THE ROCKPLE REVIEW – Heal and Move On

[Jimmy Harris 69]

McDermott needs to call the missing persons bureau, maybe they can find the six millionaires who occupy spots along the defensive line. 

[Saxum]

8 hours ago, Sweats said:

 

We had no answers for any of it.

I see some of you guys are okay with a loss and for the most part so am i, however, the Ravens basically came in with one plan.......run the ball and even when we knew it was coming, we did nothing, however, we tried every trick in the book to keep our compromised D off the field as much as possible.

 

 

Game reminded me of Dallas game in which we were the beater.  Bills have an issue with size with most of our non-linemen on the smaller side of size and subject to these type of offenses and need way to prepare without due to NFLPA contract practices to help.  

[machine gun kelly]

14 hours ago, Success said:

That one hurt - mainly because I'm not used to seeing the team on the bad end of a lopsided score.  It literally never happens anymore, until last night.  

 

My next day feeling is that this was just a situation of one team that was at home and desperate for a win to re-establish themselves in the AFC, and the other team was fat & happy basking in the hype of possibly being the best in the league all week.  A much-needed home win for the Ravens, and a much-needed wake up call for the Bills.

 

I expect we'll look back on this as an anomaly.  The schedule is pretty favorable for the next month+, and I think we'll see us stack up some wins and put some distance between ourselves & the rest of the AFCE.

 

I agree we should bounce back, but the Texans are no pushover.  I’m not worried about the Jets, Titans, and Fish.  The Seahawks could be a challenge as they keep winning.

[GaryPinC]

15 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Looked to me that after Coleman had a nice reception over the middle, he got up, saw that he was coming off the field, and made some kind of gesture that asked, “Why are you taking me out?” He’s gotta learn, fast, that there are no prima donnas on this team. The last guy with that attitude is now playing in Houston, and the Bills aren’t going to live with another one. His two back-shoulder catches were excellent; his drop was a tough catch but he has to make it.

Great write-up and thoughts as usual.  I also appreciate that you picked up this interaction with Coleman.  My question is do you really chalk this behavior up to a toxic prima donna?

 

Coleman is struggling right now to adjust and make an impact in NFL games.  He just starts to get cooking and McDermott pulls him.  

 

I get the whole 1/11 thing, but we need Keon being productive ASAP because he promises to be a playmaker.  Why not leave him in to keep growing his game against a tough D?

 

I know we're still stinging from the Diggs drama, but how many other #1s around the league are trying to hijack their offense?  I know Amari Cooper in Cleveland wants the ball but he's being a good soldier with Watson behind center.  And that is just not easy.  Just one example.

 

I like the "everyone eats" philosophy but at the same time want a receiver that's going to take it on himself to be a playmaker in tough games against elite talent like this.  We're going to need that.

 

Edited October 1 by GaryPinC

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, GaryPinC said:

Great write-up and thoughts as usual.  I also appreciate that you picked up this interaction with Coleman.  My question is do you really chalk this behavior up to a toxic prima donna?

 

Coleman is struggling right now to adjust and make an impact in NFL games.  He just starts to get cooking and McDermott pulls him.  

 

I get the whole 1/11 thing, but we need Keon being productive ASAP because he promises to be a playmaker.  Why not leave him in to keep growing his game against a tough D?

 

I know we're still stinging from the Diggs drama, but how many other #1s around the league are trying to hijack their offense?  I know Amari Cooper in Cleveland wants the ball but he's being a good soldier with Watson behind center.  And that is just not easy.  Just one example.

 

I like the "everyone eats" philosophy but at the same time want a receiver that's going to take it on himself to be a playmaker in tough games against elite talent like this.  We're going to need that.

 

I don't think so. I mean, yes, there's always going to be a guy who is 1+ of 11, the guy who is the guy you really depend on, or ideally two. The two would be Coleman and Shakir. 

