FightinIrishBills
-
Posts
267 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by FightinIrishBills
-
-
Well said. A guy like Clausen looked better because there was a ton of crap. The top guy didn't play all season and got a serious shoulder injury in one of the few tiems he got hit in college. The 2nd QB off the board is learning how to throw a football again. The rest were passed on every team in the league, sometimes multiple times.
I love next year's draft. Locker, possibly Luck, Ponder, Pryor (I think he has a big year), and Mallett could be a very special group. I like all over those guys over any QB in this draft (though I won't have hated Bradford or Tebow - love the guy as a leader).
Just a thought, but I do believe that around this time last year, many folks (not just on here) were singing the praises of the current QB class. On paper, it looked as if they could all be world-beaters: Bradford, Clausen, Tebow, McCoy, Pike, LeFevour, and, the biggest tragedy of all, Jevon Snead, were all being projected to be successful at an NFL level.
I disagree heavily with the strength of next year's class. Locker, in my opinion, does not have the decision-making ability that an NFL level QB needs. Luck could be very successful, but I think he needs more time to develop his game. Ponder and Pryor--no thanks, Pryor especially. It's the same knock that I have on Locker, but Locker is even more gifted athletically. The only QB I think will transition to do well in the NFL is Mallett.
-
1. Where would you watch the game if the Bills were in the Superbowl?
2. If the Bills won the Superbowl - in which district of Buffalo would the most rioting occur?
3. Would the city of Buffalo be the same ever again?
I would like to hear your opinions!
1. I'd have to be at my best friend's house. He's the one who brought me back into the fold when I was a wayward fan, and the only person I know IRL who shares my optimism and excitement for the team every year.
2. I think South Buffalo would be absolutely destroyed.
3. No. Every person in Buffalo will own a "Buffalo Bills Superbowl Champions" t-shirt...and every little kid will own a Trent Edwards jersey
Also, even though this video has probably been watched a million times by everybody, any talk of a Bills' Superbowl win makes head straight for Youtube. Enjoy if you haven't seen it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PlWZDZboQw&p=15C4404C488AC9BF&playnext=1&index=2
-
I'm as big of an optimistic homer there is, but I offer this as a cautionary tale:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hruby/100823_nfl_preseason_hall_of_fame&sportCat=nfl
It's a list of preseason "Hall of Famers" through the years. In the "obvious but true" category, ou might look great in preseason, but you never really know until the game goes live.
That being said, I stand by my prediction of 8-8
-
i thought he was average yesterday and at notre dame.
Didn't see the game yesterday, but you really weren't watching if you thought he was average at Notre Dame.
-
Good analysis OP. Repeating the "Jake Locker as #1 pick" mantra isn't solely the domain of Bills' fans, although some folks' unbridled optimism at the thought of having the #1 pick to get him is unique, I think. This is Locker's big year to shine, and while I do think he has some talent, he's a product of the media hype machine. As is, I don't think Locker has the accuracy or decision-making ability to succeed in the NFL.
-
*Massive homer alert*
Watch out for the Irish this year. Take a look at the schedule for a minute and tell me who they won't be favored against:
09/04/10 vs. Purdue Notre Dame, Ind. 3:30 p.m. ET
09/11/10 vs. Michigan Notre Dame, Ind. 3:30 p.m. ET
09/18/10 at Michigan State East Lansing, Mich. 8:00 p.m. ET
09/25/10 vs. Stanford Notre Dame, Ind. 3:30 p.m. ET
10/02/10 at Boston College Chestnut Hill, Mass. TBA
10/09/10 vs. Pittsburgh Notre Dame, Ind. 3:30 p.m. ET
10/16/10 vs. Western Michigan Notre Dame, Ind. 2:30 p.m. ET
10/23/10 at Navy East Rutherford, N.J. 12:00 p.m. ET
10/30/10 vs. Tulsa Notre Dame, Ind. 2:30 p.m. ET
11/13/10 vs. Utah Notre Dame, Ind. 2:30 p.m. ET
11/20/10 vs. Army Bronx, N.Y. (Yankee Stadium) 7:00 p.m. ET
11/27/10 at USC Los Angeles, Calif. 5:00 p.m. PT
That doesn't mean they're going to win every game they're favored in. Far from it. But of all the games out there, the only one that I would say is going to be a really huge challenge on paper is the Utah game. Yes, Michigan and Michigan State are always brutal games. Same with BC. Pittsburgh is always a wild card, and for the love of God, if ND doesn't beat USC this year, I'll drown myself in a vat of Bailey's and Guinness.
