Gailey is no Jauron!

[HHURRICANE]

I have done alot of reading on Gailey and it at least appears that he can run an offense.

If he picks Fitz or Brohm I have enough faith that it will be the best player for the team.

How bad was Jauron?? Awful. The fact that the QBs are talking about schemes to disguise upcoming plays is scary. The Pop Warner comments are totalyy justified!!!

I am actually excited that we have a guy who can run a real offense. Maybe we'll see some exciting football?

[YardRat]

What if he picks Edwards?

[Mr. Miyagi]

My great grandmother could run a better offense than Jauron, and she's six foot under.

[BertSquirtgum]

jauron ran the team like it was a spa for women. no, gailey is no jauron.

[Mad Bomber]

I have done alot of reading on Gailey and it at least appears that he can run an offense.

If he picks Fitz or Brohm I have enough faith that it will be the best player for the team.

How bad was Jauron?? Awful. The fact that the QBs are talking about schemes to disguise upcoming plays is scary. The Pop Warner comments are totalyy justified!!!

I am actually excited that we have a guy who can run a real offense. Maybe we'll see some exciting football?
How did Jan Reimers get your password, HH? :D

[Mr. Pink]

It doesn't matter what scheme you run when you don't have talented players to execute it.

People still point to the vanilla offense as being the problem but apparently don't realize that the players we have couldn't even do that properly.

Now, if they are truly being asked to do more, what do you think is gonna happen?

They can't run a vanilla offense but will be able to run a complex offense?

We all saw what those players did in an attempt to run the no huddle offense.

[Goobylal]

I have done alot of reading on Gailey and it at least appears that he can run an offense.

If he picks Fitz or Brohm I have enough faith that it will be the best player for the team.

How bad was Jauron?? Awful. The fact that the QBs are talking about schemes to disguise upcoming plays is scary. The Pop Warner comments are totalyy justified!!!

I am actually excited that we have a guy who can run a real offense. Maybe we'll see some exciting football?
Hey, who is using HH's account without his permission? ;)

The more time passes and the more we learn, Jauron was a disaster from the beginning. I had hoped that his time in Chicago would have made him realize that his desired simplistic offense (he was roundly criticized for his offenses/OC's in Chicago) wouldn't cut it, but apparently that wasn't the case. And guys like Schonert and Demeco Ryans have admitted that it was an easy/"Pop Warner" offense. Having a real OC will help the offense out immensely. I only wish that, outside of a proven QB, they had a proven #2 WR (like TO, who is available but likely not coming back).

As for defense, the Tampa-2 became passe almost as soon as the Bills adopted it. The reliance on smaller, quicker players, led to a lot of 4th quarter collapses, thanks in large part to an anemic offense. I can't see the run defense being worse this year, but I do know that the players won't be as worn-out come the 4th quarter and will be better able to withstand the pounding, while practicing and running a 3-4 will help the offense learn how to deal with it, if not cause problems for opposing teams (versus the Tampa-2).

[BillsWin]

I would love nothing better than to see this team come out and just shock people with their play.

Miami went from 1-15 to 11-5.

I would hope the Bills could make at least the jump from 6-10 to 8-8. Maybe even 9-7.

That would be a successful season record in my opinion.

Jauron's offense lost us quite a few games last season, maybe Gailey can get something out of the three garbage quarterbacks we have.

[mayotm]

HH, just the other day, you posted that everybody you've talked to in Atlanta hated Gailey. Now you're excited about him?

[El Guapo]

A vanilla offense works, if you have the players (i.e. talent) with which to run it. The beauty of having great players is stepping up to the line and running a play the defense knows you are going to run, and then executing the play with positive results. It's easy, relatively speaking, to coach an offense like that.

A great OC will know his team's weak points and strengths and game plan around that. He must also take into account the strengths and weaknesses of the team he is playing that week. This is where I hope Gailey does a better job (actually, I don't think he could do worse). But, do we have so many weak points we can't compensate with schemes and play calling? That's the question I hope to see answered opening weekend.

