Bill from NYC Posted February 15, 2010 Author Posted February 15, 2010 Its about the QB these days. No it isn't. Put any quarterback on the small, weak little Bills and he will get crushed. How many times do you have to see this to believe it?
Orton's Arm Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 I love the "all or nothing" mentality everyone seems to have. It's not "all about" anything in a team sport. The Super Bowl was won by the team with the 2nd round pick free agent QB and the team that made the bigger plays in each phase of the game. You have to have good linemen who play cohesively, a good/great QB, talented skill position players who don't make mistakes and a coaching staff that understands its team and can put them into the best position to succeed. It doesn't matter what position the BILLS draft in the first round - that player has to live up to his slot. I agree with just about everything in this very solid post. As you say, it's a team sport; which in this case means that both a good QB and a good OL are absolutely critical to winning games. It's not an either/or type situation. The one thing you've written with which I take issue is the last sentence. I agree that whichever player the Bills take has to live up to his draft spot. That said, I'd like them to use their first round pick on a more critical, harder-to-fill position, such as QB, LT, NT, or RDE; as opposed to a position that should normally be filled in the second round or later. Right now, the Bills have so many needs at the hardest to fill positions that they can't afford the luxury of using their ninth overall pick on a position that would normally be addressed a little later in the draft.
Alaska Darin Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 I agree with just about everything in this very solid post. As you say, it's a team sport; which in this case means that both a good QB and a good OL are absolutely critical to winning games. It's not an either/or type situation. The one thing you've written with which I take issue is the last sentence. I agree that whichever player the Bills take has to live up to his draft spot. That said, I'd like them to use their first round pick on a more critical, harder-to-fill position, such as QB, LT, NT, or RDE; as opposed to a position that should normally be filled in the second round or later. Right now, the Bills have so many needs at the hardest to fill positions that they can't afford the luxury of using their ninth overall pick on a position that would normally be addressed a little later in the draft. I probably should have said "critical position" because if we draft a friggin' DB or something off the wall, I'm gonna shiv a mofo.
Mr. WEO Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 Yeah, what does that guy know about football? Exactly--he knows better than to blame the least culpable unit of that losing team.
DarthICE Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 No it isn't. Put any quarterback on the small, weak little Bills and he will get crushed. How many times do you have to see this to believe it? That is bull Bill. The OL held up MANY times and the sacks/ incompletions were on the QUARTERBACK. I have sat there screaming at my TV for that weak minded POS Edwards to THROW THE DAMN BALL...instead he sits there and checks down or takes the sack. How many more times do experts have to show fans like you clammoring for an LT that we have OPEN WR's running down the field that our QB's flat don't see? I for one am sick of it. We need a QB in here. Bell can handle LT just fine for another year or so.
DarthICE Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 As for as Polian is concerened, he is talking out his ass to save Manning. the Colts I believe gave up the least amount of sacks this year or close to it. How many times was Manning sacked in the Superbowl? Bottom line MANNING had a bad game, MANNING screwed the pooch on one bad throw that cost the Colts the Superbowl. But after Polian shooting his mouth off, I bet Manning gets hit quite a bit more this next year
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 He's 1 for 5, not exactly a stellar record. Getting there is a major accomplishment but no one remembers you "getting there". Unless you're the Bills and you happen to lose four in a row. actually Polian may be 1 - 6. He has been to SB 2 times with colts once with Panthers and I thought 3 with Buffalo
SoulMan Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 scroll down just a bit It is right after he mentions Maybin in a 3/4. >>>>> It may not mean a whole lot but Indianapolis president Bill Polian put the blame for the Colts’ upset Super Bowl loss squarely on the shoulders of the offensive line.<<<<< Are you reading this ICE? Great qb or not, football teams need blocking. The Bills will lose until they are a big, strong team that can block, stop the run and rush the passer. A flashy new first round quarterback will in all probability NOT solve our problems. Marv and Dick are thankfully gone. It is time to build a team that opponents fear. Fully concur. The Bills are still paying for the Donohoe era that operated on the philosophy that we could win with a high dollar quarterback and a journeymen (or less) line. In reality, the reverse is true. With a recovered Wood, the addition of a stud LT, an upgrade at center and some OL depth - the Bills are close to a line that performs in the to 10 of the NFL. This all assumes that there will be an NFL in 2010 - 2011.