I do follow a lot of college football, but right now, the only thing I have on are my green Notre Dame homer goggles. Go Irish!
-
a clueless poster with too much time on his hands...
Technique is the number one thing that separates NFL players from checkout clerks that can run, jump or catch as well as they can. Most small and mid-level college programs put little emphasis on these skills due to budget/coaching constraints, so players coming into the league have to be broken down and "rebuilt" like Marine grunts.
It's particularly true of WRs and pass-oriented TEs who typically take two years to learn their craft.
Come on now, that's a sensible answer based in reality. Haven't you heard that the Bills have been and always will be the worst franchise in football?
-
Well, I hope you're right, man. I guess that's why I prefaced what I wrote with an admission that I haven't seen a lot of him. I think the game that sat with me the most was the Alabama game. I just expected to see a QB with his reputation and talent really step up in a game against a team of that caliber, especially a conference rival, but he was flat the entire game to my eyes. To me, he just seems to have the Bledsoe disease of being able to really light up teams they SHOULD light up, but never able to really mount much of a challenge against teams they are not expected to beat.
To me, a gamer is someone who becomes like Captian James Tiberius Kirk on the field. No matter what, there is no surrender....no "no win scenario"....they just find a way to get that extra yard, score that clutch TD, and get as much out of themselves and the team as possible. It's the stuff of Kelly...Reich....Flutie....and Hamdan. It's leaders who don't just talk the talk, they actually walk it, too. Maybe I"m wrong, but I just haven't seen it in this kid. Maybe this year he'll exhibit it? I dunno. I do know I'm ready for some SEC ball, and I'm sure as hell ready to see friggin' Alabama get their ass handed to them by SOMEONE.
I definitely get where you're coming from--it would be awesome to have another field general a la Jimbo to lead this team again. And flame away, but the most recent QB to come out of the draft who I believe exhibits this quality is Jimmy Clausen. However, I don't think that a player instantly has that trait; rather, I think it's developed over time and through their unique team situation.
That being said, I think Mallett has shown sparks of this so far in his college career. I'm with you though, this is Mallett's year to shine. Unfortunately Arkansas' defense is just awful, so he's really going to have to chuck it up a lot again to have them be competitive. I'm still very excited about him though, despite the relatively recent injury problems (this is another knock I have on Jake Locker--a huge injury like that, just like Sam Bradford's, is prone to show up again.)
Haha and I think the rest of the country is hoping to see the whole of the SEC get their asses handed to them by someone
-
I've seen the kid play a few times living here in SEC country, and not that I have enough basis to say this yet, but as of today I'm hoping the Bills do NOT draft him. We don't need another QB with a big arm, we need a QB with intangibles who is a GAMER. Aside from Flutie, we haven't had a gamer in here since Jimbo. That's a big reason why I think a lot of us are holding out some sort of hope for Levi. The guy has got some spunk to him and he rises up when the game calls for it. I don't see that at all in Mallet, and I think that all he'd do is set our franchise back by another 3-5 years.
Being someone who watches a lot of college football, I've also watched the kid play a few times (including in person his freshman year--a 38-0 drubbing of Notre Dame. I still get PTSD flashbacks on that one). Obviously opinion is subjective, but what do you define as a "gamer"? Or for that matter, what is your definition of "intangibles"?
I would argue that Ryan Mallett is in fact more of a gamer than Levi Brown. I'm not really sure what you're basing your contention that he "rises up when the game calls for it". Granted, you might have watched a lot more Troy games than I have, but the only one that stands out in my memory that stands out is that bowl game duel against Central Michigan. Great game, no doubt, and Levi Brown put up a hell of a performance. However, Ryan Mallett had games where he carried Arkansas on his back against some of the best teams in the country; keep in mind that they were one missed field goal away from potentially beating #1 ranked Florida last year. The only game where I wouldn't say that he looked outstanding is against Alabama, and to be honest, nobody looked good against Alabama this year (they're not sexy, but they have my vote as one of the best and most complete college football teams of the last decade).
I don't really know what you consider a gamer, but everything I saw out of Ryan Mallett last year has me convinced of the guy's big game ability. Not to knock Levi Brown, but relative to his strength of competition, he didn't show nearly as much in his college career as Mallett already has. And yes, I do know that Bobby Petrino runs a pass-heavy offense--one similar to which our very own Brian Brohm thrived in at Louisville. However, I believe that Mallett is a true talent who will thrive at the next level--and in my opinion, is a gamer with a great deal of intangibles.
