MRW Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 A great QB would give you more bang for your buck than a great OT, IMO, but how many people think that great QB will be available for the Bills in the draft this year? I'm far from an expert but there doesn't seem to be any consensus that any of the QBs are great top 10 picks, yet I expect 2 will be taken very early as they almost always are. If that's the case, the worst thing the Bills could do is take a QB just because that's what they've decided they need. The Bills cannot afford to miss on this pick. Getting fixated on which position is the most important is a terrible way to approach the draft. I hope the Bills draft a difference maker, whether that's a QB, OL, DL,or LB (hopefully not RB, WR, S, or CB though). Of course every team wants a Peyton Manning, but you don't pick J.P. Losman over Joe Thomas just because you've decided QB is more important.
grelit Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 A Quarterback makes or breaks a team. We need one asap.
Thoner7 Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 QB>OL Look at Manning, he plays behind a bunch of no names and makes them look great, if Jeff Saturday was in a Bills uniform we'd call him over-hyped and not worth the money it cost to sign him. But with the colts he's a pro bowler, do you think that Wolford, Ballard, Hull and the rest were that great? no it was the talent surrounding them! Scheme has a lot to do with it as well, the line Buffalo had in the 90's was good, but the talents of 4 Hall of famers made it great (kelly, Thomas, Lofton and should be Reed) Mike Pollack Tarik Glenn Tony Ugoh I just named one of the Colts starting Guards, and TWO of their FORMER LTs. Now I cannot think of any other team I could do that with (not counting the Bills). Dont forget Jeff Saturday either. Not exactly a bunch of no names.
Conch Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 DT's & OTs all draft long. You can create guards from dirt. Move Wood to center.
dante23x Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 The QB is more important, but before we draft a QB we need to upgrade our tackles. What's the point of drafting someone, just to get killed behind the worst set of tackles in the NFL.
thewildrabbit Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 It just amazes me on how many posters here think the QB is everything on a team, if you have a really good QB he can over come a poor O line, running game and receivers... Is simply not true. And I certainly can't chastise any posters here because many NFL coaches believe the same thing. What is so sad about that is... many new NFL head coaches believe the QB is key and draft a good young QB only to see him sacked and hit over and over and then think it is his,the QB's fault. After so many hits and sacks the QB soon gets shell shocked and plays worse and worse. They don't focus on building the O line first, and it is why they fail. The Patriots and Colts have two of the best O lines in the NFL and you may have never heard of their linemen because Payton Manning / Tom Brady and their receivers get all the press. Both those QB's are two of the least sacked QB's in the NFL because they both have decent experienced offensive lines. Look at what happened on last Monday night, that Saint pass rush got to Tom Brady and made him look very ordinary, in fact it made him look like a bad QB at times. He was forced to release the ball early causing it to be off target. He was dancing around in the pocket trying to make plays and between the Saints pass coverage and pass rush, Brady just didn't play well. Didn't throw a TD pass and didn't throw for 300 yards. Was it because he was behind a bad O line, no not really. But that Saints Defense played better and was able to harass Brady all game. Now, go back and watch that Bills vs Saints game and realize why Trent Edwards was literally running for his life most of that game. Jauron and his makeshift O line. Conversely, Drew Brees played great because the Patriot pass rush didn't get near him and many pass coverages were simply blown by the Patriot secondary. With 371 yards passing and 5 TD's, I'd say he torched the NE defense. You have two of the top NFL QB's playing against each others teams and the reasons as to why one team won and one team lost were clearly evident to me, the Saints pass rush. Better protection for Tom Brady and he plays better, given more time to throw like he has had in past games and he would eventually find an open receiver and burn the Saints defense. Would the Patriots have won, who knows? At least they would have been in the game instead of a 38-17 blowout loss. Let me ask a question, If your Bill Belichick and you know you have to face a Saints defense like that to win another super bowl and you already have a top QB, RB and receivers, what part of your offense do you upgrade?
thewildrabbit Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 The QB is more important, but before we draft a QB we need to upgrade our tackles. What's the point of drafting someone, just to get killed behind the worst set of tackles in the NFL. Some NFL coaches still don't get that sentence, Jauron clearly didn't. JP Losman, Trent Edwards and even Fitzpatrick would all have played better behind a decent O line.
