If you thought we get almost no DPI/Holding calls

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

 

Maybe someone who coaches defense can shed some light on this for me.

 

Are DBs coached NOT to look back for the ball?
 

Because it seems to me that 99% of the time they fixate on the receiver and make zero attempt to locate and track the ball. Then when the ball is underthrown they clumsily run into the receiver and get called for DPI.

 

Why would a DB willfully ignore where the ball is, therefore disqualifying themselves from being able to intercept it, and at the same time making it more likely that they'll get a DPI penalty?

 

Not a coach but I played DB mostly corner

 

You are usually coached to turn your head around at catchpoint by reading WR cues... The issue is once you're beaten your technique sort of goes out the window and you're stuck just trying to prevent the catch. 

 

It's not ignoring where the ball is, it's getting out leveraged and using whatever athleticism you have available left to stop the catch. Usually when I see guys tracking the ball they're in perfect position and are in control of the situation enough to be able to lean/leverage and locate

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

51 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

 

Maybe someone who coaches defense can shed some light on this for me.

 

Are DBs coached NOT to look back for the ball?
 

Because it seems to me that 99% of the time they fixate on the receiver and make zero attempt to locate and track the ball. Then when the ball is underthrown they clumsily run into the receiver and get called for DPI.

 

Why would a DB willfully ignore where the ball is, therefore disqualifying themselves from being able to intercept it, and at the same time making it more likely that they'll get a DPI penalty?

 

I think as a DB, you look back when you think the ball is in the air. Any time sooner, and you are going to lose your guy.

 

on an underthrown ball, as a DB, you have no chance— because when you are running and then looking back, the WR in front of you just suddenly stops. You are going to collide into him. Just not a fair play. 

[Sierra Foothills]

1 hour ago, GoBills808 said:

Not a coach but I played DB mostly corner

 

You are usually coached to turn your head around at catchpoint by reading WR cues... The issue is once you're beaten your technique sort of goes out the window and you're stuck just trying to prevent the catch. 

 

It's not ignoring where the ball is, it's getting out leveraged and using whatever athleticism you have available left to stop the catch. Usually when I see guys tracking the ball they're in perfect position and are in control of the situation enough to be able to lean/leverage and locate

 

I never played organized football so my opinion is near worthless.

 

That said, a DB knows the QB only has a few seconds to make his read and get the ball out.

 

Because of that it seems to me that on downfield throws, once the DB feels comfortable with the route direction and the play intention that he should be looking for the ball BECAUSE if he can track the ball (like a centerfielder) it becomes much less relevant where the receiver actually is. The CB is now just another receiver looking to make a play on an airborne ball. In other words the sooner he sees it the better chance he has of catching it.

 

Put differently on downfield throws, after about 2 seconds on average, a CB should be turning around to see where the ball is so he actually has a chance to make a play on it... or to see if the play has degenerated into a plaster drill.

 

JMO.

 

1 hour ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I think as a DB, you look back when you think the ball is in the air. Any time sooner, and you are going to lose your guy.

 

on an underthrown ball, as a DB, you have no chance— because when you are running and then looking back, the WR in front of you just suddenly stops. You are going to collide into him. Just not a fair play. 

 

I agree with the bolded.

 

As far as your underthrown ball argument, I would counter that if the CB knows the ball is airborne, then he should be locating it to 1) make a play on the ball and 2) avoid a penalty.

 

There are countless plays where the defender could have located the ball but refused to, instead trying to read the receivers eyes or body. I never agreed with that technique. By "trying to read the WRs cues" you're waiting too long and not giving yourself enough time to locate the ball... and making yourself more likely to get called for a penalty.

 

Again, JMO.

 

 

[GoBills808]

3 hours ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

I never played organized football so my opinion is near worthless.

 

That said, a DB knows the QB only has a few seconds to make his read and get the ball out.

 

Because of that it seems to me that on downfield throws, once the DB feels comfortable with the route direction and the play intention that he should be looking for the ball BECAUSE if he can track the ball (like a centerfielder) it becomes much less relevant where the receiver actually is. The CB is now just another receiver looking to make a play on an airborne ball. In other words the sooner he sees it the better chance he has of catching it.

 

Put differently on downfield throws, after about 2 seconds on average, a CB should be turning around to see where the ball is so he actually has a chance to make a play on it... or to see if the play has degenerated into a plaster drill.

 

JMO.

 

 

I agree with the bolded.

 

As far as your underthrown ball argument, I would counter that if the CB knows the ball is airborne, then he should be locating it to 1) make a play on the ball and 2) avoid a penalty.

 

There are countless plays where the defender could have located the ball but refused to, instead trying to read the receivers eyes or body. I never agreed with that technique. By "trying to read the WRs cues" you're waiting too long and not giving yourself enough time to locate the ball... and making yourself more likely to get called for a penalty.

 

Again, JMO.