-
The Pats had no right to win the 1st game agaisnt us. It's the NFL. You don't put asterisks on any game.
Haven't you heard? Any game won by the Bills is a fluke, and any loss is a clear sign of this franchise's inferiority.
-
I wouldn't worry about things said by a couple of overpaid blacks that can barely read or write. Ditka lucked out with the Bears back in the day. Look what he did with the Aints when he ran them. He's about a sausage & a half away from a massive coronary anyhow! Tom Jackson never won anything either, & has fallen into obscurity since ESPN changed the format of their NFL programmming
Wow.
-
Sure. I'm just speculating. It would be way too easy to wait around until 2020 and then judge the group!
I get your point though I think you're over estimating the 2009 class to make your point.
Ha, time might make fools of us all. I was only saying that the recent draft class, when viewed from last year, was really exciting. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that a lot of people last year were very high on the QBs in question. A year later? Well not so much, judging from the draft.
I'll tell you what though, if by chance we are very poor this year and land a high enough draft pick, I'd be very happy with having Ryan Mallett under center
-
I think we'll be drafting ~ #5. Locker won't be the pick there, but like I said this a GREAT qb class. When all is said and done around 2025 or so, they'll be talking about how this group edges out the class of '83!
Not to be too contrarian, but I believe that if you asked someone in 2009, the QB class of the 2010 draft was projected to be great as well: Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen, Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, Jevon Snead, Tony Pike. Obviously, it's way too early to even think about saying this class is great or not. Judging solely on the draft, however, this QB class turned out not to be the homerun draft for quarterbacks that a lot of people projected in the past. Whether it was due to lack of need at the position or seeming deficiencies in the players themselves, many of the projected big picks dropped low (including the unfortunate case of Jevon Snead, who dropped out completely).
My opinion? The 2011 draft class isn't that impressive, at least as of now. Jake Locker is way too speculative of a pick. Ryan Mallett and (to a lesser extent) Andrew Luck are big prospects, although I think Luck does need more time to develop. But the rest? According to WalterFootball.com, in the top 10 for the upcoming QB class are Christian Ponder, Terrelle Pryor, and Ricky Stanzi, just to name a few. Not discounting that these guys could have big years in 2010, but from what we've seen already from them, I really see no reason for looking at the potential of this class on par with the '83 class.
-
Do you believe this to be the case because we are going to go another season winning six or seven games? God, I hope not! I would rather finish 0-16 and lock in that first pick than be picking in the 10th or 11th spot again! I love the Bills and hate to see them lose, but it's just a necessity if we are truly going to begin rebuilding from the ground up.
Buddy and Chan have had a plan all along, and it has been to take our lumps this year and get a QB they really like as opposed to settling on one from this past year's draft just because just because QBs were available that they didn't really believe in.
Going 0-16 is a necessity towards getting better? The Detroit Lions would like to have a word with you.
-
Not everyone is sold on Locker as NFL capable.
Count me in as one who thinks the Locker hype is unwarranted. I believe that this is a case where the guy's measurables have the collective masses salivating over his potential (a la Jamarcus Russell). And yes, I do watch a lot of college football and have watched Jake Locker a good deal. I'm underwhelmed by his decision-making and accuracy, and would rather not have this guy be the hypothetical QB of the future if we are in a position to take him (assuming, of course, his draft stock doesn't tank to Jevon Snead levels).
Ryan Mallett, on the other hand...
-
You have to be kidding me. Nix F'd up the team by not addressing the OL, QB, WR positions this year. Thre were plenty of free agents to help all these positions. They left the fans with vomit in their mouths this year and I have no confidence this organization knows how to fix it. Any idiot would know you can't go into the season with the worst tackles, worst QB in the NFL and be competitive. They could have had anquoin bouldin, jamal charles, jimmy clausen or mcnabb and been competitive, while they continued to rebuild, know why they didn't? MONEY-Too Cheap or too dumb, take your pick.
Can we at least watch a regular season game (I would say a whole season myself, but that's just me) before anyone talks about how Nix "F'd up the team"? The small sample size of information that we do have of the Gailey/Nix era is not complete enough to make value judgments like "too cheap or too dumb".
