I absolutely HATE our team’s focus on Special Teams

[Rk_Bills86]

I'm confused on this topic. Has it shifted from - we pay too much for ST only players, or being made that we have a primarily ST player that happens to also be a RB and people are complaining about game day roster spots?

[JGMcD2]

43 minutes ago, Rk_Bills86 said:

I'm confused on this topic. Has it shifted from - we pay too much for ST only players, or being made that we have a primarily ST player that happens to also be a RB and people are complaining about game day roster spots?

Either one it doesn’t matter... we’re not doing anything any different than the vast majority of playoffs team from last season.

 

See my post on page 10. 
 

 

[Jauronimo]

48 minutes ago, Rk_Bills86 said:

I'm confused on this topic. Has it shifted from - we pay too much for ST only players, or being made that we have a primarily ST player that happens to also be a RB and people are complaining about game day roster spots?

This argument is residual angst for letting generational players like Foster and Da'Rick go so that we could sign special teams players like Matakevich.

[Rk_Bills86]

So this thread has become a place for people to complain for no-reason and just proof that even if we're winning fans will say we suck and have no idea what we're doing. 

 

I also didn't see - but did anyone actually mention that Taiwan Jones did get some game time in and dropped a wide open TD that one game? It was like watching  that TE in the Phins game where when the drop happened it looked like Daboll got shot (still to this day the funniest reaction I've ever seen from a coach, the man didn't even try to break his fall)

[Mike in Horseheads]

15 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

This argument is residual angst for letting generational players like Foster and Da'Rick go so that we could sign special teams players like Matakevich.

Bob Foster was a legend in @Gugny world.

[nucci]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

The premise of this thread is ridiculous, but special teams is DEFINITELY not 1/3 of the game. It’s more like 10-15 percent. That phrase is probably the dumbest thing Marv ever said.

every announcer , analyst and coach say it . I know why they say it but it's wrong

[Captain Hindsight]

17 hours ago, Bangarang said:

What a weird thing to be upset about. 

Back when Juaron was the HC and Bobby April was our ST coach, I hated how much power Bobby April had. Poz would get an injury week 2 that was a 3 week injury and we would have to IR him because our backup couldnt play defense. Then we'd sign some scrub and start him 3 days later. It was madness

 

This coaching staff doesnt do that. There are like 3-5 specialists. Taiwan Jones, Matkevich, a returner. Fine, most teams have that. Remember Matt Slater with the Pats*? Everyone wants a guy like that. Then we have guys like Klein who can wreck ***** on ST, but also wreck Russ Wilson in his kitchen. ST is now a focus but not at the detriment of the rest of the roster

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

The premise of this thread is ridiculous, but special teams is DEFINITELY not 1/3 of the game. It’s more like 10-15 percent. That phrase is probably the dumbest thing Marv ever said.

 

I'm curious how you reach this conclusion that ST is 10-15 percent of the game.  Is this based on number of snaps or something?

 

Every drive starts and ends with a ST play.  And Marv Levy is not above criticism for all aspects of his coaching, but I think he gets the benefit of the doubt over you for the wisdom of his sayings.

[LABILLBACKER]

Let's not die on this hill. Way too much is made of whether ST's is overvalued or not. Just make your damn fgs and give me decent field position and I'm happy.

[BillsFan1988]

3 hours ago, JoPoy88 said:

Lol okay you’re mad mad. First, as far as your fantasy record, I don’t believe you.

 

Second, that next paragraph is such a word salad I don’t even know what you’re trying to say. Have a cup of coffee or something and come back later.

 

Third, I don’t know who doughboy88 is?? 🤔. Maybe the number caused you to make the connection but maybe stop listening to those voices inside your head so much.

U don't have to believe me that's fine TrollBoy88. Lol. 

[dave mcbride]

18 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I'm curious how you reach this conclusion that ST is 10-15 percent of the game.  Is this based on number of snaps or something?

 

Every drive starts and ends with a ST play.  And Marv Levy is not above criticism for all aspects of his coaching, but I think he gets the benefit of the doubt over you for the wisdom of his sayings.

