What schemes/concepts would you like to see carry over into this season?

[34-78-83]

2 minutes ago, HoofHearted said:

1. His play-action numbers are outstanding - as are every other QBs play-action numbers vs normal dropback numbers. It's the whole point of Play Action - to freeze defenders and not allow them to play run or pass and get caught in no mans land. As far as I'm aware there are no sites who break down Play Action from under center vs Play Action from in the gun (would love to see that data if it exists though).

 

2. This was a common theme I saw during the season last year so I did a deep dive into our run game and found no evidence that suggested we run better from under center than from under the gun. I will try and find that thread and link it here.

 

Josh under center immediately takes him away as an immediate run threat. We have been so successful as an offense since Josh got here because of his legs, whether he uses them or not, because teams have to account for it. Gun provides that on every single snap and forces a defense to play 11 v 11 football instead of 11 v 10 which is typical of any QB who isn't a run threat. Now does that mean there is no place for anything under center? No. Obviously it's a good wrinkle to have, but with the way modern offenses are run you want to be in gun the majority of the time if you have a dual threat QB because of the stress it puts on a defense to defend the whole field. Additionally, gun allows you to take advantage of the RPO game which is even better than true play action since you are forcing a defender to be wrong regardless of what they do. Now you're getting into situations where you can play 11 v 10 offensively instead of the reverse.

All fair counters if this were a true debate (and it can be I suppose if you want it to). I think there are many out there that would agree with my angles on why to use more under-center in our offense with Josh though, including former players Eric Wood, Dan Orlovsky and J.T. O'Sullivan. They've been outspoken about it over the past couple seasons. I don't agree on Josh being removed as a run threat either. It's just going to rely more on the roll-out game where he gets his run-pass options.

 

I do recall the thread where you did the analysis you mentioned...

 

Whatever the case may be, thanks for starting an interesting thread.

[HoofHearted]

10 minutes ago, 34-78-83 said:

All fair counters if this were a true debate (and it can be I suppose if you want it to). I think there are many out there that would agree with my angles on why to use more under-center in our offense with Josh though, including former players Eric Wood, Dan Orlovsky and J.T. O'Sullivan. They've been outspoken about it over the past couple seasons. I don't agree on Josh being removed as a run threat either. It's just going to rely more on the roll-out game where he gets his run-pass options.

 

I do recall the thread where you did the analysis you mentioned...

 

Whatever the case may be, thanks for starting an interesting thread.

Healthy debates are fine, and a debate is all it'll ever be. Neither one of us, or anyone else for that matter, has the exact answer. There isn't one way to skin a cat. We had success under center last year running play-action so people want to lean into that more which makes total and complete sense. From a coaches perspective, when you start thinking about how that limits you schematically and what skill sets it takes away from your offense that would otherwise set you apart from 90% of the other offenses in the league is where you start questioning whether the juice is worth the squeeze. When does it become too much under center if you will. Roll-out run game is fine, and we've had success with Josh running naked bootlegs in short third down situations which have provided him a single pass option to take if it was there, and if it wasn't then he would keep it himself. These are easily defended in normal down and distance situations within the base rules of defenses when it comes to secondary contain players forcing Josh to pull up while still having players in coverage.

 

From a purely statistical standpoint I'd really like to see the numbers for play action compared to rpo numbers. I've seen what they look like for teams I've been involved with and I think they'd really be eye opening for fans. RPOs are the closest thing we have to out-right cheating in football lol.

[Old Coot]

1 hour ago, HoofHearted said:

From a purely statistical standpoint I'd really like to see the numbers for play action compared to rpo numbers. I've seen what they look like for teams I've been involved with and I think they'd really be eye opening for fans. RPOs are the closest thing we have to out-right cheating in football lol.

Perhaps this is because in play action with the QB under center the QB dropping back must turn his back to the D so that the play looks like a running play. He then fakes a handoff to the RB then pulls up and looks to see who is open because a D player got sucked in thinking it was a run. If the QB glances back at the D while retreating from under center, he gives away that it's really a pass play.  The in the play action pass, tehre is no option. The play is pass all the way but designed to fool the D by looking like a run.

 

The RPO is a true option; it may be a pass or a run depending on how the D reacts. In an RPO, the QB in shotgun or pistol can focus on the conflict defender and, according to what the defender does, pass or run; that is, if the defender plays pass the RB keeps and runs and if the defender plays run the QB can pass. With Josh, the RPO has the option for Josh to keep and run.

 

Is this analysis correct?

[HoofHearted]

6 hours ago, Old Coot said:

Perhaps this is because in play action with the QB under center the QB dropping back must turn his back to the D so that the play looks like a running play. He then fakes a handoff to the RB then pulls up and looks to see who is open because a D player got sucked in thinking it was a run. If the QB glances back at the D while retreating from under center, he gives away that it's really a pass play.  The in the play action pass, tehre is no option. The play is pass all the way but designed to fool the D by looking like a run.

 

The RPO is a true option; it may be a pass or a run depending on how the D reacts. In an RPO, the QB in shotgun or pistol can focus on the conflict defender and, according to what the defender does, pass or run; that is, if the defender plays pass the RB keeps and runs and if the defender plays run the QB can pass. With Josh, the RPO has the option for Josh to keep and run.

 

Is this analysis correct?

