I'm really starting to love this WR room. We quietly got better

[Royale with Cheese]

29 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Based on our defensive performance every single playoff run every single year. What team have you been watching? We'll probably need a top 1 offense to compete for a championship, honestly. Top 10 isn't acceptable. That's the bare minimum expectation with Allen.

 

You're being a little dramatic Happy.  

We don't need the #1 offense.  Only 5 teams ever have won the Super Bowl with the #1 offense.

 

I don't think there is a QB in the history of the NFL who ever had a top 10 offense every year.  Not even Brady.

[Avisan]

Just now, FireChans said:

What horses should we get

Heck if I know.  Von Miller was a swing for the fences that looked pretty good before he got injured.  If I knew how to readily acquire elite DL talent, I'd be a NFL team employee gearing up for the season, not wasting time on a fan board.  Hoping we successfully use some cap/draft capital on a difference maker next season.

[HappyDays]

30 minutes ago, Avisan said:

Okay, so this sounds more like a complaint about the defense's postseason performances, which is valid.

 

It's not really a complaint, just a matter of fact. We need an offense that can score at will, including in the playoffs.

 

I actually think this is where the disconnect lies between both sides in this discussion. Nobody thinks the offense is going to suck. Josh Allen means we are basically guaranteed a top 10 offense. It's just that top 10 is not equivalent to championship caliber. If you adjust your perspective to that, you'll understand why so many of us are unsatisfied with the offensive investments.

 

7 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

You're being a little dramatic Happy.  

We don't need the #1 offense.  Only 5 teams ever have won the Super Bowl with the #1 offense.

 

I agree it is dramatic. But when your defense is consistently giving up historically bad production in the playoffs, you need a historically productive offense to overcome that, no?

 

Edited July 16 by HappyDays

[Alphadawg7]

13 minutes ago, FireChans said:

He had a higher percentage of snaps in 2023 than he did in 2022.

 

the only game he had less than 60% of offensive snaps was the barrage against Dallas.

 

I mean I clearly didn't say from one year to the next...I very clearly said during the season it went down under Brady compared to Dorsey.  

 

Ok, so I just checked myself to get the correct answer, and yes I remembered correctly, and it is a significant drop actually.  

 

Diggs average snap count % for the first 10 games under Dorsey:  87.2% - Only 1 game under 80 (76%), with 4 games between 93% and 99%.

Diggs average snap count % for the 7 games under Brady:  72.9% (a 14.3% difference) - Only 1 game over 90 (92%) and 3 games under 66%.  

 

But here is the rub - You obviously saw Diggs snap % for each game and were staring at the necessary info to confirm that it was correct, otherwise you wouldn't have known the only game under 60% was Dallas.  Yet rather than just simply confirm it was accurate, you very obviously changed the narrative to be a different comparison so you wouldn't have to acknowledge the info was correct and instead try and spin it as if it wasn't.   

 

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I mean I clearly didn't say from one year to the next...I very clearly said during the season it went down under Brady compared to Dorsey.  

 

Ok, so I just checked myself to get the correct answer, and yes I remembered correctly, and it is a significant drop actually.  

 

Diggs average snap count % for the first 10 games under Dorsey:  87.2% - Only 1 game under 80 (76%), with 4 games between 93% and 99%.

Diggs average snap count % for the 7 games under Brady:  72.9% (a 14.3% difference) - Only 1 game over 90 (92%) and 3 games under 66%.  

 

But here is the rub - You obviously saw Diggs snap % for each game and were staring at the necessary info to confirm that it was correct, otherwise you wouldn't have known the only game under 60% was Dallas.  Yet rather than just simply confirm it was accurate, you very obviously changed the narrative to be a different comparison so you wouldn't have to acknowledge the info was correct and instead try and spin it as if it wasn't.   

 

His snaps decreased in the second half of the year. He still played lots of snaps. So it doesn’t really matter that they mildly decreased in the second half lol. 

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

His snaps decreased in the second half of the year. He still played lots of snaps. So it doesn’t really matter that they mildly decreased in the second half lol. 

