Isabella shows moves, will he make the roster?

[Warcodered]

17 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

He was returning kicks with the 1s though 

Did anyone tell that to the guys blocking for him?

[GunnerBill]

On 8/19/2023 at 3:32 PM, PBF81 said:

 

Agree somewhat with that bolded part.  But here's the thing, I just looked, but Gilliam wasn't even on the field for any of our rushing TDs this past season, long or short, by Allen, Sing, or Cook, whose only two were long runs, or even for McKenzie's.  Singletary had 2 from the 5 and 2 more from the 1 YL.  Gilliam wasn't to be found.  

 

One of the problems that I see is when attempts are made to establish how valuable a player is but that it is without any perceiveable statistics or data to support the claim, and it has to be "you have to watch the games and watch him play," or some other nebulus criteria that seemingly can only be noticed by "experts", and experts that have major issues with establishing a running game to begin with while underutilizing it regularly on top of that, which to me leans at least a little in the "but she's got a great personality" column.  

 

You may very well be right, but where's the evidence?  It clearly wasn't on our scoring runs, which would seem to be some of those "big body" plays that you refer too.  He wasn't on the field for any of our short-yardage rushing TDs, which is the very first place one would expect to see him if the case were in fact that he's brought in on short-yardage plays.  

 

As I said before, I might agree with your position, but where's the evidence?  I can't find any "every play" type of video for Gilliam, but if he's regularly not in on any of our scoring runs, and clearly he's not what makes our passing game go, again, where's the evidence?  

 

Special Teams is just that, but we're talking offense, and there will be good special teams players all over the place in two more weeks.  And how good is he on STs given that he logged a mere 3 combined tackles last season, 2 of which were solo.  It's a tough argument to suggest that he's even an impact STs player.  

 

 

I have just watched back the 2022 win at Kansas City. Let's start with the numbers:

 

The Bills had 72 offensive snaps in the game and a net total of 443 yards. The final 2 were kneel downs that were minus 8 yards combined. 

 

So excluding kneel downs the Bills had 451 yards from 70 plays - which works out at 6.4 yards per play. 

Reggie Gilliam played in 18 offensive snaps (excluding the two kneel downs) - which equates to 26%.

In those 18 snaps the Bills had 151 yards which is 8.4 yards per play. 

The Bills converted 26 first downs in the game. Reggie Gilliam was on the field for 10 of them. That equates to 38% of the first downs, despite only being in on 26% of the plays. 

The Bills passed on 9 of the 18 plays Gilliam was in. 7 were completed. 1 drew a defensive PI and only 1 was incomplete. Josh was excellent on the day 26/40. But he was 7/8 (with the PI not counting in that score) on passes thrown with Gilliam on the field. 

It is fair and correct to say he was not on the field on any of the three touchdown passes. 

 

He had two particularly impactful plays on the first Bills drive of the game. (12:18 - 1st) 1st & 10, KC 43 - Singletary up the middle for 10 yards and a first down. Gilliam drives Nick Bolton back and creates the gap Singletary bursts through.  (11:16 - 1st) 2nd & 2, KC 25 - Gilliam split wide sells the curl route outside holds the OLB Darius Harris and allows Diggs (who lined up in the slot) a 1v1 against Nick Bolton which he wins for 8 yards and a first down. In the second half he converts one of those 10 first downs himself (1:22 - 3rd) 1st & 10, BUF 36 - Gilliam catch and run 11 yards and a first down.

 

And the key to what he does and why the Bills like to use him against Kansas City is he keeps them in base 4-3 personnel. I talked about it in my reflections on the TNF vs Detroit, they did a good job of keeping Kansas City in 4-3 base. When they are in 4-3 base that mean L'Jarius Sneed who is one of the best nickel corners in football is invariably playing on the boundary. Which both takes him out of the middle of the field and opens that area up and gives you a slightly vulnerable outside corner where his skill set fits less well. It is Gilliam's versatility that makes him particularly useful in those situations. He lined up in the backfield, on the line, and was split wide 5 times too. That is where his value is to the offense. He can help create favourable looks that the players around him can exploit. I accept that the Bills don't use him much at all on offense some weeks but even then you have his special teams value. Twice just in this pre-season the Bills had punts blocked or partially blocked from players in Gilliam's normal spot whiffing on their block. Shakir one week and one of the lower depth (now PS) receivers another. 

 

So it goes back to exactly what I was saying. There are certain games and certain gameplans where Gilliam is a really important chess piece for them because of his versatility and because of his skill set. If they didn't keep him they could find a better pure blocking full back, no disagreement there, but they couldn't easily find the package of versatility, flexibility, blocking and special teams play that they get in Reggie Gilliam. And that is why, despite your protestations, the Bills have considered him worthy of the contract he has and he remains part of this roster. He is not irreplaceable, he isn't the difference between winning Superbowls or not, but he is a valuable backend of the roster player. 

