Frustrated by Bills failure to stop the run? - listen to Joe Marino - expected points added (EPA)

[BuffaloBillsGospel2014]

12 hours ago, Mat68 said:

Johnson is the only reason I would consider playing nickel against them.  He would have held up at the point of attack better than Lewis or Ingram 1000%.

 

Different game plan and different reasons for the rushing success looking at Baltimore and Miami.  Miami had more room because the secondary for the most part was back.  Miami attacked more up the middle than outside a bit of a tendency breaker imo.  The issue vs Baltimore were run fits.  Slot corner got abused.  

 

I'll definitely agree to disagree on this 1, he would have made a difference in the pass game but would have been trucked by Henry no doubt about it and it's not anything against Johnson who's a great talent but Henry would have definitely ran him over imo.

[Nephilim17]

Just listened to this Marino podcast today (I catch many of his podcasts).

He claims that there's a corelation between limiting explosive plays versus conceding the run and winning. 

Some here dispute he's right. I don't have the stats but would put money on teams with explosive passing win more than teams without explosive passing but consistent running. I could be wrong, however. But it seems like a fact-based argument rather than could be resolved with some stats.

He also said the Bills defenders need to do a better job shedding blocks. 

 

Given how Hill was fairly limited with 80 yards receiving on 4 plays with a long of 28 and Waddle had -4 yards (yes, minus) receiving, I'd do the same — with better block shedding, in the future. Especially if we build up a decent lead earlier.

[stuvian]

our defensive strategy is to score 30 points a game on offense then wait until Von Miller is healthy or off his latest suspension and go to the bathroom when the defense takes the field with fingers crossed

[Low Positive]

12 hours ago, Nephilim17 said:

Just listened to this Marino podcast today (I catch many of his podcasts).

He claims that there's a corelation between limiting explosive plays versus conceding the run and winning. 

Some here dispute he's right. I don't have the stats but would put money on teams with explosive passing win more than teams without explosive passing but consistent running. I could be wrong, however. But it seems like a fact-based argument rather than could be resolved with some stats.

He also said the Bills defenders need to do a better job shedding blocks. 

 

Given how Hill was fairly limited with 80 yards receiving on 4 plays with a long of 28 and Waddle had -4 yards (yes, minus) receiving, I'd do the same — with better block shedding, in the future. Especially if we build up a decent lead earlier.

He probably is correct on that, but as a fan I hate watching my team get run on. It's feels like getting punched in the mouth over and over again.

[Nephilim17]

10 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

He probably is correct on that, but as a fan I hate watching my team get run on. It's feels like getting punched in the mouth over and over again.

I hear you. But getting gashed for 200 yards by Hill and Waddle doesn't feel better. And the more plays in a drive, the more of a chance it stalls or there's a turnover.

The solution is to play better run D and to build an early lead. The constant runs are less viable as time runs out. But if there's 3 minutes left and we're up 2 scores I don't feel good if Hill has caught a couple bombs earlier in the game.

I don't think Joe or anyone is saying getting run on constantly is good — it's just the preference over allowing explosive pass plays AND you have to play the run better.

Edited November 7 by Nephilim17

[Jerome007]

I get the Bills strategy. But they should work in "stop-the-run" personal groupings. Just like they sometimes use 6 OLinemen and vary receivers. Why? Because when they face a run heavy team like the Ravens, they NEED a different strategy. But strategies won't work without players knowing it inside and out.

[Nephilim17]

12 minutes ago, Jerome007 said:

I get the Bills strategy. But they should work in "stop-the-run" personal groupings. Just like they sometimes use 6 OLinemen and vary receivers. Why? Because when they face a run heavy team like the Ravens, they NEED a different strategy. But strategies won't work without players knowing it inside and out.

Yes, a light box is going to pay the price against Henry. I'm not sure McD is going to roll out 3 LBs, however. Not sure what to do there. with just 2 LB. A third safety? That's kinda how they see Taron, I think.

[Jerome007]

13 minutes ago, Nephilim17 said:

I'm not sure McD is going to roll out 3 LBs, however.

Why not? When Milano is back. Williams has shown he can play. Spector too. There are not as good as Milano and Bernard, but for OCCASIONAL stop-the-run packages, why not? Milano covers the pass well too (for a LB).

[Nephilim17]

35 minutes ago, Jerome007 said:

Why not? When Milano is back. Williams has shown he can play. Spector too. There are not as good as Milano and Bernard, but for OCCASIONAL stop-the-run packages, why not? Milano covers the pass well too (for a LB).

I don't think McD philosophically likes to play the 4-3 and prefers living and dying by the nickle. Not saying it's right (I'd like to see some vs the Ravens, for example, at least early before we take a lead), just his preference. We'll see.