Yeah, snap count and play importance. Most ST plays are also entirely predictable unless there's a screw-up, which doesn't happen very often. 66 percent of kickoffs are touchbacks, and it appears that slightly over 50 percent of punt returns are fair caught. There are hardly any returns for TDs anymore (only 7 punt return TDs and 7 kickoff return TDs last year across 256 games) either -- the vast majority of points scored are the product of offensive and defensive play. Place kicking certainly adds some variability given that some kickers are better than others, and they are significant point generators (albeit reliant on the offense to put them in position). But the differences between them are pretty marginal and it explains why teams mostly regard kickers as interchangeable and never spend high draft capital on them. I'm not saying it's unimportant -- an advantage in part of of the game that comprises 10-15 percent of it can make a huge difference in a close game, and there are tons of close games in the NFL. So I'm totally on board with having a good place kicker. But overall, STs simply aren't that important relative to offense and defense. To put it another way, when you're saying that they comprise 1/3 of the game, you're clearly implying that they are of an equal weight to both the offense and defense. But that's preposterous given that teams spend just about all of their money and draft capital on players in the latter two categories, and the vast majority of plays (and scoring plays) are from scrimmage. If ST was that important, you'd see a lot more money going to ST players.   

Edited March 19, 2021 by dave mcbride

[Don Otreply]

18 hours ago, FireChans said:

This is lunacy. This is idiotic. 
 

Can someone point out what Super Bowl champion or hell, even recent contender, that dedicated this much money and effort to STers? 
 

It flies in the face of modern NFLdom. Rule changes have basically eliminated the return game. Why are we signing top end STers to prop up this phase, instead of dedicating more money to the other phases that actually matter?

 

The ST coach’s job on a team that’s contending should be to coach up a bunch of cheap backups and late round draft picks into a decent unit. Not need dedicated gunners being signed to modest contracts. 
 

It’s upsetting to say the least.

Don’t mince words with us FC, I don’t think you are fully expressing your deepest and truest feelings on our STs budgetary allotments, after a coffee and some yoga, come back and let us know what you really think, 

[warrior9]

16 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

Let's not die on this hill. Way too much is made of whether ST's is overvalued or not. Just make your damn fgs and give me decent field position and I'm happy.

Which....... is literally special teams. That's....... important. 

 

That's not too much being made... that's literally 1/3 of the game lol

[Mrbojanglezs]

18 hours ago, WMDman said:

i mean it is 1/3 of the game...

 

Its not when you take into account every play of the game

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Jauronimo said:

This argument is residual angst for letting generational players like Foster and Da'Rick go so that we could sign special teams players like Matakevich.

 

This. But you forgot Duke Williams.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

49 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Yeah, snap count and play importance. Most ST plays are also entirely predictable unless there's a screw-up, which doesn't happen very often. 66 percent of kickoffs are touchbacks, and it appears that slightly over 50 percent of punt returns are fair caught. There are hardly any returns for TDs anymore (only 7 punt return TDs and 7 kickoff return TDs last year across 256 games) either -- the vast majority of points scored are the product of offensive and defensive play. Place kicking certainly adds some variability given that some kickers are better than others, and they are significant point generators (albeit reliant on the offense to put them in position). But the differences between them are pretty marginal and it explains why teams mostly regard kickers as interchangeable and never spend high draft capital on them. I'm not saying it's unimportant -- an advantage in part of of the game that comprises 10-15 percent of it can make a huge difference in a close game, and there are tons of close games in the NFL. So I'm totally on board with having a good place kicker. But overall, STs simply aren't that important relative to offense and defense. To put it another way, when you're saying that they comprise 1/3 of the game, you're clearly implying that they are of an equal weight to both the offense and defense. But that's preposterous given that teams spend just about all of their money and draft capital on players in the latter two categories, and the vast majority of plays (and scoring plays) are from scrimmage. If ST was that important, you'd see a lot more money going to ST players.   

 

OK, so first of all, context - Levi's remarks were made before the changes to kickoff and blocking rules (pretty sure on this) that increased touchbacks and fair catch.  So before pronoucing it the "dumbest thing Levi said", I think at least take a careful look at what the game impact was in his day.

 

I see where you're coming from on saying it's not 1/3 of the game now, but for the 44% of kickoffs that are brought out and the 50% of punts that aren't fair caught, I think the importance may be >10%.  It's arguable in any event.

[Dr. K]

4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

OK, so first of all, context - Levi's remarks were made before the changes to kickoff and blocking rules (pretty sure on this) that increased touchbacks and fair catch.  So before pronoucing it the "dumbest thing Levi said", I think at least take a careful look at what the game impact was in his day.

 

I see where you're coming from on saying it's not 1/3 of the game now, but for the 44% of kickoffs that are brought out and the 50% of punts that aren't fair caught, I think the importance may be >10%.  It's arguable in any event.