 

 

[4merper4mer]

9 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I have just watched back the 2022 win at Kansas City. Let's start with the numbers:

 

The Bills had 72 offensive snaps in the game and a net total of 443 yards. The final 2 were kneel downs that were minus 8 yards combined. 

 

So excluding kneel downs the Bills had 451 yards from 70 plays - which works out at 6.4 yards per play. 

Reggie Gilliam played in 18 offensive snaps (excluding the two kneel downs) - which equates to 26%.

In those 18 snaps the Bills had 151 yards which is 8.4 yards per play. 

The Bills converted 26 first downs in the game. Reggie Gilliam was on the field for 10 of them. That equates to 38% of the first downs, despite only being in on 26% of the plays. 

The Bills passed on 9 of the 18 plays Gilliam was in. 7 were completed. 1 drew a defensive PI and only 1 was incomplete. Josh was excellent on the day 26/40. But he was 7/8 (with the PI not counting in that score) on passes thrown with Gilliam on the field. 

It is fair and correct to say he was not on the field on any of the three touchdown passes. 

 

He had two particularly impactful plays on the first Bills drive of the game. (12:18 - 1st) 1st & 10, KC 43 - Singletary up the middle for 10 yards and a first down. Gilliam drives Nick Bolton back and creates the gap Singletary bursts through.  (11:16 - 1st) 2nd & 2, KC 25 - Gilliam split wide sells the curl route outside holds the OLB Darius Harris and allows Diggs (who lined up in the slot) a 1v1 against Nick Bolton which he wins for 8 yards and a first down. In the second half he converts one of those 10 first downs himself (1:22 - 3rd) 1st & 10, BUF 36 - Gilliam catch and run 11 yards and a first down.

 

And the key to what he does and why the Bills like to use him against Kansas City is he keeps them in base 4-3 personnel. I talked about it in my reflections on the TNF vs Detroit, they did a good job of keeping Kansas City in 4-3 base. When they are in 4-3 base that mean L'Jarius Sneed who is one of the best nickel corners in football is invariably playing on the boundary. Which both takes him out of the middle of the field and opens that area up and gives you a slightly vulnerable outside corner where his skill set fits less well. It is Gilliam's versatility that makes him particularly useful in those situations. He lined up in the backfield, on the line, and was split wide 5 times too. That is where his value is to the offense. He can help create favourable looks that the players around him can exploit. I accept that the Bills don't use him much at all on offense some weeks but even then you have his special teams value. Twice just in this pre-season the Bills had punts blocked or partially blocked from players in Gilliam's normal spot whiffing on their block. Shakir one week and one of the lower depth (now PS) receivers another. 

 

So it goes back to exactly what I was saying. There are certain games and certain gameplans where Gilliam is a really important chess piece for them because of his versatility and because of his skill set. If they didn't keep him they could find a better pure blocking full back, no disagreement there, but they couldn't easily find the package of versatility, flexibility, blocking and special teams play that they get in Reggie Gilliam. And that is why, despite your protestations, the Bills have considered him worthy of the contract he has and he remains part of this roster. He is not irreplaceable, he isn't the difference between winning Superbowls or not, but he is a valuable backend of the roster player. 

 

 

But but but whaaaaaaaaa. We want the ham and egger.

[PBF81]

16 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I have just watched back the 2022 win at Kansas City. Let's start with the numbers:

 

The Bills had 72 offensive snaps in the game and a net total of 443 yards. The final 2 were kneel downs that were minus 8 yards combined. 

 

So excluding kneel downs the Bills had 451 yards from 70 plays - which works out at 6.4 yards per play. 

Reggie Gilliam played in 18 offensive snaps (excluding the two kneel downs) - which equates to 26%.

In those 18 snaps the Bills had 151 yards which is 8.4 yards per play. 

The Bills converted 26 first downs in the game. Reggie Gilliam was on the field for 10 of them. That equates to 38% of the first downs, despite only being in on 26% of the plays. 

The Bills passed on 9 of the 18 plays Gilliam was in. 7 were completed. 1 drew a defensive PI and only 1 was incomplete. Josh was excellent on the day 26/40. But he was 7/8 (with the PI not counting in that score) on passes thrown with Gilliam on the field. 

It is fair and correct to say he was not on the field on any of the three touchdown passes. 

