Being a top 3 team in scoring. Does it matter how we do it?

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

4 hours ago, FireChans said:

Josh Allen threw the ball almost 100 times fewer than he did in 2020, and almost 160 times fewer than 2021. He had around 800 less passing yards than those two seasons. 
 

The Bills offense was 10th in yards in 2024, after being 4rh, 2nd, 5th, and 2nd. 

So no, I don’t think adding Jamar Chase brings the offense down 800 yards less. That’s actually nuts.

 

How much did they run in 2020 and 2021, in 2020, was 80 less times and they are now averaging 30 yards more per game  than back then and I'll bet if you looked at individuals, you'd find that if you take out the Allen rushing plays the difference may be between 40 to 50 yards per game.

 

So yes if you want to go back to just throwing the ball practically all the time, then Allen's stats would go up, but that is what would be nuts here to compare.

 

It's a team sport, yes Allen is their best player, but running the ball more makes the TEAM better.  Again we're not playing FF here!

[FireChans]

16 minutes ago, artmalibu said:

 

I think you missed the point.  Chase would get a lot of yards but that would mean less targets and yards for the other players.  In other words Chase would would get 1000 + yards but the team would not have a total of 1000+ more yards.

Respectfully, if you still think that after what we saw last season, I think you missed the point.

 

We played this game last offseason. Folks tried to bar napkin the math of how Josh could easily throw for 4000+ yards just spreading the targets around to non-Diggs players.

 

Of course, that’s not reality, because lesser players don’t get open as much, they don’t have favorable matchups as much, and they aren’t the #1 option on as many plays.

 

Khalil Shakir saw his targets more than DOUBLE between 2023 and 2024. He went from 45 to 100. He only had 200 more yards on much worse efficiency. If we had Jamar Chase getting those 55 targets, would we get more or less than 200 yards? 
 

Obviously more. 
 

Here’s another example.

 

The 2019 Bills passed the ball 14 more times than the 2018 Bills. But they had almost 400 yards more of passing offense. Why? Because of the quality of the receiving targets improved. 
 

Sure, is it not exactly add a 1700 yard receiver and you get exactly 1700 yards more of offense?

 

Yes.
 

Would it considerably improve the offensive production?

 

Of course it would.

 

Would it make the offense 800 yards WORSE like @Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said?

 

Of course it wouldn’t and I really question the acumen of anyone who believes that.

9 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

How much did they run in 2020 and 2021, in 2020, was 80 less times and they are now averaging 30 yards more per game  than back then and I'll bet if you looked at individuals, you'd find that if you take out the Allen rushing plays the difference may be between 40 to 50 yards per game.

 

So yes if you want to go back to just throwing the ball practically all the time, then Allen's stats would go up, but that is what would be nuts here to compare.

 

It's a team sport, yes Allen is their best player, but running the ball more makes the TEAM better.  Again we're not playing FF here!

Sorry but we have the data already.

 

the Bills offenses from 2020 - 2023  with a #1 WR had more yards than the 2024 Bills offense. They would never be 600-800 yards worse by adding a #1 WR. That’s crazy talk.

[Maine-iac]

29 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

Pedantic point. Break long passages into a few shorter paragraphs for greater readability.

 

More substantial point: I agree with many of your observations, but not your conclusions. Minor disagreement: Coleman is an early second pick. Beane punted. He could have traded up for Brian Thomas, Jr., for instance, a receiver that doesn't have trouble getting separation. Larger disagreement: But actually, yes, we agree the pass receivers need to make those catches. They haven't. They don't. Beyond skill set, we need one or two more clutch, elite players on both sides of the ball. 

 

Beane has a recipe, and he plays it safe more often than not. The result has been good teams with solid depth that lack the plus players. It matches up with our generally mediocre playoff performance.

 

 

I can nit pick too.  Coleman was the first pick we used, like I said.  I never said first round.  Isn't that fun.  I'm literally doing 3 different things, checking this while I watch TV, eat, and get ready to go shovel some snow.  I'm as likely to format my responses on here as I am a text message to someone while I'm out doing something.  I do enjoy the critique.  Makes me think of when someone doesn't like the color of rust oleoum I paint my wheel barrow.

