It really comes down to Brady

[Big Blitz]

I’d like him to break this down more - “losing” meaning down 1 possession vs more then 1 has to be a factor.

 

 

[Chandler#81]

On 4/30/2024 at 8:48 AM, Don Otreply said:

Nah Rodgers is old, boring and a bit of moron, Josh is young dynamic, and knows when to keep his mouth shut, 🤣

A BIT of a moron? You’re being too kind. He’s a full blown moron!

[TheWeatherMan]

On 5/1/2024 at 12:35 AM, Chaos said:

Bills have not had any problems during the regular season on offseason for the last five years.  The coaches don't know how to elevate the defense in the playoffs against good offenses.  Joe Brady will not be solving the main problem.

Can’t believe people are still blind to this.  

[PBF81]

If the trend of Allen having a 60% completion % and a rating of about 85, along with what would be 24 passing TDs on the season under Brady in the regular season continues, or even close, there are going to be a whole lot of unhappy people and a mountain of criticism.  

 

And the misfit of the decade is Coleman as an X Receiver. 

 

Brady's got his work cut out for himself.  We'll never know how much McD is breathing down his neck.  

 

This is an incredibly curious season offensively.  

 

 

On 4/30/2024 at 1:58 PM, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Thinking about it more, for the Bills to take a $31 mil cap hit on Diggs, things must have been much worse internally than anyone knows.  And think that may mostly be due to disconnect between Brady and Diggs.  Diggs wanted to be the center of the offense, Brady wanted to spread things around including running more. Considering the emergence of Kincaid and Shakir, not a bad idea to do either.   Once Diggs saw that he just went through the motions at the end of last year.  Beginning to think off season discussion between Diggs and the team was that Diggs wasn't going to buy into that for the coming year either so they got rid of him, figuring addition by subtraction.

 

You sure it was Brady's that wanted that? 

 

 

[Beck Water]

12 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

I’d like him to break this down more - “losing” meaning down 1 possession vs more then 1 has to be a factor.

 

 

 

Agreed. 
For example, the Bills lost 6 games: all were 1 score games (one would have required a TD and 2 pt conversion).  2 were OT.

The Rams lost 7 games; 5 were 1 score games, 1 in OT; only 1 was a blowout.

 

I think the strategy is different when the teams are close

 

 

 

12 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

A BIT of a moron? You’re being too kind. He’s a full blown moron!

 

I think Rodgers is actually a very intelligent man.  But I think intelligence is often like the human neuronal equivalent of Kudzu: it requires regular, vigorous pruning and checking to keep it under control and in balance.

[LABILLBACKER]

10 hours ago, TheWeatherMan said:

Can’t believe people are still blind to this.  

Brady will have just a marginal effect on this season. The only way this team can get by KC/Cincy in the playoffs is 1) Keep your defense healthy  2) Tell your defense to make a play or 2.  Josh will always generate points.

[SirAndrew]

10 hours ago, PBF81 said:

If the trend of Allen having a 60% completion % and a rating of about 85, along with what would be 24 passing TDs on the season under Brady in the regular season continues, or even close, there are going to be a whole lot of unhappy people and a mountain of criticism.  

 

And the misfit of the decade is Coleman as an X Receiver. 

 

Brady's got his work cut out for himself.  We'll never know how much McD is breathing down his neck.  

 

This is an incredibly curious season offensively.  

 

 

 

You sure it was Brady's that wanted that? 

 

 

I absolutely agree, but I think people will quickly change their opinion of Brady if Josh puts up those numbers. I’m of the belief that our 2023 Brady offense isn’t a sustainable plan for the future. You must have chunk plays to succeed in today’s NFL. There’s far too much that can go wrong with ball control offense. One holding call easily can derail an entire game. That’s why big plays are so important these days. Everything, including defensive play worked in perfect unison during the second half of 2023. However, I don’t think we can keep winning with “complimentary” football over a long period of time. 

