Van Noy - "I've never seen them (Bills) do this as conservative they played"

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

13 hours ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Like Xavier Worthy per chance? 😂

Just because I love stirring the pot with pff ratings I have to point out that worthy was ranked lower than Coleman 😂

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

8 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

See I never bought the mismatch thing. Everyone just looked at the stats of their run offense compared to our run defense and surmised there was an insurmountable gap there. Me, I believe run defense is about WILL from the players and INTENT from the coaches.

 

I'm now fully convinced that Oliver and DQ were dogging it a bit early in the season, saving themselves for more important games. Their will showed up in this one. You saw it on tape and Henry's stat line proves it.

 

I'm also convinced the coaching staff had the wrong game plan in week 4 - against Baltimore you have to shut down the run first and live with their production through the air. Otherwise you're on your heels the whole game. In this game the intent of the coaching staff was made clear on the very first play - 4-3 base defense and Henry was stuffed for a 1 yard gain.

 

There was never a mismatch. The players and coaches just didn't have the right formula in week 4. Thankfully they corrected it when it mattered.

 

They tried the 4-3 regular season a bit and two of the linebackers were Spector and morrow due to injury haha I don’t think it was a question of not having the right gameplan they just didn’t have the bodies to execute it. 

 

idk I think it was still a mismatch that we mitigated pretty well with a good gameplan.  If you go heavy to stop the run you’ve still gotta contend with likely and Andrews in the passing game and they adjusted to our 4-3 as the game went on by going even heavier which seemed pretty effective.  If you focus on clogging up interior running lanes Lamar can bounce it outside or vice versa.
 

 They really were an absolutely stacked team lol Henry still having gas in the tank was an absolute game changer for them.  Back in 2020 everyone said it was a bad matchup and I felt exactly the same way as what you posted here because they really didn’t have that bowling ball type guy so you could focus more on containing Lamar 

[SoTier]

21 hours ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

Yea I’m a bit puzzled by the objections to it lol. That was your classic ‘hold all their receivers’ type playoff defense with pretty bad field conditions sprinkled on top of it that we would’ve really struggled against in the past and we invested in the run game for literally that exact situation  

 

in the ‘wow look at Josh throw the ball all game’ days even throwing prime diggs and prime Beasley back in there Baltimore would’ve played two high all game and easily stopped the run while limiting the pass.

 

 

 

The Ravens had real problems in pass defense in the first half of the season, but they changed some schemes and personnel in the second half of the season that enabled them to significantly improve their pass defense.  The Bills forced the Ravens to make every effort to stop their running.  Largely abandoning the run in the 2nd half would have been exactly what the Ravens wanted them to do.

 

9 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

See I never bought the mismatch thing. Everyone just looked at the stats of their run offense compared to our run defense and surmised there was an insurmountable gap there. Me, I believe run defense is about WILL from the players and INTENT from the coaches.

 

I'm now fully convinced that Oliver and DQ were dogging it a bit early in the season, saving themselves for more important games. Their will showed up in this one. You saw it on tape and Henry's stat line proves it.

 

I'm also convinced the coaching staff had the wrong game plan in week 4 - against Baltimore you have to shut down the run first and live with their production through the air. Otherwise you're on your heels the whole game. In this game the intent of the coaching staff was made clear on the very first play - 4-3 base defense and Henry was stuffed for a 1 yard gain.

 

There was never a mismatch. The players and coaches just didn't have the right formula in week 4. Thankfully they corrected it when it mattered.

 

 

Do you think that the Bills chose the game plan they did in Week 4 in an attempt to make up for not having Milano, Bernard, and Johnson on defense?

 

I'm on record that I think the Ravens were absolutely a far worse match up for the Bills than the Chiefs ever were or currently are, but you've really given me a new perspective on the Bills vs Ravens match up.   Certainly the Bills never looked over-matched in this game.

[foreboding]

I think that we are seeing this because of the josh allen factor. Now, teams are playing coverage and afraid to stack the box. If they do, Josh will light them up. Stay in coverage and the run game is gonna eAt!

[JohnNord]

On 1/21/2025 at 10:07 PM, BillsFan130 said:

The conservative offence worries me a bit. It kind of reminds me of the first 6 or so games of the season.

 

Against KC, going to have to open it up more and put the game in your superstar QBs hands

 

 

I don’t really think it was conservative, they just didn’t execute in the second half.  Josh was taking what Baltimore was giving him all game long.  Who killed them was a low pass and drop by Kincaid, a poor screen audible to Dawson Knox, and a couple of throwaways.  
 

The ball was in Josh’s hands at the end of the game and he didn’t get in the endzone.

 

So I’m not sure where the conservative label comes into play 

 

5 hours ago, Pete said:

and Knox ran inside into traffic, instead of following the blocks, and cutting outside.  If Knox ran outside as play dictated, he would of gained 5 yards and a first down./  The check down was the correct call by Josh

That was part of the issue.  To be fair though, Van Noy came across traffic and made the tackle.  It was a good play.  