[HHURRICANE]

HH, just the other day, you posted that everybody you've talked to in Atlanta hated Gailey. Now you're excited about him?

Him being hated in Atlanta is not my opinion. However, it's a fact that I posted.

It was in response to why he went so long without a job in the NFL and I speculated that maybe it was because of his stint with Georgia Tech and maybe teams viewed that negatively.

[HHURRICANE]

Chuck Knox came here in 1980 with a QB that was struggling (Joe Ferguson) and a brand new RB in Joe Cribbs. He had question marks at WR and I believe new players on defense.

We went to the playoffs that year when people were expecting 6-10.

Good coaches can do good work with crappy teams.

Bill Parcells coached a Dallas team to the playoffs, I beleive in his first season, with a drug abused QB.

[YardRat]

Knox actually came here in '78...He ended up drafting some solid players (Haslett, Smerlas) that were able to contribute significantly early, but also brought in some seasoned, proven vets (Villapiano, Robertson) and some decent players already on the roster (Freeman, Clark, Greene, Nelson).

[Goobylal]

A vanilla offense works, if you have the players (i.e. talent) with which to run it. The beauty of having great players is stepping up to the line and running a play the defense knows you are going to run, and then executing the play with positive results. It's easy, relatively speaking, to coach an offense like that.

A great OC will know his team's weak points and strengths and game plan around that. He must also take into account the strengths and weaknesses of the team he is playing that week. This is where I hope Gailey does a better job (actually, I don't think he could do worse). But, do we have so many weak points we can't compensate with schemes and play calling? That's the question I hope to see answered opening weekend.
I can assure you that no team (that is successful) uses a vanilla offense. The more disguising, if not trickery, you use, the more successful you are.

[HHURRICANE]

Knox actually came here in '78...He ended up drafting some solid players (Haslett, Smerlas) that were able to contribute significantly early, but also brought in some seasoned, proven vets (Villapiano, Robertson) and some decent players already on the roster (Freeman, Clark, Greene, Nelson).

You are correct. Didn't mean to imply that was his first year.

[psubills62]

It doesn't matter what scheme you run when you don't have talented players to execute it.

People still point to the vanilla offense as being the problem but apparently don't realize that the players we have couldn't even do that properly.

Now, if they are truly being asked to do more, what do you think is gonna happen?

They can't run a vanilla offense but will be able to run a complex offense?

We all saw what those players did in an attempt to run the no huddle offense.

Part of the reason the players "couldn't execute" a vanilla offense was BECAUSE it was vanilla. You don't think being predictable has anything to do with the opposing defenses stopping it over and over again?

Heck, put a freaking man in motion once in a while. Do a play-action pass. When the announcers can predict what play you're running exactly, of course it won't be executed well.

[TigerJ]

At the very least, I expect this to be an interesting year, and the Jauron comparisons are part of it. Clearly, Gailey has a plan. I think he knows how to hire assistants, though he came under some criticism for his tendency to hire a lot of Ga. Tech guys. It appears in retrospect that Jauron really didn't have very good judgement when it came to hiring assistant coaches on the offensive side of the line. He could not pick his offensive coordinators very well. He was 0 for 3 in his OC hirings. Granted, the last was an emergency situation, but that was brought about by his own earlier misjudgment. Gailey's experience says he has a better grasp of hiring defensive assistants than Jauron had of hiring offensive assistants.

[WeAreArthurMoates]

The biggest differance is as coordinators, Gailey has actually finished in the top while coordinating a position. Jauron's best ranking was 18th I believe, how the hell did every get a headcoaching job.

[tampabay25690]

I think Edwards is the QB going into opening day.

Edwards will look good in this offense...

[DMBcrew36]

It doesn't matter what scheme you run when you don't have talented players to execute it.

People still point to the vanilla offense as being the problem but apparently don't realize that the players we have couldn't even do that properly.

Now, if they are truly being asked to do more, what do you think is gonna happen?

