Been giving this a lot of thought....and I am a OL guy and

[PDaDdy]

Excuse me. The year before Manning was drafted the Colts selected Tarik Glenn and Adam Meadows, two excellent OTs, in rounds 1 and 2 respectively.

 

Carry on.

 

 

"Bingo!" -Thurman#1

[thewildrabbit]

And yet somehow the Ravens didn't make the Super Bowl and the Colts and Saints did. Hmmm. Wonder why that was.

 

If you want to build a team with results like the Ravens this year, win one playoff game and out, build like the Ravens. But Flacco is a second-year guy and has a lot of room to grow, and if he does become a franchise guy, the Ravens have a shot to go very far.

Yet you managed to over look my question

 

"Anyone care to explain how the Ravens won that game with the winning QB completing only 4 passes in 10 attempts for a total of 34 yards?"

 

Jeez, the Ravens managed to beat the Patriots in New England with a power running game and a QB who did almost nothing to help win, and everyone conveniently ignores the post.

 

Frankly, I could shive two gits who the Bills QB is... if only they can build a power running game and defense like the Jets and Ravens currently have ...it won't matter who plays QB.

 

Everyone keeps gushing about Jim Kelly and how great he was, I also remember is how good Thurman Thomas was with his cutbacks and the "counter trey" offense. The Bills ran the ball more then they threw the ball most of those glory years.

[PDaDdy]

I dont have the stats to back this up.....but I watched a lot of Manning in his first year and he got the crap kicked out of him.

 

Sacks aren't the only stat....pressures and knockdowns count quite a bit to.

 

 

Sure they do. QBs that don't get sacked also tend to not get pressured or knocked down as much They kind of go hand in hand. Makes sense doesn't it?

[PDaDdy]

No doubt. Glen was a great, if not elite, LT. Yet it took him eight seasons (seven with Manning) to make the Pro Bowl while others on those teams were well recognized as Manning, Faulk, James, Harrison, Dilger all made Pro Bowl and/or All Pro teams during that span. I find that interesting.

 

I'm not even remotely suggesting that the Colt's OLine didn't/doesn't provide great protection. I'm saying Manning's greatness at getting rid of the ball has made their jobs a hell of a lot easier over the years.

 

Manning was sacked 10 times in 16 games this year. His backup, Painter, was sacked three times in the two games he appeared in, which amounted to about 5 quarters, give or take. It makes a difference when you have an HOFer behind center. That's all I'm saying.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

But how is that relevant to the choice the Bills have to make if a QB drops to us at #9?

[PDaDdy]

Yet you managed to over look my question

 

"Anyone care to explain how the Ravens won that game with the winning QB completing only 4 passes in 10 attempts for a total of 34 yards?"

 

Jeez, the Ravens managed to beat the Patriots in New England with a power running game and a QB who did almost nothing to help win, and everyone conveniently ignores the post.

 

Frankly, I could shive two gits who the Bills QB is... if only they can build a power running game and defense like the Jets and Ravens currently have it won't matter who plays QB.

 

Everyone keeps gushing about Jim Kelly and how great he was, I also remember is how good Thurman Thomas was with his cutbacks and the "counter trey" offense. The Bills ran the ball more then they threw the ball most of those glory years.

 

 

Ah refreshing. Someone who knows there is more than one way to build a great if not super bowl winning team. Thank you sir.

[Orton's Arm]

Yet you managed to over look my question

 

"Anyone care to explain how the Ravens won that game with the winning QB completing only 4 passes in 10 attempts for a total of 34 yards?"

 

Jeez, the Ravens managed to beat the Patriots in New England with a power running game and a QB who did almost nothing to help win, and everyone conveniently ignores the post.

 

Frankly, I could shive two gits who the Bills QB is... if only they can build a power running game and defense like the Jets and Ravens currently have it won't matter who plays QB.

 

Everyone keeps gushing about Jim Kelly and how great he was, I also remember is how good Thurman Thomas was with his cutbacks and the "counter trey" offense. The Bills ran the ball more then they threw the ball most of those glory years.

A good running game is a lot more effective when coupled with a good passing game. If teams gang up on the run, you beat them with the pass. And if they gang up on the pass, you beat them with the run.

 

The Bills were effective in the Glory Years because when teams put seven men in the box, we could slice them apart with Thurman. And if they started putting more men in the box to stop the run, Jim Kelly could go to any number of excellent weapons to beat teams with the passing game.

