Alpha's Week 1 recap and film review

[mannc]

31 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

One major disagreement - I think it actually was pretty close to a disaster for O'Cyrus. 3 pressures, 3 penalties, 2 bad missed assignments on run plays. He was really rough. He looks out of condition to me. Agree though it was otherwise a very strong day for the line. 

 

And one major agreement - for all the crap I have given him pre-season I thought Mack Hollins had a really good game. In all facets. He ran the route on the touchdown perfectly - he made it look simple but you gotta get the depth of your break just right there to make sure both that a) you are making it to the endzone and b) that you have the right leverage on the DB to box him out. But not only that he found soft spots in zones well even when not targetted and played an important role as a blocker. 

I agree that Torrence was bad on Sunday.  The Bills have good O-line depth...at what point do you think the team would consider sending O'Cyrus to bench for a few games?  

[Alphadawg7]

17 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Trust me, I am very happy with the win and had a great tailgate (I won). But the Cards were a bad team last year with one of the worst defenses in the nfl. I think they should be better but that is not great competition we faced on Sunday. 
 

love our groups of WRs as guys but I would like to see them against better defenses but I’m sold on them. 

 

Yeah, I agree and that is why I said its just one week, it proved nothing on the season.  My grades are solely for this one game and I can only grade them on how they played regardless of who was lined up across from them.

 

More importantly, AZ had no film on this offense coming into the game.  And as the season goes on, we will be putting more and more film out there for DC's to use to try and game plan better for us.  That is where Brady comes in and needs to show he can adjust once DC's start finding ways to disrupt the offense too.  

[GASabresIUFan]

@Alphadawg7 I agree with you on the wideouts. What more were they supposed to do? They caught 12 of 14 targets for 152 yards or 12.67 yards per catch with 2 TDs.  That’s an 86% catch % converting 7 1st downs.  The big miss was on Josh not on MVS.  They blocked well and made some huge plays in the game include Coleman’s catch on the side line and Shakir’s TD.  They also had 59 yards of YAC, 30 of which belonged to Shakir.  
 

These guys can only do what they are asked to by the game plan.  They didn’t run many deep routes.  So what!  If they get 1st downs every other catch and continue to sustain drives, the Bills will win a ton of football games.  
 

I agree A+

Edited September 10 by GASabresIUFan

[Alphadawg7]

10 minutes ago, BuffaloBill said:

Each is entitled to their opinion but the Bills did not turn in an “A” performance. Keep in mind they only won by 6 and there was a chance for th Cards to win on some last minute heroics. I am happy for the win and the chance to move on.  

 

Overall, the Bills at best played a B- game.  Let’s be real, they really did not look that good.

 

I did not give the Bills an A...I only gave grades on the positions on the offense.  And the only reason the Cards were in this game was because of a ST blunder where 4 Bills should have tackled the runner but blew it, including Elam unfortunately.

 

I would have given the Defense as a whole a B or B- given they adjusted and shut down the Cards for 3 points in the 2nd half after a rough start.  But they also lost one of their best players in that half in Taron.  I would have given ST a C as they had the big return, Bass made his kicks in the wind, but they made a huge blunder missing tackles to almost let the Cards steal the game.

 

Overall, I agree, I think the Bills grade on the day was more of a B and wouldn't argue too hard against a B- with the penalites, fumble, and blown ST play.  

 

But the offense put up 34 points and outside some early rust, really had their way with AZ and all the units overall did their jobs really well.  

[GASabresIUFan]

6 minutes ago, mannc said:

I agree that Torrence was bad on Sunday.  The Bills have good O-line depth...at what point do you think the team would consider sending O'Cyrus to bench for a few games?  

Talk about overreaction.  If he continues to play at this level after 4 games, you may make a change, maybe.  The kid has earned the benefit of the doubt.  It’s the friggin NFL, everyone has bad games.

[Kirby Jackson]

50 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

The TE's were fine.  See...you need to watch film and not google box scores.  You aren't getting actual context nor are you properly evaluating their jobs on the field.  

 

Do this all year?  You are the one coming at me here.  You want to stick to your guns about your negative opinion on the group, totally fine, its one game, it proved nothing.  But I watched their film, and I graded based on the film.  You googled a box score and then accused me of issuing a "fake grade" off that fake analysis.  So please, don't tell me "I don't want to do this all year" when you are the one doing this lol.  

 

I provided my honest opinion on what I saw...you don't have to agree with it.  

 

I did go back through it again (not that I need to justify it to you). Kincaid saw a bunch of attention. If you’re the top receiving threat in an offense you can’t have 1 catch for 11 yards. That certainly doesn’t get an “A” grade!!  Travis Kelce has been the focal point of defenses for a long time. He rarely, if ever, posts that stat line. Kincaid took some pressure off everyone else and they blocked well. That’s why it’s a “C” performance for the TEs. That means average.

 

We are talking about “sticking to our guns.” I said that the WR group would have a few guys that outperformed their fantasy position (55-60). I said that I could see them being like Tyler Lockett who had 79/894/5. If you took each guys game and extrapolated it out (I know this isn’t realistic) you’d have: Coleman 68/867, Shakir 51/714, Samuel (not enough snaps to tell anything). That is the TOP of your depth chart. That is NOT an “A+.” They did what was asked and played well. 

Edited September 10 by Kirby Jackson

[Alphadawg7]

24 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

But an A+?  That is spectacular territory.  Cant get any higher than that, it wawn't like they had incredible "you got mossed" catches.  I would give them B+/A- which is still pretty high, above average.