[PBF81]

23 hours ago, SirAndrew said:

I absolutely agree, but I think people will quickly change their opinion of Brady if Josh puts up those numbers. I’m of the belief that our 2023 Brady offense isn’t a sustainable plan for the future. You must have chunk plays to succeed in today’s NFL. There’s far too much that can go wrong with ball control offense. One holding call easily can derail an entire game. That’s why big plays are so important these days. Everything, including defensive play worked in perfect unison during the second half of 2023. However, I don’t think we can keep winning with “complimentary” football over a long period of time. 

 

Here's the thing, we can say that everything worked in perfect unison during the second half, after Brady took over, but not the offense, and, moreover, under very favorable circumstances.  

 

For instance, in our 6-1 stretch, we lost to Philly because of crap defense.  They were good but not that good.  They went on a 1-6 skid after they played us and as everyone said, they were overrated.  

We beat the Chiefs, which we can't do in the playoffs, after having had a bye week and after the Chiefs came off of a road loss to the Packers while having issues of their own, like Pacheco out.  

We played Dallas which came into Buffalo completely worn down from their biggest game of the season vs. Philly the week prior, a Sunday Night game no less. 

Then we barely beat the Chargers who were w/o Herbert, Allen, and Bosa;  the Pats and Mac Jones;  and Miami whom we own.  We easily could have lost any one of those three games and needed D and STs TDs to win two of them.  Our offense averaged 19.3 points-per-game in those three games, which needless to say is pathetic, particularly against those Ds.  

 

That's hardly things going perfectly unless you mean luck & circumstances.  

 

What you first said is what I envision occurring.  The question is, at what point will McD begin taking any heat for any of this stuff.   To date the culpability rolls off of him like no coach I've ever seen.  

 

Either way, Coleman as the X-Receiver is a disaster waiting to happen.  If Brady can't see that ...   In fairness to him, it seems that his hand is being forced.  But hey, dance with the devil, ...  

 

 

Edited June 18 by PBF81

[billsfan_34]

On 4/30/2024 at 9:29 AM, Sharky7337 said:

Going to disagree here. The talent is an issue because most of it is unproven we have 0 players with a 1000 yard receiving season.

What if: three receivers with 700-800 yards, a TE with 800 - 1000 yards, a RB with 1600 all purpose yards and another RB with 500 yards on the ground along with Allen clipping 500 yards? Not a terrible recipe right there.

Edited June 18 by billsfan_34

[Neo]

On 4/30/2024 at 9:16 AM, Gregg said:

 

The league would love to have a big market NYC area team in the big game. Especially one that hasn't been in one since 1969.

I agree.    The Super Bowl really struggles for ratings.   That’s why you never see Kansas City, with an MSA of only 2 million, in the big game.  The league has to do something to get viewers.

[BADOLBILZ]

 

 

Not sure why this topic got resuscitated........

 

But it's about the Jimmy's and Joe's not X's and O's.

 

Clever X's and O's might buy an OC a little stretch of success but DC's always catch up to the tactics.

 

Over the long haul of a 17 game season plus playoffs you need the players.

 

On paper,  Joe Brady doesn't have enough of them around Josh Allen to reach a SB.

 

They've f'd around with the WR corps........and we will find out if it's greater than the sum of it's parts or their collective track records soon enough.

 

[Beck Water]

40 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Not sure why this topic got resuscitated........

 

But it's about the Jimmy's and Joe's not X's and O's.

 

Clever X's and O's might buy an OC a little stretch of success but DC's always catch up to the tactics.

 

Over the long haul of a 17 game season plus playoffs you need the players.

 

On paper,  Joe Brady doesn't have enough of them around Josh Allen to reach a SB.

 

They've f'd around with the WR corps........and we will find out if it's greater than the sum of it's parts or their collective track records soon enough.

 

 

Beane seems to be making it pretty clear they're counting on Kincaid for Josh to become Greg Olsen to Cam ("I looked at the rules; it's legal to pass to a TE").  And when the Panthers went to the Superbowl with Newton, Olsen was their leading receiver.  Behind him they had a 30-yr old Ted Ginn, 33 yr old Jericho Cotchery, and a rookie Devin Funchess.

