20 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

There’s probably some truth to this, imo.

And the winning run by Hurts was in part caused by Swift motioning behind the three wideouts. Buffalo sold out to that side.

23 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Looks like it was the other guy that pushed the fan. Interesting. 

As for the fan, yea he's probably drunk and asking for trouble, but the players need to be smarter than to get baited into this type of nonsense. I wonder if both players get fined now..

They should.   The fan stayed where the fan was supposed to be.  They are the ones that came over to him, which escalated the situation, and the player, not the fan, is the one who made it physical.   There are security there, let them deal with it.  Talk to security, don't engage the fan.  

Screens and QB draws can be like attempts to convert 4th and 5 at midfield. Coach looks great when they work out, and gets absolutely killed for it when they don't. In the same vein, those cover-2 calls by Desai look real bad when you've got Bradberry covering grass as Allen drops in a pass over his head between him and Ghost, but then few people realize the exact same play call netted us a huge turnover by the exact same player people were bashing earlier in the game. 

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

They should.   The fan stayed where the fan was supposed to be.  They are the ones that came over to him, which escalated the situation, and the player, not the fan, is the one who made it physical.   There are security there, let them deal with it.  Talk to security, don't engage the fan.  

Agreed 100%

8 hours ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

I'm genuinely curious how they come up with the 20.9%. It sounds so authoritative yet to me it seems like it's plucked out of thin air. Quick research leads me to the following. Over the past ten years (all NFL games since 2013 prior to Sunday), a 59 yard field goal has been attempted 26 times. It's been made 12 times. Nearly half of the time. Granted they're being attempted by guys who presumably have better than average skill or else they wouldn't be giving them the opportunity in the first place. So that may skew things slightly.

Okay, so I guess they're factoring in the grass surface, maybe the temperature, the wet field, and the fact that it is also raining. But to me it just seems like it's made up.

Incidentally I have a 59 yarder as being about a 38% chance. Normal conditions etcetera.

Well gut feeling says field goals of all distances made in that weather outdoors come up way short of the average made overall in benign conditions, second thing is I guess last kick to save the game field goals are no good a lot more often than mid game scoring field goals, statistically you can measure that stuff and although there'll always be a whiff of subjectivity to it, it'll be either accurate enough in most conditions as to make no odds, or so hard to measure the accuracy that no one ever bothers..

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

Screens and QB draws can be like attempts to convert 4th and 5 at midfield. Coach looks great when they work out, and gets absolutely killed for it when they don't. In the same vein, those cover-2 calls by Desai look real bad when you've got Bradberry covering grass as Allen drops in a pass over his head between him and Ghost, but then few people realize the exact same play call netted us a huge turnover by the exact same player people were bashing earlier in the game. 

My biggest issue is just the timing of when they're called usually. We've forfeited a good amount of drives to throw the screens in down and long situations just to punt them ball right back to the other team after getting the ball back in critical spots. It seems like in general when we're up, if we get no gain or a loss on 1st down the playcalling goes insanely conservative.

 

 

6 minutes ago, bitbased said:

My biggest issue is just the timing of when they're called usually. We've forfeited a good amount of drives to throw the screens in down and long situations just to punt them ball right back to the other team after getting the ball back in critical spots. It seems like in general when we're up, if we get no gain or a loss on 1st down the playcalling goes insanely conservative.

For sure, they need to be used situationally and sparingly. Sometimes it just seems BJ doesn't know what to call and uses them at odd times or overuses them too early.

20 minutes ago, just relax said:

And the winning run by Hurts was in part caused by Swift motioning behind the three wideouts. Buffalo sold out to that side.

I think it was more of a miscommunication than selling out to stop the screen. Combine that with a blitz and it was game over. 

 

1 hour ago, judunno said:

For sure... if he really wanted him he would have pounced. It's not like we have world beaters at LB.

When do we ever pounce at LB. We never do no matter the need. 

1 hour ago, bitbased said:

My biggest issue is just the timing of when they're called usually. We've forfeited a good amount of drives to throw the screens in down and long situations just to punt them ball right back to the other team after getting the ball back in critical spots. It seems like in general when we're up, if we get no gain or a loss on 1st down the playcalling goes insanely conservative.

A screen is a fine play to have in your pocket when you need to catch a defense off guard, the problem with our screen game is we might as well have a 20 foot tall neon sign in both end zones flashing "WE'RE ABOUT TO RUN A WR SCREEN" a lot of our offensive success is because the actual play that we run is one of 2 or 3 options on any give snap, but you can always see one of our screens coming before the ball is snapped, and hey presto there's the ball arriving with Smitty at the same time as the linebacker, the nickel corner and the Safety arrive at Smitty.

The RB screen is a bit better disguised but honestly not much.  It's probably too late to change it and get the offense running it effectively but they really really need to better disguise when they're setting up throws in the flat

50 minutes ago, just relax said:

The TD pass to Smith was BECAUSE we ran all those screens.

And those 5 failed drives before hand was because we threw 5 Wr screens that all died behind or at the LOS

29 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

So I keep hearing this narrative about Josh Allen and I’m not sure I understand it. So Romo kept saying (and it’s become a real narrative in the NFL) that Allen just needs to take what the defense gives him and not turn the ball over. Now firstly, of course you don’t want him to turn the ball over so that’s obvious. But surely his arm talent is what makes him potentially so dangerous? And if you take that away from him you just have a game manager?

He plays like 2020 Wentz sometimes. You don’t want him to be a game manager but you want him to be less reckless and rein it in instead of thinking you can force the ball where you want it. 

27 minutes ago, just relax said:

And the winning run by Hurts was in part caused by Swift motioning behind the three wideouts. Buffalo sold out to that side.