They can't run a vanilla offense but will be able to run a complex offense?

We all saw what those players did in an attempt to run the no huddle offense.

I agree that the offense itself does not have enough talent to be anything special. The bar, however, is set so low that the removal of Jauron and installation of Gailey should hopefully provide a major overall upgrade, instantly. I don't like any of our QBs, but I have faith that whatever Gailey asks them to do, he will prepare them better than Jauron would to do it. I mean, all of the sentiment we've heard from players since the first OTAs is, "Wow, it's been a long time since we've had a real practice like this, where someone actually demanded things from us. I haven't practiced hard like this since college."

I hate giving benefit of doubt to the Bills organization, as such, because they truly do not deserve it, but it's really just more a knock on how bad Jauron was, than a compliment of faith to the Bills.

[Nighthawk]

Part of the reason the players "couldn't execute" a vanilla offense was BECAUSE it was vanilla. You don't think being predictable has anything to do with the opposing defenses stopping it over and over again?

Heck, put a freaking man in motion once in a while. Do a play-action pass. When the announcers can predict what play you're running exactly, of course it won't be executed well.

Don't even try with FTY...he is a broken record and doesn't understand that it takes good coaching to make an offense work. This offense has talent...now we need to see if a real HC can get something out of it.

[BertSquirtgum]

gailey will be good. all the haters can suck it. you know who you are. i don't even need to name names.

[psubills62]

Don't even try with FTY...he is a broken record and doesn't understand that it takes good coaching to make an offense work. This offense has talent...now we need to see if a real HC can get something out of it.

Yeah, I shouldn't have responded to him, as we've argued this multiple times now.

[ghz in pittsburgh]

I feel I had to speak for Jauron a bit here. It's universally fashionable to rip into a coach just fired because of losing. But we need a clear head. It's a cycle folks.

Kevin Gilbride was very much into complicated offense and he was successful at it. Mularkey learned his trade under Gailey and is well known for gadgets, sometimes genius offensive plays as well. We knew how they worked for the Bills.

Jauron, on the other hand, represents those who believe simple is better. Jimmy Johnson is a strong believer of this approach and won consistently with it.

I think it's not one scheme or style that wins in NFL, it depends on who you have in players and what your front office is able to get for coaches.

If you want to keep it simple, you better have better players. Conversely if you have better players, you want to keep it simple - why risk more twist and turns where you can beat opposition one on one most of the time. For JJ, it worked great in Dallas because he got great players. In Miami, it worked OK because he got good players. For Jauron, it worked to average because we got average players (7-9 to me is average). So he wanted that style, but he didn't get enough players suits that style. So it is justfiable to get fired for that. I just don't think it's wrong for him to want to have that style, especially the management bought into it when he was hired.

If you think you can disguise average players with complicated schemes, you may be able to succeed to a degree but at the other end of it, complicated schemes induce more breaking points. So far from what I hear, Gailey does not seem to banking on too much complications, but rather he's hammering on a few basic plays into his players while adding disguises to these plays. If I have to guess it, I'd say he will have a little success at the beginning because of the new factor (his plays executed by a particular group of players with certain skill sets). The oppositions will catch up by the mid-season, and then we'll see what kind of talent we have on hand.

[better days]

I feel I had to speak for Jauron a bit here. It's universally fashionable to rip into a coach just fired because of losing. But we need a clear head. It's a cycle folks.

Kevin Gilbride was very much into complicated offense and he was successful at it. Mularkey learned his trade under Gailey and is well known for gadgets, sometimes genius offensive plays as well. We knew how they worked for the Bills.

Jauron, on the other hand, represents those who believe simple is better. Jimmy Johnson is a strong believer of this approach and won consistently with it.

I think it's not one scheme or style that wins in NFL, it depends on who you have in players and what your front office is able to get for coaches.

