Doc
-
Posts
66,107 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Doc
-
-
Aaron's days were numbered and his play was slowing down quickly as a defensive end. Do you really think he would have been a stud OLB when he was beginning to struggle at his natural position? He was a good player in his prime but I don't think he would have helped us very much at all...
As a DE, he was going-up against guys who were 60-70# heavier than him. Moving to OLB would have helped with the wear-and-tear at least.
Butler hurt us a lot more by quitting, IMO...They were both big losses. But they had more time to replace Butler since he announced his decision before FA and the draft.
-
The more I read about this kid, the more I'm surprised he lasted as long as he did. Big, good feet and pass protector, strong, mean streak, smart. Looks like he needs to work on run blocking, but seems like a player who should develop.
-
At least 5 wins?? No way doc! From a somewhat better pass rush? Maybe teams would have run on us more--200+ a game.
First off, I said better pass rush AND a better RT, doc. Second of all, Schobel was a decent run stopper.
-
Tanenbaum's primary interest is in MLSE. and you have to be careful when it comes to what he's worth. what he's worth includes his assets, a majority of that is his interest in MLSE. he would have to cash that in in order to take a run at anything else, which would be counter-intuitive, given that his primary interest is controlling MLSE.
in this equation, it's one or the other, and his interest in an NFL franchise is secondary at best.
also, i've spoken to numerous people about Tanenbaum when this deal was first struck. the Bills-In-Toronto series was largely -- almost solely -- Rogers production. in fact, wouldn't you find it curious that Rogers budgeted in paying all the money to fund the series. the $78 million was on their books. there was no mention of Tanenbaum or any other outside involvement.
as for your stadium stuff, there is no reason to believe Canadian or Ontario taxpayers will pony up a large chunk of cash for a new stadium. a large amount is going to have to come from private sources.
How much would it cost to upgrade the Rogers Center? Would it be worth it?
-
The Bills had some bad retirements last year - imagine an offensive line of Bell-Levitre-Hangartener-Wood-Butler and an LB corps of Kelsay-Poz-Davis-Schobel. That could be worth at least two extra wins.
I's say at least 5 more wins, which would have been the games that were lost by 5 points or less. RT was a black hole for the Bills and Schobel would have provided a much-needed pass rush.
-
So, when does she file the lawsuit?
-
Makes it harder for him to buy The Bills though, I suppose.
Why? The Amerks are worth, what, $5M at best? That's chump change to Pegs. And Rochester is in Buffalo's territory. It's no problem.
-
Toronto doesn't even support the Argos, and hasn't come close to supporting the Bills. There will never be an NFL team in Toronto.
-
I figured this was coming. Buying the Amerks would be a drop in the bucket for Pegs, and would allow for quicker call-ups.
-
I'm breaking for lunch. My next workout will resemble that of my teams 3 a day workout schedule. I want to make sure that I'm in trim, fit, and ready for camp when it comes. My year is going to go so well that I'm going to deserve a raise. With some of that new money, I'm going to be able to buy a similar vehicle to Jarvis Jenkins.
Thanks.
-
I agree with this.
I thought letting Favre go when they did (after an NFCC appearance) was a mistake by GB. Obviously that was wrong.
Same here.
-
In English please, for the twitter-impaired.
-
FIXED.
Not. His INT% under pressure is pretty low.
-
Green Bay won the Super bowl because they hired Dom Capers to run their defense. That super bowl does not happen without this hire.
The key to winning for lot of successful teams is having good/strong OC and DCs....The bills have lacked in this area for too long.
I agree that Capers was a huge addition, but he's never had a team that even made it to the SB before. The Packers' defense was excellent to be sure, but Rodgers is also arguably the best QB in the NFL.
-
I'm more than fine with giving him longer than a year with the current system to "figure it out". He played well enough, and the 2011 draft class had enough questions, it just makes sense to me. Does that mean he's a superstar? Does that mean he's our guy of the future? Nah.
I'll give him at least the better part of this year. He'll have had a full year in the system and the players around him should be better. If he plays better, great. If not, move to option B.
-
GB traded Favre and didn't release him. They made an organizational decision to go with Rodgers during 2008 as Favre neared 40. But I digress.
The point remains that solid ownership (CEO in this case) combined with excellent front office management and talent evaluation can and does produce success. Rodgers with the Bills' supporting cast doesn't win enough. But take an organization that gets the QB and surrounds him with top talent while featuring a very good defense and they'll win. That's the GB Packers.
If you're inferring that just having a franchise QB is sufficient in a QB driven league, well, that's false. It's much more than that.
"Solid ownership?" They're owned by Green Bay, whose executive committee elected Mark Murphy, former AD of Northwestern and Colgate, in 2007. Their HC is a guy who had a lousy track record as an OC for the Saints (4 years) and 49'ers (1 year), before Green Bay surprisingly named him HC. I can only imagine the cries had Ralph hired these guys. Ted Thompson is the only guy who had some clout, having been with Seattle and Holgrem for a number of years.
But yes, having a good QB is sufficient to win in a QB-driven league. Maybe not win the SB, but make the playoffs. Again how the Bills not finding a QB gets pinned on Ralph is anyone's guess, but I guess he's the easiest target.
-
Quibbling and sophistry. How predictable from you.
You think GB knew (EDIT: they) had a SB MVP on their hands in early 2008 when AR hadn't started a game in 3 seasons?
Lack of insight. How predictable from you.
Do I think GB, i.e. Thompson, McCarthy (who was a lousy positional coach and a "WTF!" head coaching hire), and Murphy knew Rodgers was a SB MVP-in-waiting? Can't say. But they obviously felt good enough about him to release GB demi-god Favre.