 

14.3% drop in snaps is not a mild decrease.  In his last 5 games he only had 1 game with over 79% snaps and that was the final game.  The 3 games leading up to it he had 46%, 60% and 65%.  

 

Does not change the fact you looked the answer up, saw it was CORRECT, then proceeded to CHANGE the narrative to manipulate a different answer to hide the fact it was correct rather than just acknowledge the info was correct.  If you wanted to try and diminish the answer with some comment like "it mildly decreased" then fine, but to flat out try and lie and cover that up is just a waste of everyones time.  

[Avisan]

1 minute ago, HappyDays said:

 

It's not really a complaint, just a matter of fact. We need an offense that can score at will, including in the playoffs.

 

I actually think this is where the disconnect lies between both sides in this discussion. Nobody thinks the offense is going to suck. Josh Allen means we are basically guaranteed a top 10 offense. It's just that top 10 is not equivalent championship caliber. If you adjust your perspective to that, you'll understand why so many of us are unsatisfied with the offensive investments.

I don't think there are any offenses that score at will against a stout defensive front, though, which is where my perspective comes from.  The Bills offense will probably be pretty adequate at its job in the postseason again.  It was this last season, despite facing a very good KC defense.  My hope for next season is that our defensive impact players can stay healthy enough on D to, well, make an impact.

 

 

[FireChans]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

 

14.3% drop in snaps is not a mild decrease.  In his last 5 games he only had 1 game with over 79% snaps and that was the final game.  The 3 games leading up to it he had 46%, 60% and 65%.  

 

Does not change the fact you looked the answer up, saw it was CORRECT, then proceeded to CHANGE the narrative to manipulate a different answer to hide the fact it was correct rather than just acknowledge the info was correct.  If you wanted to try and diminish the answer with some comment like "it mildly decreased" then fine, but to flat out try and lie and cover that up is just a waste of everyones time.  

What narrative?

 

I made the comment that he played lots of snaps last year. You chimed in that they decreased in the second half, they did, but my point was that he played lots of snaps. Not that they did or did not decrease in the second half of the year. My narrative, the entire time, was that he played lots of snaps. Which is what I said.

 

This persecution complex is absurd lol. I’m not out to get you or make you look stupid with every post, that’s just a bonus most of the time.

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

What narrative?

 

I made the comment that he played lots of snaps last year. You chimed in that they decreased in the second half, they did, but my point was that he played lots of snaps. Not that they did or did not decrease in the second half of the year. My narrative, the entire time, was that he played lots of snaps. Which is what I said.

 

This persecution complex is absurd lol. I’m not out to get you or make you look stupid with every post, that’s just a bonus most of the time.

 

LOL...I very specifically countered your point about his snaps with the comment that I thought I saw on here that his snap % decreased a lot once Brady took over.  that was the info to confirm...you didn't do that.  You instead saw that it was correct, and then instead of just acknowledging it you presented some other comparison that wasn't being discussed that "suggested" it wasn't correct.  

 

And LMAO...persecution complex?  This from the guy who follows me around trying to do it all the time?  And I wasn't even doing that here, I even said I wasn't sure if I was even remembering the info correctly or not.  You are the one who tried to twist an answer to create a different perception...which honestly isn't all that surprising.  

[FireChans]

3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

LOL...I very specifically countered your point about his snaps with the comment that I thought I saw on here that his snap % decreased a lot once Brady took over.  that was the info to confirm...you didn't do that.  You instead saw that it was correct, and then instead of just acknowledging it you presented some other comparison that wasn't being discussed that "suggested" it wasn't correct.  

 

And LMAO...persecution complex?  This from the guy who follows me around trying to do it all the time?  And I wasn't even doing that here, I even said I wasn't sure if I was even remembering the info correctly or not.  You are the one who tried to twist an answer to create a different perception...which honestly isn't all that surprising.  

I follow you around? You engaged me lmao. persecution complex again. It’s gotten old.