 

A team with a good defense and a one-dimensional, run-oriented offense can often win a lot of regular season games, and can sneak its way into the playoffs. Maybe it can even win a game or two while it's there, as the Ravens and Jets teams recently did. But sooner or later, teams like that will typically run into better, more complete teams that use both the running game and the passing game to put enormous pressure on defenses. At that point, the teams without good passing attacks will generally get eliminated; as the Jets were when they faced Peyton Manning, and as the Ravens were.

[PDaDdy]

A good running game is a lot more effective when coupled with a good passing game. If teams gang up on the run, you beat them with the pass. And if they gang up on the pass, you beat them with the run.

 

The Bills were effective in the Glory Years because when teams put seven men in the box, we could slice them apart with Thurman. And if they started putting more men in the box to stop the run, Jim Kelly could go to any number of excellent weapons to beat teams with the passing game.

 

A team with a good defense and a one-dimensional, run-oriented offense can often win a lot of regular season games, and can sneak its way into the playoffs. Maybe it can even win a game or two while it's there, as the Ravens and Jets teams recently did. But sooner or later, teams like that will typically run into better, more complete teams that use both the running game and the passing game to put enormous pressure on defenses. At that point, the teams without good passing attacks will generally get eliminated; as the Jets were when they faced Peyton Manning, and as the Ravens were.

 

The funny thing is that the Ravens indeed won the superbowl with this same philosophy.....well....unless you think Trent Dilfer made his line look better than it was and it was really through his incredible play from the QB position that won the day for them

 

roflol

[Orton's Arm]

The funny thing is that the Ravens indeed won the superbowl with this same philosophy.....well....unless you think Trent Dilfer made his line look better than it was and it was really through his incredible play from the QB position that won the day for them

 

roflol

Yes, the Ravens of 2000 won the Super Bowl with that philosophy. But to do so, they needed to put together one of the three best defenses in NFL history, and they had Jonathan Ogden at LT (who arguably played at or near a Hall of Fame level), and they had Jamal Lewis with his 2000 rushing yards.

 

So yeah. If you can put together a defense, an offensive line, and a RB as good as the ones the Ravens had, then you don't necessarily need a spectacular QB to win the Super Bowl. The thing is that teams with Ravens of 2000-like defenses don't come along very often; which is why Super Bowl wins are typically associated with quarterbacks playing at or near a Hall of Fame level. This past Super Bowl, for example, both Drew Brees and Peyton Manning played very well throughout the season for their respective teams.

[JStranger76]

The 2000 Ravens are a once every 25 years team. That type of cast only comes around 3 or 4 times in a century.

[Pete]

The 2000 Ravens are a once every 25 years team. That type of cast only comes around 3 or 4 times in a century.

2002 Tampa with Brad Johnson. 85 Bears

[thewildrabbit]

My entire problem with the Buffalo Bills is that if they fail to address the O line and blocking tight end, then how will they ever know if its the QB or other problems?

Last season we all knew its the O line, I think everyone agrees that the line was completely horrid for most of the year and hindered the QB's and running game.

 

J.P. Losman and Trent Edwards both started out looking promising. People were saying playoffs in 07 after the 06 season and then JP came out and fell on his face.

Edwards came out and won 4 straight in 08, was severely concussed in the Arizona game and hasn't been quite the same since.

 

Who is to say that if the Bills draft Bradford or Clausen and they start to play a few games and look really good... and then "wham" they get injured or concussed.

Everyone will then say "oh they sucked from the start" and lets look at next years draft for the "real" Buffalo Bills franchise QB.

[Orton's Arm]

The 2000 Ravens are a once every 25 years team. That type of cast only comes around 3 or 4 times in a century.

Agreed. If the Bills wanted to have that kind of defense, they'd have to find upgrades at literally every starting position on the defense. The Ravens of 2000 had a ridiculously good defensive line--the kind where you'd want to double team each of the four guys on it if you could. (Which you obviously can't.) Their linebacking corps, led by Ray Lewis, was first-rate. They had two lockdown CBs that would outplay opposing receivers. At safety they had guys like Ed Reed. That defense was just ridiculously good!

 

But note that even with a defense that could only be compared to the Steel Curtain of the '70s and the '85 Bears, the Ravens won only one Super Bowl. That demonstrates that the strategy of good defense + good running game + good special teams has to be executed almost perfectly in order to result in a Super Bowl win. If there was margin for error with that strategy, the Ravens would have won multiple Super Bowls with the ridiculous amount of talent they had.

