Oh my God. Best FanPost EVER. Rec rec rec rec rec

Your key point – it was the refusal to pull McGee, NOT the scheme, that the coaches should be blamed for – is spot-on.

I think Bills fans, used to the attacking 3-4 the team employed in the glory years and the aggressive (yet crappy) defense Gregg Williams installed, see a zone defense as letting the action come to them. I disagree and will always disagree, and I think you’re spot on in this analysis.

Please rec this FanPost, Rumblers.

The entire game I wasn’t saying Fewell was making mistakes. It was clearly on McGee not doing his job against Ginn. On the first play of the game he didn’t even stick his arm up to try and swat the ball. THat is houw bad he got beat on that play AND Ginn had to stop and jump in the air to get the ball that was underthrown. After that first play I expected McKelvin to be in there the next series at the latest but it never happened and we still haven’t heard why. Curious.

Remember a few years ago when people were ragging on the Colts D? They would bend and not break – not give up the big plays and the TDs. The Bills D is similar in that it is designed to not give up the big play. Our D should be better then that Colts D, though, since we have Stroud in the middle of the line. Those Colts won a Super Bowl with that D playing well down the stretch and their out of this world offense. It’s not a stretch to think the Bills can do well with, IMO, a better defense than they had and a capable offense.

you make an awful lot of sense here, kaisertown. I still think Fewell should put in some press coverage, but I agree that it doesn’t matter what scheme you run if one of your starters at CB is limping around the field on a gimpy knee.

Great post with the stat meat to back it up.

The Bills corners playing off Dallas’ WR’s with little time left and giving up the sidelines
last year was folly. But on the whole, the scheme and strategy behind it are sound.
Last years Pats aside, no team is able to consistently drive 70 plus yards for TD’s against a decent defense.

Many times, opinions of good and bad are based on whether a particular scheme or strategy succeeded at a given time. IE – Sundays 3 straight Bills runs from 1st down inside the 5. If it succeeds, its genius! “We muscled up and imposed our will on them!”
If it doesn’t succeed, it sucks! “Fairchild calls! Cowards! Why didn’t they throw to Hardy!”

If Edwards finds Evans on a fly pattern for a 98 yard TD its Genius playcalling – if it works. And I wouldn’t have been shocked at all if it had.
If it fails, as it did Sunday, all of a sudden Turk is a maroon.

Same might be said in regard to the wringing of hands and nashing of teeth over Lynch’s perceived inadequate number of carries. If he’s fresh and strong in Denver and at home against the Pats late in the season…GENIUS!

Problem is, there are many variables with 11 guys to create success. And as Kaiser has pointed out so well, even the injury hampered execution of one guy can spoil the meal.

We’ve seen more success than failure to this point. Long season. Jauron apparently fails to twitter some posters pelvises by not acting the ass and screaming, yelling and careening up and down the sideline doing a lame Cowher or Jimmy Johnson impersonation, spitting all over the zip code. Rest assured, the man is not stupid just because he doesn’t act it.

I cannot fathom how anyone can think that a busted up McGee is anymore help to our D than a 100% healthy though still wet behind the ears rookie in McKelvin. At least McKelvin can drive on the ball and move with the opponent, McGee couldn’t do that and admited as much. I MUST put that on the HC and DC for not making that switch.

Yes the Tampa 2 is setup up to make the other team beat us, and hopefully while trying to beat us they make a mistake, but we still are NOT a real tampa 2 team. Yes yes, this is Fewell’s version blah blah blah. Regardless, the lack of a pass rush from our standard 4 man set and an sometimes woefully ineffective blitz package hurts us immensely when running this style of D.

And yes, it is a bend but don’t break D, and yes it does seem to work for a while, but I cannot fathom how letting our opponents hold the ball for 5+minutes at a stretch, and playing our CBs 8 yards off the ball on 2nd and 5 or 3rd and 3 situations is a real benefit when we cannot rush the opposing passer? Our D wears down, and without a ground game holding the ball (which ours was on Sun,) our D will wear down and then we see big plays happen.

