Cleveland offense- Dorsey

[NewEra]

3 hours ago, BananaB said:

Stefani gonna have a lot of say in what Dorsey calls

Stefani gonna have all the say in what Stefani calls.  Dorsey = Modkins

[BarleyNY]

2 hours ago, BillsFan130 said:

Good post.

 

i think another underrated thing was the turnovers.

 

I don't have the numbers so maybe im wrong, but it seemed like the bills were turning the ball over at a historical rate with Dorsey last year.

 

Where Brady seemed to clean a lot of that up 

 

I remember seeing a stat during that season that Allen had more turnovers than turnover worthy plays. Typically that stat is a little under 50% for QBs. There looked like there was some terrible luck early in that season. 

 

Edit: For those unfamiliar with the TO Worthy Play metric, here’s an example. A pass that hits a DB and is dropped would qualify, but one that hits a WR in the hands, gets popped up into the air and picked off would not. 

Edited August 9 by BarleyNY

[WideNine]

On 8/7/2024 at 4:28 PM, 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. 

 

I will always fondly remember his epic tantrums from the booth.

 

 

 

 

[RoyBatty is alive]

On 8/7/2024 at 8:51 PM, FireChans said:

Probably because we were stumbling with Dorsey’s offense and Josh had to do SOMETHING and that something involved Josh lowering his shoulder.

 

If under Dorsey, we called less QB runs but Josh had to run more because the play was broken/didn’t work, it’s really 6 and 1/2 dozen. Either way, Josh ran too much with him throwing clipboard in the booth. Sayonara to the EPA king.

The throwing of the clipboard in the booth gif was cute but also the most overhyped of all time.  shocker a coach throughs something at the end of s game after a disastrous play.

[Mr. WEO]

1 Stefanski + 1 Watson + 1 Dorsey = 3 bums.  9-8.

[4merper4mer]

14 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Come on bro...you are the one who came up with some far fetched theory that it was McD interfering with Dorsey as an excuse for Dorsey despite there being zero evidence of such a thing outside your personal theory.  

 

I have said Dorsey wasn't working here because...

1. He got fired.  So clearly the Bills felt the same.
2. People who actually know real NFL football like Dan Orlosky, Kurt Warner, etc covered extensively what wasn't working with Dorsey and his system.
3. Bills were 5-5 and the offense was in a 6 game skid.
4. In the 5 losses and 2 other games we should have lost if not for Giants and Bucs blowing the final game winning play we averaged 19.6 PPG and were 2-5 to opponents whose win % was .436.
5. Brady came in and the offense scored 32 in his first game against the Jets, the team Dorsey led offense was 1-2 against in 3 games with a 17 ppg average. 
6. Brady led offense averaged 27 PPG which is more than a full TD better than Dorseys offense had been doing during the 6 game skid that got him fired.
7. Not only were we 6-1 compared to 2-5, but the win % was well above .500 of our opponents, and they included the SB champs, 3 playoff teams, and 2 teams Dorsey lost to.  

I don't need inside information to reach a conclusion that Dorsey wasn't working here.  It is clear as day from the data, facts, and known information that a change was needed because it was not working.  So yes, I do know that it is true Dorsey wasn't working out here because things worked out better when he was gone.  

 

I wish him well...hope he keeps improving and goes on to have a good career.  He was not working out here though.

Lots of words.  A “bro” thrown in.  Still incorrect.  I’d ask why you think things were working so well in the beginning of the season, with the exception of the Jets game where Josh was clearly at fault,  and abruptly stopped after the Miami game…..but nah.  Why bother?. 

13 hours ago, NewEra said:

No, that statement says “what Dorsey was doing wasn’t working here”.  Those aren’t the same thing.  Whether or not there was outside influence, what he was doing wasn’t working here. 

NewEra is learning to drive.  His dad forces him to close his eyes.  Car crashes.  Clearly NewEra wasn’t driving properly.  Same thing.

[Alphadawg7]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Can I just add to this that neither you or I in the various arguments we have made in this thread have sought to argue that Ken Dorsey was, throughout his time here, a bad offensive coordinator. So the numbers that look at his season and a half as a whole are not the argument. The argument is purely about that "skid" as you refer to it and the fact he really did not seem to have any answers. Was that lack of willingness to adjust or could he just not see alternative solutions? 

 

Exactly...and quite honestly, when you have Josh Allen just about any OC is going to be able to find some success.  But once teams figure out how to disrupt that offense it becomes how that OC can answer those challenges and adjust.  

 

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The alternative argument, which is legitimate is "well his work in 2022 and some of the early games of 2023 he deserved more time to find a fix." I think you can legitimately take that view and then we just get to a pure difference of opinion on how likely he was to be able to turn it around. And I go back to where I started. He reminds me a lot of the persona I observed of coaches I have come across in my life as a player and coach and guys I've observed as a fan - across multiple sports. The best coaches are the best coaches because they are able to cope with and coach through adversity. Dorsey felt more like a when it's good keep it rolling guy and when the adversity hit he didn't seem to have a response. 