Edited Saturday at 02:43 PM by Maine-iac

[harmonkillebrew]

14 hours ago, Dr. Who said:

The last two years, the defense failed and the offense did not come through in the crucial moments at the end of games.

Both are important, and both need to be addressed. 

That's how I feel.

D is the priority area this offseason, by far.

But the Offense is missing an additional playmaker than can come through when we need it. Cook was that last year, but I'm worried about the state of his contract.

We did not get much from the WRs, but what Allen and the O did do this past year was historically high ball security. 

If the Offense can get a playmaker at WR they just become that more versatile and unstoppable. 

[harmonkillebrew]

1 hour ago, FireChans said:

Respectfully, if you still think that after what we saw last season, I think you missed the point.

 

We played this game last offseason. Folks tried to bar napkin the math of how Josh could easily throw for 4000+ yards just spreading the targets around to non-Diggs players.

 

Of course, that’s not reality, because lesser players don’t get open as much, they don’t have favorable matchups as much, and they aren’t the #1 option on as many plays.

 

Khalil Shakir saw his targets more than DOUBLE between 2023 and 2024. He went from 45 to 100. He only had 200 more yards on much worse efficiency. If we had Jamar Chase getting those 55 targets, would we get more or less than 200 yards? 
 

Obviously more. 
 

Here’s another example.

 

The 2019 Bills passed the ball 14 more times than the 2018 Bills. But they had almost 400 yards more of passing offense. Why? Because of the quality of the receiving targets improved. 
 

Sure, is it not exactly add a 1700 yard receiver and you get exactly 1700 yards more of offense?

 

Yes.
 

Would it considerably improve the offensive production?

 

Of course it would.

 

Would it make the offense 800 yards WORSE like @Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said?

 

Of course it wouldn’t and I really question the acumen of anyone who believes that.

Sorry but we have the data already.

 

the Bills offenses from 2020 - 2023  with a #1 WR had more yards than the 2024 Bills offense. They would never be 600-800 yards worse by adding a #1 WR. That’s crazy talk.

Yards on offense does not necessarily equal offensive scoring and wins.

That's the mirage here.

While the Bills were worse on pass offense and the WR production much worse, the Offense scored more and turned the ball over less.

Some said that without a demanding #1WR to force it to, Allen could spread the ball around to the open player and avoid turnovers. That certainly seemed to be the case throughout the year.

The Bills also used the run to set up the pass, as opposed to vice versa. We ran so many more heavy packages with 6OLs. And Cook had an outstanding, highly efficient year. Ty Johnson and Ray Davis also contributed

I still think adding a playmaking #1WR would be good. The offense could use some extra ammo. Palmer is nice route runner starting WR, but they should add talent in the draft as well.

[artmalibu]

42 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Respectfully, if you still think that after what we saw last season, I think you missed the point.

 

We played this game last offseason. Folks tried to bar napkin the math of how Josh could easily throw for 4000+ yards just spreading the targets around to non-Diggs players.

 

Of course, that’s not reality, because lesser players don’t get open as much, they don’t have favorable matchups as much, and they aren’t the #1 option on as many plays.

 

Khalil Shakir saw his targets more than DOUBLE between 2023 and 2024. He went from 45 to 100. He only had 200 more yards on much worse efficiency. If we had Jamar Chase getting those 55 targets, would we get more or less than 200 yards? 
 

Obviously more. 
 

Here’s another example.

 

The 2019 Bills passed the ball 14 more times than the 2018 Bills. But they had almost 400 yards more of passing offense. Why? Because of the quality of the receiving targets improved. 
 

Sure, is it not exactly add a 1700 yard receiver and you get exactly 1700 yards more of offense?

 

Yes.
 

Would it considerably improve the offensive production?

 

Of course it would.

 

Would it make the offense 800 yards WORSE like @Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said?

 

Of course it wouldn’t and I really question the acumen of anyone who believes that.

Sorry but we have the data already.