 

He had two particularly impactful plays on the first Bills drive of the game. (12:18 - 1st) 1st & 10, KC 43 - Singletary up the middle for 10 yards and a first down. Gilliam drives Nick Bolton back and creates the gap Singletary bursts through.  (11:16 - 1st) 2nd & 2, KC 25 - Gilliam split wide sells the curl route outside holds the OLB Darius Harris and allows Diggs (who lined up in the slot) a 1v1 against Nick Bolton which he wins for 8 yards and a first down. In the second half he converts one of those 10 first downs himself (1:22 - 3rd) 1st & 10, BUF 36 - Gilliam catch and run 11 yards and a first down.

 

And the key to what he does and why the Bills like to use him against Kansas City is he keeps them in base 4-3 personnel. I talked about it in my reflections on the TNF vs Detroit, they did a good job of keeping Kansas City in 4-3 base. When they are in 4-3 base that mean L'Jarius Sneed who is one of the best nickel corners in football is invariably playing on the boundary. Which both takes him out of the middle of the field and opens that area up and gives you a slightly vulnerable outside corner where his skill set fits less well. It is Gilliam's versatility that makes him particularly useful in those situations. He lined up in the backfield, on the line, and was split wide 5 times too. That is where his value is to the offense. He can help create favourable looks that the players around him can exploit. I accept that the Bills don't use him much at all on offense some weeks but even then you have his special teams value. Twice just in this pre-season the Bills had punts blocked or partially blocked from players in Gilliam's normal spot whiffing on their block. Shakir one week and one of the lower depth (now PS) receivers another. 

 

So it goes back to exactly what I was saying. There are certain games and certain gameplans where Gilliam is a really important chess piece for them because of his versatility and because of his skill set. If they didn't keep him they could find a better pure blocking full back, no disagreement there, but they couldn't easily find the package of versatility, flexibility, blocking and special teams play that they get in Reggie Gilliam. And that is why, despite your protestations, the Bills have considered him worthy of the contract he has and he remains part of this roster. He is not irreplaceable, he isn't the difference between winning Superbowls or not, but he is a valuable backend of the roster player. 

 

 

 

Great, provide the points in the game, like I do when I'm trying to make a point, where his "impact play" occurs.  I'll look at those.  You simply implying that he made impacts because he was "on the field" at the time doesn't cut it.  

 

I gave you the list of all the huges plays, i.e. most of our yards and all of our TDs, and pointed out that he made no impact whatsoever on those, I'd appreciate it if you'd provide the ones that he did in support of your argument.  I'll gladly look at those. 

 

And let's revisit, you said many impact plays in those two games.  Two plays is far from many.  Any given player typically makes a couple of impact plays every bunch of games.  Heck, there are players that win games for teams once a season that don't even play in the NFL the season after and outward.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Great, provide the points in the game, like I do when I'm trying to make a point, where his "impact play" occurs.  I'll look at those.  You simply implying that he made impacts because he was "on the field" at the time doesn't cut it.  

 

I gave you the list of all the huges plays, i.e. most of our yards and all of our TDs, and pointed out that he made no impact whatsoever on those, I'd appreciate it if you'd provide the ones that he did in support of your argument.  I'll gladly look at those. 

 

And let's revisit, you said many impact plays in those two games.  Two plays is far from many.  Any given player typically makes a couple of impact plays every bunch of games.  Heck, there are players that win games for teams once a season that don't even play in the NFL the season after and outward.  

 

 

 

I have never beem trying to argue that Reggie Gilliam himself makes loads of impact plays. That isn't his role. He made some important plays in that game but his presence and his usage had a big impact on the outcome. He helps the Bills to get favourable matchups and to get the KC defense into unfavourable match ups. Maybe you think those numbers when he is on the field are coincidence. You can make that argument if you wish. But at that point you are ignoring the evidence and just seeking confirmation bias that he doesn't do anything.

[PBF81]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

I have never beem trying to argue that Reggie Gilliam himself makes loads of impact plays. That isn't his role. He made some important plays in that game but his presence and his usage had a big impact on the outcome. He helps the Bills to get favourable matchups and to get the KC defense into unfavourable match ups. Maybe you think those numbers when he is on the field are coincidence. You can make that argument if you wish. But at that point you are ignoring the evidence and just seeking confirmation bias that he doesn't do anything.

 

That's not what you said, you said that he makes many impact plays, which is what got that debate going. 

 

Otherwise, fine, but the above in an opinion without direct evidence to the contrary.  And again, just about every player makes comparable contributions.  We can easily say the same about our 4th and 5th WRs, "they create matchup difficulties with [insert whichever D or alignment, etc.]"   