NobesBLO13 Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 actually Polian may be 1 - 6. He has been to SB 2 times with colts once with Panthers and I thought 3 with Buffalo The Panthers' SB appearance was eight years after he left for Indy me thinks.
Boatdrinks Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 [quote name='thebandit27' date='Feb 15 2010, 10:56 AM' post='1758404' In fact, using this Superbowl would only serve to prove ICE's point. The better OL on Feb. 7th, 2010 belonged to the Colts (as Brees was sacked once, knocked down several times, and NO ran for less than 3 yards per carry), but the better QB that day played for New Orleans, and they won the game. While Polian's stance may be incorrect, your depiction of the QB's deciding this game is laughable at best, uninformed at worst. Manning played an excellent game, (several perfect passes were dropped that would have kept drives alive) as did Brees. Manning may have been slightly better, as he avoided the rush all day. But the play of the two QB's was effectively a wash. In a game between two upper echelon offenses, one defensive player (Porter, the real MVP) decided that a play needed to be made. The Colts were driving toward the apparent tying TD, which boiled the game down to a simple equation. Make a stop, take a chance because if you don't, the Colts may get the ball back for Manning with little time left, just enough for a late drive for a score. He knew the pass would come out quickly due to the blitz, saw Reggie Wayne being a little lazy, and jumped the route. Manning put the ball where it (and Wayne) was supposed to be if the ball came out "hot". Wayne committed the Cardinal sin on that route;letting the DB get inside him. Simple as that. You do ANYTHING, even hold or commit offensive interference to stop that DB from getting inside position. You saw the result. Unknowing observers may put that on Manning, but that ball had to come out before the WR makes his break. He expected Wayne to zig and he zagged. So give credit where it is (unfortunately) due. To Greggo for blitzing Manning even if it meant he might get burned, and to Porter for stepping up to make a game changing play when no Colt defender could say the same. In a game most expected to be gaudily offensive, the NFL championship was decided ultimately by defense. Honorable mention to the Saints special teams and Coach Sean Payton for having the guts to call the onside kick. It clearly set the tone for the half. The Colts were caught napping there as well. The timing was hardly surprising, though. Most coaches will say the opening drive of the 3rd quarter is pivotal. Payton's error in going for the TD on 4th down at the end of quarter 2 was costly, and he knew it. Kick off to the Colts, and he may have been playing from behind for most of the 2nd half. Not usually a recipe for success vs the Colts. All too often coaches are conservative, unwilling to take a chance when it may be their only real chance at winning a title. Peyton manning is still the best QB in football, maybe ever. The Saints were a little better that day than his supporting cast. Give them credit.
Alaska Darin Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 The Panthers' SB appearance was eight years after he left for Indy me thinks. He was there 3 seasons and made it to the NFC Championship game in their 2nd season of existence.