 

the Bills offenses from 2020 - 2023  with a #1 WR had more yards than the 2024 Bills offense. They would never be 600-800 yards worse by adding a #1 WR. That’s crazy talk.

 

It seems that I read the post you quoted a little differently than you did.  Chase would have helped the team have more total yards at the end of the year, but the bills other receivers would have had 600-800 less yards.  

 

In 2024 the Bills did not have a #1 after getting rid of Diggs and that caused a 30 million cap hit.   That sounds like a recipe for disaster but  passing yards compared to the rest of the league showed they only dropped 2 spots from 2023 to 2024 on 60 less attempts.  Their average yard per catch went UP.  Add to that in 2024 they basically took  week 18 off where in 2023 it was pedal to the metal and Josh threw for 359 yards.  If they could have parted ways with Diggs with out the 30 million cap hit and used the money to beef up the defense we would have watched you Bills in the Super Bowl.  

 

The everyone eats plan really didnt backfire when considering that the Bills were #2 in the league in scoring without a #1 WR.  JA was asked to throw and run less.  And 2 of the pass catchers that they were counting on in Kincade and Samual  each came up short likely due to injury.  

 

 

 

[FireChans]

38 minutes ago, artmalibu said:

Chase would have helped the team have more total yards at the end of the year, but the bills other receivers would have had 600-800 less yards

So who cares if Mack Hollins tier players have 100 yards less each if the offense is better? Are we working for Mack’s agent?

 

39 minutes ago, artmalibu said:

In 2024 the Bills did not have a #1 after getting rid of Diggs and that caused a 30 million cap hit.   That sounds like a recipe for disaster but  passing yards compared to the rest of the league showed they only dropped 2 spots from 2023 to 2024 on 60 less attempts.  Their average yard per catch went UP.  Add to that in 2024 they basically took  week 18 off where in 2023 it was pedal to the metal and Josh threw for 359 yards.  If they could have parted ways with Diggs with out the 30 million cap hit and used the money to beef up the defense we would have watched you Bills in the Super Bowl

Josh Allen played the best football of his career from start to finish last year. Surrounded by a lesser supporting cast. That’s why he won MVP despite not having mouth dropping passing numbers.
 

Obviously I’m not arguing the 2024 offense wasn’t effective. I’m arguing two points:

 

the 2024 offense being great doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t improve the offense

 

expecting Josh Allen to play perfectly every year is not a good strategy

 

Mahomes’ 2022 with lesser weapons than he was used was one of the all time great seasons by a QB ever. He was a one man show that learned to best cover 2 and be patient without Tyreek. His 2023 and 2024 were honestly awful comparatively. That’s what I would like to avoid. And sure they were in the SB both years but somehow our defense can never stop a nosebleed vs them. 

 

That’s the point.  
 

sure improve the defense. Cool. No problems at all. But when there’s no big fish to chase on defense, but there is on offense, don’t let good be the enemy of great.

 

58 minutes ago, harmonkillebrew said:

Yards on offense does not necessarily equal offensive scoring and wins.

That's the mirage here.

While the Bills were worse on pass offense and the WR production much worse, the Offense scored more and turned the ball over less.

Some said that without a demanding #1WR to force it to, Allen could spread the ball around to the open player and avoid turnovers. That certainly seemed to be the case throughout the year.

The Bills also used the run to set up the pass, as opposed to vice versa. We ran so many more heavy packages with 6OLs. And Cook had an outstanding, highly efficient year. Ty Johnson and Ray Davis also contributed

I still think adding a playmaking #1WR would be good. The offense could use some extra ammo. Palmer is nice route runner starting WR, but they should add talent in the draft as well.

The 2024 team scored a lot of points because they played an extra game and the defense turned it over a lot.

 

the 2020 offense had more PPG and more total yards.

[SoTier]

26 minutes ago, FireChans said:

 sure improve the defense. Cool. No problems at all. But when there’s no big fish to chase on defense, but there is on offense, don’t let good be the enemy of great.