 

You told me, while prior to watching our game that you were busy and would provide those plays later on.   You haven't done that yet. Two games.   You went through one but didn't identify video wise any plays.  I'll try to find the two that you mentioned, but for which no video was provided or linked to, but I find it difficult to believe, and per our original disagreement, that some other player on the team couldn't have filled that role in those two instances.  

 

And honestly, two plays is far from many, which again, aids my original point, not yours, that Gilliam does not play a significant role on the team such that he needs to be kept around in favor of any average blocking FB.  

 

 

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

 

 

And BTW, I forgot to mention, yes, I realize that you didn't say that Klein was "good," but you did say that he'd make the team for some related reason as I recall.  

 

 

[PBF81]

9 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

 

BTW, I'm also still awaiting your statement on the W/L impact of Allen on this team per season.  

 

You gonna provide that, or not?  If not, jusy say that you won't.  It's not difficult.  But then I'd appreciate it if you quit taking issue with when I substantiate how it has.  

 

Again, IMO this season is going to be very revealing in terms of McD and his coaching.  I don't think that by the end of the season his apologists are going to be anywhere near as supportive.  But we'll see.  

 

I'm having to hope that our offense carries the team this season.  Which it may, so there is legitimate hope.  

 

 

[pennstate10]

35 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I have just watched back the 2022 win at Kansas City. Let's start with the numbers:

 

The Bills had 72 offensive snaps in the game and a net total of 443 yards. The final 2 were kneel downs that were minus 8 yards combined. 

 

So excluding kneel downs the Bills had 451 yards from 70 plays - which works out at 6.4 yards per play. 

Reggie Gilliam played in 18 offensive snaps (excluding the two kneel downs) - which equates to 26%.

In those 18 snaps the Bills had 151 yards which is 8.4 yards per play. 

The Bills converted 26 first downs in the game. Reggie Gilliam was on the field for 10 of them. That equates to 38% of the first downs, despite only being in on 26% of the plays. 

The Bills passed on 9 of the 18 plays Gilliam was in. 7 were completed. 1 drew a defensive PI and only 1 was incomplete. Josh was excellent on the day 26/40. But he was 7/8 (with the PI not counting in that score) on passes thrown with Gilliam on the field. 

It is fair and correct to say he was not on the field on any of the three touchdown passes. 

 

He had two particularly impactful plays on the first Bills drive of the game. (12:18 - 1st) 1st & 10, KC 43 - Singletary up the middle for 10 yards and a first down. Gilliam drives Nick Bolton back and creates the gap Singletary bursts through.  (11:16 - 1st) 2nd & 2, KC 25 - Gilliam split wide sells the curl route outside holds the OLB Darius Harris and allows Diggs (who lined up in the slot) a 1v1 against Nick Bolton which he wins for 8 yards and a first down. In the second half he converts one of those 10 first downs himself (1:22 - 3rd) 1st & 10, BUF 36 - Gilliam catch and run 11 yards and a first down.

 

And the key to what he does and why the Bills like to use him against Kansas City is he keeps them in base 4-3 personnel. I talked about it in my reflections on the TNF vs Detroit, they did a good job of keeping Kansas City in 4-3 base. When they are in 4-3 base that mean L'Jarius Sneed who is one of the best nickel corners in football is invariably playing on the boundary. Which both takes him out of the middle of the field and opens that area up and gives you a slightly vulnerable outside corner where his skill set fits less well. It is Gilliam's versatility that makes him particularly useful in those situations. He lined up in the backfield, on the line, and was split wide 5 times too. That is where his value is to the offense. He can help create favourable looks that the players around him can exploit. I accept that the Bills don't use him much at all on offense some weeks but even then you have his special teams value. Twice just in this pre-season the Bills had punts blocked or partially blocked from players in Gilliam's normal spot whiffing on their block. Shakir one week and one of the lower depth (now PS) receivers another. 

 

So it goes back to exactly what I was saying. There are certain games and certain gameplans where Gilliam is a really important chess piece for them because of his versatility and because of his skill set. If they didn't keep him they could find a better pure blocking full back, no disagreement there, but they couldn't easily find the package of versatility, flexibility, blocking and special teams play that they get in Reggie Gilliam. And that is why, despite your protestations, the Bills have considered him worthy of the contract he has and he remains part of this roster. He is not irreplaceable, he isn't the difference between winning Superbowls or not, but he is a valuable backend of the roster player. 

 

 

Mrs. G, I don’t care what all a dem internet warriors say. Your boy is an excellent footballer and a fine upstanding young man!!

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

That's not what you said, you said that he makes many impact plays, which is what got that debate going. 

