Dukes of Awesome

The NY Times does not believe in the K-Gun by errantremark

Tangential sports reporters at the New York Times are skeptical that Turk Schonert’s “spread the ball around” philosophy will work with the Bills.

The same indignant comment could be made about the idea of finding ways to spread the ball around more, and my scouting eye wondered why Schonert would do this.

It’s odd that any sports reporter would question this philosophy, because just about every team that has won the Super Bowl recently has relied not on one particular offensive superstar to carry a team, but complete distribution of the ball, regardless of whether said team has one or more stars.

Check it:

Since 2000, every team that has won the Super Bowl has had their top three receivers separated by less than 400 yards, and their top two usually within 200 yards of each other, with notables like the 1999 St. Louis Rams (3 receivers within 300 yards of each other) and the 2006 Indianapolis Colts (top two receivers within 50 yards) hallmarked by extraordinary offense distribution. By comparison, teams that got close but lost (2003-4 Carolina Panthers, 2004-5 Philadelphia Eagles) had individual stars (Steve Smith, Terrell Owens, respectively) that were separated by 500+ yards from their second best receiver.

It’s not rocket science. The more players contributing to an offense, the more likely a team will be successful. The early ’90s Bills had Kelly, Reed, Thomas, Lofton, Metzelaars, Beebe and more contributing significant offensive numbers. Good teams have several good players getting good stats.

An individual superstar who you force the ball to can win you games, but to win it all, you gotta distribute the rock. If the Bills can successfully do so (and replacing Rock Hands Royal with a fast, young tight end) should lead to a successful year for the Bills.


4 Comments so far
Leave a comment

You’re still talking about the K-gun and you actually wrote “Check it”. Is your favorite album Cooleyhighharmony? Did you register this blog through an AOL account?

Comment by Frank



Comment by Frank

who is this loser commenting? i would assume he was spam comments if he actually had a url…

Comment by frank is lame

“SPAM comment” is redundant. “frank is lame” is an idiot (also redundant [or maybe it’s a tautology {I’m not sure}]!).

Comment by Frank

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: