Cleveland offense- Dorsey

[Ayjent]

As was pointed out earlier Defenses figured out Dorsey as the season went on, especially in critical downs and red zone calls. His offenses were statistically impressive but they struggled to be as effective as the stats suggested in terms of points per drive.  In other words the offensive drives were prone to stalling because of a series of playcalls at some point in the drive that weren’t effective and easy to defend because of clear tendencies with formations.  Many analysts pointed out that it was predictable and easy to game plan for the playcalls Dorsey had, or required such superior execution that there was no schematic advantage.  The Bills’ talent overcame some of that to make it look more effective. 
 

And you don’t need to look at advanced stats or take others words for it.  We all saw that the Bills never seemed to have an arsenal of plays that other top offenses had that were easy gainers because of the talent they had and the way teams had to defend their weapons. Everything was more difficult than it should’ve been, and it had too much player reads that could be misinterpreted especially on critical downs.   I think we can all say that yes the defense/special teams blew the Denver game, but they shouldn’t have been put in that spot with the talent level of the Bills offense vs the Broncos D.  It wasnt that game, either, it was just the trajectory of the Offense and the team that made it a necessity. 
 

This team’s lack of postseason success has been on the Defense almost every year, but Dorsey’s one shot at playoff playcalling was just as awful, and to me that was why he deserved a short leash last year because they were trending to not even make the postseason this time because they same trends happened earlier and more often than the 2022 season. 

Edited August 8 by Ayjent

[Cash]

15 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

I never said he lacked imagination - though I wouldn't disagree with that assessment.  

 

I think he had some slumps as a playcaller where he'd call low-percentage and/or predictable plays.  

 

I also think he was poor with schemes.  Too often we saw Josh scan the field and not find anyone open.  

Agree with that, and would add two complaints of mine:

1. In 2023, way too many receivers were bunched up at the end of their routes - more so than I’ve ever noticed before. Maybe that’s down to execution, but it is in the coach’s job description to get the players to execute. What he was telling them wasn’t working. How many picks did Allen throw on that out/flat route combo with Gabe and an underneath option? I think about 3 or 4, and the culprit was that the routes were too close together and the short defender had time to peel off and get between Gabe and the ball. And yet, we kept calling that route combo, and kept running it to the same depths. 
 

2. Adaptability seemed to be lacking. We had a bunch of great offensive games under Dorsey, so he obviously was doing some things right, gameplan-wise. But it seemed like if Plan A didn’t work, or the opponent adjusted to handle Plan A, there was no Plan B. And that applied at a bigger scale as well: It really felt like opposing teams started figuring out our offense last year, and Dorsey had very few answers to the problems that presented.

[FireChans]

2 hours ago, May Day 10 said:

 

The two biggest gaffes that led to his firing were 11 guys on the field, and the 2 Cover 0 blitzes.

 

I thought it was turning it over 4 times vs the Broncos.

 

Anyone got the numbers on if turnovers are bad when it comes to winning football games?

[JohnNord]

1 hour ago, Matt_In_NH said:

Which were terrible decisions by Dorsey

The offense was also really bad for a 6 week stretch and struggled to score much more than 20 points.  
 

Week after week, Dorsey had no answers.  The same thing happened down the stretch in 2022.  
 

it was the absolute right call to move on.

[msw2112]

The issues I saw with Dorsey's offense were:

• forcing the ball to Diggs too often
• not taking the underneath stuff that was available (may have been more Allen than Dorsey)
• lack of establishment/commitment to the RB run game
• not using RBs in the passing game (particularly with Hines and Cook, who are known for that skill)
• lack of pre-snap motion to confuse/slow down defenses

Despite these issues, Dorsey had Josh Allen and as such, still had a decent offense.  A lot of the issues with Dorsey's offense carried over from Daboll, although Daboll was a bit more creative than Dorsey, and Daboll had the benefit of Cole Beasley in his prime.  I don't think Dorsey was terrible, but I think the approach with Brady has been (based on W-L record), and will be, more successful.  Brady likes to run the ball with RBs, spread the ball around to everyone, and use pre-snap motion to keep defenses guessing.  I think that style of offense will be more difficult to defend, even if the statistics may not be as good.