 

I don't have any evidence the McDermott pulled him. The way the Bills' offense, and many offenses, operate is that the play they want and the formation they want dictate personnel packages. The receivers are running on and off the field all the time, depending on down, distance, play, and formation. Granted, there are some guys who get more snaps than others, and Coleman is not one of those yet, but like anyone else, he has to earn it. McDermott never puts guys on the field to let them grow into the position; everyone has to earn it. (For years now, people here have been saying, "Put Elam on the field and let him learn." It doesn't work that way.) 

 

Coleman's job is the same as MVS's job and as Hollins' job - run and off the field depending on whether your number is called, and NEVER make it about yourself. You're running on and off the field because the people running the team, the coaches, think that's the best way to win. His job is to be committed to doing his job, because that's being committed to winning; he shouldn't be worrying about how many snaps he gets.

 

I actually don't think Coleman is going to be a problem. He's just immature. Like anyone else, he loves playing and making plays, so it was natural to be disappointed when, as you say, he was heating up and he had to go off. But making that gesture essentially said he was unhappy about having to do his job. His teammates saw the gesture when he did it, or they saw it on film. They don't want their teammate thinking about himself like that. I think he'll learn. Actually, I think that by now there's been a player or two who have talked to him about it. He's the kind of guy who learns and grows, and I don't think we'll see that from him in a year or two. I think that because almost everything I've seen from him has been really professional. Those two back-shoulder throws? Man, Josh knew he could trust Keon to make the right read - not to get all goofy thinking he's going deep. Josh made excellent throws in both cases, and Keon was just as good - looking for the ball at the time, having the ability to get his body in position to win over the corner, and then be sure-handed. That's high-level play from a rookie. Compared to that, learning to accept his role on the team is a pretty small item, so I'm not not worried about it. Still, it's something I saw and something he has to learn. 

[Ballhawk]

Maybe I'm the only one, but I thought Justice hill just killed us. It felt like the defense could have dealt with Lamar/Henry/Flowers, but Hill was a clear mismatch. It wasn't just the passing situations too, his straight ahead running style was so perfect for the way our defense was on its heels once the Henry ran that 87 yard TD. 

Also, I think it's kinda funny the recency bias in NFL narratives. D. Henry, other than some nice short yardage touchdowns, wasn't looking great the first three weeks. Now he's all world again, lol

[GaryPinC]

10 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I don't think so. I mean, yes, there's always going to be a guy who is 1+ of 11, the guy who is the guy you really depend on, or ideally two. The two would be Coleman and Shakir. 

 

I don't have any evidence the McDermott pulled him. The way the Bills' offense, and many offenses, operate is that the play they want and the formation they want dictate personnel packages. The receivers are running on and off the field all the time, depending on down, distance, play, and formation. Granted, there are some guys who get more snaps than others, and Coleman is not one of those yet, but like anyone else, he has to earn it. McDermott never puts guys on the field to let them grow into the position; everyone has to earn it. (For years now, people here have been saying, "Put Elam on the field and let him learn." It doesn't work that way.) 

 

Coleman's job is the same as MVS's job and as Hollins' job - run and off the field depending on whether your number is called, and NEVER make it about yourself. You're running on and off the field because the people running the team, the coaches, think that's the best way to win. His job is to be committed to doing his job, because that's being committed to winning; he shouldn't be worrying about how many snaps he gets.

 

I actually don't think Coleman is going to be a problem. He's just immature. Like anyone else, he loves playing and making plays, so it was natural to be disappointed when, as you say, he was heating up and he had to go off. But making that gesture essentially said he was unhappy about having to do his job. His teammates saw the gesture when he did it, or they saw it on film. They don't want their teammate thinking about himself like that. I think he'll learn. Actually, I think that by now there's been a player or two who have talked to him about it. He's the kind of guy who learns and grows, and I don't think we'll see that from him in a year or two. I think that because almost everything I've seen from him has been really professional. Those two back-shoulder throws? Man, Josh knew he could trust Keon to make the right read - not to get all goofy thinking he's going deep. Josh made excellent throws in both cases, and Keon was just as good - looking for the ball at the time, having the ability to get his body in position to win over the corner, and then be sure-handed. That's high-level play from a rookie. Compared to that, learning to accept his role on the team is a pretty small item, so I'm not not worried about it. Still, it's something I saw and something he has to learn. 