 

I won't argue against removing the +, but no way they should go to A- or B+.  The receivers executed their jobs the entire game.  They can only catch what is thrown, and Allen only had 2 pass attempts before our final drive of the first half.  This team still put up 34 points.  And many of the big plays that were runs had a lot to do with the receivers blocking down field. 

 

It was total unselfish football at its finest on film.   

[Prospector]

42 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

WRs got an A+?!? They combined for 151 yards. We all know that you’ve been the most outspoken advocate for how great this group is. That’s a “B” performance if we are being real. They were fine. Can we please not do this all year? Make up fake grades to fit a narrative we are trying to pass through. Can we just agree, they were fine. 
 

The TEs were in “C” range.

Did the grades go in the official grade book yet? These must be super serious grades to you. Don't want incorrect grades to inflate their transcripts.

[Alphadawg7]

16 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

Hope you are right on us getting to Tua but you have to give the little guy credit, he has super fast receivers that get open quick and he has a very fast to get rid of the ball, a la tom Brady.  He doesnt need a howitzer like Allen, just deliver it quickly and on target.

 

Yeah, that is Tuas game, we just have a history of getting to him and disrupting him and getting him off his early reads which is when he struggles.  If you go back and look at every game Tua has played against us since Hill got there, neither have ever had a big day against us.   

 

Now our defense is missing two of our best players and has a lot of changes, so whether we can replicate that this week is yet to be seen.  But Miami's OL struggled again week 1, so I am at least optimistic we can still get some pressure on him.

[mannc]

5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFan said:

Talk about overreaction.  If he continues to play at this level after 4 games, you may make a change, maybe.  The kid has earned the benefit of the doubt.  It’s the friggin NFL, everyone has bad games.

I never said he should be benched.   

[GunnerBill]

14 minutes ago, mannc said:

I agree that Torrence was bad on Sunday.  The Bills have good O-line depth...at what point do you think the team would consider sending O'Cyrus to bench for a few games?  

 

I think the rope is still pretty long for now. But if he keeps playing like that it is possible.

[Simon]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

 But if he keeps playing like that it is possible.

 

If he keeps playing like that it is more than possible, it is likely.

They have good depth up front and making a change could come quicker than we think.

[Alphadawg7]

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I did go back through it again (not that I need to justify it to you). Kincaid saw a bunch of attention. If you’re the top receiving threat in an offense you can’t have 1 catch for 11 yards. That certainly doesn’t get an “A” grade!!  Travis Kelce has been the focal point of defenses for a long time. He rarely, if ever, posts that stat line. Kincaid took some pressure off everyone else and they blocked well. That’swhy it’s a “C” performance for the TEs. That means average.

 

We are talking about “sticking to our guns.” I said that the WR group would have a few guys that outperformed their fantasy position (55-60). I said that I could see them being like Tyler Lockett who had 79/894/5. If you took each guys game and extrapolated it out (I know this isn’t realistic) you’d have: Coleman 68/867, Shakir 51/714, Samuel (not enough snaps to tell anything). That is the TOP of your depth chart. That is NOT an “A+.” They did what was asked and played well. 

 

You want to grade them on projected total stats when we had 9 people catch the 18 passes Allen completed?  Huh?

 

Let's just agree to disagree as this is going to get off the rails.  No disrespect, and nothing personal, but I can't keep discussing this when you are talking about fantasy football rankings in your grading scale on how well they did their jobs Sunday.  It is perfectly fine to have differing opinions, and this is only one week and proves nothing for the season anyway. 

 

GO Bills!

[nedboy7]

Alpha,  was the Keon being open during the Josh TD scramble the one where he hurt his hand? 

[Coach Tuesday]

4 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

If he keeps playing like that it is more than possible, it is likely.

They have good depth up front and making a change could come quicker than we think.

 

Yeah they are not going to risk having free rushers coming at Allen because Torrence's head and body aren't right.  They'll sit him if it continues, and quickly.

[DapperCam]

I actually think Allen could play better and he probably will. Ball placement wasn’t always spot on, and he only had a few big plays on time and “on script”.

 

This was the first real playing time in Brady’s offense (rather than Brady adapting Dorsey’s offense like last year). I think Allen will ascend to even greater heights as he gets comfortable in the new offense and gains chemistry with all the new receivers. I would give him an A- personally.

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, nedboy7 said:

Alpha,  was the Keon being open during the Josh TD scramble the one where he hurt his hand? 

 

No, it was the other TD run where he had Keon.  On the one he hurt his hand, Keon ran a short crossing route outside the endzone.  On the one he could have hit Keon it was a perfectly ran slant but Allen saw the lane to the right and took off and in his post-game said he should have just thrown it.  But I get it, Allen is still getting comfortable back there, building timing and trust with his new targets, etc.  So when he has the short run there, I can see why his instinct had him take off.  

[GASabresIUFan]

30 minutes ago, mannc said:

at what point do you think the team would consider sending O'Cyrus to bench for a few games?  

 

15 minutes ago, mannc said:

I never said he should be benched.   

You kinda of did.  Isn't that what "sending O'Cyrus to the bench" means?

Edited September 10 by GASabresIUFan

[Avisan]

@Alphadawg7I thought I noticed Dawson Knox get abused as a blocker on the line on a couple of plays, as in complete whiffs.  We're you looking at that at all in your TE watch-through?

[mannc]

3 minutes ago, GASabresIUFan said:

 

You kinda of did.  Isn't that what "sending O'Cyrus to the bench" means?

Read what I wrote again...