Edited August 8 by msw2112

[ChronicAndKnuckles]

16 hours ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I think Dorsey was good. Tough being a first-time OC. I think he will only get better. 
 

That said, he isn’t calling the plays in Cleveland. 

Nah, he sucked. Relied wayyy too much on Josh pulling miracles plays out of his ass. Brady is a breath of fresh air because he knows how to run a balanced offense. I can’t even remember the last time Buffalo had a 1000 yard rusher. (Looked it up, Shady in 2017) The win streak at the end of the season to ***** the division title was a thing of beauty and they did it largely without their best skill player. I am excited to see what Brady does w/ a full off-season. The only con I can think of is Josh running the ball too much and taking hits, but I think it was a do or die mentality since the playoffs were still up in the air. I think Brady told Josh to pick up the 1st down by all means necessary. 
 

Edit: did they really bleep the word s-n-a-t-c-h ??? 🤣

Edited August 8 by ChronicAndKnuckles

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

8 minutes ago, msw2112 said:

The issues I saw with Dorsey's offense were:

• forcing the ball to Diggs too often
• not taking the underneath stuff that was available (may have been more Allen than Dorsey)
• lack of establishment/commitment to the RB run game
• not using RBs in the passing game (particularly with Hines and Cook, who are known for that skill)
• lack of pre-snap motion to confuse/slow down defenses

Despite these issues, Dorsey had Josh Allen and as such, still had a decent offense.  A lot of the issues with Dorsey's offense carried over from Daboll, although Daboll was a bit more creative than Dorsey, and Daboll had the benefit of Cole Beasley in his prime.  I don't think Dorsey was terrible, but I think the approach with Brady has been (based on W-L record), and will be, more successful.  Brady likes to run the ball with RBs, spread the ball around to everyone, and use pre-snap motion to keep defenses guessing.  I think that style of offense will be more difficult to defend, even if the statistics may not be as good.

Don’t forget the mind boggling 3rd & 4th downs out of Shotgun within a yard of 1st down or end zone.

[BigAl2526]

Dorsey is a bright guy.  He did some things that didn't work well with Buffalo's offense, but working with an offensive minded head coach, he has the capacity to learn.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

3 hours ago, JohnNord said:

I never understand people who passionately defend Dorsey like this.  At best, he was an average OC that struggled to find a counterpunch when the offense wasn’t clicking.  
 

His fastball was force feeding the ball to Diggs and the occasional deep shot to Davis.  
 

I’d agree with whoever said he lacked imagination.  Every possession just seemed like it was so hard to move the ball if there wasn’t a deep shot to Diggs.  Some of his passing concepts were just strange with two receivers ending up in the spot on the field.  
 

I also don’t think Dorsey did a great job utilizing on offense.  This something Brady did a much better job with.  
 

In the end, McDermott made the right call turning the page with Dorsey.  The struggles on offense in 2023 looked similar to the end of 2022 in spots.
 

 

Not sure anyone passionately defends Dorsey.

But the stats say the offense was better with Dorsey than with Brady. It looked more balanced with Brady and the play calling bears that out, but the offense struggled at times with Brady too.  I think with Diggs and Davis gone it's fair to worry about the offense. 

[JohnNord]

8 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Not sure anyone passionately defends Dorsey.

But the stats say the offense was better with Dorsey than with Brady. It looked more balanced with Brady and the play calling bears that out, but the offense struggled at times with Brady too.  I think with Diggs and Davis gone it's fair to worry about the offense. 

It all depends… if you’re going to use EPA, it’s been well established why that metric was deflated under Dorsey.  
 