And in a league where so many games are decided by less than a TD, playing well or poorly in 10-20% of the game can make a big difference in the outcomes.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

11 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

I am going to wrap this thread up at 10 pages with actual information from the 2020 season as it pertains to ST only players and the resources allocated to them.

 

I'll define here what I considered a ST only player...

 

A ST only player is a player that played over 40% of snaps on ST while simultaneously playing less than 10% of snaps on offense and/or defense. This does not include specialists (K, P or LS).

 

I went on PFR and went through all 14 teams that qualified for the playoffs. I sorted by ST snaps and took every player that fit my criteria listed above (40% > ST snaps and <10% off/def snaps). From there I went to Spotrac and individually searched every player that fit my criteria to figure out each player's average salary from the 2020 season.

 

To recap:

• Only playoff teams
• Must be a free agent signing
• Must play more than 40% of ST snaps
• Must play less than 10% of snaps on offense or defense
• Does not include K, P or LS

 

Findings:

 

10/14 playoff teams employed players on their rosters in 2020 to play primarily special teams. The average playoff team allocated roster spots to 2 ST players signed to UFA deals.

 

$5M - Bills, Steelers and Saints

$4M - Buccaneers

$3.5M - Bears

$3M - Titans, Ravens

$2M - Seahawks

$1M - Chiefs and Football Team 

 

Conclusion:

 

Yes, the Buffalo Bills were at the upper limit when it came to playoff teams spending money on ST but they did not significantly outspend the teams around them. New Orleans and Pittsburgh spent just as much with the Super Bowl champs right behind them. They also have not wasted roster spots on ST players any more than any other playoff team.

 

Verdict:

 

This thread is a bust.

 

 

“Known your friend long?” whispered Scipio to me.

“Fairly,” I answered.

Scipio's bleached eyes brightened with admiration as he considered the Southerner's back. “Well,” he stated judicially, “start awful early when yu' go to fool with him, or he'll make you feel unpunctual.”

                                                                 -Owen Wister, "The Virginian"

 

I'd like to point out that a good bit of the Bills ST-specific spending was tied up in Andre Roberts (2 yr, $4.6M or $2.3M/yr).  I believe the expectation when Roberts was signed was that he could run all the routes and had good hands, and would be able to fill in capably as a backup WR/blocker, at which he had shown some abilities early in his career with AZ.  But he was outplayed in that regard last year by Davis, McKenzie and even Kumerow, all of whom can block capably (McKenzie less so due to size but there's a ton of fight in that dog).

 

Matakevitch, on the other hand, looked very capable as a backup LB vs. Miami and if he gets more chances and plays well, I expect his stock will rise a bit.

[dave mcbride]

18 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

OK, so first of all, context - Levi's remarks were made before the changes to kickoff and blocking rules (pretty sure on this) that increased touchbacks and fair catch.  So before pronoucing it the "dumbest thing Levi said", I think at least take a careful look at what the game impact was in his day.

 

I see where you're coming from on saying it's not 1/3 of the game now, but for the 44% of kickoffs that are brought out and the 50% of punts that aren't fair caught, I think the importance may be >10%.  It's arguable in any event.

34 percent on kickoffs, but yeah, it's just an informed guesstimate. For the record, I thought it was dumb when Marv actually said it!

Edited March 19, 2021 by dave mcbride

[BillsVet]

ST spending isn't the main driver of their cap issues, but it's a contributing cause to why they're up against it without paying the QB or his top receiving target.

 

I mentioned this in another thread, but it bears repeating.  The strategic roster building plan's insistence on ST and defense is going to run into maintaining a solid offense in the coming years.  At some point, those contracts and draft picks devoted to lesser valued positions are going to hinder what they can do on offense.

 

And oh by the way, the cost to maintain that offensive unit went up dramatically over the past 12 months.  Even understanding that Morse took a pay cut, Dawkins, Feliciano, and Daryl Williams received sizable increases.  Josh and Diggs will, yet they're spending the same or close to it on defense and special teams.  And I know the cap was down this year and it'll be back up again.   

 

Eventually the strategy needs to come in-line with reality.  They'll need to find rookies and vet minimum guys who aren't making 2-3M to play on the kickoff/punt units.  Or, replace players looking to cash in with rookies.  That's what the draft is for and why signing all your own guys (not a bad problem) is not possible.  Bills fans haven't had to face these issues in the cap era because A) they never found the QB to pay B) they didn't have the money during the RW years and C) they didn't retain some solid draft picks into their 2nd contract.  One hopes McD will learn that his success runs through the QB, not defense and special teams.