-
Very good rebutal and I will try to clarify my viewpoints. You are right that I don't know what Gailey's plans and intentions are. I was trying to refute the previous post saying preseason isn't about game planning. IMHO, a coach preseason or not always should have some kind of game plan. Isn't Galiey calling the plays? I am assuming he has specific plays to evaluate his players. Also, I was trying to say preseason for a young inexperienced team is very important. Much more important than a team like the colts or saints. They are experienced teams who have confidence and know how to win. I would say with certainty that the Bills are nowhere close to that. As a result, IMHO, Gailey can use these preseason games to boost the confidence of his young team. Establishing a tough nosed winning attitude. Instead, it looked like the opposite may have occurred. It is way too early to tell.
I go back to the previous preseason games with the Bills. Remember how the offense couldn't even score a touchdown? That inept offense in preseason lead us right into offensive problems in the regular season. I know there are other varibles that acconted for this. I don't get how so many people can think this years preseason games with our current young players and new coaches isn't important? Or trying to minimize our preseason. Many problems in preseason rear themselves in the regular season. IMHO, that first preseasn game was horrific. I hope things turn around quick .
Perhaps, I am missing the boat but that is my take on things. Not sure if I answered your question?
Ha, good rebuttal to my rebuttal. I do agree with you that preseason is about game planning, but my only caveat is that we're not seeing what Gailey is seeing. As in, he might be seeing a look or a particular player movement in a small but important way that the rest of us aren't looking for. Yes, Gailey is calling the plays but his game plan for the preseason might be (and probably is, I would think) very different than what he would do in a regular season game.
I also agree with you that the Bills are a young and inexperienced team. You could be right, too, that a big preseason showing could increase their confidence. However, you have to think that the injuries to Jackson and Lynch might have affected Gailey's strategy. With such a young and inexperienced team, the Bills can't afford a slew of injuries. Pushing the team too hard during that game, especially with the nominally tougher practices we've been hearing about, could have been a lot more detrimental to the team's overall well-being.
Again, I'm with you about the horrors of preseasons past. But while it is trite and oft-repeated, this is a whole new coaching regime we're seeing here. And though I think you're right that we did see a bad preseason game, we can't distinguish if it was by error or by design.
In the best of all worlds, I want to see a team wearing a Bills uniform win every game or at least look solid. I am concerned about some of the sloppiness we saw on the field, but I'll reserve judgment until the first whistle is blown against Miami
-
I have to agree with certain parts of your post and disagree with it as well.
Agree: Preseason is to evaluate talent.
Disagree: Preseason is about game planning (not so much of x's and o's.) The coaches should have a plan to evaulate their players. A coach should have a long term plan towards the season opener. Preseason or not, a coach with a young team should have his players motivated to play. A coach can set the tone in the preseason. That's exactly what Mike Shanahan did. A winning positive attitude preseason or not. Gailey failed to accomplish this. So indirectly, it is about coaching too.
The players should be held accountable for their play in preseason and so should the coaches.
From your favorite poster, MPL
And what in your previous history as an NFL head coach has led you to this conclusion? Again, we don't have a window into the mind of Chan Gailey. I'm not sure whether or not you're saying that:
A.) Chan Gailey doesn't have a plan to evaluate his players
B.) Gailey doesn't have a long term plan towards the season opener
At the risk of raising the spectre of Dick Jauron, evaluating coaching in the NFL is hard to do. Is having a long-term plan for both players and the season opener directly correlative to "setting the tone in the preseason"? To put it another way, does coach have to, as you say, instill a "winning attitude" in the preseason to be directly successful as an NFL head coach?
From the outset, you're working with incomplete information regarding coaching in the preseason. We don't know their plans for evaluating players. We don't know what they're willing to show and what they're being coy with. Preseason games are a live scrimmage that give the team a chance to practice against real competition, with the risk for coaches being that they can lose players to injury and give away too much by way of game planning. A good coach strikes a balance between the risk and the reward, seeing only as much as he wants to see before playing a "vanilla" brand of play.
I disagree with your contention that a coach has to set a winning positive attitude "preseason or not". How do you know? Again, are you an NFL coach? All that matters to me is how the team performs during the course of the season. We'll know whether or not this team really has a winning attitude when the games actually mean something. Another case of incomplete information.
Again, I'm really not sure what you were saying regarding a coach's plans in the preseason and the relation to Chan Gailey. But I will say that without an adequate body of information, how do you evaluate a coach in the preseason? You argue that both players and coaches are judged based on preseason play; however, there is no reasonable way of judging either a coach's long-term plans/evaluations or his team's "winning attitude" based on one preseason game.
