JPL7 Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 he's not 5'10". they may list him at that but he's a lot smaller. even the broadcasters on MNF were commenting how he's around 5'5" to 5'6" dude you are retarted. there is no linebacker in this league that is 5'5 or 5'6. The shortest that i can even ever think of was zach thomas, who was listed at approximately 5'10 but was really about 5'8 or 5'9. A 5'5 linebacker aint ever going to happen. Fletcher is a solid 5'9 to 5'10.
zazie Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 dude you are retarted. there is no linebacker in this league that is 5'5 or 5'6. The shortest that i can even ever think of was zach thomas, who was listed at approximately 5'10 but was really about 5'8 or 5'9. A 5'5 linebacker aint ever going to happen. Fletcher is a solid 5'9 to 5'10. I saw him a couple times in person, out of uniform, and he is not a midget, you're right. Average height, 5"9' or 5"10'. I would have noticed if he was that short.
JohnC Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 London Fletcher is ranked second in the league in tackles right now. What happened to him? Free agency, trade, cut, injured? I guess I never knew how he left. London Fletcher was a good player for the Bills and is a very good player for the Skins. He is better than any LB currently playing for the Bills. The reason why he was not retained by Buffalo is very simple: His contract expired and he wanted a contract worthy of his performance. The Bills decided not to pay him what his caliber of play merited. (No one should be surprised.) He left to join the Skins on the recommendation of theilr DC, Greg Williams. The issue with Fletcher is the same issue that resulted in the loss of Pat Williams and Jason Peters, money. The unfair complaint against Fletcher is that he would make tackles down the field instead of near the line of scrimmage. There is a very simple explanation for that: Our DL was getting knocked back so far that that was where the tackles had to be made. One attribute that no one who has ever played with him, either in St. Lous, Buffalo or Washington, would dispute is that he is a leader on the field and in the locker-room. He is a player who deeply cares about the team and its performance. You can't say that the Bills have an overabundance of those type of character players on the team. The Bills run a chickenshiiit operation. Consequently, the Bills are and have been one of the worst teams for more than a decade.
Red Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 London Fletcher is ranked second in the league in tackles right now. What happened to him? Free agency, trade, cut, injured? I guess I never knew how he left. Though there are many theories on this board as to why he ultimately was allowed to leave, the consensus is that the "brain trust" at OBD did not feel that he fit their plans anymore. Now, apparently those plans have made themselves evident. Namely, to run a no-nonsense, pushover against the run, constantly injured, undersized defense. Fletcher did not fit that plan, so he was allowed to leave via free agency to the 'Skins. Living where I do in DC, he has been perhaps their sole bright spot for quite some time. Fletcher, Pat Williams, and Antoine Winfield should never have been allowed to leave the Bills. They were veteran cornerstones with which to build around. It saddens me to think of a linebacking corp with Fletcher in the middle, and Mitchell and Poz on the outsides. Williams and Stroud at the tackle positions...
VADC Bills Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 London Fletcher is ranked second in the league in tackles right now. What happened to him? Free agency, trade, cut, injured? I guess I never knew how he left. Easy answer...the Bills did not want to pay him the money. They justified it by saying they wanted a more attacking defense behind the line of scrimmage. It amazes me how peolple buy into the BS that management will feed them to disguise the fact that they don't want to pay the bucks. Bills management indicated that Fletcher was tackling down field and his age was a factor. Untrue and if you have seen him play recently he is clearly better than anyone we presently have. Remember when Pat Williams was to old and about done.....Wrong , the Bills just didn't want to pay him. Remember when Antoine Winfield didn't create the turnovers or have a strong impact on the game.....Wrong, the Bills just didn't want to pay him. Who knows how Kyle Williams or John McCargo would benefit by playing next to proven veterans when they were rookies. Who knows how Poz or Ellison would benefit playing next to a proven veteran like Fletcher. Instead I honestly do not think that Williams, McCargo, Poz, and Ellison are capable of starting on hardly any other teams. Poz really hurts because we traded up to get him when David Harris was still on the board. We could have had Harris and an additional pick....Gotta love the Bills braintrust.