They sold out with ZERO covverage, they went to MAN across the board .

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

He plays like 2020 Wentz sometimes. You don’t want him to be a game manager but you want him to be less reckless and rein it in instead of thinking you can force the ball where you want it. 

very good analogy. Allen who is a great QB- is put into positions, by his defense etc where he feels like has to be the Hero, he HAS to make the play. 

 

That in effect is what became of Wentz, when our Oline and Receiving Talent went down hill.  When HE HAD to be the hero. 

 

 

12 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

*gets interrupted by football game*

 

Please understand that many of the screens you see are part of an RPO.  Jalen is deciding whether to hand off or throw wide based on what he sees pre- and/or post-snap.

Further, much of the play calling you see in the first quarter is scripted.  These are the plays they want to run in order to learn about how the defense will react to them.  It helps them set up successful plays later in the game, such as the TD to Smith and the game-winner by Hurts.

8 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

very good analogy. Allen who is a great QB- is put into positions, by his defense etc where he feels like has to be the Hero, he HAS to make the play. 

 

That in effect is what became of Wentz, when our Oline and Receiving Talent went down hill.  When HE HAD to be the hero. 

 

 

Did Wentz take our Oline and receiving talent to the next 2 teams where HE HAD to be the hero? Hero ball with Wentz and Allen begins and ends with their head. "I'm gonna play my style" blah blah blah. It makes them flawed players because of how they approaches the game, not because of the circumstance of the team or game. This looked a lot better when they were surrounded by a SB winning level of talent but eventually, how they approach the game, and some injury baggage that reduced the hero effectiveness in Wentz's case, brought them to where they are.

Vick, Allen, Wentz, Newton, etc. are limited in their success because they are always playing with 2 play calls. The one the coach is trying to execute within the game plan and their ever present hero play. Its a flaw. Being coachable and following a game plan is a strength at QB that wins out over athletic elitism. Last night, with Fields, carrying the ball with two hands and fumbling when sacked. That fella is uncoachable and is also an elite athlete -- different physicality than Wentz but the same flaw. Hurts often ends up being a hero but he doesn't play hero ball and appears to be exceptionably coachable. 

1 minute ago, Next_Up said:

Did Wentz take our Oline and receiving talent to the next 2 teams where HE HAD to be the hero? Hero ball with Wentz and Allen begins and ends with their head. "I'm gonna play my style" blah blah blah. It makes them flawed players because of how they approaches the game, not because of the circumstance of the team or game. This looked a lot better when they were surrounded by a SB winning level of talent but eventually, how they approach the game, and some injury baggage that reduced the hero effectiveness in Wentz's case, brought them to where they are.

Vick, Allen, Wentz, Newton, etc. are limited in their success because they are always playing with 2 play calls. The one the coach is trying to execute within the game plan and their ever present hero play. Its a flaw. Being coachable and following a game plan is a strength at QB that wins out over athletic elitism. Last night, with Fields, carrying the ball with two hands and fumbling when sacked. That fella is uncoachable and is also an elite athlete -- different physicality than Wentz but the same flaw. Hurts often ends up being a hero but he doesn't play hero ball and appears to be exceptionably coachable. 

wont argue that the problem lies with them.  But will state that when you force young QB's into that position, it's awfully hard to get them out of it. 

 

The man must have clones, he goes everywhere & never gets time off.

 

24 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

They sold out with ZERO coverage, they went to MAN across the board .

True.  But if you look at the replay, the motion displaced BOTH safeties, leaving the second level on the left side wide open.

 

9 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Please understand that many of the screens you see are part of an RPO.  Jalen is deciding whether to hand off or throw wide based on what he sees pre- and/or post-snap.

Further, much of the play calling you see in the first quarter is scripted.  These are the plays they want to run in order to learn about how the defense will react to them.  It helps them set up successful plays later in the game, such as the TD to Smith and the game-winner by Hurts.

1) yes they are part of the RPO's... so call a different RPO, that one doesn't work, stop calling that one. 

2) I agree the scripted play calls are also not working., I brought that up severa times. What changes in the second half is we finally get away from the doomed game plan we brought into the game.

We have two issues here-

A) the game plans that are developed prior to the game are flawed. (likely because we are predictible)     

 B) it takes too long to recognize how poorly our predetermined game plan is, and make changes. 

2 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

True.  But if you look at the replay, the motion displaced BOTH safeties, leaving the second level on the left side wide open.

 

As the college spygate stuff was unfolding, I had far too many conversations with Michigan fans who tried to claim the advantage gained by knowing the other team's signals is minimal. These types of breakdowns prove exactly how laughably false that assertion is. Even knowing the other team's formation ahead of time can be a huge tell and significantly influence the type of play that utlimately gets called in. There's no chance on earth Buffalo calls the same blitz if they knew the play has Swift pre-snap motion to the right, let alone having full knowldege that it's a screen / draw option.

2 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

1) yes they are part of the RPO's... so call a different RPO, that one doesn't work, stop calling that one. 

2) I agree the scripted play calls are also not working., I brought that up severa times. What changes in the second half is we finally get away from the doomed game plan we brought into the game.

We have two issues here-

A) the game plans that are developed prior to the game are flawed. (likely because we are predictible)     

 B) it takes too long to recognize how poorly our predetermined game plan is, and make changes. 

OR, plays are called to set up other plays. Buffalo is not going to react to allow Swift to get wide open for a TD or Jalen to have a walk-in TD if we don't run those screens. They saved the counters to the WR screens for critical moments. They invested in those moments by calling all those screens. This is not a difficult concept.