2008 Bills Offense

[obie_wan]

You miss one huge addition by subtraction.

 

Jim McNally

 

He may have been a legend in his earlier years - but his OL blocking schemes with the Bills were convoluted at best.

 

 

Did they run a zone blocking or not?

 

Nobody knew and the run blocking showed it.

 

 

The Bills will reap huge benefits this year with a coordinated run and pass scheme that takes advantage of the bulk of the OL in the run game.

 

Consistent conversion of 3rd downs will make the offense much more efficient with the current personnel.

[Fan in Chicago]

I happen to agree with the point of the OP. I will qualify that the assessment is true as of this minute and things can change prior to the start of the season. But we have too many question marks and no solid positive changes. We don't know if a rookie OC will be better than Fairchild, we don't know if the improvement over the off-season will be adequate for Trent and Lynch. It is questionable how much rookie WR and TE can add to last year's offense. Given how we our off-season hopes have been repeatedly dashed over the last few off-seasons, esp. on O, I cannot feel optimistic about the O compared to last year. I still have a hard time understanding why 2007 was so much below the level of our second half 2006 performance on O.

Also, a point has been made regarding the negativity of the OP. I just cannot see the grounds for optimism right now.

[Frez]

I happen to agree with the point of the OP. I will qualify that the assessment is true as of this minute and things can change prior to the start of the season. But we have too many question marks and no solid positive changes. We don't know if a rookie OC will be better than Fairchild, we don't know if the improvement over the off-season will be adequate for Trent and Lynch. It is questionable how much rookie WR and TE can add to last year's offense. Given how we our off-season hopes have been repeatedly dashed over the last few off-seasons, esp. on O, I cannot feel optimistic about the O compared to last year. I still have a hard time understanding why 2007 was so much below the level of our second half 2006 performance on O.

Also, a point has been made regarding the negativity of the OP. I just cannot see the grounds for optimism right now.

 

 

Well said!

 

I don't even think you're a retard.

[Adam]

You miss one huge addition by subtraction.

 

Jim McNally

 

He may have been a legend in his earlier years - but his OL blocking schemes with the Bills were convoluted at best.

 

 

Did they run a zone blocking or not?

 

Nobody knew and the run blocking showed it.

 

 

The Bills will reap huge benefits this year with a coordinated run and pass scheme that takes advantage of the bulk of the OL in the run game.

 

Consistent conversion of 3rd downs will make the offense much more efficient with the current personnel.

Jim McNally doesn't call the plays or choose the blocking schemes. That is the offensive coordinator.

 

As far as our current personel, we have one WR capable of playing the 1/2 role and we don't even have an adequate #3 WR ot top Tight end. We have a center who gives the opposition a physical mismatch to exploit and a right tackle who is decent but not physical enough. Not to mention a QB who is in his first year as a starter.

 

If I am a DC against the Bills, I mix up a lot of coverages and blitz up the middle, shading to the right side most of the time. Stuff the run on early downs, and hammer Edwards on throwing downs. The Bills as they are currently constituted will not beat anyone by throwing on early downs- they are best off sticking with high percentage plays and managing downs and distances.

 

If their draft picks turn out to be upgrades, this can definitely change, but that remains to be seen

[obie_wan]

Jim McNally doesn't call the plays or choose the blocking schemes. That is the offensive coordinator.

 

As far as our current personel, we have one WR capable of playing the 1/2 role and we don't even have an adequate #3 WR ot top Tight end. We have a center who gives the opposition a physical mismatch to exploit and a right tackle who is decent but not physical enough. Not to mention a QB who is in his first year as a starter.

 

If I am a DC against the Bills, I mix up a lot of coverages and blitz up the middle, shading to the right side most of the time. Stuff the run on early downs, and hammer Edwards on throwing downs. The Bills as they are currently constituted will not beat anyone by throwing on early downs- they are best off sticking with high percentage plays and managing downs and distances.

 

If their draft picks turn out to be upgrades, this can definitely change, but that remains to be seen

 

The bolded statement is a direct contradiction of your objective of managing downs and distance.

 

If teams will stack to stop the run on 1st and 2nd downs - the Bills would be stupid (as they were in the past) to not throw the ball on those downs on ocassion -especially down the seam and on slant patterns. The type of pass plays that JP had difficulty with and the Bills avoided to cut down the mistakes.

[Captain Hindsight]

The Bills offense from the 2007 season has not changed one bit for the 2008 season. Yup we have a different offense cord, big deal. The Bills better add some playmakers to this offense or it's going to be 3 and out all over again!

 

Adding one rookie WR to this team in 2008 is like peeing in Lake Ontario and trying to raise the water level.

Ok what do you want us to do to improve. Sign Bryant Johnson? You have your rant but how do you wanna fix it? How shoudl we fix it?

 

 

Dont just tell me what sucks tell me what you want to do about it

[Brandon]

You miss one huge addition by subtraction.

 

Jim McNally

 

He may have been a legend in his earlier years - but his OL blocking schemes with the Bills were convoluted at best.

 

 

Did they run a zone blocking or not?

 

Nobody knew and the run blocking showed it.

 

 

The Bills will reap huge benefits this year with a coordinated run and pass scheme that takes advantage of the bulk of the OL in the run game.

 

Consistent conversion of 3rd downs will make the offense much more efficient with the current personnel.