 

 

no offense but yes this is near worthless

[The Wiz]

On 7/6/2024 at 7:07 PM, Billl said:

Yeah, look at all those calls Kansas City got. 

DPI, no.

Defensive holding is the one you want to look for. They had like 20+ calls in their favor last year.

[JP51]

On 7/6/2024 at 2:33 PM, LABILLBACKER said:

It's all Jerry Hughes fault 

No its because Keon Coleman is slow!.... oh wait... LOL 

 

[Sierra Foothills]

10 hours ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I think as a DB, you look back when you think the ball is in the air. Any time sooner, and you are going to lose your guy.

 

on an underthrown ball, as a DB, you have no chance— because when you are running and then looking back, the WR in front of you just suddenly stops. You are going to collide into him. Just not a fair play. 

 

I agree that the defender should be looking for the ball the moment he believes that it's airborne... and not trying read the receivers eyes.

 

I disagree that the play you describe is unfair towards the defender. I blame the defender in these situations for being unaware that the ball is underthrown.

 

 

[Billl]

2 hours ago, The Wiz said:

DPI, no.

Defensive holding is the one you want to look for. They had like 20+ calls in their favor last year.

Kansas City gained 65 yards via defensive holding calls in 2023, just ahead of Tennessee and Carolina who were obviously also favored by the officials.

[The Wiz]

26 minutes ago, Billl said:

Kansas City gained 65 yards via defensive holding calls in 2023, just ahead of Tennessee and Carolina who were obviously also favored by the officials.

so 13 then.  I was just throwing a number out there since they seem to get one every game.

 

Still a big difference when compared to other teams that were posted on page 1.

 

New England 8 (6 DPI + 2 DH)

New Orleans 9 (4 DPI + 5 DH)

Chicago 9 (5 DPI + 4 DH)

Las Vegas 10 (9 DPI + 1 DH)

Buffalo 10 (3 DPI + 7 DH)

Miami 11 (6 DPI + 5 DH)

 

KC  19 (6DPI + 13 DH)

 

So they averaged an automatic 1st down every game from a DPI/DH call.

Edited July 8 by The Wiz

[Sweats]

Ya see, it's like were not even trying out there...........aye carumba

[JP51]

There is always the conspiracy theorist in me... saying the NFL hates us and is fixed... not gonna lie LOL ... but reality is that to me the numbers have to mean something and it is way too easy to say oh thats just the refs.. I think we have to examine the type of receiver and offensive game plan we have. Are we getting separation, do we have threats that have to get PI, do we have big physical receivers that they need to hold, how effective is our us of tight end and does it create mismatches that result in penalties etc... 

[Billy Claude]

5 hours ago, Billl said:

Kansas City gained 65 yards via defensive holding calls in 2023, just ahead of Tennessee and Carolina who were obviously also favored by the officials.

 

4 hours ago, The Wiz said:

so 13 then.  I was just throwing a number out there since they seem to get one every game.

 

Still a big difference when compared to other teams that were posted on page 1.

 

New England 8 (6 DPI + 2 DH)

New Orleans 9 (4 DPI + 5 DH)

Chicago 9 (5 DPI + 4 DH)

Las Vegas 10 (9 DPI + 1 DH)

Buffalo 10 (3 DPI + 7 DH)

Miami 11 (6 DPI + 5 DH)

 

KC  19 (6DPI + 13 DH)

 

So they averaged an automatic 1st down every game from a DPI/DH call.

 

 

Right, its not the yards that matter, its the automatic first downs from defensive holding that matters.

 

I have to think Kelce is a large reason for this -- and no, its not a Taylor Swift effect -- KC has been leading the league in benefitting from defensive holding every season since 2021.

 

[nedboy7]

On 7/6/2024 at 12:30 PM, LeGOATski said:

Meh. Doesn't seem to correlate with success at all. Other great teams are low on that chart.

 

Maybe it says more about our receivers or our QB's play style. Idk.

 

So that would be interesting to see who else is right above us and the types of WRs they have. 

Turns out Philly had 5 to our 3.  KC had 6.  Slow WR room in Philly? 
Hard to really come to the conclusion that our WR room and coach and owner and....... suck. 

[nedboy7]

NFL teams don’t need a No. 1 receiver and here’s why

Packers, Chiefs, and more NFL teams are moving away from alpha dogs in the receiver room.

 

https://www.sbnation.com/2024/7/3/24190709/nfl-teams-dont-need-a-no-1-receiver-and-heres-why

[Thurman#1]

On 7/7/2024 at 3:14 AM, mrags said:

Why on earth would the defenses we play against even bother to try and hold us? 
 

1. They don’t need to because none of our WRs have been fast and they aren’t trying to slow them down. 

 

2. everyone except Shakir dropped everything thrown at them. 

 

 

This is just dumb.