 

The issue was though that his body of work had its own issues in 2022 despite some of the successes too.  Coming into 2023 Dorsey was very much still a question mark given he was a first time OC, someone that needed to show further growth and that he was going to continue to evolve and improve.  Then you have the factor of being a team with Super Bowl expectations, an elite QB, a team who had been an offensive powerhouse as the 2nd highest scoring team since Allens emergence.  

 

So I personally don't think he "deserved more time to fix", and I think you don't either.  The growth wasn't there, and in fact, we were seeing regression and for a sustained period of time that almost cost us the season.

 

IMHO you just can't justify sticking with him over a 6 game skid against that low level of competition like that while all hope for the season fades.  And our offense was healthy with no significant injuries either.  

 

I would argue personally he got too much time, I thought he should have been fired after the Giants game.  In fact, the first thing I said to my wife when Daboll blew that game on the goal line at the end was that was the worst outcome for us because it likely means Dorsey isn't going to get fired that week.  Had we lost that game as we should have on that last play, I think there would have been a strong chance he would have been fired that week.  

 

Edited August 9 by Alphadawg7

[Alphadawg7]

13 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Lots of words.  A “bro” thrown in.  Still incorrect.  I’d ask why you think things were working so well in the beginning of the season, with the exception of the Jets game where Josh was clearly at fault,  and abruptly stopped after the Miami game…..but nah.  Why bother?. 

 

Ok...so in your mind McD mettled into the 2nd highest scoring offense over the past 4 years to slow it down and score less and that is why Dorsey sucked.  Got it.  Its astonishing that in your mind that is somehow "fact" despite its outrageously ridiculous, has literally zero supporting evidence of any kind, not even on film, and 100% just an opinion.  I will add you have provided literally no facts, evidence, proof, or reasonable logic of any kind to support this theory.  You just keep saying it as if it is fact.

 

Meanwhile...I am somehow unreasonable for stating that Dorsey wasn't working here despite him getting fired, people who know football discussing issues with Dorseys offense for weeks prior to firing, and the MASSIVE improvement in scoring, wins, and team morale from the moment he was gone. 

 

Got it.  I guess I am just crazy

 

Edited August 9 by Alphadawg7

[4merper4mer]

8 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Ok...so in your mind McD mettled into the 2nd highest scoring offense over the past 4 years to slow it down and score less………

 

I stopped reading right there and erased the rest because you’re clearly setting up a ridiculous straw man.  I’ve explained what I believe to be McD’s rationale and also said I don’t completely disagree with it but if you prefer to put words in my mouth then you do you.  I’m done with you in this thread.  Maybe in some other thread you’ll be more willing to read objectively but clearly you’re too emotionally involved in this particular thread for reasons I don’t understand. 

[Mr. WEO]

22 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Exactly...and quite honestly, when you have Josh Allen just about any OC is going to be able to find some success.  

 

 

Daboll, as a perfect example...

Edited August 9 by Mr. WEO

[Alphadawg7]

43 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I stopped reading right there and erased the rest because you’re clearly setting up a ridiculous straw man.  I’ve explained what I believe to be McD’s rationale and also said I don’t completely disagree with it but if you prefer to put words in my mouth then you do you.  I’m done with you in this thread.  Maybe in some other thread you’ll be more willing to read objectively but clearly you’re too emotionally involved in this particular thread for reasons I don’t understand. 

 

LOL, I am not emotionally involved, I am having a discussion.  

 

I have no idea how I am putting words in your mouth.  If what I wrote is not what you are saying, then I think you need to revisit your own posts because I do not know how else to interpret what you have said.  

 

I am not setting anything up.  You have said nothing outside of passing the blame for the offensive woes onto McD instead of Dorsey.  You literally just gave @NewEraan example of a Dad teaching a son to drive, telling son close his eyes, and son crashes then blaming the son.  That is VERBATIM an example of YOUR stance that McD interfered with Dorsey and his offense, the entire basis of your entire argument in this thread.  So how on earth am I getting that wrong?  How am I putting words in your mouth?  I have not intentionally twisted or changed anything you said, I am responding to your exact comments.

 

If your stance is NOT that Dorsey's struggles were based on McD interfering, then state that now and state what your actual point is.  Because everything you have said thus far has strongly communicated that to be your stance.  

[NewEra]

10 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

LOL, I am not emotionally involved, I am having a discussion.  

 

I have no idea how I am putting words in your mouth.  If what I wrote is not what you are saying, then I think you need to revisit your own posts because I do not know how else to interpret what you have said.  

