Cash
-
Posts
2,657 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Cash
-
-
I respectfully disagree, Red.
I'm not obtuse enough to say that Buffalo doesn't need improvements along the o-line, but a top-notch QB would solve most of the problems with the offense in one move. Granted, a good o-line gives an average QB more time and thus a better chance of being successful, but a great QB can be successful despite his o-line.
Compare a team like Pittsburgh to a team like Tennessee.
- Pittsburgh is tied with Buffalo through 8 games with 23 sacks allowed, good for the 7th most in the league. Buffalo is fortunate to be 3-5 (thanks to two horrific performances form opposing QBs), while Pittsburgh is 6-2, with both losses coming without their best defensive player. They also own victories over 6-2 Denver and 7-1 Minnesota. The two teams have very similar running games as well--Buffalo averages 110.0 ypg (19th in the NFL) vs. Pittsburgh's 115.2 ypg (15th). Defensively, Pittsburgh allows an average of 17.4 ppg to Buffalo's 21.1, so there is something to be said for defensive play, but I think the major difference is QB play. Big Ben ranks 4th in the league in QB rating, 5th in passing ypg, 9th in TDs (3 behind 1st place), and 1st in ypa (which I understand that most analysts consider to be a more telling stat than QB rating even). I'm not proposing that Ben's doing it all on his own, but I think it's a very good example of why QB play is paramount to offensive productivity.
On to Tennessee:
- They've allowed the fewest sacks in the NFL (4), and their running game employs the NFL's leading rusher in Chris Johnson, yet they rank 30th in the league in total offense and needed back-to-back wins just to get to 2-6. Defensively, they rank 31st in the NFL, and own the league's worst pass defense. However, they managed to win 2 straight games by simply switching QBs. Now I'm not saying that Vince Young is the answer for them, but it's another great example of how offensive line play is almost negligible compared to the impact that QB play has on an offense.
So I say Buffalo should take their shot at getting an elite QB. Even if they get it wrong, I'd rather they keep at it until they've got the right guy behind center, since that's what I believe will get the team pointed in the right direction. As for who that should be, I need some time on that one...I'm not nearly ready with my draft stuff yet to start throwing out names.
As for the OL, I favor the idea of moving Wood back to his natural center position, letting Butler play RG, and drafting (after a QB, of course) multiple OTs in rounds 2 through 7 to compete with Bell and Meredith (the rest of the picks should be devoted to DT and LB--figure a total of 1 QB, 3 OTs, 2 LBs and 2 DTs).
Just my 1 cent.
Excellent post. I'd add that in addition to drafting multiple OTs, I'd like to see at least 1 veteran brought in with the aim of starting. If said veteran got beat out by a rookie or one of our holdovers, great.
-
Well, the part where the NFL is essentially taking probably hundreds of thousands of dollars away from Gridiron Greats really sucks. But it's probably not good for our society to have children's idols shilling hard liquor during football games that children are watching. As a childless adult, I say screw the kids -- let the players strike the pose.
-
A lot of the problem with our run D has been overpursuit/bad angles/guys freelancing and leaving their gaps open. In theory, a smaller veteran might do a better job of shoring up those flaws than a bigger rookie. I don't buy it, but we'll see.
The good news is that we probably won't lose time of possession quite so badly this week. It'll be hard for the Titans to put together any 10 play drives when Chris Johnson bursts through the line untouched on most carries. And since he's much faster than any of our linebackers (including Scott), and a fair amount faster than anyone in our secondary (unless McGee is healthy), he'll just be scoring on most of those carries.
"Small, slow, and injured is no way to play defense, son."
-
Isnt Roscoe a FA at the end of this year? Can someone provide a link to his contract?
I don't have time to look up Roscoe's details right now, but our only free agent WRs this offseason will be TO and Josh Reed. Maybe Jenkins, too, but I'm not sure about that. Evans, Hardy, Johnson, & Parrish are all signed for at least one more year.
-
Hmm, carrying 7 WRs, 2 RBs, and 1 FB is a rather unconventional setup. So if both of our backs get hurt on Sunday, what's the backup plan? McIntyre moves to tailback? Josh Reed (former RB) is the emergency tailback? Empty sets all day long?