 

 

I don't think that DK Metcalf would make the Bills "great" because I don't think he's really a "difference maker".  I have never particularly like Metcalf, even when he had Wilson throwing moon balls to him.  I'd prefer that the Bills extend Benford (which they have done) and Cook rather than shell out a 2nd rounder plus $132 million for Metcalf.  

[FireChans]

Just now, SoTier said:

I'd prefer that the Bills extend Benford

Which basically does not affect his 2025 cap at all. 
 

1 minute ago, SoTier said:

and Cook

Again, will likely not affect his 2025 cap at all (if they even choose to extend him)

 

But while there is not a real “choice” between re-signing those players and bringing in new players, it’s framed that way. Sounds better than “we are just running back the same team last year with a different old, often hurt, possibly washed EDGE,” I suppose.

 

 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

3 hours ago, FireChans said:

Respectfully, if you still think that after what we saw last season, I think you missed the point.

 

We played this game last offseason. Folks tried to bar napkin the math of how Josh could easily throw for 4000+ yards just spreading the targets around to non-Diggs players.

 

Of course, that’s not reality, because lesser players don’t get open as much, they don’t have favorable matchups as much, and they aren’t the #1 option on as many plays.

 

Khalil Shakir saw his targets more than DOUBLE between 2023 and 2024. He went from 45 to 100. He only had 200 more yards on much worse efficiency. If we had Jamar Chase getting those 55 targets, would we get more or less than 200 yards? 
 

Obviously more. 
 

Here’s another example.

 

The 2019 Bills passed the ball 14 more times than the 2018 Bills. But they had almost 400 yards more of passing offense. Why? Because of the quality of the receiving targets improved. 
 

Sure, is it not exactly add a 1700 yard receiver and you get exactly 1700 yards more of offense?

 

Yes.
 

Would it considerably improve the offensive production?

 

Of course it would.

 

Would it make the offense 800 yards WORSE like @Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said?

 

Of course it wouldn’t and I really question the acumen of anyone who believes that.

Sorry but we have the data already.

 

the Bills offenses from 2020 - 2023  with a #1 WR had more yards than the 2024 Bills offense. They would never be 600-800 yards worse by adding a #1 WR. That’s crazy talk.

 

And yet the 2024 offense scored more points which what's actually needed to win games.  Again in FF the yards gives you points, but not in the NFL so being more balanced helps.

[FireChans]

Just now, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

And yet the 2024 offense scored more points which what's actually needed to win games.  Again in FF the yards gives you points, but not in the NFL so being more balanced helps.

The 2024 offense scored less PPG than the 2020 offense.

 

 

[harmonkillebrew]

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

The 2024 offense scored less PPG than the 2020 offense.

 

 

But also ran less and turned it over more.

Running controls the clock and the game. Lowers points scored by shortening the game and Bills were brutally efficient in scoring despite.

 

Don't get me wrong, I loved that 2020 offense. Josh slinging the ball around to a group of dynamic WRs. It was more entertaining for sure, but I also appreciate what Brady is doing with a more ball control, efficient, low turnover offense.  I'd ideally like them to find a balance - get some of that 2020 explosiveness back, while still being efficient and not turning it over.  Too much to ask for??

 

[FireChans]

13 minutes ago, harmonkillebrew said:

I'd ideally like them to find a balance - get some of that 2020 explosiveness back, while still being efficient and not turning it over.  Too much to ask for??

Apparently yes. Asking for any improvement on the offensive side of the ball is not allowed. We must draft 10 defensive players.

Edited Saturday at 08:40 PM by FireChans

[artmalibu]

3 hours ago, FireChans said:

So who cares if Mack Hollins tier players have 100 yards less each if the offense is better? Are we working for Mack’s agent?

 

Josh Allen played the best football of his career from start to finish last year. Surrounded by a lesser supporting cast. That’s why he won MVP despite not having mouth dropping passing numbers.
 

Obviously I’m not arguing the 2024 offense wasn’t effective. I’m arguing two points:

 

the 2024 offense being great doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t improve the offense

 

expecting Josh Allen to play perfectly every year is not a good strategy

 

Mahomes’ 2022 with lesser weapons than he was used was one of the all time great seasons by a QB ever. He was a one man show that learned to best cover 2 and be patient without Tyreek. His 2023 and 2024 were honestly awful comparatively. That’s what I would like to avoid. And sure they were in the SB both years but somehow our defense can never stop a nosebleed vs them. 

