful till late in the game and prevent defense time.

 

 

 

You say, "As we all know, that usually, the more a team runs the ball the better the RB does over the course of the game." We don't all know that, by any means. It's a pretty common thought, but it's likely a great example of the logical problem of confusing correlation with cause. More, where are the numbers that even show correlation? It's a common cliche, but what's real is that sometimes that's true and sometimes it's not. And that if there is some correlation, it's probably more result than cause ... if a guy's having success early, he's likely to get it a lot late, and if a team's winning, they're more likely to run the ball late to burn clock.

 

Singletary was underused and Gore was overused all season? Yeah, fair enough, that's a very reasonable feeling. This FO absolutely loved Gore. And late in the season it got hard to see why when you looked at his production.

 

But in terms of the OL, well, yeah they looked bad, but the Ravens D was killing everyone, all year, especially when they were able to take away the run and make teams one-dimensional, which they mostly did in this game.

 

Again, more than half of Singletary's carries went for two yards or less. Any OC is going to be affected by a lack of success like that. And up till that long run near the end of the game, it was even worse.

 

 

 

Anyway, I've said enough on this. Nice to talk to you.

Okay, what we both agree on is that the Ravens were blitzing nearly every Buffalo offensive play. What they did after they saw that Allen couldn't hit the deeper throws was that they stepped up their blitzing from around their normal 50% to 65% or more against the Bills. 

 

And I'd argue that when the Bills handed off to Singletary over and over, again and again he was very successful in the second quarter drive. The Bills ran Singletary 6 straight times successfully, 6, 3, 8, 3, 14, 9 yards. Those for two first downs and in the final 2 yard run play by Allen another first down. The next three plays were two throws and a run, all for either negative yards or incomplete and the result of that drive was a FG.

 

Bad play calls at the end of that drive by Buffalo or was it something that the Ravens Defense saw / heard and was keying on after listening to the previous Bills cadence and realizing what play was being called. 

 

In any event the next series the Bills went with five pass attempts and two runs by Gore. After that it was close to the end of the half and perhaps the Bills went into a 2 min drill with no runs and six straight passes which did result in another FG.  That series did start on the Ravens 49 yard line after the Bills defense held the Ravens offense to only 4 yards starting from their own six yard line. Still, nine passes, two runs and those by Gore. 

 

In the second half it was mostly passes with an occasional run once per series by Singletary for usually not many yards, 2, 1 ,5, no gain, -3 yards, 2 yards. I do agree that the by the second half, for whatever reason, the Ravens had stopped the Bills run game and were in Allen's face every pass attempt. Plus, he couldn't run because due to all the Ravens blitzing there were no holes anywhere. Even Allen, who was a prolific runner all season was held to only two rushing attempts for nine yards.

 

Still, 27 pass attempts vs six runs in the second half fed right into that Ravens pass blitz. We don't know if the Bills run game could have overcome those sporadic fails in the second half because its like the didn't even try more than once a series.

 

Would it shock you to learn that the Ravens "players" blitzed 96 times, got 6 sacks, 15 QB pressures on Allen. Not to mention that the Bills receivers Beasley and Brown were mostly covered like blankets in the game, leaving the QB with mostly nowhere to go with the ball. 

 

Myself, I don't put this offensive failure on the 2nd year QB going against the Blitz crazy Ravens #3 defense. Against a Ravens team that had been destroying very team in their path, that beat Seattle in Seattle 30-16. That beat the Patriots 37-20. That Beat the LA Rams in LA 45-6 and had just beaten the then best team in the NFL besides themselves in the 49ers 20-17. 

 

Coming off that Thanksgiving game on Thursday the Bills offense had extra time to prepare for this Ravens game and yet they fell on their face... The Bills defense was more than good enough to win this game as it was the offense that let them down.