Yes, but more importantly defenses still have the upper hand without the threat of QB run because they don’t have to designate a defensive player to account for it (Essentially playing 11 v 10 in favor of the defense). RPOs allows offenses to get the numbers advantage by putting at least one defender in conflict, as you said. So now it’s 11 v 10 in favor of the offense. With a player like Josh you could have old school triple option through RPOs where you are now putting 2 defenders in conflict playing 11 v 9. This is why you saw an uptick in our RPO game once Brady took over. He understands the numerical advantages it gives you, especially when you have a guy like Josh back there orchestrating the whole thing.

[BillsVet]

22 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

For all his accolades, Aaron Kromer is still underrated. Morse, McGovern, Brown & Edwards are run of the mill players and Dawkins is overrated, imo. Yet they were among the Leagues best rated units last season. Now, Morse is gone, McGovern is Center (presumably) Edward’s moves up. It’s Kromer’s skill -and Allen’s run & threat to run that makes them seem great.

 

Buffalo was fortunate that their 5 starting OLinemen, Dawkins, McGovern, Morse, Torrence, and Brown all played 96% of their offensive snaps.  I do not expect them to feature a starting 5 next season that duplicates that luck  

 

It also speaks to how having a unit that is experienced with perhaps less talent > a talented unit that is newly assembled.  If the OL is comprised of Dawkins, Edwards, McGovern, Torrence, and Brown that's at least 1 new face and I'm not sold McGovern is penciled in at C just yet as much as SVPG is talked up.  

 

Also think the threat of Allen running has bailed them out some, but would need more data on his non-designed runs to see how much.   

[hondo in seattle]

I've heard Kurt Warner and others suggest that Josh gets frustrated by 2 high shells and other defensive schemes that take away the long ball.  According to the narrative, Josh doesn't like to dink and dunk down the field.

 

Yet, we didn't hear this story a lot when Beasley was with the team.   Maybe folks are right and Allen will throw to a covered deep guy before an open short guy just because he likes to air it out - film certainly shows instances of that.   But maybe Josh doesn't trust his recent short threats the way he once trusted Bease.  I'm not sure what's going on but whatever it is, it needs to be fixed because teams are frequently using 2 high shells to slow down QBs like Allen, Mahomes, etc. 

 

Our offense needs to become proficient at moving the ball, regardless of the defensive scheme.  And Brady has talked about making defenses 'defend every blade of grass.'  We need to get better at that.  The encouraging thing is Brady was adept at using short crossers at Carolina.  But guys open short won't matter if Allen inappropriately chooses the guy running the intermediate or deep pattern.  Schematically, Brady needs to find ways to get guys open at all levels of the defense.  But he also needs to persuade Josh to choose the guy with the greatest separation, even if that guy is James Cook or Dalton Kincaid, only 5 yards beyond the line of scrimmage.  

 

 

[Richard Noggin]

15 hours ago, BillsVet said:

Also think the threat of Allen running has bailed them out some, but would need more data on his non-designed runs to see how much.   

 

Allen has not been adequately celebrated for his ability to avoid pressure (early penetration especially) that would result in sacks for the majority of NFL QBs. Why an otherwise ultra efficient Marino or Cousins or Goff or Tagovailoa tends to fall short in the playoffs: they don't often transcend/overcome early defensive pressure and extend otherwise negative/dead plays. A talent like Allen can cover up or compensate for so many protection breakdowns that would immediately scuttle the same plays for so many other offenses. 

 

15 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

I've heard Kurt Warner and others suggest that Josh gets frustrated by 2 high shells and other defensive schemes that take away the long ball.  According to the narrative, Josh doesn't like to dink and dunk down the field.

 

Yet, we didn't hear this story a lot when Beasley was with the team.   Maybe folks are right and Allen will throw to a covered deep guy before an open short guy just because he likes to air it out - film certainly shows instances of that.   But maybe Josh doesn't trust his recent short threats the way he once trusted Bease.  I'm not sure what's going on but whatever it is, it needs to be fixed because teams are frequently using 2 high shells to slow down QBs like Allen, Mahomes, etc. 

 

Our offense needs to become proficient at moving the ball, regardless of the defensive scheme.  And Brady has talked about making defenses 'defend every blade of grass.'  We need to get better at that.  The encouraging thing is Brady was adept at using short crossers at Carolina.  But guys open short won't matter if Allen inappropriately chooses the guy running the intermediate or deep pattern.  Schematically, Brady needs to find ways to get guys open at all levels of the defense.  But he also needs to persuade Josh to choose the guy with the greatest separation, even if that guy is James Cook or Dalton Kincaid, only 5 yards beyond the line of scrimmage.  

 

 

Yes. Re-watching even the 13 seconds game recently, I was struck by how efficient Allen was early in drives, targeting Beasley especially to move the chains and get within striking distance (for those legendary deep/intermediate TD strikes to Davis). QB17 has ALREADY shown us he is willing to be the trigger man of an efficient, diverse attack. But Beasley and Brown went away, and Diggs and Davis plateaued, and Mckenzie and Harty failed to fill in. 

 

Hopefully Kincaid and Samuel and Shakir and the RBs shine as featured targets in a diverse passing attack, with some combination of Coleman, MVS, and/or Claypool and Shorter/Shavers doing the boundary work to keep defenses honest enough.

 

I do think Samuel and Shakir and Kincaid (and maybe Knox and Cook and Davis) could all be trustworthy targets encouraging Allen to take what the defense gives him.