PushthePile Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 It's been posted before but I think it is a clear example of how a QB can effect the way an offensive line is viewed. Last year the Pats line was being discussed as if it needed to be overhauled. They have somehow returned to their dominant form, despite the same general makeup. The only difference being the QB in place. 2007 Pats with Brady 21 sacks 2008 Pats with Cassel 48 sacks 2009 Pats with Brady 16 sacks It doesn't get any clearer than that. A solid QB can buy you more time in the pocket, he feels the pressure and gets the ball out quicker. It has everything to do with instincts and feel for the game. I absolutely agree that constant pressure will get to any QB. The Saints v.s Pats game last week is a great example of this. Another great example would be the Giants over Pats superbowl. Tom Brady despite the relentless pressure had his team in position to win despite those circumstances. That is a blowout with your average QB. O-lines are going to perform poorly on occasion, even the outstanding ones. The great QBs can keep you in the game despite the pressure, even if they are off their own personal game. I'm not in love with any of the QB prospects in this draft. I would not be upset at all if the Bills took lineman with every pick in this draft. The idea that a great LT is more valuable than a great QB is a joke though. If this teams pitiful scouting deartment feels the next good QB is available, they better take him. Talk to Minnesota fans about having a great line and no QB.
thewildrabbit Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 It's been posted before but I think it is a clear example of how a QB can effect the way an offensive line is viewed. Last year the Pats line was being discussed as if it needed to be overhauled. They have somehow returned to their dominant form, despite the same general makeup. The only difference being the QB in place. 2007 Pats with Brady 21 sacks 2008 Pats with Cassel 48 sacks 2009 Pats with Brady 16 sacks It doesn't get any clearer than that. A solid QB can buy you more time in the pocket, he feels the pressure and gets the ball out quicker. It has everything to do with instincts and feel for the game. I absolutely agree that constant pressure will get to any QB. The Saints v.s Pats game last week is a great example of this. Another great example would be the Giants over Pats superbowl. Tom Brady despite the relentless pressure had his team in position to win despite those circumstances. That is a blowout with your average QB. O-lines are going to perform poorly on occasion, even the outstanding ones. The great QBs can keep you in the game despite the pressure, even if they are off their own personal game. I'm not in love with any of the QB prospects in this draft. I would not be upset at all if the Bills took lineman with every pick in this draft. The idea that a great LT is more valuable than a great QB is a joke though. If this teams pitiful scouting deartment feels the next good QB is available, they better take him. Talk to Minnesota fans about having a great line and no QB. Clearly your fixated on sacks when you should be looking at everything!!! Your talking about a QB that didn't play college football, he sat on the bench behind others for FOUR YEARS!!!! Your talking about a guy who was so raw he literally stunk in preseason so badly that once Brady went down everyone had the Patriots winning no games. Instead that decent O line allowed him to learn and get better and progress, hence the huge contract given to him by the Chiefs. With a scrub that had never played College football the Patriots still managed an 11-5 record. With that same QB and behind a poor O line that same QB is 3-8 and the 24th rated QB in the NFL with the Chiefs. Thank you, you just made my argument for me
PushthePile Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Clearly your fixated on sacks when you should be looking at everything!!! Your talking about a QB that didn't play college football, he sat on the bench behind others for FOUR YEARS!!!! Your talking about a guy who was so raw he literally stunk in preseason so badly that once Brady went down everyone had the Patriots winning no games. Instead that decent O line allowed him to learn and get better and progress, hence the huge contract given to him by the Chiefs. With a scrub that had never played College football the Patriots still managed an 11-5 record. Thank you, you just made my argument for me Made your argument for you? You are delusional. Cassel looks to be the same bum in K.C. that he was in NE. He didn't learn and grow behind a solid o-line. He came in on the fly and looked putrid only to develop into mediocre. Big deal! The afc east played one of the easiest schedules ever that season and Cassel was on the best team. Sacks are only a single example of how a line protects but it is often a glaring example. If you can't see the difference between Brady and Cassel, then I am afraid the argument is pointless.