If you want to keep it simple, you better have better players. Conversely if you have better players, you want to keep it simple - why risk more twist and turns where you can beat opposition one on one most of the time. For JJ, it worked great in Dallas because he got great players. In Miami, it worked OK because he got good players. For Jauron, it worked to average because we got average players (7-9 to me is average). So he wanted that style, but he didn't get enough players suits that style. So it is justfiable to get fired for that. I just don't think it's wrong for him to want to have that style, especially the management bought into it when he was hired.

If you think you can disguise average players with complicated schemes, you may be able to succeed to a degree but at the other end of it, complicated schemes induce more breaking points. So far from what I hear, Gailey does not seem to banking on too much complications, but rather he's hammering on a few basic plays into his players while adding disguises to these plays. If I have to guess it, I'd say he will have a little success at the beginning because of the new factor (his plays executed by a particular group of players with certain skill sets). The oppositions will catch up by the mid-season, and then we'll see what kind of talent we have on hand.

Jauron will be lucky to even be a DC again let alone a HC.

[Bufftp]

It doesn't matter what scheme you run when you don't have talented players to execute it.


It doesn't matter what talent you have if you don't have the coaching to coach them and the game plan for them to execute.

I think Jauron was so bad he made what talent we had look worse than it was.
I will be interested to see what we really have this year.

[TacklingDummy]

It doesn't matter what scheme you run when you don't have talented players to execute it.


No coach would succeed here with the QB's the Bills have on the roster.

[TacklingDummy]

It doesn't matter what talent you have if you don't have the coaching to coach them and the game plan for them to execute.


It doesn't matter what coach you have if you have players that don't perform and that lack the talent to execute the game plan.

There are many talented players that have made many bad coaches look good. There hasn't been any players who lack talent that made a coach look good.

[jamze132]

I miss Drew!

[X-Era]

I agree with TD.

In the cyclical world of being a Bills fan, how many years have we gotten our hopes up about a new scheme, coach, player, etc... only to see it not make the impact we had hoped for? Then, about mid-season, we see a major negative outcry.

If you don't have the players to make plays, I dont think it will matter all that much.

I dont expect much from this season, I dont think we have a solution at QB on this roster yet. And without it, I expect fair to poor results.

Dale Earnhardt Jr. can drive a go cart, but he wont be able to do 200 mph.

[Jan Reimers]

It doesn't matter what coach you have if you have players that don't perform and that lack the talent to execute the game plan.

There are many talented players that have made many bad coaches look good. There hasn't been any players who lack talent that made a coach look good.
Actually, Gailey has succeeded with worse. He got good production from a diverse cast of misfits, including Mike Tomczak, Jay Fiedler, Slash Stuart and Thigpen (forgot his first name already).

[X-Era]

It doesn't matter what talent you have if you don't have the coaching to coach them and the game plan for them to execute.

I think Jauron was so bad he made what talent we had look worse than it was.
I will be interested to see what we really have this year.

I agree with this too.

We have had bad coaching, and Jauron was certainly not very good. Gailey may raise the level of play and get some overachieving... but at some positions, like QB, I'm afraid it wont matter much.

[Mr. Pink]

Don't even try with FTY...he is a broken record and doesn't understand that it takes good coaching to make an offense work. This offense has talent...now we need to see if a real HC can get something out of it.


And you don't understand that it takes talent to make an offense work.

This team has as much talent as a 1st year expansion franchise and it's a rotating cycle year after year.

We don't build around any players. We get good players and then let them go to greener pastures. Then try to replace those guys with substandard talent. Pat Williams? Sam Adams? London Fletcher? Drew Bledsoe? Jason Peters? Eric Moulds? Willis McGahee? Antoine Winfield? Nate Clements? Hell we take marginal players and then replace them with guys worse. Trey Teague, Peerless Price. Mark Campbell. Takeo Spikes. Jim Leonhard.

There is no star. There's no player to build around. There's no QB. There's no tackles to protect said QB. There's a 9 million dollar WR who can run go routes though! Oh yeah and a defense where maybe 3 guys fit. We do have a top 5 punter though.

