Chan must read Football Outsider Stats

by keysh67 on Aug 2, 2011 7:44 AM EDT

I just read an article from the folks at Football Outsiders entitled: "Formation Analysis: Number of WRs Part II"

They discovered that statistically most teams basically have very poor defensive performances against 4/5 receiver sets. I've been quite vocal against Chan's tendency to ignore the TE position in favor of 3-5 receiver sets. Now after reading this article I'm starting to think that he must be smarter than we think. It seems that he's onto something here.

Unfortunately out Defense did not fare well in this study finishing at #29. With all the defensive additions we've seen this year I am quite hopeful that we can drastically improve this stat. The great news is that if this tendency continues in 2011, we are poised to have a great year on offense because we have a great stable of receiving options and Chan seems intent on spreading out the field.

I can't wait for the start of the season!

Go Bills!!

Just another great fan opinion shared on the pages of BuffaloRumblings.com.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I agree

weve got a real shot to improve drastically this season. Im looking forward to this season more than ever!

by Lynchisin23 on Aug 2, 2011 8:54 AM EDT reply actions

I think a lot of pressure will be on Fitz by week# 3 the Patriots.

Spread offense, gunslinger QB, accuracy issues, adequate O-Line, short offseason. Fitz is going to be looked upon as a huge difference maker early on.

YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde

by VanScottM on Aug 2, 2011 9:46 AM EDT reply actions

Please consider a mind dump, Keysh

I’m guessing that most people scan the ‘recent fanposts’ along with the articles when they come to Rumblings. I doubt that very many people click the ‘all fanposts’ link with any regularity. With room for only 10ish fanposts in the ‘recent fanpost’ section, you might want to consolidate your thoughts into a single fanpost—and thus not drive other fanposts off of the front page. You’ve got a lot to say (and I, for one, generally find your fanposts interesting) so a mind dump may both allow you to get it all out there and let others get their thoughts across as well.

It can always get worse. Let me tell you how.

by Ron From NM on Aug 2, 2011 10:51 AM EDT reply actions

thats a good thought

but to defend keysh, these thoughts probably dont come all at the same time. its probably one good thought, then another a couple of days later. its not fair to ask him to hold his ideas and wait to post until he has “enough of them” on backlog

I may have scored a hundred points yesterday, but I scored a lot more off the court.

by Adam_K on Aug 2, 2011 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions

I think it’s fair.

Year two is upon us.

by Buffalo for Eternity on Aug 2, 2011 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions

I know Ron and I’ve done mind dumps in the past. I’ve just been so busy the past year that i’ve considerably cut down on my posts and I simply did not realize until the last post. Sorry if i inadvertently cluttered up our site, wasn’t my intention.

Rebuilding a team properly takes time and patience

by keysh67 on Aug 2, 2011 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Well if Chan reads it, he doesn't understand it.

The teams that are best against it are mostly playoff teams. The 4 and 5 wide receiver sets are great for beating on scrub defenses, but on teams that can bring pressure not so much.

Most interesting is look how much better the Pats and Jets are at defending 4 and 5 WR sets than 3 WR sets, no wonder we got spanked so hard by the jets twice and the pats in the rematch last year.

4 and 5 wr sets have their place against certain teams and personnel, but if we use it at as a base offense, we won’t be sniffing the playoffs anytime soon.

Girls use hair spray, Men don't.

DO YOURSELF A FAVOR AND GROW UP BY NOT USING HAIRSPRAY MALES!

Don't be a Paully!

by The Buffalo Kid on Aug 2, 2011 11:05 AM EDT reply actions

The 4 and 5 wide receiver sets are great for beating on scrub defenses, but on teams that can bring pressure not so much

not true

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2011/formation-analysis-empty-backfields

Buffalo, however, had just -3.7% DVOA. The Bills were also a bit of an aberration because they were the only team that used empty backfields more than eight percent of the time and didn’t make the playoffs.

then read down in the comments section for the answer to your rebuttal to the block quoted item above. :)

With an overall offensive DVOA of -9% and a pass offense DVOA of -5%, one could argue that going empty was the most successful unsuccessful thing that BUF did last year on offense. He’s a coach, not a magician

When you innovate, you've got to be prepared for everyone telling you you're nuts.

by J2 on Aug 2, 2011 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions

DVOA

On defense, a negative DVOA is good.
On offense a positive DVOA is good.

