For those of you that actually like Bell

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Demetrius Bell was a developmental player who had little football experience to begin with. He should have never been put in the situation he was placed in. Thinking that Peters could have been replaced by the lumbering Walker was foolish. Thinking that Bell was ready for the most challenging position on the line was not only foolish, it was reckless.

I agree with you to an extent. He was overmatched. I think the most telling thing you wrote was "it was reckless".

 

Here's where I'm different than some who post here...I'll admit that I have no clue what it takes specifically to build a successful franchise. I have opinions, ideas and thoughts along the way, and most are grounded in the traditional thought processes of the average fan. I think success starts in the management office with a sound approach to O and D lines.

 

what I don't know is if Bell would have fared any better on a line that wasn't built 'recklessly'. i do known that chaos as a general business philosophy generally is problematic, and chaos reigned supreme for many reasons on our line last year. note--I'm not suggesting I think Bell would have been a top 10, 20 or whatever LT on a better team, but I know with certainty that a better team would not have had the chaos he dealt with. i also think it's probably statistically a bad idea to put a raw talent/project alongside guys unskilledin their respective position, at least if you're looking for successful line play.

It seems to me that we "lost the O-line" after McNally retired. Sean Kugler was probably not ready or simply not as good at evaluating talent. Clearly the injuries hurt, but the "reckless" decisions fall clearly on Mr. Kugler as the position coach. I wonder what Ray Brown thought about the choices made in the 2009 preseason...

[PDaDdy]

Yeah, um, the smart, mobile veteran QB didn't stop the Eagles from totalling 44 sacks, compared to the obllivious sack-prey in Buffalo, who were only sacked 32 times.

 

The point is that Peters did a damn good job, especially when playing hobbled for quite a few games.

 

 

I like McNabb but did you see him this past year? I'm not saying I watched every minute but seems like the game plan, especially when Westbrook was hurt, was to wait all day for Deshaun Jackson to get open deep. As many like to say on this board QBs more than O-line determine sack total. Care to change your stance on that Thurman#1?

 

What is really needed in these discussions is a stat that I wish could be found. Average Time to Throw (ATT)!!!!! This to me would be a great GREAT stat to truly gauge whether it is the QB or the OL that is responsible for the sack numbers and a teams offensive success.

 

ATT low and sacks low = QB is getting rid of the ball quickly possibly making his line look better

ATT high and sacks low = OL doing a great job of protecting affording their QB lots of time

ATT low and sacks high = OL it terrible and they are getting their QB killed

ATT high and sacks high = QB is holding on to the ball too long

[BADOLBILZ]

Exactly right. Which confirms the Peters trade as a genuinely awful trade. We got a first-rounder for him (#28), plus a fourth and a sixth this year, and we are apparently going to give up a first-rounder this year (#9) to replace him. So we essentially gave up Peters for a fourth and a sixth and also gave up a #9 to get a #28. Epically bad.

 

Aside from poor QB play, the Bills biggest problem has been their inability to make strides with their roster because of poor decisions like trading Peters.

 

They are the kings of self inflicted wounds.

 

Let Pat Williams walk, draft McCargo #1 two seasons later.

 

Cut Lawyer Milloy, then 2 months later use the 8th overall pick on Whitner. Milloy was a decent player for a couple seasons beyond, Whitner has been a bust.

 

Let London Fletcher leave, use the equivalent of a late first/early second on Poz(after trade up). Fletcher has outplayed Poz, that is when Poz has actually been playing. Fletcher is out there performing at a high level every week.

 

Trade Willis McGahee, use the #11 to draft Lynch. McGahee wasn't great, but he was entering his walk year and likely would have had his best year ever. But even if he didn't, you don't need to waste #1 picks on RB's like Lynch who don't even have breakaway speed.

 

Let Nate Clements walk for nothing, use an #11th overall to replace him 14 months later with Leodis McKelvin, who, like Poz has already missed more games in his career to injury than Clements and Fletcher combined(by A LOT). Now they are contemplating using the 9th overall pick to replace Peters.

 

All in the name of staying $30M or so under the salary cap.

 

And there are actually idiots around here who support the Bills for essentially all of these moves.

 

Imagine this team not having to replace Williams/Milloy/Fletcher/Clements/McGahee/Peters and how they could have used those picks. They could have replaced Milloy with Bryan Scott or George Wilson and McGahee with Fred Jackson. For NOTHING.

 

The rest would still be here. Overpaid a bit? Some yes, others no. But HERE, playing good football and part of a team that could have had a completely different core of potentially great young players if not for bad decisions made on draft day, out of need, to attempt to repair self inflicted damage.