[Goobylal]

And you don't understand that it takes talent to make an offense work.

This team has as much talent as a 1st year expansion franchise and it's a rotating cycle year after year.

We don't build around any players. We get good players and then let them go to greener pastures. Then try to replace those guys with substandard talent. Pat Williams? Sam Adams? London Fletcher? Drew Bledsoe? Jason Peters? Eric Moulds? Willis McGahee? Antoine Winfield? Nate Clements? Hell we take marginal players and then replace them with guys worse. Trey Teague, Peerless Price. Mark Campbell. Takeo Spikes. Jim Leonhard.

There is no star. There's no player to build around. There's no QB. There's no tackles to protect said QB. There's a 9 million dollar WR who can run go routes though! Oh yeah and a defense where maybe 3 guys fit. We do have a top 5 punter though.
LOL! I guess Nighthawk wasn't too off the mark.

Sorry FTY, but the Bills have talent on offense. Evans, Lynch, Jackson, Spiller, Nelson, and Easley have talent. What the Bills have lacked is professional OC'ing. The interior of the O-line is good and should only be better with Wood and Levitre having a year under their belts. If Green can cut down on the penalties, he should be a major upgrade at RT. And Meredith has all the tools you look for in a LT. As for QB, that's the biggest question mark, possibly along with #2 WR, which is why I want the Bills to re-sign TO.

[Mr. Pink]

LOL! I guess Nighthawk wasn't too off the mark.

Sorry FTY, but the Bills have talent on offense. Evans, Lynch, Jackson, Spiller, Nelson, and Easley have talent. What the Bills have lacked is professional OC'ing. The interior of the O-line is good and should only be better with Wood and Levitre having a year under their belts. If Green can cut down on the penalties, he should be a major upgrade at RT. And Meredith has all the tools you look for in a LT. As for QB, that's the biggest question mark, possibly along with #2 WR, which is why I want the Bills to re-sign TO.


Evans is at best a 2 and likely a slot guy. He's a nice piece to the puzzle but he shouldn't be the guy. This team needs a bonafide 1.

Lynch is a dime a dozen average NFL RB who easily replaced. If he was so good as people here think we wouldn't have been drafting CJ Spiller. The sad part is we shouldn't have even bothered drafting Lynch in the first place.

Jackson while better than Lynch, we still drafted CJ Spiller.

Spiller is unproven.

Nelson is unproven and to be honest he didn't show anything last year that should make you think weapon! If you think Nelson is a talent, then you must think Hardy is too.

Easley? Is he the guy who's gonna get everyone hard now and forget about Stevie Johnson?

Even if we had all these weapons as some people think, we still have no QB to get them the ball and no O line to protect said QB.

[Turf]

When I saw Jauron on the sidelines at the end of his stint with his avaitor sunglasses on and his hoodie, he looked like the biggest charlatan I had ever seen, someone trying to look like a head coach. It was laughable and sad. The guy didn't have clue how to manage a game from the sidelines.
Its amazing to me how his teams win 7+ games, and almost beat some really good teams. I'm telling you the talent here isn't that bad and with Gailey we'll see that this year.

[Goobylal]

Evans is at best a 2 and likely a slot guy. He's a nice piece to the puzzle but he shouldn't be the guy. This team needs a bonafide 1.

Lynch is a dime a dozen average NFL RB who easily replaced. If he was so good as people here think we wouldn't have been drafting CJ Spiller. The sad part is we shouldn't have even bothered drafting Lynch in the first place.

Jackson while better than Lynch, we still drafted CJ Spiller.

Spiller is unproven.

Nelson is unproven and to be honest he didn't show anything last year that should make you think weapon! If you think Nelson is a talent, then you must think Hardy is too.

Easley? Is he the guy who's gonna get everyone hard now and forget about Stevie Johnson?