We used empty backfields more than any other team with 15.1% of plays, yet only ranked #19 in overall success.

By contrast, NE used empty backfields 9.9% of the time and ranked #1 in overall success

NO used empty backfields 9.6% and ranked #2 in overall success.

The article you give a link to says we weren’t very successful using it as witnessed in this quote J2

Buffalo. Yes, the team whose strongest position going into the season was running back used nobody in the backfield more than any other team. They weren’t particularly successful either.

Girls use hair spray, Men don't.

DO YOURSELF A FAVOR AND GROW UP BY NOT USING HAIRSPRAY MALES!

Don't be a Paully!

by The Buffalo Kid on Aug 2, 2011 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions

I never said our offense was successful – what I was trying to convey is that for our offense an empty backfield was the most successful thing we did on offense all year. As evidence by our DVOA between offense, empty sets and pass offense DVOA stats.

When you innovate, you've got to be prepared for everyone telling you you're nuts.

by J2 on Aug 2, 2011 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions

^^^^ This is right ^^^^^

We shouldn’t decided whether we run more empty sets based on if we can do it as well as Brady or Brees. We should decide based on whether its the best way to utilize our team. The DVOA’s say our offense wasn’t very good, but we were better in an empty set. For whatever its worth.

by greysquirrel on Aug 2, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions

The article was about defense buddy

I only used it to point out the fact that Chan seems to know that most defenses aren’t very good at defending 4-5 receiver sets, which is probably why he was using them so much.

We sucked because our defense could stop our own shadows and we were never able to establish a strong running game.

Rebuilding a team properly takes time and patience

by keysh67 on Aug 2, 2011 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions

I think that statistic could be very telling

All those teams that made the playoffs have franchise QB’s. If you’re going to run those formations so often, you better take advantage!

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Aug 2, 2011 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions

All those teams that made the playoffs have franchise QB’s.

it’s so telling how much those guys mean to a club – if we had one we’d be perennial playoff contenders. The rest of the roster is at a distant 2nd place to how important Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers etc… are to their clubs.

When you innovate, you've got to be prepared for everyone telling you you're nuts.

by J2 on Aug 2, 2011 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions

franchise qb = GOOOOD?

; ) who would have suspected such a radical idea? hahaha. all this said.. i don’t know that i would assume Chan has a specific resource in regards to what works in the NFL, i should hope as a head coach, they are reporting on knowledge these guys have- which is why these stats exist in the first place. that said- i am a huge fan of a singleback 3wr 1te set as Peyton has consistently employed in the NFL, because of some of the personnel match ups it creates. if only we had a dallas clark, because we are definitely better in terms of RBs (i take freddie and CJ over Addai and brown any day) and with a FRANCHISE QB we have WRs. We have them with Fitz, so i can only imagine what Philip Rivers/Aaron Rodgers (etc) would do for our offense

by ThaRealTruth on Aug 2, 2011 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions

they are reporting on knowledge these guys have- which is why these stats exist in the first place.

they meaning the resource is reporting on a coaches knowledge, moreso than the coaches are using their reporting. hard to say, but i HOPE he already knows what is effective… since we are paying him to.

by ThaRealTruth on Aug 2, 2011 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Not only did they have franchise QB's

they also had pretty good tight end’s as well. Maybe all aren’t pro bowlers or superstars but they are certainly above average. Green Bay had Finley (before he got injured), Philly had Celek, New Orleans had Shockey, Seattle had Carlson, Jets had Keller, Indy had Clark and even Tamme showed some good upside, Baltimore had Heap, KC had Tony Moeaki (was pretty good for a rookie on a run first offense), New England had their 2 stellar rookies, Pittsburgh had Miller, Atlanta had Tony G, and Chicago had Olsen.

