McDermott to Call Defense in 2023

[notacon]

There actually was a very long and involved conversation here on this message board where the question was asked how to voice the sound of a beer opening on a message board. pfft is what they came up with.

Never saw that and I don’t care.

[notacon]

If we led the league last year in nickel defense, if our DC is out and the LB who allowed us to do so is gone, do you think we might scale that back?

Of course, we actually have to have a LB who can play Edmunds' position. But will we find one? Is it Milano?

There are teams we will have to play mostly nickel against, and others we will not.

If we lead the league again in nickel and fail to limit playoff offenses again, then what?

McDermott likes to play an attacking style of defense and generate turnovers.

Now that he is calling the D, it will be completely his.

Does he view Taylor Rapp as a hybrid capable of playing like an off ball LB with an increased ability to cover shifty WRs?

I don't think we'll get away with Taron Johnson playing so many short yardage downs. I also think he took a beating last year and played through it.

Poyer took a beating, too.

Something tells me Taylor Rapp wasn't brought in to ride the bench and my money says he's an insurance policy against a hybrid S/LB who gets drafted. I don't think Bernard is the guy they were looking for.

Nope. It’s more likely with the signing of Taylor Rapp that we may see an increase in DIME coverage, and more single LB defenses. Your opinion that you just expressed....


”Something tells me Taylor Rapp wasn't brought in to ride the bench and my money says he's an insurance policy against a hybrid S/LB who gets drafted. I don't think Bernard is the guy they were looking for.” is opposite of the “getting back to 3rd LB” premise that I have objected to.

We will see soon enough.

The point is that the idea of “....the 4-2-5 gets phased out and we get back to playing a 3rd LB.” is extremely unlikely with the Bills not being able to field 2 LB’s (much less 3) that are better than fielding five or six DB’s.

The loss of Edmunds makes the nickel (and probably more dimes) even more critical to success, spearheaded by the safety position which they have been doing for years, and every action by Beane (so far) is pointing in that direction.


The Bills strength on defense are the DB’s. NOT LB anymore. With the undeniable and unstoppable movement away from 3 or 4 LB’s on the field and the common sense prediction is to de-emphasize the importance of ILB (which is happening all around the NFL) and concentrate on bolstering the secondary...whch is exactly what the Bills are doing.

[Typ0]

Never saw that and I don’t care.

You don't care about the context of anything.

[Mace]

You don't care about the context of anything.

Don't even bother...it's useless.

[notacon]

You don't care about the context of anything.

Actually writing this shows that YOU don’t care about the context of anything.

[Cali512]

How silly. Well thought out and reasoned posts take more than a bumper sticker to explain.

Whether any Super Bowl defenses “started 3 LB’s” or not is totally irrelevant.

In fact, a “KC Nation” site in a preview of the 2022 season had this to say about “starting 3 LBs”...."The traditional, three-linebacker sets are far from the true “base” personnel of the defense; last season, only 27% of their defensive snaps came with four defensive backs on the field — which was still the 10th-highest rate in the NFL, per Football Outsiders."


The FACT is that nickel and dime defenses have been steadily growing as THE defensive go-to for more and more snaps.

In 2008, the percentage of snaps over the whole NFL that had five or more defensive backs averaged 43.4% That steadily increased every year so that by 2015, it was up to 63.4%

In 2021 that percentage was 75%.

The team with the highest percentage of nickel and dime snap count was Dallas at 98%, followed closely by Buffalo with 95%.

The Bills led the league in nickel snap count with 92%.

Nickel and dime defenses are now the overwhelming norm in the NFL and the new “base defense”.

In Buffalo, the idea of taking Taron Johnson, who was their most steady and dependable CB last season, OFF THE FIELD and replace him with a LB that we do not have is absurd beyond measure.

Of course what you stupidly dismiss as "rambling word vomiting” shows unequivocally how the Bills are responding to the loss of Edmunds...concentrating on bolstering the secondary....and the idea that they will abandon the nickel as their “base” defense and regularly have 3 LB’s is not supported by the facts or any kind of reasonable logic or common sense.