 

Otherwise, fine, but the above in an opinion without direct evidence to the contrary.  And again, just about every player makes comparable contributions.  We can easily say the same about our 4th and 5th WRs, "they create matchup difficulties with [insert whichever D or alignment, etc.]"   

 

You told me, while prior to watching our game that you were busy and would provide those plays later on.   You haven't done that yet. Two games.   You went through one but didn't identify video wise any plays.  I'll try to find the two that you mentioned, but for which no video was provided or linked to, but I find it difficult to believe, and per our original disagreement, that some other player on the team couldn't have filled that role in those two instances.  

 

And honestly, two plays is far from many, which again, aids my original point, not yours, that Gilliam does not play a significant role on the team such that he needs to be kept around in favor of any average blocking FB.  

 

 

 

And BTW, I forgot to mention, yes, I realize that you didn't say that Klein was "good," but you did say that he'd make the team for some related reason as I recall.  

 

 

 

You should really read what I say. 

 

I said "Because without racking up numbers he has had a big impact on both."

 

That is quite clear I wasn't talking about him making big impact plays. I was talking about his usage having a big impact. And it did. The numbers prove it. 

 

I can't link the video because it came from my Game Pass subscription. If I linked to it they'd be dead links to anyone who doesn't have my Game Pass. It is why I was careful to give the exact time stamps for the plays I was referring to.

 

On Klein my logic was he'd make the team as the break glass in case of emergency "at least we know who this guy is" in case whoever won the starting job sucked so badly they had to pull the plug. I have provided you the link to that view.

[4merper4mer]

5 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

That's not what you said, you said that he makes many impact plays, which is what got that debate going. 

 

Otherwise, fine, but the above in an opinion without direct evidence to the contrary.  And again, just about every player makes comparable contributions.  We can easily say the same about our 4th and 5th WRs, "they create matchup difficulties with [insert whichever D or alignment, etc.]"   

 

You told me, while prior to watching our game that you were busy and would provide those plays later on.   You haven't done that yet. Two games.   You went through one but didn't identify video wise any plays.  I'll try to find the two that you mentioned, but for which no video was provided or linked to, but I find it difficult to believe, and per our original disagreement, that some other player on the team couldn't have filled that role in those two instances.  

 

And honestly, two plays is far from many, which again, aids my original point, not yours, that Gilliam does not play a significant role on the team such that he needs to be kept around in favor of any average blocking FB.  

 

 

 

And BTW, I forgot to mention, yes, I realize that you didn't say that Klein was "good," but you did say that he'd make the team for some related reason as I recall.  

 

 

Your yearning for ham and egger Isabella is silly.  You just got curb stomped in a discussion about Gilliam and you’re coming back for more?  Shirley.

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

BTW, I'm also still awaiting your statement on the W/L impact of Allen on this team per season.  

 

You gonna provide that, or not?  If not, jusy say that you won't.  It's not difficult.  But then I'd appreciate it if you quit taking issue with when I substantiate how it has.  

 

Again, IMO this season is going to be very revealing in terms of McD and his coaching.  I don't think that by the end of the season his apologists are going to be anywhere near as supportive.  But we'll see.  

 

I'm having to hope that our offense carries the team this season.  Which it may, so there is legitimate hope.  

 

 

 

It is in the other thread.

[PBF81]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

It is in the other thread.

 

Can't you restate is since I don't know which "other thread," and it could take me an hour to find if, or more, if I went on that easter egg hunt? 
 

I mean what, it's a sentence, two?  

 

 

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

You should really read what I say. 

 

I said "Because without racking up numbers he has had a big impact on both."

 

And you should read what I say.  Two plays is not many plays.  

 

Also, I said I'd like to see those plays.  Recall if you will, this discussion began with essentially my implying that the offense would be fine without Gilliam.  To which you tried to get me to believe that he was a much bigger part of our offensive success and made a significant, not an occasional, impact on our offense. 

 

Sorry, but you haven't provided that evidence yet.  Two plays and your opinion as such in the matter isn't what qualifies as evidence in support of that.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, PBF81 said:

 

Can't you restate is since I don't know which "other thread," and it could take me an hour to find if, or more, if I went on that easter egg hunt? 
 

I mean what, it's a sentence, two?  

 

 

 

And you should read what I say.  Two plays is not many plays.  

 

Also, I said I'd like to see those plays.  Recall if you will, this discussion began with essentially my implying that the offense would be fine without Gilliam.  To which you tried to get me to believe that he was a much bigger part of our offensive success and made a significant, not an occasional, impact on our offense. 

 

Sorry, but you haven't provided that evidence yet.  Two plays and your opinion as such in the matter isn't what qualifies as evidence in support of that.  