Good post, but I cannot agree with all of it.

But i would like to see our D a bit more aggressive. It’s just that simple. I just don’t understand the cushion our corners seem to be required to give (scheme) versus a bit bit more press action. When you are dealing with choreographed timing routes, a lil’ bump (i feel) would be a bit more disruptive for the opposing O. Although for the most part, it works, but I feel like like we are almost settling at times. I don’t want us to be just a good or sufficient D, i want our guys to dominate. We have some really good players defense and I wonder at times if it holds them back a bit….or maybe we don’t quite have all the peices to the puzzel yet. i don’t know. my foot ball eye is syill developing to really see the X’s and O’s, and i am on my couch or a bar stool (or trying not to fall off one) on Sundays, but that’s how I see it.

You what did grind my gears about that game IS why the hell was McGee still out there on Sunday? Is it lack of confidence in the other player’s? All I say is thank god for Greer. i really hope we can keep him along with a healthy McGee around for a bit.

Lastley, as evident in our last 3 games, (even the SD W) is it simply plausible that teams have enough tape on us to attack our weaknesses ie soft coverage? Scary thought with the New York Bretts coming up this week….

How is it now the scheme’s fault that McGee was still 5 yards behind Ginn on the first play after we took the 16-7 lead and he took off for 60+ yards? Sure, the safety (Whitner) was out of position, but McGee was still giving a cushion a good 20 yards downfield. Unless McGee simply had no business on the field (maybe) or just didn’t do what he was supposed to, then the scheme had him that far behind Ginn allowing him free reign up the field on the post pattern. Again, I don’t see how that’s not a bad play call.

If McGee isn’t doing what he is supposed to do, or worse can’t do what he’s supposed to do, why the heck is he out there? The Miami game wasn’t just an aberration, we’ve been seeing our CB’s getting beat on slants and other quick routes because of the cushion they are forced to give. I don’t know how anyone can’t hate that.

Again, this isn’t some one time thing. A lot of us have been preaching about how much we hate having our CB’s so far off the line. And I thought that the cover 2 was designed to limit deep plays because the safeties play back, not the CB’s…?

Nice chess analogy, but football isn’t chess. You can’t sit back and play conservatively all the time like Jauron does, and I sort of think in the back of his mind, it is due to his fear of getting beat by big plays. This is EXACTLY why we can’t beat good teams. The Jauron mindset is to play efficient, limit our mistakes and wait for the opposition to make mistakes on their own. At least it appears that way. This works fine against the crappier teams in the league, but against teams who are good and don’t commit many mistakes, or are good enough to overcome them, we just can’t get it done.

I just don’t see how we can ever truly challenge for a title without being more aggressive and force teams into mistakes. I just don’t agree with the current mentality.

I’m not sure what you are really trying to prove with those stats. We aren’t talking about the Tom Brady Pats or the 2006 Peyton Manning Colts passing games here. This was the Dolphins and Chad Pennington, a guy who lives on the underneath stuff. Of course those guys aren’t going to put up huge numbers against us. Yeah, we held them below their season averages, but that’s mostly because Ginn was busy impregnating McGee on the intermediate routes…at least IMO. If Camarillo or Bess took Ginn’s spot, I’m sure they’d have put up nice numbers too.

Mostly though, the fact that McGee was playing so far off the line is what hurt the most. I really can’t see how that isn’t schematic if he was indeed following the playcall!!

That’s a very good post, but I have to disagree with the premise.

Thanks for the recs. It’s pretty cool to have a fanpost that makes it to the “recommended” section.

Let me first say, that I agree with some of you that the Bills could play their corners closer to the line in some situations without negative effects. Just putting the corners 3 or 4 yards of the line instead of 7 or 8 could make a positive difference, especially on third and short. It definitely bothers me too when its a 3rd and 3 situation and the Bills line their corners up 8 yards off the line and there is some little slant or out that goes for exactly 3 yards. Its as frustrating as it gets.