 

That’s the point.  
 

sure improve the defense. Cool. No problems at all. But when there’s no big fish to chase on defense, but there is on offense, don’t let good be the enemy of great.

 

The 2024 team scored a lot of points because they played an extra game and the defense turned it over a lot.

 

the 2020 offense had more PPG and more total yards.

 

I think you are posting in the wrong forum...  This is a football forum, not a fantasy football forum.  

 

I get your mad that they didnt make big swings on WRs who are almost making QB money.  To say JA had to play a perfect season is nuts, his rating and completion % went down.  He played great just like the  last several seasons.   

 

They did not have that sexy WRs you so desire, but JA got to play behind the best line of his carrier.  But I know linemen are not drafted in fantasy football.  

 

The lack of super star WRs was not the problem last year. 

The Bills scored 40 points to lose a game.

In the AFC title game the Chiefs scored more points than any other of their 20 games of the season.  

 

 

Edited Saturday at 08:51 PM by artmalibu

[SoTier]

4 hours ago, FireChans said:

Again, will likely not affect his 2025 cap at all (if they even choose to extend him)

 

But while there is not a real “choice” between re-signing those players and bringing in new players, it’s framed that way. Sounds better than “we are just running back the same team last year with a different old, often hurt, possibly washed EDGE,” I suppose.

 

 

 

I wouldn't object to the Bills trading for a big name WR and extending him ... if he's truly a difference maker not just a big name.   I don't think that's Metcalf.  That he's better than any of the Bills WRs doesn't mean that the Bills should have traded for him when acquiring Garrett or Crosby became a moot point.  Metcalf isn't the same level of WR that either Garrett or Crosby are pass rushers.   I was on the fence about trading for Hendrickson because I don't think he's on the same level as Garrett or Crosby, either.

 

 

Edited Saturday at 10:13 PM by SoTier

[FireChans]

2 hours ago, artmalibu said:

 

I think you are posting in the wrong forum...  This is a football forum, not a fantasy football forum.  

 

I get your mad that they didnt make big swings on WRs who are almost making QB money.  To say JA had to play a perfect season is nuts, his rating and completion % went down.  He played great just like the  last several seasons.   

 

They did not have that sexy WRs you so desire, but JA got to play behind the best line of his carrier.  But I know linemen are not drafted in fantasy football.  

 

The lack of super star WRs was not the problem last year. 

The Bills scored 40 points to lose a game.

In the AFC title game the Chiefs scored more points than any other of their 20 games of the season.  

 

 

Lmao the fantasy football forum. Very funny. 
 

See you in October when we have to desperately try to find an answer at WR again. 

45 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

I wouldn't object to the Bills trading for a big name WR and extending him ... if he's truly a difference maker not just a big name.   I don't think that's Metcalf.  That he's better than any of the Bills WRs doesn't mean that the Bills should have traded for him when acquiring Garrett or Crosby became a moot point.  Metcalf isn't the same level of WR that either Garrett or Crosby are pass rushers.   I was on the fence about trading for Hendrickson because I don't think he's on the same level as Garrett or Crosby, either.

 

 

Fair enough, but my counter would be that it’s unlikely that a WR significantly better than Metcalf becomes available for anything other than 2 1sts starting price, which most would likely say is far too much to pay.

[DrPJax]

23 hours ago, PrimeTime101 said:

So last year scoring, the Lions, Bill and Ravens were top 3. 

https://www.statmuse.com/nfl/ask/nfl-top-scoring-teams-2024

 

Did it feel hard to score for us last year to you guys? We basically did it without a field stretcher. How will it feel to you all if we did it again, TOP 3. Without a true viable field stretcher on the team? How do we continue moving forward with THIS team on offense with the WR/HB/TE combination we have on the team now, or do we still need a EDGE WR to stretch this field this year?