On the bright side, it's nice to have another big target that our QB won't be able to get the ball to.
-
Man, all of this drafting a QB talk is way too premature. It will do no good to have Tom Brady or one of the Manning's under center if he is always on his arse.
The Bills need an offensive line. I like Wood, Hangartner, Levitre, and Butler. McKinney is good depth. I hope that Meredith and Bell do mature into starting offensive tackles for the Bills, but neither should be starting right now.
Chambers is horrible. I'm not too fond of Scott.
Right now, with losing Chambers and Scott and having both MEredith and Bell on the #2 roles at the tackle positions, the depth would be ok. This would also give a project like Bell time to mature and grow into the position.
But a real LT (I would draft #1 this year on a LT), and perhaps a later round RT and/or free agent would help round out the line.
Any other focus other than the line would be a colossal mistake (that includes picks for the secondary).
So what's the plan then? Build up an elite line, then try to win the Super Bowl with a rookie QB? How about trying to find a QB while trying to fix the line?
I think everyone understands that you need good O-line play to win in the NFL, but QB remains the most important position in football. In the NFL, you either have a quarterback or you're looking for a quarterback. We fall into the latter category. That doesn't mean we have to or should ignore the O-line.
-
Not me. Best case scenerio is McNiel comes in as a FA. In that case I still target the best T in the draft because one tackle is not enough to help this line. Hang leaves much to be desired at C and Wood shifting there fixes that. But who plays G? Butler going back is an option but he has his ACL to worry about. Even if he can play we need a G or T to fill in where ever he is not. IMO you HAVE to jump at the chance to get two bookend tackles and hope Butler can come back from injury to play G. If not Hang can hold down the spot until Butler is back. Even with all that we are still in need of more depth along the interior, because as of right now NONE of our backups inside belong in the NFL.
Aaron Rogers has shown he is one of the better QBs in the league. He is playing great even with getting no protection, but while his play is very high the sacks that result in negative yardage are killing their team. I heard on ESPN this week that only one time this season, last week vrs TB, has Rogers been sacked AND the Packers have had that drive produce points. AKA if Rogers gets sack, drive over. So while great blocking is not imperative to QB success, it is imperative to team success. The Bills have had zero success recently, and it relates directly to the OL.
So how would you like the QB position to be addressed?
-
You know, if they predicted that pick with the explanation, "The Bills are in love with drafting DBs high," I think it would be a solid mock. But when you say ridiculous things like, "(The Bills) need to upgrade at cornerback," it makes you sound stupid. The Bills have the #3 pass defense in the league right now. Also the worst run D in the league, terrible QBs, and a terrible O-line. So clearly the defensive backfield is not the problem. Try 20 minutes of research before writing the next mock draft, chief.
-
Nice troll. Kudos.
-
If I thought 10-6 or better was in any way possible, then I'd root for that. But I don't, so I'm rooting for wholesale changes. Only way to make that happen is with a bad record.
During the individual games, however, I can't bring myself to root for the Bills to lose. If I'm watching them, I'm happy if they win and upset if they lose.
-
At this point, I'd prefer he start. If he spends the rest of the year on the bench, people might be able to convince themselves that he should be brought back next year.
-
Fitzpatrick >> Edwards
Doesn't mean either one is starter material. From what I've seen, it looks like a bunch (but not all) of Fitzpatrick's bad throws come are caused by pressure, to the point where I think he could do a good job behind a good O-line.
Trentative plays so scared that I really don't think he can ever be good, even behind the best O-line in the world. And even if he miraculously grows some balls and develops a pocket presence, there's still the problem of his arm. He doesn't have a big arm, and he's not very accurate. How often do you see him hit someone in stride? That's accuracy. Throwing the ball 4 yards to a stationary guy is not.
-
Video's up. Ten seconds in, seems to be the usual.
-
You make some good points in your post Dr.
BTW, Mamula had 5.5 sacks his rookie year and 31.5 during his 5 year career. So he averaged about 6 sacks per season. Like Maybin he came out as a 6'4" 250 pounder.
One difference is that Mamula admitted after his career was over that he didn't love football, he was in it for the money.
Hopefully (and it seems likely) Maybin loves football and has the desire and motivation to become a good player. We've seen little to be encouraged about so far so all we have right now for Maybin is hope.