Adam Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 That is bull Bill. The OL held up MANY times and the sacks/ incompletions were on the QUARTERBACK. I have sat there screaming at my TV for that weak minded POS Edwards to THROW THE DAMN BALL...instead he sits there and checks down or takes the sack. How many more times do experts have to show fans like you clammoring for an LT that we have OPEN WR's running down the field that our QB's flat don't see? I for one am sick of it. We need a QB in here. Bell can handle LT just fine for another year or so. Actually, we don't know about that because the tv cameras don't show much. Did they hold up the pass rush? Sure, on some plays they did. Were passing lanes open in the proper spaces for the play that was called? You know the answer to that as well as I did, since that isn't shown. Were the WR's open? No idea. Bottom line is that we only know what we see on TV, unless we are at the game. The GM's and coaches see a lot more angles than we do. Edwards got off to a good start in 2008. Does that mean he can get back to that form? I am not a trainer, so I don't know- I do know that whether by his fault or not, he hasn't been the same after the concussion. Bell is not good enough to play LT. I question whether Hangartner is good enough either. I don't like what we have at RT as far as starting. Another point is that our defense isn't good enough to be developing a young QB. It is one thing to be under constant pressure to score points when you are a veteran QB, but it really will hamper the development of a young QB. I like what I saw early on from Edwards and what I saw from JP after a year or two, but we have missed on so many draft picks over the years that we have failed to build a team that can win. I see this as a 4-5 year rebuilding project. I would prefer to make a moderate investment at QB at this point, and build up a team. AS far as trades, I don't see anyone on the roster as indispensible- we have been a loser for 10 years now. I would give the Rams our top pick and their choice of any number of players on the roster they want for the top pick to get Suh. We haven't had a building block player for a long time now
Bill from NYC Posted February 15, 2010 Author Posted February 15, 2010 That is bull Bill. The OL held up MANY times and the sacks/ incompletions were on the QUARTERBACK. I have sat there screaming at my TV for that weak minded POS Edwards to THROW THE DAMN BALL...instead he sits there and checks down or takes the sack. How many more times do experts have to show fans like you clammoring for an LT that we have OPEN WR's running down the field that our QB's flat don't see? I for one am sick of it. We need a QB in here. Bell can handle LT just fine for another year or so. Please examine this comment. In a year or so one would think Bell would be in or at least approaching his prime. If he is any good, why give up a guy who can be "just fine" at LT? The answer is that he is NOT good. He is small, weak, and cannot hold down this position in a competetive manner, let alone remember the snap count. On another team I might be inclined to agree with you, but Levy andJauron built this team upon a foundation of tiny little gadget players, and I'm asking you to look at the possibility that this equals failure until it is completely undone.
thebandit27 Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 While Polian's stance may be incorrect, your depiction of the QB's deciding this game is laughable at best, uninformed at worst. Manning played an excellent game, (several perfect passes were dropped that would have kept drives alive) as did Brees. Manning may have been slightly better, as he avoided the rush all day. But the play of the two QB's was effectively a wash. In a game between two upper echelon offenses, one defensive player (Porter, the real MVP) decided that a play needed to be made. The Colts were driving toward the apparent tying TD, which boiled the game down to a simple equation. Make a stop, take a chance because if you don't, the Colts may get the ball back for Manning with little time left, just enough for a late drive for a score. He knew the pass would come out quickly due to the blitz, saw Reggie Wayne being a little lazy, and jumped the route. Manning put the ball where it (and Wayne) was supposed to be if the ball came out "hot". Wayne committed the Cardinal sin on that route;letting the DB get inside him. Simple as that. You do ANYTHING, even hold or commit offensive interference to stop that DB from getting inside position. You saw the result. Unknowing observers may put that on Manning, but that ball had to come out before the WR makes his break. He expected Wayne to zig and he zagged. So give credit where it is (unfortunately) due. To Greggo for blitzing Manning even if it meant he might get burned, and to Porter for stepping up to make a game changing play when no Colt defender could say the same. In a game most expected to be gaudily offensive, the NFL championship was decided ultimately by defense. Honorable mention to the Saints special teams and Coach Sean Payton for having the guts to call the onside kick. It clearly set the tone for the half. The Colts were caught napping there as well. The timing was hardly surprising, though. Most coaches will say the opening drive of the 3rd quarter is pivotal. Payton's error in going for the TD on 4th down at the end of quarter 2 was costly, and he knew it. Kick off to the Colts, and he may have been playing from behind for most of the 2nd half. Not usually a recipe for success vs the Colts. All too often coaches are conservative, unwilling to take a chance when it may be their only real chance at winning a title. Peyton manning is still the best QB in football, maybe ever. The Saints were a little better that day than his supporting cast. Give them credit. I didn't say that the QBs decided the game. What