[Alphadawg7]

40 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

I agree it is dramatic. But when your defense is consistently giving up historically bad production in the playoffs, you need a historically productive offense to overcome that, no?

 

I actually agree with you that if we field a "top 10" offense, then it may not be enough this year.  Our defense has not been able to come up when we needed them to in the past seasons.  I do give last year a bit of a pass given how much better the defense was IMO before we lost Milano and Bernard.  I really wish we could have seen what our D would have done with Milano and Bernard playing, or even one of them.  Going into the KC game the first thing I told everyone I was scared of was KC's ability to attack the LB position and that they were going to feat on that all day.  And the result was just that, we even helped bring Kelce back to life who honestly murmurs he may be losing a step down the stretch of the season were out there.  He looked vintage against us as we had no shot at covering with our bandaid group.

 

This year I am worried we are too thin at CB and also while I think Milano and Bernard are a great duo (when healthy), I am a little worried if they can stay healthy being both undersized.  

 

On the other hand, I am more optimistic about the offense as I like the potential of not having a target hog in Diggs and a limited Davis opposite him.  IMHO, I think the overall group between WR, TE, and RB have better hands, bigger route trees, better route runners, are more cerebral, and tougher overall.  It does have a lot of youth and some unproven aspects of course.  But still, I think we are improved in those ares.  We don't have that proven top end player like a Diggs, but I think what we lack in that we can make up for in depth overall across the offense in guys who can make plays.  

 

But, I get the concern, lots of unknowns still between a new offense being installed with Brady and the youth amongst our top playmakers.  I mean no opinion is right or wrong right now, we have yet to see most of this on the field yet.  But I do like our ascending guys like Kincaid and Shakir, and Samuel I think is a good addition as a Vet, plus I think our RB room is better with Davis over the aging vets we had paired with Cook.  Biggest thing for me though is last year I was very concerned about Dorsey going into the season, and this year I am coming into the season a lot more confident in our OC and I think Brady will be smarter about putting Allen in better positions to succeed than Dorsey was.  

 

So for me, I think the potential to remain one of the best offenses in the league is still there and it could result in Allens best season yet.  

Edited July 16 by Alphadawg7

[HappyDays]

10 minutes ago, Avisan said:

The Bills offense will probably be pretty adequate at its job in the postseason again.  It was this last season, despite facing a very good KC defense.

 

The offense was not adequate in that playoff game as evidenced by the fact that they scored less points than their opponent.

 

I think every single person in this discussion secretly agrees with each other. Everyone knows the Bills will have a good offense but not a blow you away offense. We can quibble a bit on the exact expected rankings and stats, but really I don't think anyone on here disagrees with that general statement. So what it really boils down to is whether that caliber of offense is championship caliber and I think past playoff experience under this regime would indicate heavily that it is not.

 

For me the most likely source of optimism isn't that every single pass catcher on offense is going to exceed their career production to the point that we become a blow you away offense; it's that Bobby Babich will be the DC in more than just name and will turn out to be an elite defensive coach. On that point I actually am willing to wait and see.

 

I just wish we had chosen the path of most likely success, which would have been over-investing in the offense and trying to just steamroll teams all the way to the Super Bowl. Even if that kind of turnaround didn't happen in a single offseason, I would have been happy with just a sign that the regime was making it their new philosophy. Instead they invested basically the bare minimum on offense and appear to be rolling along with the same philosophy that has failed them time and time again. We just have to hope this time they happen to be right.

[Rampant Buffalo]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

No disrespect, but not only is this not a good strategy at all for a team playing in bad weather, it is the same failed strategy where all anyone could talk about was how we lacked a running game and Josh needs help from the run game.  

 

By no means should we become a run first team when we have Josh Allen, but to disregard the run game again and force the pass no matter what is a terrible approach and one that had us at 5-5 last year and staring at no playoffs.  Running the ball more we went 6-1 and won the division and the 2 seed after a 5-5 start.  Some of you seem to prioritize the "style" of football you personally like over winning football.  