zazie Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 Easy answer...the Bills did not want to pay him the money. They justified it by saying they wanted a more attacking defense behind the line of scrimmage. It amazes me how peolple buy into the BS that management will feed them to disguise the fact that they don't want to pay the bucks.Bills management indicated that Fletcher was tackling down field and his age was a factor. Untrue and if you have seen him play recently he is clearly better than anyone we presently have. Remember when Pat Williams was to old and about done.....Wrong , the Bills just didn't want to pay him. Remember when Antoine Winfield didn't create the turnovers or have a strong impact on the game.....Wrong, the Bills just didn't want to pay him. Who knows how Kyle Williams or John McCargo would benefit by playing next to proven veterans when they were rookies. Who knows how Poz or Ellison would benefit playing next to a proven veteran like Fletcher. Instead I honestly do not think that Williams, McCargo, Poz, and Ellison are capable of starting on hardly any other teams. Poz really hurts because we traded up to get him when David Harris was still on the board. We could have had Harris and an additional pick....Gotta love the Bills braintrust. We would have picked Poz in the first round, according to Levy, had our first choice not still been there. He was #2 on the board for the Bills. So, could have been worse, believe ot or not.
PushthePile Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 London Fletcher is in his 12th season of professional football. He only started one game his rookie season but since then has started all but one game over 11 years. It's amazing how the guys getting paid to run football teams have missed the boat so badly, and a few of our very own TSW experts can see he sucks. I mean, with 12 years of game footage you would think that someone would have noticed that London only tackles players 10 yards down field. London Fletcher has had a fantastic career and is as reliable as they come. He's always been a leader and class act. Screw the pro-bowl, it is nothing but a joke anyway. Fletcher played his azz off for this team and it's a little disturbing that a small percentage of fans still hold onto that BS myth. What we have now at MLB, should serve as sufficient proof as to what Fletcher brings to a team.
benderbender Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 Fletcher is undersized but has excellent awareness and is a good tackler. All of which we lack in the LB corps currently. But to be honest, he is old and I was sure he'd have retired by now
zazie Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 Fletcher is undersized but has excellent awareness and is a good tackler. All of which we lack in the LB corps currently. But to be honest, he is old and I was sure he'd have retired by now Instead he is near the top of his game and still never misses a game. Left forearm intact
silvermike Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 Keith Ellison is #4 in the league in tackles. Fletcher leads him by 3, all of them assists. I think Fletcher is a good linebacker, but tackles isn't an effective measurement of that.
zazie Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 Keith Ellison is #4 in the league in tackles. Fletcher leads him by 3, all of them assists. I think Fletcher is a good linebacker, but tackles isn't an effective measurement of that. If you think Keith Ellison is comparable to Fletcher, well, he is not.
rstencel Posted November 9, 2009 Posted November 9, 2009 Instead he is near the top of his game and still never misses a game. Left forearm intact He needs protection in order to be on top of his game. Playing behind the best DT in the game is a big reason why he is playing well. He wouldn't have the same luxury if was still with Bills. He needs clean are, and runs around the blockers rather than taking them on. While he is quick enough to still get in on many tackles doing this, it isnt in best interest of team in doing that. The act of running around give the ball carier more yards, and still leaves that blocker unoccupied to take someone else out of the play.
rstencel Posted November 9, 2009 Posted November 9, 2009 If you think Keith Ellison is comparable to Fletcher, well, he is not. Is a great example of tackles not being a great indicator of talent however I would take Fletcher over Ellison, but there are probably about 40 other LB's would take before Fletcher as well. Although Ellison is a much better pass defender than Fletcher.
Fewell733 Posted November 9, 2009 Posted November 9, 2009 always like Fletcher. Still a heck of a player.