Edited 17 hours ago by JohnNord

[BillsFan130]

1 minute ago, JohnNord said:

I don’t really think it was conservative, they just didn’t execute in the second half.  Josh was taking what Baltimore was giving him all game long.  Who killed them was a low pass and drop by Kincaid, a poor screen audible to Dawson Knox, and a couple of throwaways.  
 

The ball was in Josh’s hands at the end of the game and he didn’t get in the endzone.

 

So I’m not sure where the conservative label comes into play 

 

Why I say it's conservative:

 

1. Running into heavy boxes in the 2nd half and mostly getting shut down

 

2. Having 36 runs to 22 passes when you have the best QB on the planet 

[PoundingDog]

7 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:

Having 36 runs to 22 passes when you have the best QB on the planet 

I hope not offending you, but I hate the argument of the bold part. Older guys remember guys like HoF Dan Marino, arguably the best pure passer in the NFL history, never won a superbowl in part is because defenses like the Bills at the time, schemed to make him throw, throw and throw. When teams know you are passing, they can unleash all kinds tricks to defend.  

[DCofNC]

17 hours ago, Da webster guy said:

Allowing Gabe Davis 4TD’s comes to mind.  That should have been plenty.

 

We know KC is scoring 30, and so are we.   It will come down to the last drive(s).  McD and Josh have both learned a lot and hopefully Brady has too along the way.

 

Bass kicking well, Pacheco looks slower since broken leg, Chris Jones less snap counts lately, our O line better than theirs (or anyones).   McDuffie will likely be on Shakir all game, he travels w #1’s, look for our TE’s and RB’s to have heavier loads, Coleman and Cooper just not enough chemistry yet for Josh to rely on as 1st read options.   

its our year.   

 

 

 

Pacheco does not look the same, not sure if that’s from Hunt taking carries or the injury, but he doesn’t appear to be the same guy.

[BillsFan130]

26 minutes ago, PoundingDog said:

I hope not offending you, but I hate the argument of the bold part. Older guys remember guys like HoF Dan Marino, arguably the best pure passer in the NFL history, never won a superbowl in part is because defenses like the Bills at the time, schemed to make him throw, throw and throw. When teams know you are passing, they can unleash all kinds tricks to defend.  

But in the 2nd half Baltimore was daring the Bills to throw- Which is my point as they ran a lot of heavy boxes

 

1st half? Ok different story as Baltimore did play a lot of cover 2 and cover 3.

 

Which makes sense, as bills had great rushing production in the 1st half, but not much in the 2nd

Edited 16 hours ago by BillsFan130

[PoundingDog]

4 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:

But in the 2nd half Baltimore wasn't scheming the Bills to throw- Which is my point as they ran a lot of heavy boxes and were daring the bills to throw a lot of the times.

 

1st half? Ok different story as Baltimore did play a lot of cover 2 and cover 3.

 

Which makes sense, as bills had great rushing production in the 1st half, but not much in the 2nd

Nothing wrong about your argument. My point is to throw more should not be based on Allen is the best thrower, more because the game and the defense dictate you do that. Personally I'd prefer they'd go play action on first downs to gain some good yards. 

[JohnNord]

1 hour ago, BillsFan130 said:

Why I say it's conservative:

 

1. Running into heavy boxes in the 2nd half and mostly getting shut down

 

2. Having 36 runs to 22 passes when you have the best QB on the planet 

Why force the pass if it isn’t there?  We saw what they led to under Ken Dorsey.   It sounded like Baltimore ran a lot of 2 high looks on defense. 
 

Believe it or not, I read that the success rate with running the ball in the second half was higher than the first.  
 

You don’t have to like the offensive gameplan but I wouldn’t call it conservative 

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, PoundingDog said:

I hope not offending you, but I hate the argument of the bold part. Older guys remember guys like HoF Dan Marino, arguably the best pure passer in the NFL history, never won a superbowl in part is because defenses like the Bills at the time, schemed to make him throw, throw and throw. When teams know you are passing, they can unleash all kinds tricks to defend.  

 

IIRC, it wasn't just that teams forced Miami to pass, but that Don Shula believed that he didn't need a running game to win because Marino was so great, so he NEVER gave Marino a solid running game ... and Marino never got back to the SB after losing Super Bowl XIX after the 1984 season, under Shula or his successors.

Edited 15 hours ago by SoTier

[BillsFan130]

1 hour ago, JohnNord said:

Why force the pass if it isn’t there?  We saw what they led to under Ken Dorsey.   It sounded like Baltimore ran a lot of 2 high looks on defense. 
 

Believe it or not, I read that the success rate with running the ball in the second half was higher than the first.  
 

You don’t have to like the offensive gameplan but I wouldn’t call it conservative 

The pass was there in the 2nd half as baltimore was playing a lot more heavy boxes to stop the run

[ganesh]

4 hours ago, BillsFan130 said:

The pass was there in the 2nd half as baltimore was playing a lot more heavy boxes to stop the run

but I think the WRs were covered

[BillsFan130]

33 minutes ago, ganesh said:

but I think the WRs were covered

It's kind of hard to gauge that, when we ran like 75 percent of the time in the 2nd half though 

[RunTheBall]

I haven’t read the whole thread but this idea that we went conservative in the 3rd quarter is BS. We played a tight, conservative game the whole game. That was the plan. The difference in the 3rd quarter was execution. The plays were there to be made.