I didn’t go into why the Bills do keep their corners off the line scheme-wise, but there are reasons other than preventing the deep ball. The biggest advantage is that the corners get to stay in their backpedal longer before turning and running with the corner. This allows them to look forward at the quarterback and they can get much better reads on whether the play is a run or pass, where the QB might be going with the football and what routes the WRs might be running. It is a huge advantage for our corners to have the vantage point that they get while being 7-8 yards downfield as opposed to being worried about just jamming the corner and trying not to get beat. I’m not sure how pressing the WRs at the line could create more turnovers. It seems like the best way for a corner to jump a route is to sit back and watch his WR run every route all day until they get a good feel for what is coming next.

Regardless, the lack of a pass rush from our standard 4 man set and an sometimes woefully ineffective blitz package hurts us immensely when running this style of D. – WABillsfan

 I actually think our pathetic lack of pass rush is exactly why we have to run this style of cover 1 and cover 2. A good pass rush doesn’t typically impact short routes. The goal of a pass rush (other than to get sacks) is to force the QB to use hot reads, check downs and basically throw a short pass. That is why you see teams blitzing on third and long sometimes, the goal isn’t to get a sack, but to force a quick throw short of the first down. A good pass rush forces teams to use shorter routes that develop quicker. If the Bills use too much press coverage and don’t get the necessary pass rush, teams can call deep routes and our corners will eventually get burnt while trying to jam at the line.

but we still are NOT a real tampa 2 team. – WABillsfan

I couldn’t agree more. A real tampa two team gets good pressure from the front four and as a result can jam at the line. The pass rush makes it tough for teams to throw deep and the corners effectively take away the short routes. The two have to work in a symbiotic way though, otherwise the whole plan falls apart. That is why the Bills need to line their guys up where they do. If we had a pass rush, I would be all for a physical scheme that hits WRs at the line, but it just wouldn’t work with the guys we have right now.

but I cannot fathom how letting our opponents hold the ball for 5+minutes at a stretch – WABillsfan

The Bills don’t just sit back and “let” teams have these long slow drives. The Bills have 124 first downs this year. Our opponents have 123 first downs and yet the Bills are winning the time off possesion battle by about 2 minutes per game. I don’t think the Bills give up any more slow methodical scoring drives than any other team in the league does.

our D will wear down and then we see big plays happen. – WABillsfan

The Bills have allowed the third least plays of 20+ yards in the entire league. What long plays are you talking about? I’m starting to think the problem here isn’t with Buffalo’s scheme, but rather our expectations of what this group is capable of doing.

But i would like to see our D a bit more aggressive. – MonStarr_716

Ideally, I would too, but I just don’t think the Bills have the personel on D, to be any more aggressive than they are right now. And aggressive is an interesting way to describe what our defense isn’t. You can look at the scheme as if the Bills just sit back and wait, but I prefer to look at it like the Bills are dictating the play on the field. By taking away the deep ball, opposing offenses are forced to do exactly what we want them to do.

We have some really good players on defense and I wonder at times if it holds them back a bit….or maybe we don’t quite have all the peices to the puzzel yet. – MonStarr_716

I definitely think it is the latter. We lack pass rushers and our linebackers and safeties are just OK in coverage. The Bills really rely on the corners to cover a lot of ground in our current scheme and I think putting them up on the line to bump really stretches the zones for our other players, linebackers in particular. Poz is one guy who I hate to call out, but he is pretty mediocre in coverage and while I think he is getting better, I wouldn’t rely on him at all to pick up a WR going across the middle who beat a CB up at the line of scrimmage. Another double digit sack guy across from Schobel as well as another year or two of practice and development from the linebackers and safeties and this team might be able to use some more full fledged cover 2 philosophies.

what did grind my gears about that game IS why the hell was McGee still out there on Sunday? – MonStarr_716

I can’t say enough how much I share everyone’s frustration that McGee was left in that game. I really believe it was the difference between winning and losing.