 

Plenty of terrific, extremely effective WRs are not all that fast. The idea that you have to be fast to be worth trying to stop them from separating is just pure dumb. Diggs is a good example. While not an absolute flier, he is a terrific WR, and there are plenty more like that, including Andre Reed, but also tons of others with Ceedee Lamb, Puka Nacua, Davante Adams and Cooper Kupp as wildly obvious off the top of my head.

 

And the WRs - the ones with significant numbers of targets so the numbers are significant with the worst hands in the league have drop rates well below 10%. The idea that you'd let a receiver go because he drops, as an example, 8 - 12% of his throws again is purely without sense. And again, part of the reason Bills receivers drop a lot is that Josh throws a very powerful ball and is harder to catch than most.

 

About the Bills, would teams let Sherfield run free last year because he had one drop out of 12 catchable passes of 22 targets? Shakir with zero drops on 39 catchables of 45 tar

 

https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/advanced-stats-wr.php

 

Or Diggs because he had 8 drops out of 115 catchables and 163 targets? Or Harty on one drop out of 16 catchables out of 21 targets? Or Davis with 3 drops out of 48 catchables from 81 targets? Shakir with 39 catchables of 45 targets?

 

Doesn't stand up to any test of simple sense.

[mrags]

3 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

This is just dumb.

 

Plenty of terrific, extremely effective WRs are not all that fast. The idea that you have to be fast to be worth trying to stop them from separating is just pure dumb. Diggs is a good example. While not an absolute flier, he is a terrific WR, and there are plenty more like that, including Andre Reed, but also tons of others with Ceedee Lamb, Puka Nacua, Davante Adams and Cooper Kupp as wildly obvious off the top of my head.

 

And the WRs - the ones with significant numbers of targets so the numbers are significant with the worst hands in the league have drop rates well below 10%. The idea that you'd let a receiver go because he drops, as an example, 8 - 12% of his throws again is purely without sense. And again, part of the reason Bills receivers drop a lot is that Josh throws a very powerful ball and is harder to catch than most.

 

About the Bills, would teams let Sherfield run free last year because he had one drop out of 12 catchable passes of 22 targets? Shakir with zero drops on 39 catchables of 45 tar

 

https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/advanced-stats-wr.php

 

Or Diggs because he had 8 drops out of 115 catchables and 163 targets? Or Harty on one drop out of 16 catchables out of 21 targets? Or Davis with 3 drops out of 48 catchables from 81 targets? Shakir with 39 catchables of 45 targets?

 

Doesn't stand up to any test of simple sense.

The only thing that doesn’t stand up is any argument that the Bills were by far the least beneficial of any team in regards to PI calls. Numbers don’t lie. There is a reason why. It’s because we lack talent at WR. Speed. Ability to separate. Ability to actually catch passes. 

[Rampant Buffalo]

6 hours ago, nedboy7 said:

NFL teams don’t need a No. 1 receiver and here’s why

Packers, Chiefs, and more NFL teams are moving away from alpha dogs in the receiver room.

 

https://www.sbnation.com/2024/7/3/24190709/nfl-teams-dont-need-a-no-1-receiver-and-heres-why

 

The Bills are ahead of the curve! Not only do we not have a No. 1 receiver, we also don't have a No. 2 or No. 3 receiver either! 👍 

[Billy Claude]

5 hours ago, mrags said:

The only thing that doesn’t stand up is any argument that the Bills were by far the least beneficial of any team in regards to PI calls. Numbers don’t lie. There is a reason why. It’s because we lack talent at WR. Speed. Ability to separate. Ability to actually catch passes. 

 

It was hardly "by far", the Bills benefited from one less accepted DPI  than the 49ers and the Saints.   If you include DPIs that were not accepted then the Bills had one more DPI in favor than the 49ers and the Saints. 

 

I agree that the WR room plays a role in the numbers but clearly a lot of other factors go into play and I doubt that the lack of speed is that large a factor.  No one would say the 49ers had a bad WR room or lack speed.

The "by far" numbers is for the Jaguars.  They benefited from 19 DPIs (3 more than the next team) and also had only one DPI against (3 less than the next team).   

 

 https://www.nflpenalties.com/penalty/defensive-pass-interference?year=2023

Edited July 9 by Billy Claude

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

13 hours ago, mrags said:

The only thing that doesn’t stand up is any argument that the Bills were by far the least beneficial of any team in regards to PI calls. Numbers don’t lie. There is a reason why. It’s because we lack talent at WR. Speed. Ability to separate. Ability to actually catch passes. 

 

I think its because Josh doesn't underthrow deep balls, and we didn't run a lot of back-shoulder stuff.  Allen missed a lot of deep throws last year, and most of them were overthrows so there isn't really a chance for DPI.  I think targeted players in contested catch situations will always result in more DPI and holding calls.  

[RoyBatty is alive]

On 7/6/2024 at 7:08 PM, transient said:

That was a comically bad call, quite possibly one of the worst in NFL history.  U "understand" what the ref "THOUGHT " he saw but even if he was directly beating on the Patriot with those love taps you never make that call.