The Defensive Problem

[Throne Logic]

Position by position, the Bills appear very strong on defense. They even ranked high among NFL Team defenses in 2004. So why don't I get that warm confident feeling when Buffalo's defense is lined up to play when the game is on the line?

After watching the entire season and mulling it over for another month or two, I've come to a realization. I know where the problem is. This is a Big Play defense. I can hear you now, "come on, how is that a bad thing". Well, here's the thing: this defense lives and dies on the Big Play. If they don't generate a turnover, they tend to give up points.

I started to notice about four games into 2004 that there was always at least one sustained 80 drive by the opponent that chewed up clock and made our defense look absolutely foolish. Furthermore, Buffalo could never seem to stop third and long. What baffled me was that our defense didn't give up a whole lot of points and the Bills generally had a number of offensive possessions. What truly began to nag at me was that the Buffalo defense didn't seem to be able to deliver when the game was on the line.
Finally, I put it all together. The way to beat Buffalo's defense is through conservative play and emphasis on ball protection. Throughout the majority of games, teams are willing to take risks and push the envelope looking for big plays. Buffalo’s defense is excellent in turning those risks into turnovers. However, when a close game is on the line, teams tend to get more conservative and think more about ball protection. That’s when the Big Play turnovers disappear and those 80 yard sustained scoring drives happen. To take this idea one step further, good teams protect the ball better than bad teams and good teams beat made the Buffalo defense look average at best. If you need a good example or two, see Buffalo’s performances against one of the best ball-protecting teams in the league, New England.

What I still don’t’ understand is why, with the talent this defense has, can’t they consistently stop teams the “old fashioned way” by forcing a punt.

Thoughts?

[Philagape]

I think our run defense was overrated. The DEs didn't provide enough pass rush, and the secondary was vulnerable, especially while Milloy was out.
Hopefully another year of experience will allow some players (Kelsay, Schobel, McGee) to take a step up.

[Italian Stallion]

They at times force punts and stop teams the "old fashioned" way, however I think you answered your own question...Because they are predicated on the big play, they will tend to take more chances by jumping routes for an INT, corner and/or safety blitz, things of that nature.

I think the talent is there to stop anybody, but the philosophy of the team isn't a sit back and let the offense dictate the game...and with a ailling offense in recent years, it's necessary to score on D to have a chance

[Throne Logic]

I think the talent is there to stop anybody, but the philosophy of the team isn't a sit back and let the offense dictate the game...and with a ailling offense in recent years, it's necessary to score on D to have a chance

I certain agree with this. But why can't they make the adjustment in the forth quarter to stop teams on downs? When teams go conservative, you need to shore things up a bit. To many 3rd and medium-longs were converted vs. this defense. I'm not suggesting a prevent defense - cripes, I hate the prevent. I just seems that the third down package doesn't work.

Now, I might take what you stated a step further and say that this defense might be tired by crunch time. But I didn't get the feeling that fatigue was the primary issue.

[Stewie]

I disagree with the original post. Turnovers aren't necessarily the result of "high risk plays". If you run a simple counter, and your rb fumbles it away, was that "high risk?" If you throw a hitch and the db jumps the route for a pick, was that "high risk?"

I think our defense played well enough to win 12 games. At least.

[Bill Brasky]

this defense lives and dies on the Big Play.

Which they rarely get. Schobel needs to start stepping up and earning that paycheck and generating some sacks, and more big plays will come. Clements needs to start getting more INT's against teams other than Miami.

[Italian Stallion]

Which they rarely get. Schobel needs to start stepping up and earning that paycheck and generating some sacks, and more big plays will come. Clements needs to start getting more INT's against teams other than Miami.

Clements certianly isnt the problem, he had 6 INT's and had blanket coverage on guys like Chad Johnson (1 catch 5 yds), Darrell Jackson (3 catch 35 yds), Tory Holt ( 2 catch 15 yds and one bull***** TD), and i know the Fish QB sucked, but Chris Chambers did nothing against him either

[Jeff1220]

Which they rarely get. Schobel needs to start stepping up and earning that paycheck and generating some sacks, and more big plays will come. Clements needs to start getting more INT's against teams other than Miami.