thewildrabbit Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Made your argument for you? You are delusional. Cassel looks to be the same bum in K.C. that he was in NE. He didn't learn and grow behind a solid o-line. He came in on the fly and looked putrid only to develop into mediocre. Big deal! The afc east played one of the easiest schedules ever that season and Cassel was on the best team. Sacks are only a single example of how a line protects but it is often a glaring example. If you can't see the difference between Brady and Cassel, then I am afraid the argument is pointless. When exactly did I compare Brady to Cassell or state there was no difference between them, your the one who was comparing the seasons Brady played vs Cassell and fixated on the sacks. Then you dismiss the horrid play of Cassell at the start of the season to a finish with an 11-5 record by stating they played an easy schedule? and I'm delusional. This argument may in fact be pointless if you can't grasp the concept of how a decent O line allowed a QB who hadn't played college football to become a success and secure a huge contract. Then go on to another team to stink it up behind a poor O line.
Saint Doug Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Since so many posters are mentioning the Colts and Manning, let's see what Bill Polian has to say about this subject: "The model hasn't changed," Polian said. "The things we do work for us. We have continuity. It starts with a great coach and a great quarterback. Without that, you're not going very far." http://www.buffalonews.com/494/story/876639.html
Red Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 For the Buffalo Bills, it is a Left Tackle. With that being said, how is this Pike kid from Cincy? He looks like a pretty good QB at a #5 school, and the offense looks very pro-like. I admit to knowing nothing about college football, but he looks like a pretty good prospect from a colder weather/ northern climate school.
PushthePile Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 When exactly did I compare Brady to Cassell or state there was no difference between them, your the one who was comparing the seasons Brady played vs Cassell and fixated on the sacks. Then you dismiss the horrid play of Cassell at the start of the season to a finish with an 11-5 record by stating they played an easy schedule? and I'm delusional. This argument may in fact be pointless if you can't grasp the concept of how a decent O line allowed a QB who hadn't played college football to become a success and secure a huge contract. Then go on to another team to stink it up behind a poor O line. The question is not does a good o-line help an offense. The question is can a good QB produce behind a below average o-line, and the answer is yes. The vice-versa is also true, in that a bad QB can screw up a good o-line. The OP asked OL or QB. Assuming that he meant good OL or good QB, the debate is non-existent. A good QB is the only position in football that literally effects the play of everyone else. The comparison to Tom Brady and Cassel stemmed from comparing how each guy effects that same offense. You turned it into how Cassel developed behind that o-line. Which once again leaves you miles away from the point, which is becoming a constant. Cassel's MINIMAL development was thanks in no part to the Pats o-line. In fact that o-line has become a major weakness on an otherwise stacked offense. Matt Cassel is having a similar performance this season in KC to his performance last year. The point was that the Pats o-line is average to below average, and is exposed even worse when a mediocre QB is at the helm. If you put Tom Brady behind center the line is helped out immensely and overall production goes up. This doesn't even take into account Brady is recovering from surgery still and has had a much more difficult schedule this year. No team sport is more effected by one position. Year in year out the best QBs have their teams in the playoffs. You can usually go right down the playoff list and check off the best QBs in the league. They all don't always have the greatest o-lines and running games. It's virtually impossible to be a consistent winner every year without a QB. You can do it with a patchwork o-line.