You're right, but I wish he would learn to change a bit sometimes.  They want to hold onto Elam but not put him on the field.   It's just insane to me for a first round pick.  This year I also feel he really doesn't have the luxury to helicopter-parent Bishop and Coleman along.

At least he's finally realizing this defense needs a big body in the middle!

[Shaw66]

On 10/1/2024 at 12:37 PM, Ballhawk said:

Maybe I'm the only one, but I thought Justice hill just killed us. It felt like the defense could have dealt with Lamar/Henry/Flowers, but Hill was a clear mismatch. It wasn't just the passing situations too, his straight ahead running style was so perfect for the way our defense was on its heels once the Henry ran that 87 yard TD. 

Also, I think it's kinda funny the recency bias in NFL narratives. D. Henry, other than some nice short yardage touchdowns, wasn't looking great the first three weeks. Now he's all world again, lol

As to your first paragraph, I think the Ravens' offense killed us, not one person. They have an offense that features fast, shifty ball carriers, and they've had it for years. They've been tough to handle for years, because Lamar is a unique threat. Then they added Henry, which made the offense even more difficult to deal with. So, yes, Justice Hill killed the Bills, but in their offense it can be anyone. Put James Cook in that offense, and he'd be amazingly explosive. 

 

As for Henry, I think you're wrong.  HE rushed for 150 yards against the Cowboys, 6 yards per carry. I watched that game, and he was the principal reason I was worried about the Bills playing the Ravens. He had 84 the week before. Henry was looking all world before he ever stepped on the field Sunday night. 

[Shaw66]

On 10/1/2024 at 9:23 PM, GaryPinC said:

You're right, but I wish he would learn to change a bit sometimes.  They want to hold onto Elam but not put him on the field.   It's just insane to me for a first round pick.  This year I also feel he really doesn't have the luxury to helicopter-parent Bishop and Coleman along.

At least he's finally realizing this defense needs a big body in the middle!

So, if you're the coach, you're going to take snaps away from Benford to let Elam work on his skills?  Or Douglas? 

 

I've always thought we should look at it from the players' perspective. If I'm Greg Rousseau, to pick a guy, or Ed Oliver, or Terrell Bernard, and I see Elam on the field instead of Benford (or even worse, Elam gets beat for a TD), I'm really unhappy with my coach. I'm working my butt off, every day, every play, to win football games, and my coach isn't putting the best players at their positions on the field with me? I think that's one of the surest ways for a coach to lose his team. Preseason, fine. Mop up time, but real snaps in real games, a coach is a fool if he puts a guy in the game who clearly is not as good as the guy who goes to the bench. 

[GaryPinC]

41 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

So, if you're the coach, you're going to take snaps away from Benford to let Elam work on his skills?  Or Douglas? 

 

I've always thought we should look at it from the players' perspective. If I'm Greg Rousseau, to pick a guy, or Ed Oliver, or Terrell Bernard, and I see Elam on the field instead of Benford (or even worse, Elam gets beat for a TD), I'm really unhappy with my coach. I'm working my butt off, every day, every play, to win football games, and my coach isn't putting the best players at their positions on the field with me? I think that's one of the surest ways for a coach to lose his team. Preseason, fine. Mop up time, but real snaps in real games, a coach is a fool if he puts a guy in the game who clearly is not as good as the guy who goes to the bench. 

I'm certainly not suggesting Elam just suddenly gets the nod over Benford.  But I also think it's counterproductive to continue to relegate him to garbage time unless he really is so much worse than Benford.  He can be worked in for a series or two in the context where we have a two score lead and I don't think that's foolish.  Give him the opportunity to gain some confidence.