Mamula was a solid but unspectacular player whose career was cut short by injuries. Definitely a bust considering how high he was drafted, but not nearly the "one workout wonder" that people think he is.
-
I am perplexed at DraftTek's computer pick for the Bills in RD#1: QB Jake Locker.
http://www.drafttek.com/round12010.asp
As per your recommendations, I put in our positional needs.
The comnputer spat out Locker.
Brandon Spikes was still on the board. He'd make a kickazz ILB, either moving Poz to the outside or go with a 3-4.
Arthur Jones from Syracuse (the DE) DT Terrence Cody, and WR Dez Bryant were the next 3 picks. How bad would Cody be next to Stroud?
I intend to put a comment up about Locker, but would you have rather had Spikes or Cody or someone else?
I can change our positional needs accordingly.
Astro, Bills Correspondent
DraftTek
I'd much rather have Locker than any LB in the first round. I'm not sold on Locker by any means, but you have to consider positional value. The 49ers hit a Grand Slam with Patrick Willis. Hey, that's great, enjoy your 6-10 seasons. That's not a knock on Willis, he's amazing and I'd definitely rather have him than Poz. It's just that no linebacker can make that big a difference in the win column. QB is a different story on that front. There's no sure things at QB in the first round, but if you hit (e.g., Flacco), you win big and keep on winning. Even if you hit on a Hall of Fame linebacker, you just don't get the payoff of hitting on a money QB.
Also, Arthur Jones is a DT. He could probably play DE in a 3-4 (as DraftTek has him listed), but he's played DT in a 4-3 in college. I like him, but not before the late first round, preferably second round. I know you weren't advocating us drafting him as a DE; I just wanted to point that out.
-
If I remember correctly.. isn't this the guy that John Madden coined the term "cankles" from?
Cankles = Calf + Ankles
Quite possibly. I know that he was on the Greatest Show on Turf Rams, and Madden was all about him at that time, but I don't remember if he was specifically the Cankles guy.
-
Commit to Captain Checkdown for another year? Why not just bring back George Bush? I think he's finally gonna turn it around. At this point, I think I'd take Bush under center over Edwards.
-
Hot dog! We have a wiener!
-
Yeah, loved the bounce-back game from the special teams. Really got a jolt out of seeing my man Terrance McGee back there on the one kickoff, too. Can we maybe cool it on the "fire Bobby April" talk? Five bad games do not outweigh five excellent years.
-
You don't watch very closely. TE has gone deep to both Evans and TO.
Again, repeating endlessly that TE has not thrown downfield to a WR doesn't make it true. He clearly checks down a lot. But the vast majority of Fitz's passes are short also.
You should be surprised that "Fitzpatrick hasn't turned the ball over yet"--because he HAS. He was picked off twice against the Jets--one was waved off after Jets penalty.
You should do some basic research before you dive into the shallow end. It's just lazy.
<Sigh>
Really, dude? I go through box scores and one game log to compile and post stats showing that Edwards goes to WRs 49% of the time and Fitzpatrick does so 81% of the time, and I'm the lazy one?
Let me hit you with some knowledge, chief. When I say "...I can't recall Edwards successfully throwing to a WR on the move, except for the occasional go route," that doesn't mean the same thing as (your words) "TE has not thrown downfield to a WR." Of course he's thrown downfield to WRs. Duh. But first of all, less than half of his passes even go towards WRs, and secondly, when they do go to WRs, it's usually to either a stationary WR or to a WR running a go route. "TE has gone deep to both Evans and TO." No kidding, ace. We know. That's why we say things like "except for the occasional go route." Also called the fly or 9 route, it's the quintessential deep ball. Trent throws a fair number of those. I don't want him throwing many more. Only Al Davis thinks you can still build an offense around the fly pattern. Trent doesn't throw nearly enough slants, crossing patterns, ins, outs, and posts. Yes, he throws some, but very rarely, and with little success. Off the top of my head, I can think of two slants to TO that were both bad throws resulting in interceptions, and one really nice circle route to Marshawn in the Cleveland game, where Edwards hit Lynch in stride and Lynch picked up some nice RAC. So Edwards has had at least one good pass to a target on the move, but I can't think of any that went to WRs.