 

Teams with elite-level quarterbacks, on the other hand, are often associated with multiple Super Bowl wins.

[PDaDdy]

Yes, the Ravens of 2000 won the Super Bowl with that philosophy. But to do so, they needed to put together one of the three best defenses in NFL history, and they had Jonathan Ogden at LT (who arguably played at or near a Hall of Fame level), and they had Jamal Lewis with his 2000 rushing yards.

 

So yeah. If you can put together a defense, an offensive line, and a RB as good as the ones the Ravens had, then you don't necessarily need a spectacular QB to win the Super Bowl. The thing is that teams with Ravens of 2000-like defenses don't come along very often; which is why Super Bowl wins are typically associated with quarterbacks playing at or near a Hall of Fame level. This past Super Bowl, for example, both Drew Brees and Peyton Manning played very well throughout the season for their respective teams.

 

News flash.....QBs like Manning and Brees don't come along very often either but that doesn't stop people from throwing them out there as an example of why we should get a QB first and you can't win without one. Peyton Manning and Drew Brees didn't have good lines they had great QBs. People are idiots if they believe that junk. The truth is they had both a great QB and a great line. That is one recipe to win a superbowl. Great offensive line, good running game and a great defense can win you a super bowl too. The common thread is a great offensive line. This isn't rocket science. It's so basic and simple it drives me crazy how some people just don't get that.

 

If our line was at least average ....get the QB. Since our line is god awful horrible...get the o-line fixed. Getting a first round LT is the bare minimum we can do to try to protect whomever will be the QB savior that people think will fix all of our problems.

 

For the record the Ravens won that superbowl to the tune of 34 - 7. The defense did a great job but so did the offense and special teams.

[PDaDdy]

QUOTE (JStranger76 @ Feb 23 2010, 03:53 PM) *

The 2000 Ravens are a once every 25 years team. That type of cast only comes around 3 or 4 times in a century.

 

2002 Tampa with Brad Johnson. 85 Bears

 

 

ZING!!!!

 

AS much as I would like to let's not forget the 1991 Giants that beat our star QB led Bills

[PDaDdy]

Agreed. If the Bills wanted to have that kind of defense, they'd have to find upgrades at literally every starting position on the defense. The Ravens of 2000 had a ridiculously good defensive line--the kind where you'd want to double team each of the four guys on it if you could. (Which you obviously can't.) Their linebacking corps, led by Ray Lewis, was first-rate. They had two lockdown CBs that would outplay opposing receivers. At safety they had guys like Ed Reed. That defense was just ridiculously good!

 

But note that even with a defense that could only be compared to the Steel Curtain of the '70s and the '85 Bears, the Ravens won only one Super Bowl. That demonstrates that the strategy of good defense + good running game + good special teams has to be executed almost perfectly in order to result in a Super Bowl win. If there was margin for error with that strategy, the Ravens would have won multiple Super Bowls with the ridiculous amount of talent they had.

 

Teams with elite-level quarterbacks, on the other hand, are often associated with multiple Super Bowl wins.

 

 

How many elite QBs in the last 10 years have won superbowls? NOTE!!!!! I said how many elite QBs not how many superbowls

 

For extra credit, tell me how many of those elite QBs had an average or worse o-line?

[K-9]

But how is that relevant to the choice the Bills have to make if a QB drops to us at #9?

 

It isn't. Not in the least. My post was relevant to the consistently low sack totals Manning has taken over the years. Despite multiple line combinations and a stunning lack of Pro Bowl/All Pro recognition for his OLineman over the years. That speaks more to Manning's ability to avoid sacks than it does his line's ability to prevent them.

 

The only thing that's relevant to our choice if Clausen/Bradford falls to us at #9 is what the Bills' FO thinks of either of them. If either rate higher on their board than other players, they'll pick one of them to solidify the most important position on offense. If not, they won't.

 

In any event, as stated earlier, whomever the Bills choose at nine, regardless of position, that player is going to be crucified around here the first time he screws the pooch. Whether it's a QB making a stupid rookie play, an LT getting burnt for a sack, or an LB getting swallowed by a blocking guard. There will be no shortage of criticism for a kid learning to play the game.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[PDaDdy]

It isn't. Not in the least. My post was relevant to the consistently low sack totals Manning has taken over the years. Despite multiple line combinations and a stunning lack of Pro Bowl/All Pro recognition for his OLineman over the years. That speaks more to Manning's ability to avoid sacks than it does his line's ability to prevent them.