The idea that your “one sentence” bumper sticker of irrelevance trumps the well reasoned and accurate analysis backed up with facts is really ludicrous.

We actually relied on our safeties and DBs more because of our scheme last year. Hamlin and Poyer accounted gor 154 tackles while both missed 6 games in total while Edmunds and Milano accounted for 200 exactly while missing a couple games as well.

All in all it was about a 60-40 split. To say we'll rely more on our DBs in the run game seems just dumb and it also completely goes against your reasoning for Edmunds being good. Edmunds responsibility was supposedly that he could play the sidelines and cover deep which is why out DBs played more downhill. With Edmunds gone, it seems like it would make more sense for them to play more traditional pass coverage since we dont have Edmunds roaming the center of the field, would it not? If Edmunds was that valuable to our pass coverage, wouldnt it be more productive for our DBs to play more traditional since we dont have Edmunds roaming?

You cant have it both ways

[notacon]

We actually relied on our safeties and DBs more because of our scheme last year. Hamlin and Poyer accounted gor 154 tackles while both missed 6 games in total while Edmunds and Milano accounted for 200 exactly while missing a couple games as well.

All in all it was about a 60-40 split. To say we'll rely more on our DBs in the run game seems just dumb and it also completely goes against your reasoning for Edmunds being good. Edmunds responsibility was supposedly that he could play the sidelines and cover deep which is why out DBs played more downhill. With Edmunds gone, it seems like it would make more sense for them to play more traditional pass coverage since we dont have Edmunds roaming the center of the field, would it not? If Edmunds was that valuable to our pass coverage, wouldnt it be more productive for our DBs to play more traditional since we dont have Edmunds roaming?

You cant have it both ways

So, basically you agree with me.


While misrepresenting what I wrote...actually, you conjuring up what I did NOT write and attributing it to me when you say "To say we'll rely more on our DBs in the run game....”. Where did I say that???


And where do you get the silly idea that "it (a premise that I did not put forward) also completely goes against your reasoning for Edmunds being good"

All I was commenting about was refuting the idea that "I think the 4-2-5 gets phased out and we get back to playing a 3rd LB.”.

I have no ida what you mean by "You cant have it both ways”. What in the world are you talking about????

The post you quoted is simply pointing out, with extreme accuracy, that the NFL and the Bills in particular have embraced a nickel defense, and will not “go back to playing a 3rd LB”

You want to know why our discussion sometimes devolve into crap??? THIS is why. Misrepresenting what I say and assuming what I think (when you don’t have the first clue) is trolling of the worst kind. Plain dishonest. Don’t do that!!!

[Cali512]

So, basically you agree with me.


While misrepresenting what I wrote...actually, you conjuring up what I did NOT write and attributing it to me when you say "To say we'll rely more on our DBs in the run game....”. Where did I say that???


And where do you get the silly idea that "it (a premise that I did not put forward) also completely goes against your reasoning for Edmunds being good"

All I was commenting about was refuting the idea that "I think the 4-2-5 gets phased out and we get back to playing a 3rd LB.”.

I have no ida what you mean by "You cant have it both ways”. What in the world are you talking about????

The post you quoted is simply pointing out, with extreme accuracy, that the NFL and the Bills in particular have embraced a nickel defense, and will not “go back to playing a 3rd LB”

You want to know why our discussion sometimes devolve into crap??? THIS is why. Misrepresenting what I say and assuming what I think (when you don’t have the first clue) is trolling of the worst kind. Plain dishonest. Don’t do that!!!

I read your post wrong thats all, i agree with you actually now

[notacon]

I read your post wrong thats all, i agree with you actually now

Thank you.

Sometimes I find my self not reading other posts completely, but just skim, and come to incorrect assumptions.

I attempt to resist doing that. Sometimes, I fail. Gotta keep at at.

[Woodman]

Woo-hoo.

Don't really like the idea, but whatever. Not a fan of over-lapping responsibilities.

Take all time out duties away from him and I'm good with it.