 

I am not setting anything up.  You have said nothing outside of passing the blame for the offensive woes onto McD instead of Dorsey.  You literally just gave @NewEraan example of a Dad teaching a son to drive, telling son close his eyes, and son crashes then blaming the son.  That is VERBATIM an example of YOUR stance that McD interfered with Dorsey and his offense, the entire basis of your entire argument in this thread.  So how on earth am I getting that wrong?  How am I putting words in your mouth?  I have not intentionally twisted or changed anything you said, I am responding to your exact comments.

 

If your stance is NOT that Dorsey's struggles were based on McD interfering, then state that now and state what your actual point is.  Because everything you have said thus far has strongly communicated that to be your stance.  

That’s just what people say when they have nothing to say of substance-  playing the emotion card is the cool thing to do, get with the times.

[Alphadawg7]

46 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Daboll, as a perfect example...

 

Daboll is a great example...I think what made Daboll look so good was that Allen had so many people doubting him becoming anything close to what he became, so the assumption is that Daboll is a genius when Allen proved to be elite.  

 

And quite honestly, Daboll was great for Allen, they did have a great relationship.  But Allens biggest developments and mechanic improvements came in the offseason with Palmer and all the tech and specialists he worked with every year to completely revamp his mechanics.  So I think Allen would have still become Allen with or without Daboll.

 

As great as Daboll was in some cases, he was also a guy with his own issues as an OC.  He would out think himself a lot, 3rd and short lets throw a 20 yard wheel route to a FB kind of thing.  It was like he wanted to be seen more as a mad genius at times rather than make the sound decision on a key play.  He was also allergic to running the football, and he had his own offensive skids in his tenure here that were turned around once he finally started getting the run game with Devin more involved like in 2021 at halftime in the Bucs game and for the rest of the season.  

 

He did it again against us this season.  He is on the goal line to win the game with one final play with Tyrod (his backup QB).  Instead of handing the ball to his best player in Barkley or trying to run it in with Tyrod (a good runner at QB), he has Tyrod (a short and below average passer) drop back and attempt a pass into the crowded middle to one of the worst collections of receiving weapons in the NFL for an incomplete pass.  How do you even make that decision?  At the very least, roll Taylor out so he can have the option of running it in if the pass isn't there...or just give it to your best player Barkley to due what you pay him to do.

 

For all Daboll does well, he can't shake this tendency to out Daboll himself in some key situations...and he certainly made a head scratching call that helped us get a win we didn't deserve.

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Ok...so in your mind McD mettled into the 2nd highest scoring offense over the past 4 years to slow it down and score less and that is why Dorsey sucked.  Got it.  Its astonishing that in your mind that is somehow "fact" despite its outrageously ridiculous, has literally zero supporting evidence of any kind, not even on film, and 100% just an opinion.  I will add you have provided literally no facts, evidence, proof, or reasonable logic of any kind to support this theory.  You just keep saying it as if it is fact.

 

Meanwhile...I am somehow unreasonable for stating that Dorsey wasn't working here despite him getting fired, people who know football discussing issues with Dorseys offense for weeks prior to firing, and the MASSIVE improvement in scoring, wins, and team morale from the moment he was gone. 

 

Got it.  I guess I am just crazy

 

 

Personally, I do think McD meddled with the offense. 

 

Josh Allen had 4.8 rushes per game under Dorsey and 9.0 rushes per game under Brady last season. 

 

Do you think Dorsey made a unilateral decision to have Josh run less? 

 

Or do you think Dorsey was listening when McD and Beane spent the entire offseason talking about Josh running less and sliding more?

 

[4merper4mer]

43 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

LOL, I am not emotionally involved, I am having a discussion.  

 

I have no idea how I am putting words in your mouth.  If what I wrote is not what you are saying, then I think you need to revisit your own posts because I do not know how else to interpret what you have said.  

 

I am not setting anything up.  You have said nothing outside of passing the blame for the offensive woes onto McD instead of Dorsey.  You literally just gave @NewEraan example of a Dad teaching a son to drive, telling son close his eyes, and son crashes then blaming the son.  That is VERBATIM an example of YOUR stance that McD interfered with Dorsey and his offense, the entire basis of your entire argument in this thread.  So how on earth am I getting that wrong?  How am I putting words in your mouth?  I have not intentionally twisted or changed anything you said, I am responding to your exact comments.

 

If your stance is NOT that Dorsey's struggles were based on McD interfering, then state that now and state what your actual point is.  Because everything you have said thus far has strongly communicated that to be your stance.  

Really?  When did I say McD purposely wanted to score less? You straight up pulled that out of thin air and I find that dishonest. I said I was done and I should have stuck to that.

 

 The point about the driving lesson should be clear.  When driving, eyes are tools.  If you can’t use all the tools at your disposal, you’re not going to drive as well.  If you’re limited in plays you can call or when you can call them, you’re not going to be your best self as an OC.  Does that mean NewEras dad wanted him to crash?  No, it doesnt.  But blaming only NewEra would be incorrect.