Even if we had all these weapons as some people think, we still have no QB to get them the ball and no O line to protect said QB.
Evans' 2006 proved that he's a #1 WR (and that was with Fairchild coordinating, JP throwing, and Peerless Price opposite him). His problem is that he's been stuck in horrible offenses almost since he arrived in Buffalo.

As for Nelson, the guy is 6'5" and 240# and runs in the 4.4's. Hardy had potential, but he hasn't played much because of injury, and might not ever reach his potential. And I was never that impressed with Steve Johnson. Easley looks to be a diamond in the rough with his size, speed, hands, blocking, and work ethic. It might take him some time to get up to speed, which again is why I'd like to see TO back.

As for RB, you need more than 1 good RB. Lynch is better than average and so too is Jackson. Spiller is a multi-dimensional threat and insurance for Lynch getting into trouble again or Jackson declining because he's 30 (although with few miles on him). And of course he's unproven, but he'll be a major talent for the Bills.

And the O-line should be decent to good, health-willing. Cutting Walker days before the season opener was a mistake of gigantic proportions, and Butler going down in game 2 basically killed the O-line as journeymen and rookies populated the tackle positions most of the season.

And as has been mentioned, Gailey has gotten more out of far less.

[Mr. Pink]

So is it really gonna take another season of having a bottom 5 offense for people to finally realize that the talent is very deficient?

Then again, you have to scapegoat someone and blame them for the problem.

Mularkey had the 7th best offense then the 24th and people were ready to run him out of town for being incompetent.

What was the difference? Competent QB vs Incompetent QB. What did we have the past 5 years? Incompetent QB. What do we still have today? Incompetent QB.

Without a competent QB, you don't do a hell of a lot of anything as an offense.

[Goobylal]

So is it really gonna take another season of having a bottom 5 offense for people to finally realize that the talent is very deficient?

Then again, you have to scapegoat someone and blame them for the problem.

Mularkey had the 7th best offense then the 24th and people were ready to run him out of town for being incompetent.

What was the difference? Competent QB vs Incompetent QB. What did we have the past 5 years? Incompetent QB. What do we still have today? Incompetent QB.

Without a competent QB, you don't do a hell of a lot of anything as an offense.
Mularkey wasn't run out of town because of the offense. He was run out of town because his team failed to beat the Steelers' backups in the final game of 2004, which would have gotten them into the playoffs. Followed-up by the awful 2005 season. And whose decision was it to start JP and get rid of Bledsoe?

As for QB'ing, the Jets made it to the AFCCG despite Sanchez. And the Bills figure to run the ball a lot anyway.

[Mr. Pink]

Mularkey wasn't run out of town because of the offense. He was run out of town because his team failed to beat the Steelers' backups in the final game of 2004, which would have gotten them into the playoffs. Followed-up by the awful 2005 season. And whose decision was it to start JP and get rid of Bledsoe?

As for QB'ing, the Jets made it to the AFCCG despite Sanchez. And the Bills figure to run the ball a lot anyway.


And the Jets had the best rushing offense in football. A better offensive line and one of the top, if not the top, defense in football.

So yeah, if we can get the top rushing offense in football and a top 3 defense, we can get to the playoffs too!!!

It's fine to be optimistic and all but damn I don't see how anyone can make that leap.

And it was Donahoes decision to start JP. Mularkey benched him. We would have been a borderline playoff team in 05 if Holcomb started the whole year or if Bledsoe was still around.

[Goobylal]

And the Jets had the best rushing offense in football. A better offensive line and one of the top, if not the top, defense in football.

So yeah, if we can get the top rushing offense in football and a top 3 defense, we can get to the playoffs too!!!

It's fine to be optimistic and all but damn I don't see how anyone can make that leap.

And it was Donahoes decision to start JP. Mularkey benched him. We would have been a borderline playoff team in 05 if Holcomb started the whole year or if Bledsoe was still around.
The Jets' defense was excellent, and it had to be for them to make the playoffs with a rookie QB who wasn't ready to run a full playbook. The Bills don't need to have a defense as dominant, although the secondary is one of the best, and they can certainly have a dominant run game. Plus they have a much better ST's.