 

Just a question to you folks. This may of been covered in other topics... just wanted to read more direct answers to this topic.

 

Thanks. 

How many lombardies did we win with our current strategies?  How many SB appearances have we made with our current offensive and defensive schemes we currently run?   I thought this regime preached how it’s all about winning a superbowl.  8 years later and teams have surpassed us despite having what I believe is a true superstar qb, who is coach able , fits the community well, has been only a positive influence since day one. It’s always preached , if you have the qb position solved , have a great qb, you have most of what’s necessary to win a SB!  Teams with poor QBs don’t win sbs.   I think that’s almost an incontrovertible fact. 
 

Score in the top three again , but we did it and didn’t even make a Super Bowl. You have to have a dominant d to win that game. It just makes it harder to not surround Josh with the best wr corp possible.  KC dies it , but they have true playmakers on d , and a future HOF guy in Kelce , so even they know it’s not about Maholmes only.    So how do we start this year?  Get two guys at a critical weal area that will miss at least a third of the season. Let a well liked good guy go to the pats and replace him with a different guy who supposedly is always ready to break out but always is buried behind other talent , and despite all potential, has never really been all that productive.  Good route runner , can supposedly separate , yet his numbers never seem very impressive. Throw another dart at a prior dominating edge guy in bosa, yet who would bet he starts and finishes more than 13 full game?     Can you honestly say our d is better and will be a force come playoff time ? Hope so , but chemistry takes time, Mcd has strange ideas concerning rookie usage and “ earning the refs” where fa’s have come in , never played , and then excelled immediately elsewhere. Just lots of red flags I still see.  Gonna have to prove to me bringing in guys missing a third or more of the season to start, relying on an aging injury prone edge, hoping a wr will finally break out , and then hoping you can repeat a top three offense and that will overcome everything else , is a big leap,of faith in belief of a coach who every year loses at least one reg season game due to poor coaching during the game , and has an abysmal playoff away record and overtime record.  
 

 

These are just facts. Refusing to just ignore things. Call me allnthe names you want , judge my being a true fan , I don’t care. Facts are facts. Truth is an inconvenient thing. Been a loyal fan since ‘63. No doubt in my mind , Allen is the best qb , probably best player in bills history ( and I cam big fan of smith, Kelly, Thomas , reed, Talley, Bennett, odomes and Leonard smith , moulds) and we haven’t sniffed a sb yet. Something is still wrong with, and maybe it’s time to decide if the HC can actually coach well in win or go home situations , and maybe it’s time to se if Beane needs a better talent evaluator to really build a COMPLETE  , successful team.  Just honest thoughts comparing this team to prior great teams who did get to the superbowl!   I would take a top 3 d over top 3 o any time. 

[NewEra]

Man, there’s some abomination takes here.  We had a great offense and a meh defense.  Make a big play on D or a catch on O and we may have been champs.  Make plays.  Call good plays on O and D.  Get some luck with injuries.  Did we lose the game because we lacked 1 or 2 elite players?  Not imo.  We lost because we didn’t make the clutch plays and had some bad luck (Benford, Rapp and every judgement call going against us).  
 

[Dr. Who]

3 hours ago, NewEra said:

Man, there’s some abomination takes here.  We had a great offense and a meh defense.  Make a big play on D or a catch on O and we may have been champs.  Make plays.  Call good plays on O and D.  Get some luck with injuries.  Did we lose the game because we lacked 1 or 2 elite players?  Not imo.  We lost because we didn’t make the clutch plays and had some bad luck (Benford, Rapp and every judgement call going against us).  
 

Zebras always seem to be force for evil, or at least one-sided judgment. Luck is something one can hardly prepare for, but having superlative players is at least a partial counter, because elite players have greater capacity to respond to those moments where a clutch play is needed. I don't think this is much beyond common sense, but if you think it is a bad take, have at it.

[BullBuchanan]

Aggregate scoring both defense and offense doesn't mean much to me when you're an elite team. All good teams are going to play a lot of weak, non-playoff teams throughout the year. How you stack up against elite teams matters a lot more, but timing is probably the most important thing of all.