And by the way, there are many who want to defend Dorsey.  Take a look through this thread

[GunnerBill]

7 minutes ago, JohnNord said:

It all depends… if you’re going to use EPA, it’s been well established why that metric was deflated under Dorsey.  
 

And by the way, there are many who want to defend Dorsey.  Take a look through this thread

 

You mean inflated.....

[Just in Atlanta]

I don't know about a lack of imagination, as one poster said, but Dorsey's schemes were too reactionary, at least for this team. If x then y and z. Too much mental processing and too much to go wrong. Either way, the offense took a huge step back under the last half of his reign. 

I prefer Joe Brady and how his schemes dictate, not react.  I also look forward to the "no positions" philosophy that could capitalize on more competitive weaknesses. Time will tell, though. 

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

51 minutes ago, BigAl2526 said:

Dorsey is a bright guy.  He did some things that didn't work well with Buffalo's offense, but working with an offensive minded head coach, he has the capacity to learn.

Abuses electronics.  Dorsey, we knew Bill Belichick.  And you're no Bill Belichick. 🤨

[Ethan in Cleveland]

44 minutes ago, JohnNord said:

It all depends… if you’re going to use EPA, it’s been well established why that metric was deflated under Dorsey.  
 

And by the way, there are many who want to defend Dorsey.  Take a look through this thread

Fair enough...you know me I blame it all on McDermott anyways

 

Ideally Brady schemes up a few more easy throws and finds a nice run pass balance.

 

What I would really like to see is our NFL franchise effectively run a basic screen play. Not sure why they have struggled with this but it sure wpuld be a nice play to see. 

 

Allen needs to do his part. 4 less INTs and he needs to be more accurate on his deep ball. 

[Ayjent]

The frustrating thing with both Daboll and Dorsey is that you could see that there was another level the offense could go to and they were not realizing it as much as they probably should have. Some of that is no doubt on players, too, but it was most frustrating with Dorsey.  Brady still remains to be seen IMO, but I liked what he brought to the table last year and I think he is also building an identity this team hasn’t had to reflect the toughness of its QB.   Will not having a true stud No. 1 hurt at times?  Maybe, but that is going to require a defense to stop a lot of things to expose that weakness.  Daring the Bills WR to beat you may not work out the way you think if you are an opposing defense because of the height outside and shiftiness inside.  Not saying they are going to be better or worse than last year but I can see the team being much harder to defend because they have such versatility in their ability to attack a defense, especially if the line can play as well as last year. 

[Logic]

Dorsey had some good and imaginative play designs. What he lacked, in my opinion, was cohesion and purpose to his playcalling. Plays were called without particular rhyme or reason. Playcalls did not build on each other in a thoughtful, logical way, or in a way that showed the sequencing one would expect out of a top NFL playcaller.

As others have stated, his plays also depended too often on flawless execution and/or too many WR option routes that would only work if the WR and QB were on the same page and, as we saw, they too often were not. 

While EPA and other metrics that analytics majors love showed that Dorsey was a successful play caller, anyone who watched the games saw stalled drives, poorly timed play calls, lack of cohesion and logic and sequencing to gameplans, and a failure to adapt or evolve.

Dorsey's playbook and play calling reminded me of giving a sharp play designer a blank slate and allowing him to design plays and gameplans in a vacuum, but those plays and those gameplans lacked real-time response and adaptation to what the opposition was doing, and they did not build on what they had done on previous plays or in previous games. In short, it often seemed like Dorsey was playing next level checkers, but rarely was playing even beginner level chess.

On top of all that, the actual COACHING aspects of being the offensive coordinator -- the attention to detail in practice, the motivating of players, helping the QB be in the right mindset or chewing him out when needed, etc -- seemed to be lacking. For all of these reasons, Dorsey -- who drew up some great plays in a vacuum but whose failure to sequence, evolve, and adapt -- ultimately failed as offensive coordinator for the Bills. Will he learn from his mistakes and fix his shortcomings and improve? Maybe. It WAS his first go-around, after all. All I know is that the whole was never the sum of its parts during his tenure here, and the Bills did the right thing by replacing him. 