spartacus Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 When exactly did I compare Brady to Cassell or state there was no difference between them, your the one who was comparing the seasons Brady played vs Cassell and fixated on the sacks. Then you dismiss the horrid play of Cassell at the start of the season to a finish with an 11-5 record by stating they played an easy schedule? and I'm delusional. This argument may in fact be pointless if you can't grasp the concept of how a decent O line allowed a QB who hadn't played college football to become a success and secure a huge contract. Then go on to another team to stink it up behind a poor O line. if you need a magician to play QB to hide the crappy OL play, do you need a Barry Sanders clone at RB as well? seems a good OL would make the running game and passing game to without super stars in the backfield. The Bills have ruined at least 4 QBs by forcing them to play behind craptacular OLs. it would be so much simpler to just build a decent OL
Bufcomments Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Oline...me having played the position in college I kinda biased. You have 2 of the best RB in the NFL IMO and they are semi good because the Oline sucks. Both should have at least 650 yds behind a decent line. Fitz is a career backup. But when he is accurate he can make at least some plays. Behind a better line we might see more passes completed. The Oline comes first. Even if we draft a QB in the first round he wont have a chance behind a weak Oline. I would take the best Olineman with the first pick, depends on what they do during the free agent period.
EC-Bills Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Whats more important? Let the debate begin! OL
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 The Patriots and Colts have two of the best O lines in the NFL and you may have never heard of their linemen because Payton Manning / Tom Brady and their receivers get all the press. This is either just ignorant or a bald-faced lie. Tom Brady MADE that OL what it is. It was the same OL that got Drew Bledsoe killed. Brady comes in and changes how it looks ENTIRELY. That's not a coincidence. And then, when Brady was out last year, Cassell was among the MOST sacked QBs in the league. Sorry, your argument is weak at best.
Alphadawg7 Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Just because he got sacked does that mean he sucks or the line sucks? Also a SB or two. You guys that look at the tree instead of the whole forrest blow my mind. Im no stats man like you Im sure but how bout the touchdowns. How many of those has he drove. I suppose you can give us all that info too. Also how long was he in the pocket waiting for the receiver to get open? Who were the opponents? What I am saying is I dont care who your QB is. If he has no supporting cast he will be as bad as the rest. Chain is only as strong as the weakest link buddy. Dont cry for me bandit. the other men will look at you funny LOL...you are screwing yourself in your own argument with this statement...We have more offensive weapons on our team than probably 2/3's the league. Lynch and Jackson form a formidable duo, Lee and TO would be one of the top tandems in the league if we had a QB, we have young talent behind them at WR and TE...teams would kill to have that many offensive weapons...but why doesnt it work? Because our QB core is pathetic and one of the worst in the league...there isnt a QB on our team that would start for any other team in the league except probably oakland. I mean seriously go team by team and find me a single team other than Oakland where that coaching staff would start Fitz or Trent over their starting QB...there really isnt one...the only other possible team would maybe be Cle... Miami: They really like Henne TB: They have a plethorar of young QB's they are high on and a first rounder from this years draft Thats how bad our QB situation is...why this is so hard for people to get is beyond me. So, the more important point, NO MATTER HOW GOOD YOUR SUPPOTING CAST, YOU WONT BE VERY GOOD WITH BAD QUARTERBACKS...the NFL today is a quarterback driven league...look at ALL the top teams... Brohm is the only exception because he hasnt had a chance to show what he could do.
Alphadawg7 Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 This is either just ignorant or a bald-faced lie. Tom Brady MADE that OL what it is. It was the same OL that got Drew Bledsoe killed. Brady comes in and changes how it looks ENTIRELY. That's not a coincidence. And then, when Brady was out last year, Cassell was among the MOST sacked QBs in the league. Sorry, your argument is weak at best. Hey Joe, look at who you are talking to...thewildrabbit, who is the same guy that said this: If Joe Montana had played for Detroit or the Cardinals in the 80's the guy would have become just another obscure has-been. So what do you expect...lmao
Recommended Posts