 

That said, I agree with your overall point that the Bills WR room is made up of insufficient WR parts, and not enough investment has been made there

[BillsVet]

27 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

Beane seems to be making it pretty clear they're counting on Kincaid for Josh to become Greg Olsen to Cam ("I looked at the rules; it's legal to pass to a TE").  And when the Panthers went to the Superbowl with Newton, Olsen was their leading receiver.  Behind him they had a 30-yr old Ted Ginn, 33 yr old Jericho Cotchery, and a rookie Devin Funchess.

 

That said, I agree with your overall point that the Bills WR room is made up of insufficient WR parts, and not enough investment has been made there

 

Benjamin got injured in camp that year after going over 1k yards in 2014 as a late 1st.  With him healthy, that '15 Panthers team had him and Olsen heading into the season.

 

Point is, they're not that far off in how they view their receiving talent from ~10 years ago and constantly behind the curve of where the league's heading.  And some of that is reacting to what happened the season before.  Diggs wasn't physical and didn't get much YAC.  Then again, neither did Benjamin and Funchess.  

 

 

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, Beck Water said:

 

Beane seems to be making it pretty clear they're counting on Kincaid for Josh to become Greg Olsen to Cam ("I looked at the rules; it's legal to pass to a TE").  And when the Panthers went to the Superbowl with Newton, Olsen was their leading receiver.  Behind him they had a 30-yr old Ted Ginn, 33 yr old Jericho Cotchery, and a rookie Devin Funchess.

 

That said, I agree with your overall point that the Bills WR room is made up of insufficient WR parts, and not enough investment has been made there

 

 

Yeah.   Hate seeing those kind of Carolina connections.   Their approach there proved very unsustainable for their MVP QB.

[NORWOODS FOOT]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Not sure why this topic got resuscitated........

 

But it's about the Jimmy's and Joe's not X's and O's.

 

Clever X's and O's might buy an OC a little stretch of success but DC's always catch up to the tactics.

 

Over the long haul of a 17 game season plus playoffs you need the players.

 

On paper,  Joe Brady doesn't have enough of them around Josh Allen to reach a SB.

 

They've f'd around with the WR corps........and we will find out if it's greater than the sum of it's parts or their collective track records soon enough.

 

I think you’re right. At the end of the day you need players that can beat the man in front of them whether the other team knows it’s coming or not.

 

I’m afraid we lack that at WR and Edge. Two “money” positions.

 

But I’m having a typical Bills fan feeling: I hope I’m wrong…

[Putin]

On 4/30/2024 at 9:40 PM, MasterStrategist said:

It isn't just about having 2 dynamic boundary players.  It's about being able to attack all areas/zones of the field effectively.  

 

Chiefs and Bengals were both bottom 10 teams in Avg Depth per Target (adot) and Yards before catch (ybc).  But they also gained ALOT of YAC and effectively hit on "intermediate" areas of the field.  Yes, Burrow missed some time so we can take some of that into consideration, but it's still their persona to work all areas.

 

Point is, if Brady can design better schemes and a better intermediate passing game then we'll be very successful.  We have 4 guys that should hit those intermediate areas very well.  

 

Our achilles heal LY ( 2 things were):

1.  Cover 2 defenses/with a strong front 4.  Aka the Jets and others

2. Press man teams, aka the Chiefs and others

 

We need to be able to attack deep too, but in order to beat these coverages above (without Josh having to scramble consistently, esp vs man) is to find guys who can either create separation, via speed/route running or physicality.  We added 2 weapons, in Samuel and Coleman, who excel at both and bring YAC.  Shakir and Kincaid are going to be better this year, especially Kincaid.  And hopefully a healthy Knox.