 

The only thing that's relevant to our choice if Clausen/Bradford falls to us at #9 is what the Bills' FO thinks of either of them. If either rate higher on their board than other players, they'll pick one of them to solidify the most important position on offense. If not, they won't.

 

In any event, as stated earlier, whomever the Bills choose at nine, regardless of position, that player is going to be crucified around here the first time he screws the pooch. Whether it's a QB making a stupid rookie play, an LT getting burnt for a sack, or an LB getting swallowed by a blocking guard. There will be no shortage of criticism for a kid learning to play the game.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

 

Well as long as you admit it has nothing to do with the choice the Bills may or may not have at #9 that's cool. The draft probably makes the most sense for the LT position as there isn't anyone of quality out there and good under contract LTs cost multiple picks and lot's of money if any team is stupid enough to trade them. Ask Jason Peters. The only way the Bills get great performance at bargain basement prices at LT is drafting a rookie that outperforms his contract.

 

We need a QB badly but 2 things are universal truths which I have dared anyone to dispute:

 

1) A rookie QB pick at #9 WILL start his first year. Other than Phillip Rivers, who backed up an eventual superbowl winning QB in Brees, show me a top 10 pick QB who didn't start his first year for whatever reason in the last say 10 15 years.

 

2) Show me a team that drafted their top 10 pick QB first before having a MUCH better line than we have now.

 

It's not done. It doesn't happen. It's foolish. The only exception is if we go out and buy the rest of an o-line in free agency and they some how elevate this line from abysmal to average. If we do that and screw the idea of putting together a solid young unit go ahead and draft the next in a long line of "saviors" at the QB position.

[Thurman#1]

Yet you managed to over look my question

 

"Anyone care to explain how the Ravens won that game with the winning QB completing only 4 passes in 10 attempts for a total of 34 yards?"

 

Jeez, the Ravens managed to beat the Patriots in New England with a power running game and a QB who did almost nothing to help win, and everyone conveniently ignores the post.

 

 

 

Wow. Tough question. OK, here's the answer. Weird stuff happens a small percentage of the time. That's all the answer that's necessary. Again, did they win another? Did they get to the conference championship? The Super Bowl?

 

Luck wins a game or two, probably more, every single week in the NFL. And in the case of that particular game, the Pats* are no longer as good as they looked, Thank the Deity, and the Ravens were lucky enough to get three turnovers. Doubt it was luck? Then why didn't they keep winning?

 

A team winning one playoff game, however they do it, doesn't impress. When they string together a few wins and get to the conference championship or the SB, start considering them a serious threat.

 

But smart people go for the high odds.

 

EDIT: Ah, I see you already answered that, EDWARDSARM, and better than I could have. Great job.

[Thurman#1]

Sure they do. QBs that don't get sacked also tend to not get pressured or knocked down as much They kind of go hand in hand. Makes sense doesn't it?

 

 

No, it doesn't. Sometimes they go together and sometimes they don't. In the case of a QB like Manning with incredible awareness, he often managed to get the ball out just before he got creamed.

 

I remember that year. Manning was a punching bag, but still looked like he had a serious future, and one of the main reasons was because he was able to limit his sacks despite the pressure he faced and the hits he took.

 

Sacks are one indicator, but far from a perfect one.

[Thurman#1]

The funny thing is that the Ravens indeed won the superbowl with this same philosophy.....well....unless you think Trent Dilfer made his line look better than it was and it was really through his incredible play from the QB position that won the day for them

 

roflol

 

 

OK, so apparently we have uncovered your blueprint for Super Bowl success. All we have to do is put together one of the great defenses of all time. Then you don't have to have a competent passing game. Wow, if only I had realized it was so simple. And that strategy works ... for the Ravens ... the 1985 Bears ...

 

Um ...

 

I'm sure there are others if you go far enough back.

 

Again, as I have said again and again and again, yeah, there are other ways to win. But they are lower percentage chances. The smart thing to do is go high percentage.

 

Bill Polian has followed the Golden Rule of the Draft, "Never pass up a franchise type QB, unless you already have one," every single time he built a team.

 

The Bills. He had one in Kelly, so he was able to work on other aspects.

The Panthers. He didn't have one, so he went QB in the first in his first draft there.

The Colts. He didn't have one, so he went QB in the first in his first draft there.