 

 

The evidence is actually 3 specific plays AND the numbers. 

 

And I never argued the offense wouldn't be "fine" without Gilliam. That is yet another strawman. My argument was entirely about the fact that he serves a dual role on offense and a key role on special teams in one player. And that level of versatility and flexibility makes him valuable to the roster. 

 

Read back. That was always my argument. It was finding a player who can be used in the ways Gilliam can on offense and be a very good STer in a single body isn't easy and he saves us a roster spot in that sense. Before he was here we had Pat DiMarco, to play full back, we had Lee Smith to be a blocking only tight end. That was 1 full back, 4 tight ends. We are now at 1 full back, 3 tight ends.... and he is better than Julian Stanford the backup linebacker who was playing his primary ST responsibilities previously. 

 

That has ALWAYS been my justification of Gilliam's roster spot. You get a ST stud and save a spot on offense. And you get that in one player. And he can be used on offense in a way neither Lee Smith or Pat DiMarco could. 

10 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Can't you restate is since I don't know which "other thread," and it could take me an hour to find if, or more, if I went on that easter egg hunt? 
 

I mean what, it's a sentence, two?  

 

 

The Beane one. It is roughly 50% QB, 25% rest of roster, 25% coaching. So QB is worth about double of the other two elements. 

[PBF81]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The evidence is actually 3 specific plays AND the numbers. 

 

And I never argued the offense wouldn't be "fine" without Gilliam. That is yet another strawman. My argument was entirely about the fact that he serves a dual role on offense and a key role on special teams in one player. And that level of versatility and flexibility makes him valuable to the roster. 

 

Read back. That was always my argument. It was finding a player who can be used in the ways Gilliam can on offense and be a very good STer in a single body isn't easy and he saves us a roster spot in that sense. Before he was here we had Pat DiMarco, to play full back, we had Lee Smith to be a blocking only tight end. That was 1 full back, 4 tight ends. We are now at 1 full back, 3 tight ends.... and he is better than Julian Stanford the backup linebacker who was playing his primary ST responsibilities previously. 

 

That has ALWAYS been my justification of Gilliam's roster spot. You get a ST stud and save a spot on offense. And you get that in one player. And he can be used on offense in a way neither Lee Smith or Pat DiMarco could. 

 

Got that link to your statement about the W/L impact of Allen yet?  That I'd like to see.  

 

Otherwise, re: the above, the entire debate between us began upon my suggesting that Gilliam may be cut with the implication that the offense doesn't need him to succeed.  You took issue with that.  To that you replied this ... 

 

Quote

The evidence is I have seen it the years he has been here. I don't have an exact breakdown of the plays written down to share with you. But I'd advise you start wit the two regular season KC wins. Because without racking up numbers he has had a big impact on both.

 

I then looked at one KC game's highlights and came up with this;  

 

Quote

 

OK, so you went and found two games in which he had his 1st and 4th highest snap counts.  Taking your advice, I reviewed 20 minute highlight video.  

 

2021:  

 

On Allen's first designed run Sing blocked for him, Gilliam not on the field.  

Second play, in motion, dropped into the flat, didn't even directly draw a defender.  Inconsequential on that play.  

Third play, Allen run, Gilliam not on the field. 

Fourth play, designed trick play, Allen run for a TD, Gilliam not on the field. 

Fifth play, Gilliam entirely against the grain, whiffing on the block inconsequentially.  

Next relevant play, Moss with about a 10-yard run, Gilliam not on the field. 

Next three plays big pass plays, last one for a TD.  Gilliam not on the field. 

Huge pass play to Diggs deep, Gilliam not on the field.  

Designed screen to Moss for 15, Gilliam not on the field. 

Next play, deep to Knox for a 53 TD, Gilliam not on the field. 

Allen on what appears to be a designed run for 5, Gilliam not on the field.  

Gilliam lined up as TE, blocks, sheds, wide open in the flat, Allen to Knox deep for 41.  

Allen 11-yard pass to Sanders, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen to Beasley for 5, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen scrambles for 4 and a 1st, Gilliam not on the field. 

Screen to Moss for 16, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen to Davis for 16 and another 1st, Gilliam not on the field.  

Designed UTM run by Allen for 12, Gilliam not on the field.  

Tight formation, Allen to Sanders for an 8-yard TD, Gilliam not on the field.  

 

I suspect that a third of Gilliam's snaps were on our last drive clearly just trying to kill the clock and insurmountably up at that point.  

 

Either way, on the entire highlight video Gilliam was on the field for only three plays, inconsequential on every single one, as in could have been any JAG that did what he did.  He clearly wasn't getting any particular respect from Reid's D.  