-
You're all griping about the coaching in a preseason game?
Regarding the 4th and short situation, let me ask you this: if we had gone for it there and someone got hurt, would you all be praising the decision? Or would you be upset that Chan took an unnecessary risk in an inconsequential game? How about if Chan does have a play designed for that situation, but would rather not give that look away in the preseason?
I don't have access to Chan Gailey's mind and neither does anyone else on this board. I'm sorry, but getting worked up over a coaching decision in the preseason is asinine. Let's hold off on the doom and gloom until we see the guy coach a regular season game for us.
-
Because when you're Chicken Little, the sky's always falling.
-
Yes...it is preseason...and yes....there are some guys out there still hoping to catch a ride on this sunken ship, but it is truly sad times when the Redskins dominate your team in every facet for 60 minutes and coast to a 25 point victory.
After Friday's beat down, Chan Gailey should start cheating (the Patriots do it, so why not us) and should deploy scouts with cash to let Locker, Luck, and every legitimate LT prospect in the college ranks know how desperate this team is for talent.
Time to cut or trade all the crummy vets for a bag of chips or a 7th round pick if possible(Chambers, Corner, Ellison, Edwards, Fitzpatrick, Kelsay etc.) and let all rookies and those still with developmental potential play every snap possible. When it is all said and done what is the difference between a 2-14 team and this team? Answer: 3-13.
Time to blow up this ship and rebuild. Stockpile as many draft picks as possible and get a real QB, LT, Pass rusher, and outside linebacker.
Preseason is a time to work out the kinks. The Bills were sloppy, I'll give you that (a lot more so than I thought I'd see on defense). There is, however, a reason why they say "that's why they play the games". If it were the middle of the season and we were 1-7 and still looked like this, then you might have cause for the hysterics.
But after 1 preseason game? Come on, let's at least get a real look at this team first.
-
Thigpen is just another Trent, Brohm, and Fitz. Our best (and increasingly realistic) hope is to finish dead last this year and draft Jake Locker #1 overall. At least Locker can take off running if/when the line can't block anyone.
I agree that Thigpen falls in line with the type of QB we already have. I believe that Chan made Thigpen look good, not the other way around, and I'm hoping that he can do that with the talent we have on our roster right now.
Do you really think that being the league loser is the best hope for the Bills? I'm genuinely curious whenever I hear this line of logic. The Bills are a small market team with a history of drafting poorly, at least in the first round. Could we really take the hit of busting on the #1 overall pick? I'm not of the opinion that Jake Locker is worthy of being a #1 (maybe a top 10) pick, but even if that where he's projected at the end of next year, do you think that taking the risk of him pulling a JaMarcus Russell is something we should look forward to?
It takes a lot to turn around a franchise, but I don't know if "bottoming out" is necessarily the key to success. Looking at the drafts of the past few years (just a quick unscientific glance), there have been some picks within the top 3 that immediately brought their team success (Carson Palmer and Matt Ryan stand out) and others that haven't (paging David Carr). It's a fairly obvious point, but I would rather see the team draft smart in the later part of the 1st round than take a huge gamble.
As for the hype surrounding Locker, here's a short, cautionary tale in two words: Jevon Snead.
-
i watched some games, not alot though. he just looks average to me. he doesnt seem to have alot of zip when he throws. they just look like floaters.
I'm definitely biased, but I will say that throwing strength is not a knock that I've ever heard on Clausen. I've watched Clausen for the past 3 years, and noodle arm he is not. Any floaters I've seen him chuck up were desperation throws as he was getting destroyed by his porous O-line in his freshman and sophomore years (which might fall under the domain of poor decision making). However, I might be going out on limb here, but I really believe he was the best QB in college football this past year, and possibly in the draft as well.
Did I want the Bills to take him? Absolutely. I was consoled by Spiller (once in a decade talent, and the absolute best player in the draft judged solely on his college career) and Torrell Troup (a solid player at a position of big need). But Clausen really has the potential for greatness. I don't have a crystal ball handy, but I think that for all the knocks on this year's QB class, it'll emerge as one of the best we've seen in a while, including next year's, Ryan Mallett excepting (and yes, I HAVE heard of Jake Locker).
-
i thought he was average yesterday and at notre dame.
I didn't watch the game yesterday, so I can't comment. But at Notre Dame? Did you ever watch the games? I'm just curious what you base your opinion on.
Usually this doesn't bother me but....
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Ugh. Consolation isn't what comes to mind