[msw2112]

26 minutes ago, Just in Atlanta said:

I don't know about a lack of imagination, as one poster said, but Dorsey's schemes were too reactionary, at least for this team. If x then y and z. Too much mental processing and too much to go wrong. Either way, the offense took a huge step back under the last half of his reign. 

I prefer Joe Brady and how his schemes dictate, not react.  I also look forward to the "no positions" philosophy that could capitalize on more competitive weaknesses. Time will tell, though. 

 

I think the NFL, like the NBA, is becoming more "positionless." 

 

In the NBA, anyone over 6'10" used to be a back-to-the-basket center.  Now we have 7 footers launching 3-pointers and some even bringing the ball up the court and distributing the ball.  Big guards are small forwards and quick forwards are big guards.  The old book has gone out the door.

 

Some of the same is happening in the NFL.  OLB or DE or "Edge?"  DEs moving inside to DT on certain downs.  Big safety or small LB (or "Rover")?  TE or Fullback ("H-Back")?  Pass catching TE or big WR?  RB or "pass catcher" out of the backfield?  Slot or outside WR?  Not to mention the Wildcat and guys like Taysom Hill taking snaps.  Some of this stuff is not all that new, but it's become more and more common.  Brady seems to be very much on top of this trend and that's good for the Bills offense. 

 

The "this is what we're going to run, we know it, you know it, and you're not going to stop it because we are better than you" philosophy is not as effective as it once was, given free agency and salary caps.  Talent disparities are not as great as they once were.  Even Nick Saban, in recent years at Alabama, got more creative with his offense, after many years of the "this is what we're going to do and you can't stop us" philosophy.  That was no longer good enough to beat Georgia every year.  In the NFL, there is more parity than in college football, so creativity is even more important.  I'm glad to see the Bills' offense moving in this direction.

Edited August 8 by msw2112

[JP51]

4 hours ago, JohnNord said:

I don’t know… I think overall he was an average OC.   His offense seemed to start strong, but ended up struggling when defenses adjusted.  
 

What would you label as Dorsey’s signature win as OC?

 

Week 1 vs. LAR?

Good question on signature win... I mean that LAR game has to be in the conversation maybe the Titans or the Steelers games in 2022... I dunno... and yeah I think he was competent but overall unimpressive certainly no innovator. Lets see what he does in Cleveland, lets see if he adjusts his approach based on the changes he saw in Buffalo after he left... he adjusts and improves he has a chance to be above average , he doesnt he wont even be average I think he wont be an OC in two years.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

2 hours ago, Cash said:

Agree with that, and would add two complaints of mine:

1. In 2023, way too many receivers were bunched up at the end of their routes - more so than I’ve ever noticed before. Maybe that’s down to execution, but it is in the coach’s job description to get the players to execute. What he was telling them wasn’t working. How many picks did Allen throw on that out/flat route combo with Gabe and an underneath option? I think about 3 or 4, and the culprit was that the routes were too close together and the short defender had time to peel off and get between Gabe and the ball. And yet, we kept calling that route combo, and kept running it to the same depths. 
 

2. Adaptability seemed to be lacking. We had a bunch of great offensive games under Dorsey, so he obviously was doing some things right, gameplan-wise. But it seemed like if Plan A didn’t work, or the opponent adjusted to handle Plan A, there was no Plan B. And that applied at a bigger scale as well: It really felt like opposing teams started figuring out our offense last year, and Dorsey had very few answers to the problems that presented.

 

Too many option routes and leverage based assignments too.  They see it on film and adjust how they play to it.  

[Alphadawg7]

18 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Josh had a career high in carries in Ken Dorsey's only full season. 

Oh those pesky facts right