 

 

You appear to be backtracking or we have two entirely different ideas of what it means to make an impact in a game.  

 

I don't consider a routine block that any JAG good at blocking could have made, as being some kind of impact play on that merit alone.  To me "impact plays" are big 1st-down plays, sacks that end drives, not sacks after which the opponent goes down and scores anyway, batted passes, INTs on passes that aren't thrown right to the defender, huge receptions in traffic, etc.  

 

"Good blocks" that any number of good blockers without any other particular skills in this league easily could have made, including others on the team, don't seem to me to be of the "impact" variety.  

 

Look, I enjoy discussing with you, and this isn't really all that important.  It's a simple disagreement.  Now it seems to be that you're saying that Gilliam really doesn't offer anything special that many other players could bring if they were here.  With that I'd agree with if that's your position now.  

 

In short, my opinion is that his presence on this team isn't going to significantly contribute to a win or a loss the entire season.  Could I be wrong?  Sure, of course, it's merley an opinion.  For all we know he could have a STs return TD for a win this season.  All I know is that despite playing nearly 80% of the STs snaps, he had 3 combined tackles on those nearly 300 plays and nothing otherwise to make him stand out, and that on an average of 11 offensive snaps per game last season, his biggest single season contribution ever, it's only possible that he made a mild impact and anything far from a significant one, but the key here is impacts that any other JAG that's good at blocking only, could not have made.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Got that link to your statement about the W/L impact of Allen yet?  That I'd like to see.  

 

Otherwise, re: the above, the entire debate between us began upon my suggesting that Gilliam may be cut with the implication that the offense doesn't need him to succeed.  You took issue with that.  To that you replied this ... 

 

 

I then looked at one KC game's highlights and came up with this;  

 

 

You appear to be backtracking or we have two entirely different ideas of what it means to make an impact in a game.  

 

I don't consider a routine block that any JAG good at blocking could have made, as being some kind of impact play on that merit alone.  To me "impact plays" are big 1st-down plays, sacks that end drives, not sacks after which the opponent goes down and scores anyway, batted passes, INTs on passes that aren't thrown right to the defender, huge receptions in traffic, etc.  

 

"Good blocks" that any number of good blockers without any other particular skills in this league easily could have made, including others on the team, don't seem to me to be of the "impact" variety.  

 

Look, I enjoy discussing with you, and this isn't really all that important.  It's a simple disagreement.  Now it seems to be that you're saying that Gilliam really doesn't offer anything special that many other players could bring if they were here.  With that I'd agree with if that's your position now.  

 

In short, my opinion is that his presence on this team isn't going to significantly contribute to a win or a loss the entire season.  Could I be wrong?  Sure, of course, it's merley an opinion.  For all we know he could have a STs return TD for a win this season.  All I know is that despite playing nearly 80% of the STs snaps, he had 3 combined tackles on those nearly 300 plays and nothing otherwise to make him stand out, and that on an average of 11 offensive snaps per game last season, his biggest single season contribution ever, it's only possible that he made a mild impact and anything far from a significant one, but the key here is impacts that any other JAG that's good at blocking only, could not have made.  

 

 

 

My position has never changed. It is there very clearly in this threat all the way through. Consistent. 

 

The problem is you in every single scenario willfully read thing that are not there into my posts. And then start long arguments about things I haven't said. I am not backtracking. The point has never been that the individual elements of what Gilliam does are irreplaceable. The argument has always been that the package is very difficult to find in one player. Reggie Gilliam far from costing us a roster spot that could go to someone more impactful saves us at least one possibly two because he can do so many of the unfashionable jobs that have to be done on an NFL football team and despite them not being "impact plays" those unfashionable jobs impact outcomes.

 

But even when presented with the evidence of how that can be true you say you don't believe it. So of course we are never going to agree. Because I have evidence. And you have feelings.

[Augie]

@PBF81 

 

You might want to quit while you are behind. 

 

 

 

WAY behind…..

[PBF81]

24 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

My position has never changed. It is there very clearly in this threat all the way through. Consistent. 

 

The problem is you in every single scenario willfully read thing that are not there into my posts. And then start long arguments about things I haven't said. I am not backtracking. The point has never been that the individual elements of what Gilliam does are irreplaceable. The argument has always been that the package is very difficult to find in one player. Reggie Gilliam far from costing us a roster spot that could go to someone more impactful saves us at least one possibly two because he can do so many of the unfashionable jobs that have to be done on an NFL football team and despite them not being "impact plays" those unfashionable jobs impact outcomes.

 

But even when presented with the evidence of how that can be true you say you don't believe it. So of course we are never going to agree. Because I have evidence. And you have feelings.