I said was that--if it proves anything in the QB vs. OL debate--the Superbowl supported the QB side of things moreso than the OL, as evidenced by the numbers. I didn't say that Manning didn't play well, what I said was that he didn't make the plays he needed to make when he needed to make them. I happen to think that Wayne does bare some responsibility for the INT (he ran a very sloppy route, uncharacteristic for him), but loose route or not, Manning made a poor throw and Porter beat him on the play. Whichever way Wayne broke, that ball wasn't getting to him, as Porter had a bead on it from the start. Looking at the replay (which we've all seen a million times by now), the ball was thrown pretty much at Wayne's back. I honestly don't think he had a shot at it no matter what. Like it or not, that play cost them the game. Manning did have another possession after that as well, and he couldn't manage to get his team in the end zone then either. He got out-played by Brees. And as far as I'm concerned, that's ok. Brees is really, really good. Nobody plays their best game every game. But the assertion that Manning was under pressure all game long is just wrong, in my opinion. Unless I watched a different game, I didn't even see Manning touched, not once. Not to mention that, as a QB that calls his own plays, Manning made poor choices consistently when it came to play calls. All game long, Indy was running the ball clean down New Orleans' collective throats. Why not run the ball more? Regardless, I stand by my stance on this one. The Colts OL played a better game than New Orleans' OL, but Brees made the plays when it mattered and Manning did not. Relative to all quantifiable measures, I can't find anything that would support an argument in opposition to either of those statements. So, if it says anything at all (and I never claimed it did), the Superbowl would support the QB side of the QB vs. OL debate. That's all I was trying to say, and it's not laughable or uninformed in the least. It's 100% fact-based.
DarthICE Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 Actually, we don't know about that because the tv cameras don't show much. Did they hold up the pass rush? Sure, on some plays they did. Were passing lanes open in the proper spaces for the play that was called? You know the answer to that as well as I did, since that isn't shown. Were the WR's open? No idea. Bottom line is that we only know what we see on TV, unless we are at the game. The GM's and coaches see a lot more angles than we do. Edwards got off to a good start in 2008. Does that mean he can get back to that form? I am not a trainer, so I don't know- I do know that whether by his fault or not, he hasn't been the same after the concussion. Bell is not good enough to play LT. I question whether Hangartner is good enough either. I don't like what we have at RT as far as starting. Another point is that our defense isn't good enough to be developing a young QB. It is one thing to be under constant pressure to score points when you are a veteran QB, but it really will hamper the development of a young QB. I like what I saw early on from Edwards and what I saw from JP after a year or two, but we have missed on so many draft picks over the years that we have failed to build a team that can win. I see this as a 4-5 year rebuilding project. I would prefer to make a moderate investment at QB at this point, and build up a team. AS far as trades, I don't see anyone on the roster as indispensible- we have been a loser for 10 years now. I would give the Rams our top pick and their choice of any number of players on the roster they want for the top pick to get Suh. We haven't had a building block player for a long time now Edwards never should have started a game in the NFL. Only Bills fans think we can keep taking scrubs and make them into something. There isn't one QB on this roster worthy of taking a starting snap in the NFL. That said, YES I have seen NFL Live, ESPN, NFL Network etal show where we had open guys down the field. Several reporters (local and not) have stated they have seen open guys and Edwards won't throw the ball. Bottom line, we need a Quarterback and badly. Tell QUARTERBACK is finally addressed this team will suck. No team is going to be as stupid as the Chargers were and let a probowl type QB just walk as they did with Brees. And the ONLY reason that happened is they thought they upgraded with a first round pick that is playing now at a probowl level himself. If we don't address the QB position this team will suck until we do. And it can't be with some other teams scrub that fans have 'heard of' (see Brohm). It can't be with a trade of an old POS (See bledsoe/ any shot at McNabb) and it can't be withi a gimick QB (see Vick). This staff has to finally get their **** together and find us a QB. We can parade out the best OL in the league, this team still sucks without a great QB. For a long long time now (since 96) we havent' had a guy under center worth a damn. Yeah yeah I know the gimick Flutie was exciting, but teams quickly figured him out and he got sent to the pine. It is well past time to find that QB we need. A great OL didn't get The Vikings to the NFC championship with the best RB in the league. ONLY after Farve joins them do they have the season they did. This line blocked well at times last year and the QB play just flat sucked. None of our QB's have an arm worth a damn, none can read a defense worth ****. None of them have the awareness to just side step or step up in the pocket to buy time and none have the BALLS to flat out play this position and lead this team. It is past time to quick jerking around and address the QB position once and for all. And FWIW I for one am hoping we aren't in the position to get a top 10 draft pick for a long long time. So if we don't address QB NOW then we are stuck with retred **** for a long time which = failure.