 

What the Bills are fortunate to be able to both pass and run the ball at a high level.  What they need to do is play the style of football that gives this team, this roster, the best chance to win the game against that specific opponent that week, the conditions of the field, etc.  That means there will be games where we are pass heavy, games we are run heavy, and games we are balanced.  To commit to one way to play and force that no matter what when you have a team that is capable of both passing and running the ball is exactly what get's coaches fired.  Many teams do not have that luxury, they may only be good at one or the other (or neither).  Bills are fortunate to be able to do both, and to take one of those away as dramatically as you are wishing for is absolutely the wrong way.  

 

Look at Dallas last year...we DOMINATED that game with Allen doing very little which killed my fantasy teams that week, but who cares, we crushed them and it was glorious.  I didn't care that it was because we ran all day on them because we could.  That is what we need more of...adjusting to what our opponent is giving us and play to win the game, not to entertain fans with their favorite style of football.  Then there is the opposite like when we lost to the lowly Mac Jones led Pats where he threw like 3 total passes and all we did was try and pass in a blizzard because we couldn't run the ball.  

 

The good news is that there is 0% chance the Bills are going to over commit anyway to the pass or the run, but its just a wild thing to hope for.  

 

The 6-6 start was due in large part to McDermott sometimes opting for a soft zone/prevent defense. The Eagles game was a good example. Tight pass coverage and a good defensive plan for the first half, limiting the Eagles to just 3 points at halftime. Soft zone/prevent defense for the second half. Simply allowing the Eagles to complete 8 - 12 yard passes, with literally no opposition from the defense. The Eagles scored every drive once the Bills went to that style of prevent defense. The result was a completely avoidable loss.

 

The Bills defense also allowed the short stuff when facing Mac Jones and the Patriots, even though that Patriots offense was built around taking the short stuff. Result: Mac Jones put up Montana-like numbers, and another Bills loss. The primary reason for the late season win streak was because the defense tightened up. McDermott had gotten away from the soft zone/prevent defense which had failed so abysmally earlier in the season.

 

The offensive improvement under Brady is mostly a mirage. He got more drives per game, causing overall numbers to go up. But his points per drive stat was about the same as it had been under Dorsey.

 

When the Bills' passing offense was at its best, the team came within 13 seconds of a postseason win over the Chiefs. That was despite a near-total defensive collapse (two defensive stops). If an elite passing offense is good enough to carry the team almost to victory over the Chiefs, despite pretty much no defense, why get away from that type of offense?

 

Are there times when the play-calling should be run heavy? Absolutely! The Dallas defense was selling out against the pass, while daring us to beat them with the run. You run the ball all day against a defense like that. I want the OL and RBs to be good enough to punish that particular type of defensive misbehavior.

 

It's one thing to run the ball all day against a defense like that. And it's another thing to take the ball out of your best player's hands, in order to run James Cook up the middle for a 3 yard gain. I recall that Brady called slightly more running plays than passing plays. That's the wrong ratio. A lower octane offense. If he was doing that as a temporary measure, due to Allen playing hurt, or Diggs fading down the stretch, fine. I can respect that. But if he genuinely wants to run the ball at least as often as he passes, then he's the wrong OC and needs to be replaced.

[Mikey152]

1 hour ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

The 6-6 start was due in large part to McDermott sometimes opting for a soft zone/prevent defense. The Eagles game was a good example. Tight pass coverage and a good defensive plan for the first half, limiting the Eagles to just 3 points at halftime. Soft zone/prevent defense for the second half. Simply allowing the Eagles to complete 8 - 12 yard passes, with literally no opposition from the defense. The Eagles scored every drive once the Bills went to that style of prevent defense. The result was a completely avoidable loss.

 

The Bills defense also allowed the short stuff when facing Mac Jones and the Patriots, even though that Patriots offense was built around taking the short stuff. Result: Mac Jones put up Montana-like numbers, and another Bills loss. The primary reason for the late season win streak was because the defense tightened up. McDermott had gotten away from the soft zone/prevent defense which had failed so abysmally earlier in the season.