 

No problem being a ball control offense, if it's not solely dependent on Josh's legs.  IMO, Diggs lost a step/perhaps poor effort LY, and Davis has never been an intermediate threat consistently.  

 

I think this years offense will be more difficult to defend, due to complementary skill sets and Brady taking over with a full offseason to install his scheme.  Dorsey was a smart guy, but seemed to have some ADHD in his playcalling, which never had any rhythm or identity. We saw Brady "inherit" Dorseys scheme and show a much better knack for setting an identity and get the offense in rhythm.  Can't imagine that he won't improve with his own design and playbook.

Just think of the Dallas game last year where Brady sticks to the running game and we dismantle them  , with Dorsey calling the plays Josh would have been sacked 5 times and 3 INT’s while looking for Diggs 

[Rampant Buffalo]

On 6/17/2024 at 11:54 AM, Beck Water said:

I think Rodgers is actually a very intelligent man.  But I think intelligence is often like the human neuronal equivalent of Kudzu: it requires regular, vigorous pruning and checking to keep it under control and in balance.

 

Each of us needs to answer the question, How am I going to see the world? The most common answer to that question is to believe what you read in the paper, what you see on the news, etc. Conformism. A person who uses that approach is going to have correct views about some subjects, incorrect views on others. But, and here is a key point, that person's incorrect views will still be socially acceptable. No one is going to be called crazy or a fruitcake for believing something he saw on the news.

 

Let's say a man wakes up one morning and decides, I can do better than this. He goes online, and starts researching alternatives to mainstream ways of seeing things. The problem is, it's cheap and easy to create alternatives to the mainstream way of thinking. As a consequence, there are plenty of alternatives to mainstream thinking out there. The vast majority of these alternatives contain far more falsehood than truth. It would be easy for this man to be misled by some of these alternatives. This type of error is not socially acceptable. A man will absolutely have the verbal equivalent of rotten eggs thrown at him, if he indulges in this type of error.

 

As a hobby, I chose a topic. Over the years, I've done about 10,000 pages of reading about it. I've written a 90 page article about it. My article is supported by numerous quotes from mainstream sources. My conclusion is not mainstream. I avoided both the error of conformism and the error of being seduced by a conspiracy theory. Life is short, and there simply isn't time to perform this level of effort for very many subjects.

 

How much time has Aaron Rodgers taken to research the subjects he talks about? Has he written about them? How much research has he done, and how credible are the sources he's citing? I don't have the answers to these questions. Putting aside the specific example of Aaron Rodgers, I would say it's far more common to encounter someone easily seduced by a half-baked conspiracy theory, than it is to encounter someone who's reached a non-mainstream conclusion through rigorous research.

[Lfod]

I just want to speak on the Jets because I see people thinking they will make noise. I wanted to say it last year and wish I did, but the Jets are a joke and Rogers was nothing but desperation and ticket sales. 

 

I don't count last year because Rogers was injured but I promise you I thought it was going to be bad but im saying it now. Itz going to be bad. 

 

The other thing I saw some one mention why our HC isn't getting more heat under the seat. Dude broke the drought and has been playoff bound ever since. You dont fire a person in that situation. You fire bad HCs who are in charge of crap teams with bad records. Im getting tired of people who question my playoff caliber HC. Turn in your fan cards till the guy is fired ok? At least chill out with the song and dance until the thing falls apart enough to know its a real problem and not one you make up because of personal desperations. 

 

Lastly Dorsey deserved to get fired at least some what. It wasnt scapegoat level. He was fired it got better. All you need to know. 

 

Other great stuff in this thread I can think about but needed to touch on a few bad takes. 

 

 

Edited June 18 by Lfod

[Rampant Buffalo]

3 hours ago, Lfod said:

I just want to speak on the Jets because I see people thinking they will make noise. I wanted to say it last year and wish I did, but the Jets are a joke and Rogers was nothing but desperation and ticket sales. 

 

I don't count last year because Rogers was injured but I promise you I thought it was going to be bad but im saying it now. Itz going to be bad. 