 

This is what to expect of teams the Buffalo Bills will face every season in the playoffs and they need the offensive game plan to be better than 23 rushes, 17 of 39 passes. They need the play calls to be better, the offensive line to be better, the run game to be better, the QB to be better... and to give the QB the time needed to make the throws.

 

Is that current Buffalo Bills offensive line good enough?

 

 

 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

On ‎5‎/‎6‎/‎2020 at 9:55 AM, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

I didn't just look at the drive charts for that Ravens game. I looked at the play-by-play. Every single play.

 

And then I read your post. And it said a lot more about your point of view than it did about that game. Your argument doesn't hold up.

 

Take out that 38-yarder and Singletary had a really bad game. Now, it's not fair to take out whatever play you don't like ... but that 38 yarder didn't happen till about halfway through the 4th quarter (specifically, 8:47 remaining in the 4th, down by 15). So right up until then, he'd gone 13 for 52 and nearly all of those 52 came on that one drive. Outside of that he'd been completely contained. And after that big 38 yarder seemed to indicate they might have success running him? Three carries for -1.

 

You look at the one productive drive he had ... exactly one and no more ... and you say that in your view this drive proved that the run game will work if you commit to it.

 

You can't back that contention up. I'd argue that's confirmation bias. You ignore the rest of the game and look at the one time he was successful. That didn't prove squat. Ups and downs is how things work in life. One short success doesn't prove things will work. Only thing it proves is that things CAN work ... under certain circumstances.

 

Till that one drive, they'd run Singletary three times, for 1 yard, for 5 yards and for -2 yards. Three runs for a total of four yards. Then the drive on which he was successful. The first play was for six yards. Then three, then eight, then three, then 14, then 9, then -1.

 

That didn't show that if you commit to it, he'll succeed. Just the opposite. The first play on that drive was successful, far before they "committed" to using him. If anything, that showed that if he was successful, they'd commit to continuing to use him. Most likely the Ravens tried a defensive variation that the Bills liked Singletary against, or the Bills tried a variation to work Singletary that the Ravens couldn't handle. And when things worked, they continued running him.

 

After that drive, though, Singletary's next run went for two. Hmm. His next was for one and the one after that was for -2. Not surprisingly, they didn't run him consistently after that.

 

When he was successful, they handed it to him. When he wasn't, they didn't. This makes a lot of sense. Most likely the Ravens adjusted after that good drive to work much harder on taking Singletary away, and they were successful till late in the game and prevent defense time.

 

 

 

You say, "As we all know, that usually, the more a team runs the ball the better the RB does over the course of the game." We don't all know that, by any means. It's a pretty common thought, but it's likely a great example of the logical problem of confusing correlation with cause. More, where are the numbers that even show correlation? It's a common cliche, but what's real is that sometimes that's true and sometimes it's not. And that if there is some correlation, it's probably more result than cause ... if a guy's having success early, he's likely to get it a lot late, and if a team's winning, they're more likely to run the ball late to burn clock.

 

Singletary was underused and Gore was overused all season? Yeah, fair enough, that's a very reasonable feeling. This FO absolutely loved Gore. And late in the season it got hard to see why when you looked at his production.

 

But in terms of the OL, well, yeah they looked bad, but the Ravens D was killing everyone, all year, especially when they were able to take away the run and make teams one-dimensional, which they mostly did in this game.

 

Again, more than half of Singletary's carries went for two yards or less. Any OC is going to be affected by a lack of success like that. And up till that long run near the end of the game, it was even worse.

 

 

 

Anyway, I've said enough on this. Nice to talk to you.

 

Thurman wins the thread. We should close this one now. I had a go at explaining this very thing about the Ravens game earlier in the offseason in a different thread but I didn't manage to articulate it as well as you have here.

[Thurman Kelly]

1. Quarterback.

2. Backup quarterback.

3. 3rd string quarterback.

4. Edge rusher

5. Run stuffing middle linebacker

6. Punter

7. Kicker

8. Coach

9. Offensive co-ordinator

10. Cheerleaders