 

I"m not even sure what your point is.  You took issue with my stance which implied that this team would be just fine without him.  Yet, what you say above seems to agree with that.  

 

I'm quite honesty not certain what your point is in all of this.  Again, you took issue with my position.  I've now provided evidence, and you've provided two or three plays in description but not in video that's available, three plays, and opinion otherwise.  

 

Look, he made the team, we're both rooting for us to win a Lombardi, let's simply agree to disagree on the particulars and drive on.  

 

I am eager to see your statement on the W/L impact of Allen however, for which despite all of my asking here and there for a few months all you've done is told me that it's in some "other thread," which is kinda lazy to be honest, particularly when as I said, it takes what, one, two sentences, possibly three to sum it up.  Why are you hedging on that?  

 

You know mine, IMO (opinion) but based on evidence, Allen's impact to the W/L column of this team, singlehandedly, is four, possibly five games/season.  In the playoffs it's just about everything. 

 

Otherwise, I'm curious how "good" you think McD would be with Orton, Mac Jones, etc. as his QB.  We know how good he was with Taylor, other than for an incredibly soft schedule his offense put up fewer points than all but seven of our drought era offenses, all coached by Gailey, Jauron, Mularkey, and Williams.  Other than for "backing into the playoffs" over three other better 9-7 teams, it was not good.  

 

Or better yet, how do you think that McD's Bills would be with Allen or Barkley at QB?  IMO he wouldn't win more than 6 maybe 7 games over a 17 game season.   

 

But, if as you've said, we have one of the "top third" best rosters in the league apart from the QB, it should be better than that.  So clearly you must think that even with Allen, Barkley, or Jones, not Taylor obviously, that we'd still be making the playoffs.  IDK, since you won't say.  

 

 

Edited September 9, 2023 by PBF81

[SectionC3]

41 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The evidence is actually 3 specific plays AND the numbers. 

 

And I never argued the offense wouldn't be "fine" without Gilliam. That is yet another strawman. My argument was entirely about the fact that he serves a dual role on offense and a key role on special teams in one player. And that level of versatility and flexibility makes him valuable to the roster. 

 

Read back. That was always my argument. It was finding a player who can be used in the ways Gilliam can on offense and be a very good STer in a single body isn't easy and he saves us a roster spot in that sense. Before he was here we had Pat DiMarco, to play full back, we had Lee Smith to be a blocking only tight end. That was 1 full back, 4 tight ends. We are now at 1 full back, 3 tight ends.... and he is better than Julian Stanford the backup linebacker who was playing his primary ST responsibilities previously. 

 

That has ALWAYS been my justification of Gilliam's roster spot. You get a ST stud and save a spot on offense. And you get that in one player. And he can be used on offense in a way neither Lee Smith or Pat DiMarco could. 

 

The Beane one. It is roughly 50% QB, 25% rest of roster, 25% coaching. So QB is worth about double of the other two elements. 

I'll summarize.  Functional versatility.  Totally worth the roster spot. 

[PBF81]

14 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

But even when presented with the evidence of how that can be true you say you don't believe it. So of course we are never going to agree. Because I have evidence. And you have feelings.

 

Right, like my specifically detailing our illustrious "making the playoffs" season in avid detail, in support of my argument, with you providing nothing but opinion to date.  

 

Those kinds of "feelings"?   

 

Again, feel free to say how many games you believe that Allen's being at QB means to us in W/Ls?  

 

We both know why you won't.  If you did, again, point it out.  God knows how many times I've asked yet never to get a direct reply.  Again, in the vein of "feelings," I've given you mine and presented the record of an otherwise very distinguished coach as evidence.  Not sure how data and facts are "feelings," but OK.  

 

Either way, I'm [still] awaiting your  response to that and have been for months.  

 

 

[FLFan]

18 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

My position has never changed. It is there very clearly in this threat all the way through. Consistent. 

 

The problem is you in every single scenario willfully read thing that are not there into my posts. And then start long arguments about things I haven't said. I am not backtracking. The point has never been that the individual elements of what Gilliam does are irreplaceable. The argument has always been that the package is very difficult to find in one player. Reggie Gilliam far from costing us a roster spot that could go to someone more impactful saves us at least one possibly two because he can do so many of the unfashionable jobs that have to be done on an NFL football team and despite them not being "impact plays" those unfashionable jobs impact outcomes.

 

But even when presented with the evidence of how that can be true you say you don't believe it. So of course we are never going to agree. Because I have evidence. And you have feelings.

You are fighting the good fight but to no avail I am afraid.  None the less, your posts are always educational.  

Edited September 9, 2023 by FLFan