Lastley, as evident in our last 3 games, (even the SD W) is it simply plausible that teams have enough tape on us to attack our weaknesses ie soft coverage? Scary thought with the New York Bretts coming up this week…. – MonStarr_716

I’ll equate the Bills D, to the 2-3 zone that Syracuse basketball employs. I’m sure this will go over a lot of people’s heads, but I know there are a lot of die-hard Cuse fans around here like myself. Everybody knows there is a soft spot in the middle of the zone, around the free throw line. Some teams find ways to exploit it, others try to get into those empty areas and fail. Every scheme has a weakness, if there was a flawless plan out there, everyone would be doing the same thing. Favre is the exact kind of guy who you want to use a conservative scheme against though. He has no problems throwing into double coverage or trying to force the ball into little holes as they are closing. If Favre comes out and actually goes through his progressions quick enough to kill us with slants and outs, I will be shocked.

Nice chess analogy, but football isn’t chess. – Kurupt

True, but it sure does get used as an analogy quite often. I think there are a number of reasons for that.

This works fine against the crappier teams in the league, but against teams who are good and don’t commit many mistakes, or are good enough to overcome them, we just can’t get it done. – Kurupt

I’ve got a theory on that. Maybe we just aren’t as good as the best teams in the league. Maybe we just lose sometimes because our players don’t play as well as the guys on the other sideline. Considering that San Diego has one of the best passing attacks in the league and we pretty much shut Rivers down, I’m not sure I buy your “our scheme prevents us from beating the best teams” theory anyways. Buffalo has played two of its best defensive games against SD and JAX, while Trent Green and STL had as much success as anyone we’ve faced (other than Ted Ginn) at throwing the ball down the field and making big plays. Has there been any correlation between the quality of opponent we face and how well they have thrown the ball this season? I havn’t seen anything more than what you would expect. Maybe better teams do better against us, because they are better teams. That is what makes them better teams.

This was the Dolphins and Chad Pennington, a guy who lives on the underneath stuff. – Kurupt

It wasn’t just that we held their players below their season averages. It was that we pretty much shut down the Pennington short game. He averaged 6.3 yards per pass attempt to passes not thrown at Ted Ginn which is 2.2 yards less than his current average. 6.3 yards per attempt would rank 28th out of the 35 QBs who have enough pass attempts to qualify (we’re talking about the Ryan Fitzpatricks, Dan Orlovskys and Seneca Wallaces of the world who average less). Stopping the short stuff works if it really does lead to taking away the deep stuff. And I’m not even talking deep, I’m talking 10+ yard type completions. Pennington only completed 3 passes over 10 yards all game that weren’t thrown to Ginn. One to each tight end and one to Ricky Williams. 6 of Ginn’s 7 catches went for 10 or more yards. If McGee keeps Ginn in check, the Bills win this game and nobody is talking about Fewell because we are 6-1.

Mostly though, the fact that McGee was playing so far off the line is what hurt the most. I really can’t see how that isn’t schematic if he was indeed following the playcall!! – Kurupt

Mostly what Brian said. But can you honestly watch that game and not think there is something wrong with McGee? In his Bills tenure he has never played half that bad and that alone leads to me realize that he shouldn’t have been in the game.

Cover 2: How is it played?

In Cover 2, it is obvious that the safeties have a tremendous burden and a lot of field to cover. They must get help from the underneath coverage to keep receivers from outnumbering them in the deep zones. There are two critical techniques that can help the safeties. First, the corners must collide with the receivers and flatten out their routes to keep them from running outside freely, which would stretch the safeties. If the wide receivers release unmolested, it is almost impossible for the safeties to get enough width quickly enough to defend the deep pass. The corners are responsible for their outside fifths, which is a shallow area, but they must sink with the receiver until another receiver threatens their zone.