I don't know how you can say that they rarely get them. The Bills were one of the top teams in +/- turnover ratio, with the majority of those coming during an 8-1 stretch of the season. Their style of big-play D certainly helped create offense where there was none. I'd pretty much say the sentiments of Thone's first post are pretty much right on.

[Bill Brasky]

I don't know how you can say that they rarely get them. The Bills were one of the top teams in +/- turnover ratio, with the majority of those coming during an 8-1 stretch of the season. Their style of big-play D certainly helped create offense where there was none. I'd pretty much say the sentiments of Thone's first post are pretty much right on.

They should have had that kind of TO ratio against teams like SF.

Where was the D against NE, or PIT's 3rd stringers?

[Jeff1220]

They should have had that kind of TO ratio against teams like SF.

Where was the D against NE, or PIT's 3rd stringers?

Like I said, I pretty much agree with the post that said that a good conservative approach will beat this style of D. They aren't the caliber of NE or Pitt, but this team did beat the Jets, Rams, and Seahawks - all playoff teams, as well as Cinci, who was in the hunt.

[Bill Brasky]

Like I said, I pretty much agree with the post that said that a good conservative approach will beat this style of D. They aren't the caliber of NE or Pitt, but this team did beat the Jets, Rams, and Seahawks - all playoff teams, as well as Cinci, who was in the hunt.

The Rams and Seattle were horrible teams that only made the playoffs by having the luxury of playing in a lacluster conference.

It's funny that people used to ride DB because he never "showed up" against the good teams. Too bad people fail to realize this defense tends to do the same thing. They're just as much to blame for us not making the playoffs as our offense, if you need more evidence, look no further than the last game of the season, when even Pitt's players were laughing at our D's innability to stop their 2nd and 3rd stringers.

[OpIv37]

First of all, once the offense starts performing better, it will take pressure off the D and they won't be on the field as much- this will help stop them from giving up points.

Second, I can't believe I'm reading this. Fans need to make up their minds. At the end of '02, our D started coming to life, and the D was ranked #2 in '03, but everyone complained because they didn't create enough turnovers. In '04, we lead the league in turnovers and STILL have the #2 defense but no one has any confidence in them? What more do you want?

[Bill Brasky]

First of all, once the offense starts performing better, it will take pressure off the D and they won't be on the field as much- this will help stop them from giving up points.

Second, I can't believe I'm reading this. Fans need to make up their minds. At the end of '02, our D started coming to life, and the D was ranked #2 in '03, but everyone complained because they didn't create enough turnovers. In '04, we lead the league in turnovers and STILL have the #2 defense but no one has any confidence in them? What more do you want?

I don't think it's a matter of confidence, they just seem to croak against good teams and pile up TO stats against crappy teams that they should dominate anyways.

[OpIv37]

I don't think it's a matter of confidence, they just seem to croak against good teams and pile up TO stats against crappy teams that they should dominate anyways.

well I have two things to say about that- #1, they probably wouldn't be considered good teams if our D was capable of wailing on them. I've really never understood the "struggles against good teams" argument- the ability to beat a D, stop a QB etc is what makes a team GOOD. If they don't make you struggle, they'd probably never have the "good" label in the first place.

#2, the offense had horrendous problems with time of possession against better teams. I don't care how good your D is, they'll only be able to hold off another team for so long (see '03 Sunday night game against Miami).

[jamze132]

Lets not forget 2 things. 1-Maybe Gray changes to a more conservative scheme late in the game when it's close, to prevent the big play. I personally think we shuld play aggressive the entire game. Maybe we would have won the Jag's game last year.

2. Any team in the NFL can beat any team on any given day of the week.

Overall, you have to like what you see from out defense. I just wanna see a little more aggression late in the 4th.