 

The other thing I saw some one mention why our HC isn't getting more heat under the seat. Dude broke the drought and has been playoff bound ever since. You dont fire a person in that situation. You fire bad HCs who are in charge of crap teams with bad records. Im getting tired of people who question my playoff caliber HC. Turn in your fan cards till the guy is fired ok? At least chill out with the song and dance until the thing falls apart enough to know its a real problem and not one you make up because of personal desperations. 

 

Lastly Dorsey deserved to get fired at least some what. It wasnt scapegoat level. He was fired it got better. All you need to know. 

 

Other great stuff in this thread I can think about but needed to touch on a few bad takes. 

 

 

 

Before deciding whether McDermott is a good head coach, it's worth at least asking the question: is he a good defensive coordinator? If he is, why did Andy Reid fire him?

 

Look at the Eagles game. In the first half, McDermott did an outstanding job, and held their offense to 3 points. But then in the third quarter, he switched to a soft zone/prevent defense. He simply allowed the Eagles to complete 8 - 12 yard passes, without the defense contesting those. It was as though he was grimly determined to remind Eagles fans why their team had fired him. The Eagles scored every drive once McDermott started doing that, ultimately winning the game.

 

Which Sean McDermott did we get in our playoff losses? In our four most recent playoff losses, his defense has generated a total of seven defensive stops. Seven defensive stops, in four postseason losses to the Chiefs and Bengals. This past Super Bowl, when facing the Chiefs, the 49ers defense generated, you guessed it, 7 defensive stops! Their defense accomplished in one game, what McDermott's defense has in four. A large portion of Josh Allen's career has been expended, without any Super Bowl rings to show for it. The primary reason for that is McDermott's soft zone/prevent defense, which the Chiefs cut through like a hot knife through butter.

[Lfod]

2 hours ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

Before deciding whether McDermott is a good head coach, it's worth at least asking the question: is he a good defensive coordinator? If he is, why did Andy Reid fire him?

 

Look at the Eagles game. In the first half, McDermott did an outstanding job, and held their offense to 3 points. But then in the third quarter, he switched to a soft zone/prevent defense. He simply allowed the Eagles to complete 8 - 12 yard passes, without the defense contesting those. It was as though he was grimly determined to remind Eagles fans why their team had fired him. The Eagles scored every drive once McDermott started doing that, ultimately winning the game.

 

Which Sean McDermott did we get in our playoff losses? In our four most recent playoff losses, his defense has generated a total of seven defensive stops. Seven defensive stops, in four postseason losses to the Chiefs and Bengals. This past Super Bowl, when facing the Chiefs, the 49ers defense generated, you guessed it, 7 defensive stops! Their defense accomplished in one game, what McDermott's defense has in four. A large portion of Josh Allen's career has been expended, without any Super Bowl rings to show for it. The primary reason for that is McDermott's soft zone/prevent defense, which the Chiefs cut through like a hot knife through butter.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/bills/news/buffalo-bills-top-10-defense-cbs-sports#:~:text=Buffalo has finished all but,the 2021 and 2022 campaigns.

 

"Buffalo has finished all but one of its seven seasons under McDermott with a top-10 defensive unit, finishing first in total defense in the 2021 and 2022 campaigns"

 

Top defence 2021-2022 and Top 10 every other year. If the article is correct Its not a question I would ask. 

 

I think he is a good HC. Time will tell if he is proven to be a great SB winning coach. Im sure he is closer than other HCs employed today. 

 

If he was fired today he would have a job tomarrow and I would rather have the playoff births with him than venture into that unknown territory. People talk as if giving him the boot ensures a SB victory because we still have Josh. 

 

To many absolutes in some peoples takes. Not saying firing Mcd and hiring a different HC isnt the SB answer but why try to fix what isnt broken. Playoffs every year? Sure sign me up because one of those years things just might fall into place. 

 

No you dont fire him until its clear this team trended down and Josh looks like his current back up.

 

Edited June 19 by Lfod