 

The offensive improvement under Brady is mostly a mirage. He got more drives per game, causing overall numbers to go up. But his points per drive stat was about the same as it had been under Dorsey.

 

When the Bills' passing offense was at its best, the team came within 13 seconds of a postseason win over the Chiefs. That was despite a near-total defensive collapse (two defensive stops). If an elite passing offense is good enough to carry the team almost to victory over the Chiefs, despite pretty much no defense, why get away from that type of offense?

 

Are there times when the play-calling should be run heavy? Absolutely! The Dallas defense was selling out against the pass, while daring us to beat them with the run. You run the ball all day against a defense like that. I want the OL and RBs to be good enough to punish that particular type of defensive misbehavior.

 

It's one thing to run the ball all day against a defense like that. And it's another thing to take the ball out of your best player's hands, in order to run James Cook up the middle for a 3 yard gain. I recall that Brady called slightly more running plays than passing plays. That's the wrong ratio. A lower octane offense. If he was doing that as a temporary measure, due to Allen playing hurt, or Diggs fading down the stretch, fine. I can respect that. But if he genuinely wants to run the ball at least as often as he passes, then he's the wrong OC and needs to be replaced.

To be fair, the league has changed since 2020 (our actual best offensive season) and 2021. Defenses are playing more conservatively to limit big plays. We also see a lot less defensive penalties. Trying to pass like it's 2021 into that might not yield the results you expect.

 

https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/analysis/nfl-offense-scoring-penalties-efficiency-2023/

Edited July 16 by Mikey152

[Alphadawg7]

27 minutes ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

The 6-6 start was due in large part to McDermott sometimes opting for a soft zone/prevent defense. The Eagles game was a good example. Tight pass coverage and a good defensive plan for the first half, limiting the Eagles to just 3 points at halftime. Soft zone/prevent defense for the second half. Simply allowing the Eagles to complete 8 - 12 yard passes, with literally no opposition from the defense. The Eagles scored every drive once the Bills went to that style of prevent defense. The result was a completely avoidable loss.

 

The Bills defense also allowed the short stuff when facing Mac Jones and the Patriots, even though that Patriots offense was built around taking the short stuff. Result: Mac Jones put up Montana-like numbers, and another Bills loss. The primary reason for the late season win streak was because the defense tightened up. McDermott had gotten away from the soft zone/prevent defense which had failed so abysmally earlier in the season.

 

The offensive improvement under Brady is mostly a mirage. He got more drives per game, causing overall numbers to go up. But his points per drive stat was about the same as it had been under Dorsey.

 

When the Bills' passing offense was at its best, the team came within 13 seconds of a postseason win over the Chiefs. That was despite a near-total defensive collapse (two defensive stops). If an elite passing offense is good enough to carry the team almost to victory over the Chiefs, despite pretty much no defense, why get away from that type of offense?

 

Are there times when the play-calling should be run heavy? Absolutely! The Dallas defense was selling out against the pass, while daring us to beat them with the run. You run the ball all day against a defense like that. I want the OL and RBs to be good enough to punish that particular type of defensive misbehavior.

 

It's one thing to run the ball all day against a defense like that. And it's another thing to take the ball out of your best player's hands, in order to run James Cook up the middle for a 3 yard gain. I recall that Brady called slightly more running plays than passing plays. That's the wrong ratio. A lower octane offense. If he was doing that as a temporary measure, due to Allen playing hurt, or Diggs fading down the stretch, fine. I can respect that. But if he genuinely wants to run the ball at least as often as he passes, then he's the wrong OC and needs to be replaced.

 

You wont get any argument from me that our defense has needed to be better overall.  I do think it was last year, and I don't think we lose to KC in the playoffs if Milano and Bernard play, and probably don't lose if just one of them play.  

 

But my main point is that a team who plays a lot in cold and bad weather late in the season and playoffs should not be focused on passing 60% or more every game.  Not having a run game was an achilles heal for this team for a long time.  Now that we have one, we should not move away from it for the sake of just throwing all the time again.  And like I said, we also should not be a run first team clearly, we have an elite QB.  