[ddaryl]

On 11/5/2024 at 11:42 AM, Dr.Mantis_Toboggan said:

The Run McD can be frustrating to watch at times, but the scheme clearly works more than it doesn’t… However when it doesn’t it can be ugly, as shown by King Henry and the guy they’re up against this week who’s run all over this McDefense on more than one occasion…

 

Elite and even very good qbs on playoff caliber teams, will eat this D up. We are equally vulnerable to good WRs TEs and RBs finding space with no dominant pass rusher.

 

This D strategy will get us through the season but it is not good enough for playoffs IMO

[WideNine]

17 hours ago, Nephilim17 said:

Just listened to this Marino podcast today (I catch many of his podcasts).

He claims that there's a corelation between limiting explosive plays versus conceding the run and winning. 

Some here dispute he's right. I don't have the stats but would put money on teams with explosive passing win more than teams without explosive passing but consistent running. I could be wrong, however. But it seems like a fact-based argument rather than could be resolved with some stats.

He also said the Bills defenders need to do a better job shedding blocks. 

 

Given how Hill was fairly limited with 80 yards receiving on 4 plays with a long of 28 and Waddle had -4 yards (yes, minus) receiving, I'd do the same — with better block shedding, in the future. Especially if we build up a decent lead earlier.

 

EPA is an a good way to assign weight to plays, but aggregate data can sometimes water down or miss important data points.

 

I would think it is always important for coaching staffs to recognize any shortcomings of a tool and know where their coaching subjectivity needs to come into play to tailor plans vs opponents.

 

From nfelo site:

Shortcomings of EPA

EPA does have its limitations, most notably in its ability to measure individual performance. EPA analysis works for QBs because that position dictates so much of the game. However, football is a team sport, and attributing EPA to other positions like running-back or wide-receiver typically does not yield as much signal. EPA can’t distinguish between a well run route and a well thrown ball.

 

A further limitation of EPA is its inability to capture non-point benefits or benefits not realized by the play in question. For instance, rushing EPA ignores any positive benefit a strong running game may create in the passing game by slowing down a pass rush or the benefit it may provide to a team in their ability to close out games.

 

EPA based analysis can also be limited by the dataset itself. Most EPA analysis is derived from nflfastR's public historical data. This dataset does not have classifications for formation or scheme, which means EPA based analysis typically doesn't have context for the degree of difficulty or intention of the play. Does a QB have high EPA because scheme put them in advantageous positions or because they really played at a high level?

 

A final (and perhaps least recognized) limitation of EPA is its susceptibility to leverage. The power of EPA comes from its ability to recognize that not all yards are created equal. Distance and field position matter. Averaging 5 yards per play generally isn't that great, but gaining 5 yards on any one play can be worth a whole lot of EPA if it converts a first down and extends a drive. 

The problem with this approach is that it has a tendency to overweight individual plays that may or may not be very predictive of the future. For example, if a team loses a random fumble on first and goal, (which carries an EP value of about six points), they'll end the game with a heavily deflated EPA that understates their overall efficiency as an offense

 

 

 

[MPT]

I listen to Joe every day and I understand his belief in EPA but all of these advanced analytics take into account bad teams even if the numbers are adjusted for them.

 

If we face the Ravens in the playoffs and they just run the ball every single play they will kill us unless we make significant changes to our game plan.

 

This is my biggest problem with McDermott. He relies on his system no matter the situation and no matter the opponent because it works 80% of the time and that will get you into the playoffs every year. However, when you play against good teams, you have to be willing to throw something new at your opponent or they will just exploit your weaknesses with ease. We see it happen every single year.

[BillsFan130]

2 hours ago, MPT said:

I listen to Joe every day and I understand his belief in EPA but all of these advanced analytics take into account bad teams even if the numbers are adjusted for them.

 

If we face the Ravens in the playoffs and they just run the ball every single play they will kill us unless we make significant changes to our game plan.

 

This is my biggest problem with McDermott. He relies on his system no matter the situation and no matter the opponent because it works 80% of the time and that will get you into the playoffs every year. However, when you play against good teams, you have to be willing to throw something new at your opponent or they will just exploit your weaknesses with ease. We see it happen every single year.

Ya Joe Marino is great, but that may have been one of the worst podcasts I've listened from him.

 

Justifying Miami running it down their throats with long play drives that keeps Josh on the sidelines, makes absolutely 0 sense to me 

[HardyBoy]

On 11/5/2024 at 1:21 PM, Charles Romes said:

the analytics say that’s even better 

 

Only if they're in the nfc

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

On 11/5/2024 at 12:44 PM, Allen2D̶i̶g̶g̶s̶TBD said:

Regardless of their philosophy, the defense was terrible against Miami. 

 

Intentionally allowing the other team to run on us won't get us wins against the Ravens or Lions.