Out of those 12 playoff teams most if not all have above average-good tight ends. I’m not saying that to be a playoff team you HAVE to have a good tight end, but it certainly doesn’t hurt (especially in the redzone!!) and they seem to help push their teams into the playoffs. Unfortunately our Bills don’t have a franchise QB or a franchise TE and it’s really hurting our chances.

"I promise you, ... When I come back, I'm going to be like a mad dog in a meat house." -Takeo Spikes

by panekattack on Aug 3, 2011 2:42 AM EDT up reply actions

First of all this article is about Defense against 4/5 receiver sets, it had nothing to do with offense.

I was trying to imply that Chan is smart to use formations that are seemingly difficult to defend (as per this article).

Finally, I would like a TE too but this article really has nothing to do at all with TEs!! 4/5 receiver formations automatically implies no TE :
5 receivers+5 linemen+QB=11
4 receivers+5 linemen+QB+RB=11

Rebuilding a team properly takes time and patience

by keysh67 on Aug 3, 2011 6:20 AM EDT up reply actions

I got that

I was just saying it isn’t something that the Bills should just go all in on and bypass taking a TE in the future because defending against 5 WR’s is harder than not. I know you’re point was about defense which was precisely why I didn’t put it as a comment, but as a reply to K who had made a comment about how all those team’s had a franchise QB.

"I promise you, ... When I come back, I'm going to be like a mad dog in a meat house." -Takeo Spikes

by panekattack on Aug 4, 2011 3:50 AM EDT up reply actions

Believe me it makes me mad that we’ve ignored the TE position for so long! If you’ve been around for a while you’ll know that I’ve been screaming for TE help for a loooooong time. I was so vocal the year Pettigrew got drafted, I wanted us to draft him so bad. I knew he’d be special and sure enough he’s well on his way!

For the record I love a balanced attack with lots of power running up the middle, the Bill Parcells way. So these 4/5 receiver formations are not my preference but I can’t deny that they seem to work and more importantly these stats from FO seem to confirm it.

Rebuilding a team properly takes time and patience

by keysh67 on Aug 4, 2011 6:22 AM EDT up reply actions

I hear ya

sometimes it seems us fans know a bit more than the guys who get paid to make the decisions. It seems we’re looking to use more 4 and 5 WR formations again this year given the fact we brought back the same guys, signed Brad Smith and also drafted a rookie RB who is pretty good at catching the ball too (maybe a slot WR in some formations). We’re so overloaded at WR and so thin at TE it makes me a bit worried.

"I promise you, ... When I come back, I'm going to be like a mad dog in a meat house." -Takeo Spikes

by panekattack on Aug 4, 2011 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions

In their best offensive game last year ...

…against the Bengals, the Bills were in 5WR formation thirteen times; they gained 6.38 yards per play, including two TD passes (28 yds and 11 yds).

They ran it seven times on 1st down, five times on 2nd down, and once on third-and-2 (incomplete to Evans).

Fitz went 7/12 for 83 yards; there was double-reverse to Donald Jones. Jones also caught three passes (including two screens, one for a 28-yard touchdown).

In the win against Miami, they ran it 7 times (6 passes, 1 Fitz scramble), and only gained a total of 27 yards from that formation (3.85 per play). Fitz went 4-for-6. It seems like Donald Jones and F. Jackson were the big targets from that formation in those games. They did a lot of screens, curls and similar short passes from that formation.

Ironically, according to Football Outsiders, CIN’s (14th) pass defense was actually better than MIA’s (23rd), when accounting for strength of schedule. I don’t know what any of this means, but there it is.

by williamherbert on Aug 2, 2011 10:47 PM EDT reply actions