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said:

Really?  When did I say McD purposely wanted to score less? You straight up pulled that out of thin air and I find that dishonest. I said I was done and I should have stuck to that.

 

 The point about the driving lesson should be clear.  When driving, eyes are tools.  If you can’t use all the tools at your disposal, you’re not going to drive as well.  If you’re limited in plays you can call or when you can call them, you’re not going to be your best self as an OC.  Does that mean NewEras dad wanted him to crash?  No, it doesnt.  But blaming only NewEra would be incorrect.

 

Lol...I have repeatedly now said that you blame Dorseys failures on some alleged McD interference you insist was happening (despite any evidence, proof, facts, film supporting it, etc)...you then say that is not what you said...BUT then proceed to give another example showing that is exactly what you said.  

 

Feel like I am some dude on a prank show who hasn't figured out he is on a prank show yet.

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

Personally, I do think McD meddled with the offense. 

 

Josh Allen had 4.8 rushes per game under Dorsey and 9.0 rushes per game under Brady last season. 

 

Do you think Dorsey made a unilateral decision to have Josh run less? 

 

Or do you think Dorsey was listening when McD and Beane spent the entire offseason talking about Josh running less and sliding more?

 

 

Thats fair, so lets look at the full context to answer your question:

• They have been wanting Josh to run less for 5 years now, it wasn't some sudden change only under Dorsey.  Even when Daboll was here, every offseason the discussion was to have Josh take less hits to protect their quarter of a billion dollar investment.  Allen goes down, so does the whole team.
• When Brady took over we were essentially in a must win situation almost every week, and certainly after the Eagles loss.  So I think its pretty reasonable to see an increase in Josh doing everything he can to win in must win situations.
• Brady used Allen's legs MUCH more strategically than Dorsey ever did.

There is no question what so ever that McD, Beane, and whoever the OC is would prefer Josh to take less punishment and have to run and take hits so much.  Josh himself said he doesn't like to run or want to run if he doesn't have to, but we also know Josh will leave it all out there on every play in key moments and games.  

 

But no, I do not at all think McD came in and told Dorsey that you have to keep Allen from running.  McD does not want to take that out of Allens game, and has spoken about that and how they "have to let Josh be Josh" and play free out there.  What he really wants is Allen to take less hits/punishment...he wants him to not fight for meaningless or unnecessary few extra yards where he takes big hits instead of sliding or getting out of bounds.  McD has talked many times about what a weapon it is to have a QB like Josh who can make those kinds of plays with his legs, pick up the 3rd and 1, 4th and 1 with such a high degree of success.  

 

 

 

[4merper4mer]

11 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Thats fair, so lets look at the full context to answer your question:

• They have been wanting Josh to run less for 5 years now, it wasn't some sudden change only under Dorsey.  Even when Daboll was here, every offseason the discussion was to have Josh take less hits to protect their quarter of a billion dollar investment.  Allen goes down, so does the whole team.
• When Brady took over we were essentially in a must win situation almost every week, and certainly after the Eagles loss.  So I think its pretty reasonable to see an increase in Josh doing everything he can to win in must win situations.
• Brady used Allen's legs MUCH more strategically than Dorsey ever did.

There is no question what so ever that McD, Beane, and whoever the OC is would prefer Josh to take less punishment and have to run and take hits so much.  Josh himself said he doesn't like to run or want to run if he doesn't have to, but we also know Josh will leave it all out there on every play in key moments and games.  

 

But no, I do not at all think McD came in and told Dorsey that you have to keep Allen from running.  McD does not want to take that out of Allens game, and has spoken about that and how they "have to let Josh be Josh" and play free out there.  What he really wants is Allen to take less hits/punishment...he wants him to not fight for meaningless or unnecessary few extra yards where he takes big hits instead of sliding or getting out of bounds.  McD has talked many times about what a weapon it is to have a QB like Josh who can make those kinds of plays with his legs, pick up the 3rd and 1, 4th and 1 with such a high degree of success.  

 

 

 

Dude stop.  I never said anything about Josh running.  Where are you getting this crap from?

[Alphadawg7]

28 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Dude stop.  I never said anything about Josh running.  Where are you getting this crap from?

 

Dude...is your name @DabillsDaBillsDaBills because that is who I was replying to and talking to about something he politely sent to me.  

 

Maybe read before responding because this post had nothing to with you.

[4merper4mer]

31 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Dude...is your name @DabillsDaBillsDaBills because that is who I was replying to and talking to about something he politely sent to me.  

 

Maybe read before responding because this post had nothing to with you.

My bad.  I saw the notification, clicked it and it sent me to one post down.  I didn’t read it closely enough.