 

To win in the postseason of the NFL, we need to play to our strength which is the fact we are a team capable of both passing and running at high level and being able to dial one up or down when needed based on the teams we are facing, weather, etc.  That is all I am saying...that is what KC is so good at as well.  They know how to adjust to attack each team differently very well, and it is something I am hoping we see more of from Brady than we saw with Dorsey and even Daboll.  

[Billl]

28 minutes ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

The 6-6 start was due in large part to McDermott sometimes opting for a soft zone/prevent defense. The Eagles game was a good example. Tight pass coverage and a good defensive plan for the first half, limiting the Eagles to just 3 points at halftime. Soft zone/prevent defense for the second half. Simply allowing the Eagles to complete 8 - 12 yard passes, with literally no opposition from the defense. The Eagles scored every drive once the Bills went to that style of prevent defense. The result was a completely avoidable loss.

The difference between the way the Bills season went as far as games 1-12 versus 13-17+ has been way over analyzed.  Buffalo was 2-6 in one score games over the first 12 games.  They were 4-0 over the final 5.  It’s really no more complicated than that.  By the end of the season, Buffalo was winning the coin-toss type games they were losing previously.

[BADOLBILZ]

5 hours ago, eball said:

 

Wait-and-see is the only reasonable approach for a fan to take.  And predicting good catch numbers for Kincaid and Shakir is hardly pie-in-the-sky thinking.

 

You just hate optimists and think you have to beat everyone down who doesn't immediately bow to your self-lauded superior football intelligence.

 

And when some of us ignore you, you resort to personal attacks.  You have your little puppies BillsVet and Bill from NYC to come running to your defense.  It's hilarious.

 

I've got no time for your nonsense.  I'm sorry we root for the same team.  At least I hate the Yankees.

 

 

 

 

Again,  you've never taken a wait-and-see approach.    You are synonymous with bad predictions on TSW @eball.    You are the gold standard for wrong calls made on this site.    And what's worse for your claim to being such a great fan.........you are the physical manifestation of disloyalty by quitting on your Bills season tickets because of the choice to fire Rex and hire McDermott.    You can't put that or any of those peanut buttery spirits back in the bottle.    

 

 

[Alphadawg7]

5 minutes ago, Billl said:

The difference between the way the Bills season went as far as games 1-12 versus 13-17+ has been way over analyzed.  Buffalo was 2-6 in one score games over the first 12 games.  They were 4-0 over the final 5.  It’s really no more complicated than that.  By the end of the season, Buffalo was winning the coin-toss type games they were losing previously.

 

The comparison is games 1-10 versus games 11-17.  Dorsey was fired when we were 5-5 with Brady taking over week 11 against Jets.  

 

But you are under analyzing here, you are treating those 1 game wins/losses as if all things were equal in terms of class of opponent.  

 

Under Dorsey we were 2-5 in 7 one score games with losses to the lowly Jets, Pats, Broncos, Burrow-less Bengals, and mediocre Jags.  And quite frankly, we were lucky to even win the 2 games where both the Giants and Bucs had chances to win the game on the final play and blew it.

 

Brady had a harder strength of schedule than Dorsey did and we didn't lose games to bad teams with losing records like we did with Dorsey.  Our only loss overall was to a playoff team in the Eagles in Brady's 2nd week as OC.  

 

 

[Rampant Buffalo]

12 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

You wont get any argument from me that our defense has needed to be better overall.  I do think it was last year, and I don't think we lose to KC in the playoffs if Milano and Bernard play, and probably don't lose if just one of them play.  

 

But my main point is that a team who plays a lot in cold and bad weather late in the season and playoffs should not be focused on passing 60% or more every game.  Not having a run game was an achilles heal for this team for a long time.  Now that we have one, we should not move away from it for the sake of just throwing all the time again.  And like I said, we also should not be a run first team clearly, we have an elite QB.  