And players notice which of the younger guys have unique talents, so I would counter that even if teammates are unhappy short term I would bet they understand why it is being done.  I would also argue the players could be unhappy with coach languishing a talented guy on the bench they know could be a difference maker on the field.

 

We are contending for a super bowl, coach owes it to the players to develop and put the best team of playmakers out there for the playoffs.  I can't say for sure this is the case for Elam, but I watch Bishop's instincts and Coleman height, size and work ethics and feel that these two need all the playing time they can get because they will both be important for success in the playoffs.  

I just don't think McDermott can afford to take the Terrel Bernard pathway.  And who knows if Bernard would have been able to contribute his rookie year if gotten more playing time?

[Ballhawk]

14 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

As to your first paragraph, I think the Ravens' offense killed us, not one person. They have an offense that features fast, shifty ball carriers, and they've had it for years. They've been tough to handle for years, because Lamar is a unique threat. Then they added Henry, which made the offense even more difficult to deal with. So, yes, Justice Hill killed the Bills, but in their offense it can be anyone. Put James Cook in that offense, and he'd be amazingly explosive. 

 

As for Henry, I think you're wrong.  HE rushed for 150 yards against the Cowboys, 6 yards per carry. I watched that game, and he was the principal reason I was worried about the Bills playing the Ravens. He had 84 the week before. Henry was looking all world before he ever stepped on the field Sunday night. 

I'll admit that I didn't see the Cowboys game but I did watch the Chiefs and Raiders games and as I said, he had some nice TDs but overall wasn't particularly dominant. In fact, the announcers kept mentioning his lack of utilization/production. Now maybe he just needed time with a new team as is numbers are up in the last two weeks, I just find it funny how quickly the narrative changes sometimes.

You're not actually disagreeing with my statement that media personalities have a heavy recency bias when it come to NFL narratives

are you? 

 

Edited October 3 by Ballhawk

[Shaw66]

5 hours ago, Ballhawk said:

I'll admit that I didn't see the Cowboys game but I did watch the Chiefs and Raiders games and as I said, he had some nice TDs but overall wasn't particularly dominant. In fact, the announcers kept mentioning his lack of utilization/production. Now maybe he just needed time with a new team as is numbers are up in the last two weeks, I just find it funny how quickly the narrative changes sometimes.

You're not actually disagreeing with my statement that media personalities have a heavy recency bias when it come to NFL narratives

are you? 

 

Well, I don't know if there is recency bias in the announcers or not. However in the case of Henry, I think that a guy who has had the incredible production that he has had for the past 6 years who then puts up 150 yards against the Cowboys is not an example of recency bias. The guy has had a long career of outstanding play and what is unusual for him this year is not the 150 yards against the Cowboys but the relatively small output in the first game of the season. As a result I think this is the wrong case to be talking about recency bias. This is a great player who once again this season is playing at a level that is rarely seen in the NFL.

[ChronicAndKnuckles]

It’s very rare to see Buffalo get beat like that. Most of their losses have been by the single digits in the McDermott era. This was eye opening. It had a Cincinnati Bengals feel to it where we couldn’t stop a nosebleed on defense and the offense sputtered w/ the little opportunities they had. I hope Beane at least does his due diligence in checking out some WRs that might be available at a reasonable cost.  I’m not sold on Mack Hollins as anything above a 4th or 5th option. 

[Ballhawk]

16 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Well, I don't know if there is recency bias in the announcers or not. However in the case of Henry, I think that a guy who has had the incredible production that he has had for the past 6 years who then puts up 150 yards against the Cowboys is not an example of recency bias. The guy has had a long career of outstanding play and what is unusual for him this year is not the 150 yards against the Cowboys but the relatively small output in the first game of the season. As a result I think this is the wrong case to be talking about recency bias. This is a great player who once again this season is playing at a level that is rarely seen in the NFL.

I happen to agree about the view of his career. The recency bias as I was expressing it, was announcers and media saying he was washed up after the first two games, only to have him go from washed up to all world in two short weeks.