And the Bills could have made the playoffs in 2006 with JP, if not for Robert Royal's spastic attempt to catch what was otherwise a routine TD reception (the way in which Royal tried to catch that ball makes me think he had money on the game), the Bills would have beaten the Titans in the penultimate game, and then cared enough to show up to play the Ravens the following weekend. And that was Jauron's first year.

[TacklingDummy]

And the Jets had the best rushing offense in football. A better offensive line and one of the top, if not the top, defense in football.

So yeah, if we can get the top rushing offense in football and a top 3 defense, we can get to the playoffs too!!!

It's easier to hide 1 flaw when you have all those other things.

The Bills are not just a good QB away from the playoffs.

That's not the coaches fault, it's the GM's.

[Mr. Pink]

It's easier to hide 1 flaw when you have all those other things.

The Bills are not just a good QB away from the playoffs.

That's not the coaches fault, it's the GM's.


I wasn't trying to imply that as of today they're a good QB away.

Honestly last year I think they were a good QB away from being a legitimate playoff team, not a championship team but a team that could make the playoffs.

Now, with new schemes on both offense and defense, we're a lot of pieces away.

[Goobylal]

I wasn't trying to imply that as of today they're a good QB away.

Honestly last year I think they were a good QB away from being a legitimate playoff team, not a championship team but a team that could make the playoffs.

Now, with new schemes on both offense and defense, we're a lot of pieces away.
Here's an interesting thread on teams that switched from the 4-3 to a hybrid or straight 3-4 defense:

http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=257327

It says that the teams improved in their 1st year of the switch. As for offense, that will only improve.

[TacklingDummy]

I wasn't trying to imply that as of today they're a good QB away.


I know you weren't.

I was just pointing out that the Bills lack talented players all over the field. No coach can change that.

[TacklingDummy]

It says that the teams improved in their 1st year of the switch. As for offense, that will only improve.
Couldn't get much worse.

[Mr. Pink]

Here's an interesting thread on teams that switched from the 4-3 to a hybrid or straight 3-4 defense:

http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=257327

It says that the teams improved in their 1st year of the switch. As for offense, that will only improve.


Although if you read Rex Ryans comments on it, without a dominant 2 gap NT, you're going to struggle heavily on the front.

We lack that dominant 2 gap NT.

If the NT can't swallow up blockers, then the ends are blocked easily and whoever the blitzing backer/s are also get blocked. Which if we play a man coverage, we're gonna get burned and gonna get burned big.

Other teams improved because they had a guy who could play that role in their front. NY had Kris Jenkins to make the transition. GB had Ryan Pickett. We have who? Basically equivalent of trying Ron Edwards at NT.

So basically we're looking at best a KC type improvement, if you even wanna call what their D did in 2009 an improvement. They did go from allowing 27.5 points per game to 26.5.

[Mr. Pink]

To add to the above...

If you don't have a dominant NT, then it only takes the Center to block him and guards can fire up field to block the ILB.

Which then leaves Whitner and George Wilson forced to stop running plays 6-8 yards upfield consistently.

[Goobylal]

Although if you read Rex Ryans comments on it, without a dominant 2 gap NT, you're going to struggle heavily on the front.

We lack that dominant 2 gap NT.

If the NT can't swallow up blockers, then the ends are blocked easily and whoever the blitzing backer/s are also get blocked. Which if we play a man coverage, we're gonna get burned and gonna get burned big.

Other teams improved because they had a guy who could play that role in their front. NY had Kris Jenkins to make the transition. GB had Ryan Pickett. We have who? Basically equivalent of trying Ron Edwards at NT.

So basically we're looking at best a KC type improvement, if you even wanna call what their D did in 2009 an improvement. They did go from allowing 27.5 points per game to 26.5.
The Ravens and Cowboys run 3-4's with guys the size of Williams. From what I recall, they play 1-gap NT, with the DE on the non-covered (by the NT) side shading more inside.