Beebe's Kid Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 Not that I want to argue the OL/QB thing, although I actually agree with Ice on this one. I do want to say that they lost the Super Bowl...and as bad as I used to think that was, it feel pretty good right not to be rooting for a team that good again.
DarthICE Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 Please examine this comment. In a year or so one would think Bell would be in or at least approaching his prime. If he is any good, why give up a guy who can be "just fine" at LT? The answer is that he is NOT good. He is small, weak, and cannot hold down this position in a competetive manner, let alone remember the snap count. On another team I might be inclined to agree with you, but Levy andJauron built this team upon a foundation of tiny little gadget players, and I'm asking you to look at the possibility that this equals failure until it is completely undone. And AGAIN it is ALL ABOUT THE QB. Without a good one it doesn't matter. As for as small and weak, are you seriously telling me that from LG to RT we are small? At one point we had one of the bigger OL's in the league and it still sucked. Big or small, if they can play they can play, if not then they cant. Mike Williams was HUGE and flat sucked at LT didn't he? Let lets say we take a LT. Wow now we have 'upgraded the OL'. Guess what? The offense still sucks because we don't have one quality starter at QB. Edwards will still sit back there, puss out, check down, miss open WR's, be scared to throw the ball with anticipation, can't read a defense to save his ass etc. So we are in the same shape with or without a LT.
Mr. WEO Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 actually Polian may be 1 - 6. He has been to SB 2 times with colts once with Panthers and I thought 3 with Buffalo How, exactly, does a GM get the blame for losing a SB??? Polian has stacked 2 teams with boatloads of talent........unless you are blaming him for poor coaching (Marv, Dungy, DungyII).
Buffalo Beeeews Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 WE'RE HORRIBLE... THEY AREN'T.... LET THEM SAY WHAT THEY WANT, THEY WIN... WE HAVE HAD 1 WINNING SEASON IN 10 YEARS... WE ARE THE JOKE OF THE LEAGUE (yes, an even bigger joke than Detroit/Oakland)... BILL POLIAN IS A WINNER AND RALPH WILSON IS A JOKE... STOP IT!
JohnC Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 scroll down just a bit It is right after he mentions Maybin in a 3/4. >>>>> It may not mean a whole lot but Indianapolis president Bill Polian put the blame for the Colts’ upset Super Bowl loss squarely on the shoulders of the offensive line.<<<<< Are you reading this ICE? Great qb or not, football teams need blocking. The Bills will lose until they are a big, strong team that can block, stop the run and rush the passer. A flashy new first round quarterback will in all probability NOT solve our problems. Marv and Dick are thankfully gone. It is time to build a team that opponents fear. Don't bother with trying to change ICE's view about taking a qb with our first pick. He is incorrigible. My preference is still addressing the OL first. However, if Nix has the conviction that Clausen or Bradford are capable of being our franchise qb and he has them rated high as players then I'm not against going in that direction. ICE has moved me a little on this issue. But I still believe that Nix is going to address the LOT first.
Recommended Posts