I don’t think we intentionally let the ravens run on us lol. We were just missing way too many defensive starters to do anything effective. I think we’d lean towards run stopping against Detroit too 

[ganesh]

2 hours ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

I don’t think we intentionally let the ravens run on us lol. We were just missing way too many defensive starters to do anything effective. I think we’d lean towards run stopping against Detroit too 

I don't believe so.   As per the all-22 review,  the Bills had a light box most of the game resulting in easy runs

[2003Contenders]

Rather than focusing on the run defense, I think it is critical to examine the Bills' overall defense against opposing RBs. That is, the defense against RBs catching passes out of the backfield is what has been REALLY bad.

 

Against Arizona, 6 receptions for 64 yards (over 10 yards/catch)

Against Miami (first game) 9 receptions for 81 yards (9 yards per catch)

Against Jacksonville 4 receptions for 17 yards

Against Baltimore 9 receptions for 88 yards (9.8 yards per catch)

Against Houston 8 receptions for 62 yards (7.75 yards per catch)

Against Jets 5 receptions for 56 yards (11.2 yards per catch)

Against Tennessee 3 receptions for 13 yards

Against Seattle 7 receptions for 53 yards (7.6 yards per catch)

Against Miami (2nd time) 10 receptions for 90 yards (9 yards per catch)

 

Essentially in the team's 9 games, only twice was this not a problem -- and that came against Jacksonville and Tennessee that did not really even try to pass the ball to their backs. Otherwise, teams have had success getting 8-10 yards per pass to their RBs.

 

Not sure what the best remedy is for this, but it is also part of the price you pay for only keeping 6 in the box and dropping everyone else back into coverage.

 

 

[Mat68]

On 11/6/2024 at 11:25 AM, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Well Allen passed up multiple completely WIDE OPEN deep TD opportunities in this Dolphins game to take shorter, higher percentage throws and keep the chains moving so I guess he's not doing his job right by not taking those "10/10" throws by your description.

 

Mahomes has won 2 SB's in a row taking the surer thing.......after Brady made a GOAT career out of it.   You can't laud Allen(and Joe Brady) for adopting that same philosophy this season and not acknowledge that Allen should have taken the wide open throw to Diggs underneath in that divisional game and gotten the first down or set up a 3rd and short and keep grinding the clock and the exhausted Chiefs D to get a TD with as little time left as possible.    

 

How does one be a fan of, at the time, the biggest SB favorite in history(XXV) and watch that team lose by having the clock controlled and then 30+ years later still not understand that YOUR team can use the clock to choke out a superior performing offense as well?

 

 

 

High redzone skinny post is one of Allens favorite throws.  When it’s there he rips it.  I don't buy into any argument against it.  An abstract theory on game management or fan fiction on what happens when he throws it to Diggs?  Maybe Diggs just drops it.  Like he did earlier that drive and multiple times in that stretch of the season.  The pass wasn't a 50/50 fade or deep shot on 3rd down.  He has thrown multiple touchdowns on that pass.  If not for Chris Jones he would have again.  It is not Madden.  You cant assume you can score with 1 sec left.  Gotta take the chances as they come.  
 

 Vs Miami I haven't seen the all 22 to see the touchdowns Allen passed up on.  And if on film that was the case he wont be high fiving, he will be pissed that he missed them.  The offense moved the ball very well.  2 touchdowns taken off the board in the first half made that game closer than it should have been.  

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

6 hours ago, ganesh said:

I don't believe so.   As per the all-22 review,  the Bills had a light box most of the game resulting in easy runs

Seemed like we tried adding an extra LB to me but it was morrow so we abandoned it pretty quickly lol. Different injury situation and that game goes a lot different imo.  I don’t think we would’ve won but it would’ve been a lot closer 

Edited November 8 by Generic_Bills_Fan

[BillsFan130]

49 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

High redzone skinny post is one of Allens favorite throws.  When it’s there he rips it.  I don't buy into any argument against it.  An abstract theory on game management or fan fiction on what happens when he throws it to Diggs?  Maybe Diggs just drops it.  Like he did earlier that drive and multiple times in that stretch of the season.  The pass wasn't a 50/50 fade or deep shot on 3rd down.  He has thrown multiple touchdowns on that pass.  If not for Chris Jones he would have again.  It is not Madden.  You cant assume you can score with 1 sec left.  Gotta take the chances as they come.  
 

 Vs Miami I haven't seen the all 22 to see the touchdowns Allen passed up on.  And if on film that was the case he wont be high fiving, he will be pissed that he missed them.  The offense moved the ball very well.  2 touchdowns taken off the board in the first half made that game closer than it should have been.  

And here's the other thing- people think just cause the bills got the ball to Diggs and got the 1st down, that they were automatically going to score..

They still would have had about 15-20 yards to go.

And what happens if you get stopped? Now you're relying on Tyler bass to tie the game, and we know all that worked out..

 

If a wide open TD is there, you take it 100/100 times.

It was just unfortunate that Dawkins got pushed back into Josh