Jim Leonhard faces a clear priority for the Bills: fixing late-down stops

The Bills’ defensive storyline heading into the 2026 season may be less about the overall “eye test” and more about a specific, repeatable weakness. According to a recent breakdown from Yahoo Sports, Buffalo was notably poor on late downs in 2025, and the team’s new defensive coordinator, Jim Leonhard, is expected to treat that issue as a central focus rather than something that will correct itself through general adjustments.

In the analysis, “late downs” are defined as third and fourth down situations. The numbers cited were stark: Buffalo ranked 25th (worst) in EPA per play against on late downs in 2025, and the metric’s 0.10 mark was third-worst among playoff teams (only the Carolina Panthers and Pittsburgh Steelers were worse). The same breakdown tied those struggles to rushing as well, pointing to Buffalo allowing 0.64 EPA per rush on late downs, the second-worst figure in the league behind the New York Giants. In practical terms, opponents did not need trick plays to move the ball when the situation tightened.

Third and short, the article argued, did not consistently phase the opposition. It noted that when teams ran from 11 personnel on late downs, they produced 0.60 EPA per rush against Buffalo, while 12 personnel produced 0.77 EPA per rush. The takeaway was that Buffalo’s base late-down defensive approach was not effectively discouraging conventional runs, including plays that should have fit into opponents’ “safe” short-yardage decision-making.

On conversion success, the breakdown cited a late-down success rate against the Bills of 45.5 percent, which would place Buffalo 20th in the NFL. The article also emphasized that opponents were not limited to one specific down and distance, saying the defense struggled across both third down and fourth down situations. The broader theme was that Buffalo’s late-down execution and run-fit details were unreliable enough that opponents could consistently reach or exceed conversion thresholds.

The path to improvement, at least as outlined in the same report, is not simply a matter of general defensive “talent” or pass-rush expectation. Rather, the fix likely requires more disciplined late-down alignments and more effective down-to-down leverage, particularly against run-heavy concepts used to attack third-and-short and fourth-and-short moments. That also implies teaching the staff’s scheme to operate cleanly under the faster, more constrained play-call rhythms of late-down football, where a single missed assignment can cost an entire drive.

Buffalo’s broader offseason context, as described in additional local reporting reviewed for this project, has included a defensive identity that sometimes relies less on a traditional, nose-tackle-style presence and more on flexible fronts and personnel usage. One report examined after the team’s 2026 draft discussed the Bills’ defensive line vision and noted questions about whether the roster gives Buffalo the sort of run-stuffing capability needed in the middle when late downs demand exacting gap control. While that draft-related coverage is separate from the late-down EPA critique, it aligns with the idea that Leonhard’s immediate challenge is to ensure the defense’s scheme details translate into stops when the margin tightens.

What to watch next for Buffalo is whether Leonhard’s adjustments show up in the same measurable areas that were exposed in 2025. If the Bills’ third- and fourth-down EPA against improves, it would suggest the defense can better manage short-yardage downs and deny opponents the easy conversions that come from late-down run efficiency. Even modest gains in late-down performance can swing a season because those downs appear so frequently at the ends of drives, and because they often decide field position, pace, and third-down-attempt totals throughout the game.