 

On the first series, Kincaid was wide open and Allen threw a bad pass. Yeah, Kincaid should have caught it but that pass was ass for a guy who was WIDE OPEN

 

On the 2nd series, Allen correctly alerted to the Knox screen. Why Knox was the target IDK, but that was the alert call in the huddle. Ravens were blitzing from that side. Knox screwed it up by running inside when he had blockers to the outside. Also, no one blocked Van Noy from the opposite side of the line. Poor execution.

 

If you watched Hard Knox, the Ravens game plan was to take away the intermediate to deep passes and “plastering” the receivers on scrambles. They ran a LOT of Tampa 2 and Cover 3 (According to Marino and Cover 1) which basically doubles both your outside receivers. So where’s the beef? With the run game and short passes over the middle which is where we went.

 

It was the perfect game specific game plan and it worked. Yeah, with a few better play calls and better execution it would have been a blow out but it wasn’t. Who cares. We are in the AFC Championship game. 

 

Everyone saying “we need to open it up” doesn’t understand the offensive philosophy. You take what the defense gives you. If KC loads the box you can bet we will look to throw it more. 

 

If we needed to, Josh would have opened it up against the Ravens. He never needed to because we were playing ball control especially in the 4th with a lead. Yeah, it got too close for comfort but we were playing probably the most talented team in the AFC who was peaking at the right time and we won.

 

[oldmanfan]

8 minutes ago, RunTheBall said:

I haven’t read the whole thread but this idea that we went conservative in the 3rd quarter is BS. We played a tight, conservative game the whole game. That was the plan. The difference in the 3rd quarter was execution. The plays were there to be made.

 

On the first series, Kincaid was wide open and Allen threw a bad pass. Yeah, Kincaid should have caught it but that pass was ass for a guy who was WIDE OPEN

 

On the 2nd series, Allen correctly alerted to the Knox screen. Why Knox was the target IDK, but that was the alert call in the huddle. Ravens were blitzing from that side. Knox screwed it up by running inside when he had blockers to the outside. Also, no one blocked Van Noy from the opposite side of the line. Poor execution.

 

If you watched Hard Knox, the Ravens game plan was to take away the intermediate to deep passes and “plastering” the receivers on scrambles. They ran a LOT of Tampa 2 and Cover 3 (According to Marino and Cover 1) which basically doubles both your outside receivers. So where’s the beef? With the run game and short passes over the middle which is where we went.

 

It was the perfect game specific game plan and it worked. Yeah, with a few better play calls and better execution it would have been a blow out but it wasn’t. Who cares. We are in the AFC Championship game. 

 

Everyone saying “we need to open it up” doesn’t understand the offensive philosophy. You take what the defense gives you. If KC loads the box you can bet we will look to throw it more. 

 

If we needed to, Josh would have opened it up against the Ravens. He never needed to because we were playing ball control especially in the 4th with a lead. Yeah, it got too close for comfort but we were playing probably the most talented team in the AFC who was peaking at the right time and we won.

 

Well stated.  It won’t change the minds of those who wanted the ball thrown all over the field, but it should.

[Whites Bay]

6 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

IIRC, it wasn't just that teams forced Miami to pass, but that Don Shula believed that he didn't need a running game to win because Marino was so great, so he NEVER gave Marino a solid running game ... and Marino never got back to the SB after losing Super Bowl XIX after the 1984 season, under Shula or his successors.

Not to get off topic, but chiming in to agree.  This is what I observed as well.  And during that 1984 season you really couldn't blame Shula.  That was terrifying.

 

And then it just got predicable.

[3rdand12]

23 hours ago, gomper said:

I think they have too. Baltimore may have a better collection of talent, but playoff-wise, KC is a way better team. 

Not sure if this is true, but I am voting against statistical proof  lol.

If we were smart enough to beat a SB bound Ravens (yes I said that )

 we are smart enough to take on Reid and Steve and his minions.

 book it

[3rdand12]

18 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

See I never bought the mismatch thing. Everyone just looked at the stats of their run offense compared to our run defense and surmised there was an insurmountable gap there. Me, I believe run defense is about WILL from the players and INTENT from the coaches.

 

I'm now fully convinced that Oliver and DQ were dogging it a bit early in the season, saving themselves for more important games. Their will showed up in this one. You saw it on tape and Henry's stat line proves it.

 

I'm also convinced the coaching staff had the wrong game plan in week 4 - against Baltimore you have to shut down the run first and live with their production through the air. Otherwise you're on your heels the whole game. In this game the intent of the coaching staff was made clear on the very first play - 4-3 base defense and Henry was stuffed for a 1 yard gain.

 

There was never a mismatch. The players and coaches just didn't have the right formula in week 4. Thankfully they corrected it when it mattered.