Doc, Rodgers is quite a pick, no doubt. But check out the Packers drafts over the past few years. Not too shabby.
I agree. But Rodgers is the key given it's a QB-driven league.
-
I think a large portion of the issue is that they are not statistical facts because it is an opinion as to what determines "pressure." Or at least that's an argument against it.
Also, the grading system seems to involve more than the "statistical facts" that are claimed.
As I have stated previously, some of the stats show well for Fitz. He's one of the best at sack % when pressured. He's above average at interception % when pressured. This tells me Fitz gets the ball out when pressured without taking a loss and without creating turnovers. He makes the smart play and lives for another down.
I think these numbers show exactly what we thought of Fitz, he's an average QB/athlete with great intelligence.
That Fitz has a low completion percentage, sack rate, and fairly low INT percentage under pressure tells me he's throwing the ball away rather than risk a sack (+/- fumble) or INT. The question that needs to be answered is "did he miss open/obvious receivers when throwing under pressure?" It's hard to complete a pass when no one is open/quick enough.
-
It's ironic in the discussion of big market versus small market that Green Bay was the SB champion this season. Some will rush to point out how the Packers spent a lot of money, but pay close attention to where they allocated their dollars. It was re-signing current players, originally drafted, undrafted, or in the case of Ryan Pickett, on free agents they're giving a 2nd contract.
And I'm sure someone will point out their ownership structure is different, and that's valid. Except it has nothing to do with their ability to build a championship caliber team, while transitioning from a HOF QB and implementing an entirely new defense.
The Bills are where they are because the owner sought to meddle and only now is delegating authority over football decisions to actual football people. You won't see Mark Murphy telling Ted Thompson what to do, even though both played in the NFL. For all the credit some Bills fans give RW, he is directly responsible for their inability to win these past 11 years. Small market or big market, a team has to have an owner who A) finds quality people in the front office and B) let's them do the job they're hired to do. Maybe RW is finally realizing this, but in the interim it's inexcusable to waste an entire decade like Buffalo did.
Green Bay won thanks in large part to Aaron Rodgers, who wasn't drafted by their current regime, and who was bypassed by 21 other teams in 2005, many of them needing a QB. Has Ralph's alleged "meddling" prevented the Bills from getting a decent QB all these years?
-
I would just add that besides the questions with RT, does anyone think that the OL that was on the field most of the time (i.e. injury replacements) had any sort of continuity as an offensive unit?
edit: many fans wanted help on the OL. Well, it turned out there must have been more needs for the Bills on D than even Nix would admit to.
The O-line had little continuity last year. Woods and Bell barely practiced during the off-season and training camp, and needed rest during games and during the week. RT was a revolving door almost all season long. RG became a revolving door from game 11 on. The only constant was Levitre at LG.
This time around, Bell and Wood are healthy going into the off-season, the RG situation will be fleshed-out before the season starts from a promising group of candidates, and ideally the same goes for RT, where the Bills added a draft pick to the mix. Of course, there's nothing you can do about injuries.
-
Is that a real question to the poster who put that up? I mean come on, it has a fairly obvious answer. The Cincy game was an abnormal game greatly helped to make possible by the fact that Cincy literally lost half of their starting secondary mid game in which prior to that Fitz was playing atrocious. The point the other poster was trying to make, was that outside of that game, he was pretty unimpressive in the majority of the rest of his games.
Like I said before, in the 9 games following the Balt game which caused everyone to get on his band wagon, he completed just 56% of his passes, 12 TD's, with 16 turnovers, and a QB rating of 70...and that is including the Cincy game.
I mean how often are you banking on our opponent losing half their starting secondary for a game?
They lost Joseph, which hurt, but Cris Crocker is a journeyman talent at best and was replaced by an equal, and arguably better, FS in Ndukwe. And it's not like the Bills didn't have injury issues of their own. So again, if you want to take out the best game, you had better take out the worst.
-
Aside from the Cinci game (where Fitz was playing terrible up until the Bengals lost half of their starting secondary before half time due to injury) Fitz didn't play well in games that we won. In those 4 games, he only completed 58% of his passes while only throwing for an average of 207 yards per game (again, the Cinci game really skews those numbers.). Take out the Cinci game and Fitz only completes 57% of his passes and only throws for 170 yards per game. In those 4 games, our defense held our opponents to just over 15 points per game and if you take out the Cinci game, our defense only allowed a hair under 11 points per game. Why is it that Fitz wasn't very good even in games when we weren't playing catch-up and he wasn't being forced to sling the ball down the field trying cut down a big deficit?
Why just remove the Cincy game? Why not also remove his worst game, which was the 2nd Pats game? If you do, he completed 58.3% of his passes, threw for 221 yards/game and had a 19:10 TD:INT ratio, not to mention 2 fewer fumbles.
-
Agreed. IMHO, any deal that would move the Bills (or any NFL team for that matter) to Toronto would include a clause for a new stadium.
The Rogers Centre is just too small for the NFL in both overall seating capacity and the number of luxury boxes. It's also over 20 years old.
As for the guy who said they would support the team if it was "theirs": the Argos are averaging less than 30K per game. If that's what the NFL can expect, I do not see the NFL being in a big hurry to put a team there. The LA market can put more people in the seats.
Holy crap, you're right! The Rogers Center holds 31,074 (expandable to 52,230, ha!), but looking at 2010's attendance figures, I'd eyeball average attendance at ~26,000. That's pathetic! And the Argos are "their team," unlike the Bills, who they also don't support.
-
Time will tell good people. Time will tell. There are no other options at present so the Bills will dance with who they brung.
I think OT Hairston is going to be a player
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
More than a few productive OL come from the mid-rounds. Again, Hairston has all the things you want in an OT (could stand to be a better run-blocker) and went against some quality competition in college.