Orton's Arm Posted February 25, 2010 Posted February 25, 2010 Sorry old friend, but this type of thinking is way too abstract for my tastes. You seem to be basing everything upon winning a superbowl which is fine, but imo not for the Bills. You see, the Bills can be summed up as a team of tiny little players who collectively, and more often than not individually suck. Our last 4 first round picks during the pitiful debacle of Levy/Jauron consisted of a head case running back, 2 small, so-so defensive backs and a defensive end who weighs less than 100 pounds. Week after week we see our team pushed around. Now.....bandit (and I like dialogue with him mind you) or another poster will soon find some stats telling us that we are NOT a small team. The ugly truth is that we are small, weak, and we suck. Our best resources have been consistently put into "skill" players, mostly defensive backs. Putting an inexperienced and or fragile qb behind this motley would sell tickets but it won't make this team of weak sisters strong. The Bills are not to be taken seriously because they can't block and they can't tackle. They even had defensive backs playing linebacker. This is a joke. A sick joke, and the joke is on fans like us. Sorry to talk in cliches, but you can't win a superbowl unless you make the playoffs. The Bills can't make the playoffs until they toughen op, stats and abstract theory notwithstanding. They need Linemen on both sides and linebackers more than yet another quarterback to get destroyed. Thruthfully, it is surprising to see you post otherwise. In general, it's best to start off with your end goal in mind, and then build toward that goal. My end goal here is for the Bills to be a Super Bowl winner. Part of achieving that goal (almost always) involves having an elite-level quarterback. If the Bills have the opportunity to fill that need, they should take it. That said, you correctly pointed out that this team is weak in a number of areas due to abysmal failures of people like TD and Marv. There are a ton of needs on this team, and it will take a good three years to fill them all. There's nothing we can possibly do to get them all filled in year 1 of the rebuilding process; and any efforts in that direction will only lead to a series of ultimately useless and futile half-measures. During year 1, the Bills would be far better off gaining one or two permanent solutions at critical positions than a hundred Band-Aids. Suppose the Bills were to take (for example) Clausen with their first round pick, and an offensive tackle in the second. Then they could put Clausen on the bench, which is exactly where all rookie quarterbacks belong! For the 2010 season, that 2nd round OT could play LT, with Meredith at RT and Brohm as starting QB. Incognito would be re-signed. He and Levitre would play guard, and Wood (when healthy) would start at center. Then in 2011, the Bills could use their first round pick on a LT. That 2nd round OT from 2010 would move to RT. Clausen would take over as the Bills' starting QB. The defense would still be a mess, but the Bills would have both their franchise quarterback and offensive line in place. But at least the defense would get some help in 2010 with picks from rounds 3 - 7, as well as in 2011 starting in round 2. The defense would also require the first round pick in the 2012 draft--this is, after all, a three year rebuilding process!
thebandit27 Posted February 25, 2010 Posted February 25, 2010 Thanks for agreeing. When the Bills draft a decent LT and RT I think the offense will be much improved Thanks for basically admitting that you don't actually have a single fact to back up your original statement. And I don't agree with the bolded at all. I believe once the team has a good QB the offense will be much improved, and not before.
Orton's Arm Posted February 25, 2010 Posted February 25, 2010 Thanks for agreeing. When the Bills draft a decent LT and RT I think the offense will be much improved The bottom line is that the Bills' offense needs both a good QB and good OTs to be successful. Not even Joe Montana can be productive while lying on his back. But an upright QB is useless unless he knows how to play! Look at the Ravens offense of 2000. They had a very good offensive line, led by Jon Ogden (one of the very best LTs of his day.) They had Jamal Lewis with his 2000 rushing yards. And yet that offense went for five straight games without scoring a touchdown, due to troubles at the QB position. Only after Dilfer wrested the starting slot from Tony Banks, and only after Dilfer improved his initial level of play, did the Ravens' offense achieve the modicum of productivity that allowed that insanely good defense to carry that team to a Super Bowl win.
thewildrabbit Posted February 25, 2010 Posted February 25, 2010 Thanks for basically admitting that you don't actually have a single fact to back up your original statement. And I don't agree with the bolded at all. I believe once the team has a good QB the offense will be much improved, and not before. I backed up my statement when I said that Fred Jackson makes a lot of yardage on his own after he breaks the first tackle, its the biggest reason he won the starting job over Marshawn. You just refuse to acknowledge it because you only care to see things your way, and your dense. Your entitled to your opinion and furthermore I could really care less what it is because all you ever want to argue about is QB vs O line, in many threads. I firmly believe that the Bills can win with any of the 3 QB's on the roster if they upgrade the O line properly. You on the other hand would have them chasing the proverbial " Franchise" QB and waste first round draft picks over and over. The Bills already wasted a first round pick on JP Losman...
Recommended Posts