Wilson from Gamehendge Posted November 9, 2009 Posted November 9, 2009 Until he starts making drive ending tackles, and plays that actually get his team off the field, I do not think a pro bowl is in his future. Yes with him on the field, can be pretty successful with a bend but don't break system, since he keeps down the big plays that can kill you in run game. But if the opponents just keep running at him they keep getting first downs, since he gives so much ground so frequently. Most teams love to play against players like that, as they can keep their defense off the field while he pads his stats. Why does he have to make a drive ending tackle? Why can't #1 pick Orakpo do it? Why cant the $100 million dollar man do it? Or their stud SS Landry? Andre Carter? Come on...give me a better excuse than that! It is up to the whole DEFENSE to get the team off the field, not just Fletcher's. He is ALWAYS at the top of the charts in tackles...and has never been to a pro-bowl. He deserves to go.
rstencel Posted November 9, 2009 Posted November 9, 2009 Why does he have to make a drive ending tackle? Why can't #1 pick Orakpo do it? Why cant the $100 million dollar man do it? Or their stud SS Landry? Andre Carter? Come on...give me a better excuse than that! It is up to the whole DEFENSE to get the team off the field, not just Fletcher's. He is ALWAYS at the top of the charts in tackles...and has never been to a pro-bowl. He deserves to go. He doesn't need to to be a good player. But the pro bowl players should be the elite ones making the big plays. He does his job, and makes allot of tackles, but don't think tackle count alone is a good indication of greatness. Shoot, Ellison would be considered for pro bowl votes this year if was, and he isn't even good by LB standards. I don't think he was every the type of player that should have been in the pro bowl. Every team he played on, reportedly tried to upgrade the position he was playing while he was there. Rams tried repeatedly, and supposedly tried to trade him the year before he left via free agency. He was good enough to outplay the players that were brought in to be an upgrade to him however. The fact that the teams he was on kept trying to replace him, doesn't exactly show a glowing advertisement as one of the best in the game however.
BADOLBILZ Posted November 10, 2009 Posted November 10, 2009 How many of those tackles are 10 yards down field? By contrast, Poz visualizes making tackles 10 yards downfield while on the sideline with his arm in a sling. Over under on Poz snapping that arm again is 3 weeks. But at least we are $30M under the salary cap.
Sisyphean Bills Posted November 10, 2009 Posted November 10, 2009 By contrast, Poz visualizes making tackles 10 yards downfield while on the sideline with his arm in a sling. Over under on Poz snapping that arm again is 3 weeks. But at least we are $30M under the salary cap. Cash-to-cap enables competitive continuity.
GrudginglyPessimistic Posted November 10, 2009 Posted November 10, 2009 How many of those tackles are 10 yards down field? As is demonstrated by some of the analysis above this is simply a bogus claim. I think Fletcher has demonstrated one flaw consistently. He now languishes with the DeadSkins (who are bad for numerous other reasons than MLB play) after signing as an FA. He chose them after choosing the Bills where though he led the team in tackles to his credit year and year out (notable in that he broke the one year total tackle record of Chris Spielman), where essentially he languishes in the midst of our 0 for a decade playoff performance. Before that he got drafted by the Rams. He is not the perfect player (no wrap on him as few are) but he is very good. His big problem is that he is lousy at picking good teams.
zazie Posted November 10, 2009 Posted November 10, 2009 As is demonstrated by some of the analysis above this is simply a bogus claim. I think Fletcher has demonstrated one flaw consistently. He now languishes with the DeadSkins (who are bad for numerous other reasons than MLB play) after signing as an FA. He chose them after choosing the Bills where though he led the team in tackles to his credit year and year out (notable in that he broke the one year total tackle record of Chris Spielman), where essentially he languishes in the midst of our 0 for a decade playoff performance. Before that he got drafted by the Rams. He is not the perfect player (no wrap on him as few are) but he is very good. His big problem is that he is lousy at picking good teams. Like all the players in the league, he picks the team that agrees to pay him the most.
Recommended Posts