 

To win in the postseason of the NFL, we need to play to our strength which is the fact we are a team capable of both passing and running at high level and being able to dial one up or down when needed based on the teams we are facing, weather, etc.  That is all I am saying...that is what KC is so good at as well.  They know how to adjust to attack each team differently very well, and it is something I am hoping we see more of from Brady than we saw with Dorsey and even Daboll.  

 

Every team needs an offensive identity. The identity of the Bills' offense should be built around the pass. Back when the Bills' passing offense was at its best, it had the following. 1) Josh Allen at QB. 2) Good offensive weapons: Diggs, Beasley, Davis, Knox. 3) An OL which was reasonably proficient at pass protection. 4) A good OC, in the form of Daboll, who was committed to the pass and knew how to scheme guys open. When the team has a proper identity, all four of those boxes are checked. A failure to check even one box means the offense is not firing on all cylinders.

 

Does this style of offense work in January? Josh Allen achieved the highest QB rating in NFL postseason history, with one playoff game in Buffalo and the other in Kansas City. Yeah, I'd say a passing offense can work in January. The enemy of passing isn't cold so much as it is wind. By the time you get to January, the windiest games of the season are generally behind you. In the Chiefs' postseason games, do you see the Chiefs give up on the pass? Take the ball out of Mahomes' hands, in order to give it to the RB instead? Is that how they've been winning their Super Bowls? Did the Patriots win their Super Bowls by getting away from Tom Brady in the postseason, and running the ball instead?

 

You win in January by having an elite passing offense.

[Mikey152]

15 minutes ago, Rampant Buffalo said:

 

Every team needs an offensive identity. The identity of the Bills' offense should be built around the pass. Back when the Bills' passing offense was at its best, it had the following. 1) Josh Allen at QB. 2) Good offensive weapons: Diggs, Beasley, Davis, Knox. 3) An OL which was reasonably proficient at pass protection. 4) A good OC, in the form of Daboll, who was committed to the pass and knew how to scheme guys open. When the team has a proper identity, all four of those boxes are checked. A failure to check even one box means the offense is not firing on all cylinders.

 

Does this style of offense work in January? Josh Allen achieved the highest QB rating in NFL postseason history, with one playoff game in Buffalo and the other in Kansas City. Yeah, I'd say a passing offense can work in January. The enemy of passing isn't cold so much as it is wind. By the time you get to January, the windiest games of the season are generally behind you. In the Chiefs' postseason games, do you see the Chiefs give up on the pass? Take the ball out of Mahomes' hands, in order to give it to the RB instead? Is that how they've been winning their Super Bowls? Did the Patriots win their Super Bowls by getting away from Tom Brady in the postseason, and running the ball instead?

 

You win in January by having an elite passing offense.

You keep talking about 2020/2021 like nothing has changed...

 

Offense across the league is down since then, especially passing offense and even more significantly passing in the Red Zone. It's a big reason Gabe Davis seemed to regress...Teams started playing more two high and refs started calling less DPI. It was easier to neutralize him.

 

To me, that was the biggest change going from Dorsey to Brady. Dorsey continued to call plays like nothing had changed, and the only reason we didn't completely suck is because he has the best QB in the NFL on his team. When Brady took over, our efficiency went way down, but we were finally taking what the defense was giving us. I think we realized pretty quick that our roster was not built for more of a possession and YAC game, though. Inconsistent hands and pretty bad ball skills across the board. Right plays, wrong players. Only Shakir looked like a fit. Not a coincidence he is the only WR left. I think Stef could do it, but lets be real...his bread and butter is winning routes against man and making catches downfield. He was never a great after catch guy and most of his drops were on quick passes where LB might be lurking so he isn't trying to work middle zones.

 

So, like them or not, our new WR do fit what Brady wants to do and the way the NFL is trending better. If we had more money (Stef dead cap) maybe we get a better player than MVS/Claypool as the Vet X, but I think Shakir and Samuel are exactly who they need at Y and Z...guys who make catches and can make things happen with the ball in their hands.

Edited July 16 by Mikey152