"But the vast majority of Fitz's passes are short also."
This strikes me as one of those Poz-type vast majorities, i.e., about 40%. But you know what? Back up this statement with evidence, and I'll agree. All you have to do is take a look at the game logs of the last two games. Every pass is labeled as short, deep, etc. Just find the total number of "short" attempts by Fitzpatrick, then divide by his total attempts on the year, and you'll get a percentage. Don't be lazy.
-
I think this makes sense, especially given the array of great QB and OT's about where we pick. Also, since LB is deep in free agency, you have that priority right behind.
I'd add WR either at P9 or P4, leading toward P9.
The only reason I wouldn't put WR at P9 is that there's a significant chance that all 3 of TO, Josh Reed, and Roscoe Parrish are gone this offseason. Reed will probably get re-signed, but you never know, and I'd be surprised to see either TO or Parrish on next year's opening day roster.
-
The Panthers must have dropped considerably unless someone had their info wrong last week. Seems like someone posted the panthers were 2nd against the pass.(before the game) I can't see Fitzpatrick's performance dropping them that much, but I also didn't verify the ranking so it was probably wrong to begin with then.
I think he meant that the Bills are 10th against the pass, which is true. The Panthers are #1. That's the official ranking, which is passing yards per game. If you look at yards per pass, the Bills are #3 and the Panthers are #12.
-
The trend that you have noticed is that Fitz can't connect with his WRs. His complettion percentage is demonstrative.
Trent has major problems with confidence--he may be done psychologically in this league. But I'm not sure how you get excited about another guy who can't get the ball to his WRs any better than TE, despite "targeting" them more frequently.
Yeah, Fitzpatrick isn't a very good QB. Anyone getting excited about him is fooling himself. He would play better with a better O-line (a bunch of his misses came when he was hit as he threw), but that's true of any QB. Bottom line is that Fitzpatrick is no more than a backup.
But the point is that he's at least trying to be a good QB. If he had better ability, he would be a good QB. But Edwards isn't even trying to make plays downfield. How many times does he have to throw to a covered RB at the line of scrimmage on 3rd or 4th and long before it's clear that Edwards just doesn't get it? You could give him the best arm in the world and the best O-line in the world and he'd still suck, because his decision-making is nightmarish.
Now, if Edwards had the best arm in the world, I might be willing to wait on him, and hope his decision-making miraculously turns around. But Edwards doesn't have a good arm. His completion percentage is only better than Fitzpatrick's because Edwards makes so many more safe throws. On WR throws, they're both around 50%. And I can't recall Edwards successfully throwing to a WR on the move, except for the occasional go route. You just can't have a successful offense made up of hitches, checkdowns, and fly patterns, and that's all that Edwards gives you. Even the rare (extremely rare) times that he throws to a WR on the move, he's way too inaccurate. He's gotten intercepted twice on slants, and both times it was because the pass was high and behind TO. And he turns the ball over way too much for a guy who never makes any risky throws. I'm actually really surprised Fitzpatrick hasn't turned the ball over yet, because his willingness to take risks plus his lack of accuracy plus our bad pass protection should equal significant turnovers. Don't be surprised if Fitzpatrick tosses a couple picks against Houston.
-
Not a bad comparison, but better than Edwards at this point (IMO).
On 24 attempts Sunday Fitzpatrick was sacked, knocked down or pressured on 14.
Fix the O-line, then think about fixing the QB position.
Why can't we try to do both at the same time? Fitzpatrick might be able to lead a team to 10-6 or so with a great O-line, but that's a best-case. Edwards is worthless. I'd like to go QB at the top of the draft, and make O-line (especially the tackles, but there's currently no depth in the middle) the overall top priority in the off-season. I'd like at least 1 decent veteran signing and at least 1 pick in the first 3 rounds.
“Captain Morgan” pose was effectively banned by NFL
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
That's neither here nor there. The kids are watching, whether the NFL cares about them or not. And those kids are idolizing the players they're watching, and imitating them at every turn. So it's probably not a good thing if said idols are shilling for booze. Although at least it's a premium spiced rum. I'd feel more strongly about it if it was Wolfschmidt or something.