 

No offense, but I've heard that story before. How many times have the Bills made changes to their offensive staff over the last five years and then tried to pass it off as a cure-all? Quite a few. How many times has it worked? Not once. If that's what they're trying to sell, I'm not buying it.

 

There's really only one way this offense is going to get significantly better and that's by improving the talent level.

[The Dean]

It's still early, but trading Fairchild for Schonert is hardly something to start slobbering knobs about. Schonert has, quite literally, done absolutely nothing as an NFL OC.

 

 

I can't seem to find the posts slobbering on Schnoert's knob. Can you point them out?

 

I see post saying, "thank God Fairchild is gone", and I concur. I will neither praise nor criticize Turk until he give me reason. But, on the whole I imagine the subtraction of Fairchild is reason to think the offense COULD be better than it was, last year.

[BillsVet]

It's still early, but trading Fairchild for Schonert is hardly something to start slobbering knobs about. Schonert has, quite literally, done absolutely nothing as an NFL OC.

 

I wasn't a big fan of the Schonert hiring, though there's more going on with it. DJ and the rest of the league know the Bills are under a lot of pressure to make the playoffs. I can't imagine another up and coming position coach or established NFL OC willing to take a deal where the HC could very well be coaching their final season. That sort of job assurance isn't going to attract many candidates. Enter Schonert.

 

Edwards has a fairly entrenched OL, combined with a workhorse back and excellent receiver. From a purely on the field perspective, I don't think Schonert's going to make much difference. Fairchild was horrible, but installing a rookie OC (who's been a QB coach for five different franchises over 12 seasons) is a gamble too. I see them improving, but to somewhere around around 23-27th in the league in yards and scoring. DJ teams have never been offensive powers.

[Frez]

Ok what do you want us to do to improve. Sign Bryant Johnson? You have your rant but how do you wanna fix it? How shoudl we fix it?

 

 

Dont just tell me what sucks tell me what you want to do about it

 

 

First I would have signed Ernest Wilford from the Jags. I believe he would have been a difference maker for us in the redzone and picking up the tough yards for the first downs.

 

Second, yes why not pick up Bryant Johnson and throw him into the mix with our WR group. Obviously the Bills were interested but they were outbid for his services. He would have been a nice addition to our offense.

 

Third, I would have had Alge Crumpler in here the first day of his release and wouldn't have let him out of Buffalo. If healthy, what a difference maker he would have been.

 

Then going into the draft you can take that CB that the Bills desperately need.

[The Dean]

DJ teams have never been offensive powers.

 

 

Never?

 

In 2001 the Bears were #11 in scoring.

 

How about "rarely".

[Brandon]

Never?

 

In 2001 the Bears were #11 in scoring.

 

How about "rarely".

 

They were also 26th in total yardage that season.

[The Dean]

They were also 26th in total yardage that season.

 

 

Would they be a better offense if they were 10th in yardage and 18th in scoring?

[1billsfan]

Never?

 

In 2001 the Bears were #11 in scoring.

 

How about "rarely".

 

The 2001 Bears were #1 in defense that season with 48 turnovers (interceptions and fumble recoveries combined). They also had 48 sacks that year. In contrast the Bills in 2007 had 24 sacks and a combined total of 38 turnovers. I have a feeling the reason the 2001 Bears reached #11 in scoring had a lot to to with them having extremely short fields for their offense to go to work on.

[Brandon]

Would they be a better offense if they were 10th in yardage and 18th in scoring?

 

Possibly, though perhaps not in every case. The ability to move the ball and keep the opposing offense on the sidelines does have its merits, even if those sustained drives are ending in field goals or punts, as opposed to going three and out.

[The Dean]

They were also 26th in total yardage that season.

 

 

If it's yards you are after, Jauron's Bears were #3 in passing yards in 1999. Would that be considered conservative?

 

So, my point is, Jauron's teams are TYPICALLY offensively conservative and low-scoring. But, not ALWAYS.

[Brandon]

If it's yards you are after, Jauron's Bears were #3 in passing yards in 1999. Would that be considered conservative?

 

So, my point is, Jauron's teams are TYPICALLY offensively conservative and low-scoring. But, not ALWAYS.

 

It really doesn't matter to me. I'm just pointing out that scoring totals for their 2001 season really don't tell the whole story.

[BillsVet]

Never?

 

In 2001 the Bears were #11 in scoring.

 

How about "rarely".

 

Yes, they were 11th in scoring, although 5 defensive touchdowns helped their final ranking (3 INT and 2 Fumbles returned)

Without those returns, Chicago is tied for 17th with NY Jets and their 308 pts.

 

A little quick research shows that Chicago's combined opponents' record in 2001 was 119-137. Their wins came against: 5-11 MIN twice, at 7-9 ATL, vs 7-9 ARI, @ 6-10 CIN, vs 12-4 SF, vs 7-9 CLE, 2-14 DET twice, 9-7 TB twice, @ 8-8 WAS, and vs 6-10 JAC.

 

With that weak of a schedule, 11th overall is low in my book.

[San-O]

If it's yards you are after, Jauron's Bears were #3 in passing yards in 1999. Would that be considered conservative?

 

So, my point is, Jauron's teams are TYPICALLY offensively conservative and low-scoring. But, not ALWAYS.

 

 

Jauron's teams typically lose.

[The Dean]

Jauron's teams typically lose.

 

 

That is certainly true, to date.