[Thurman#1]

If we're taking "profootballfocus" as gospel, the 2008 numbers bear-out that Peters had a poor season, hence the Bills making him the highest-paid player afterwards would have been foolish. And even being ranked 8th for LT's, and especially 18th overall for OT's last season, bears that out further. Regardless of whether the Bills have to spend the 9th overall on a LT, who will still make a lot less than $10M/year and likely won't have an entitlement attitude.

 

 

 

Yeah, he had a season that was far below his usual standards. But only a stupid team figures future performance by looking only at one season, a season where an offensive lineman misses training camp. The fact that he leapt upwards the next year clearly shows how stupid.

 

And the other fact that Peters was ranked #3 among all tackles, left and right, right up till his injury in Week Six, shows how his season was affected by the injury to his ankle which he nonetheless fought through by playing injured.

 

As for the contract of the #9 pick, B.J. Raji's #9 deal last year was about $28.5 mill over 5 years, with about $18 mill guaranteed, and that was about a 40% increase in the total contract over the #9 guy the year before, Keith Rivers, and about 15% more guarantees. Which means we will likely pay more than $6 mill per year for the #9 man this year, knowing that there will be a roughly 50% chance he will be a flop. Yeah, that makes much more financial sense. We knew that Peters could play, we know that about half of all LT first-round picks bust and we could be facing the same problem for years. Yeah, sensible, in the Bizarro Universe, maybe. If you doubt that, look at the huge rush of teams trading their good LTs since the Bills did. I'm sure somebody else will do that in another 10 years or so.

 

One thing that you can guarantee about ANY good LT we manage to get in ... he will feel "entitled" to pay commensurate with his level of play, just as Peters was and is. And if we won't pay market value, the next one will turn just as surly as Peters did.

[PDaDdy]

Aside from poor QB play, the Bills biggest problem has been their inability to make strides with their roster because of poor decisions like trading Peters.

 

They are the kings of self inflicted wounds.

 

Let Pat Williams walk, draft McCargo #1 two seasons later.

 

Cut Lawyer Milloy, then 2 months later use the 8th overall pick on Whitner. Milloy was a decent player for a couple seasons beyond, Whitner has been a bust.

 

Let London Fletcher leave, use the equivalent of a late first/early second on Poz(after trade up). Fletcher has outplayed Poz, that is when Poz has actually been playing. Fletcher is out there performing at a high level every week.

 

Trade Willis McGahee, use the #11 to draft Lynch. McGahee wasn't great, but he was entering his walk year and likely would have had his best year ever. But even if he didn't, you don't need to waste #1 picks on RB's like Lynch who don't even have breakaway speed.

 

Let Nate Clements walk for nothing, use an #11th overall to replace him 14 months later with Leodis McKelvin, who, like Poz has already missed more games in his career to injury than Clements and Fletcher combined(by A LOT). Now they are contemplating using the 9th overall pick to replace Peters.

 

All in the name of staying $30M or so under the salary cap.

 

And there are actually idiots around here who support the Bills for essentially all of these moves.

 

Imagine this team not having to replace Williams/Milloy/Fletcher/Clements/McGahee/Peters and how they could have used those picks. They could have replaced Milloy with Bryan Scott or George Wilson and McGahee with Fred Jackson. For NOTHING.

 

The rest would still be here. Overpaid a bit? Some yes, others no. But HERE, playing good football and part of a team that could have had a completely different core of potentially great young players if not for bad decisions made on draft day, out of need, to attempt to repair self inflicted damage.

 

 

Right on my man. If you're not one of the whiney "I hate Peters" crowd you will see that he was just one of many talented players that we let go over the years and made new holes for ourselves. Good teams keep their talent and develop more. Bad teams lose their talent and constantly try to fill the holes that they made for themselves. Couple that with an inability to accurately identify new talent in the draft or free agency and you have a recipe for disaster plain and simple.

[JohnC]

Don't act like you know exactly what will happen in the draft, because you don't. Nobody does. What you've got is an educated guess, but plenty of other people have educated guesses that disagree with yours, reasonably.

 

And as for other ways of getting a franchise QB, yeah, there are other ways. So what a sensible team does is look at how successful each way is. Look at the franchise QBs in the league right now. About 2/3rds of them were drafted in the first round. That is the highest probability you have in getting a franchise QB. And getting a franchise QB is the highest correlation you can find to winning the Super Bowl.

 

It should be mission number one, and we should do it the highest probability way. Getting lucky the way about four teams have done is the pipe dream.

 

I don't know EXACTLY what will happen in the draft, and neither do you. There is no one on this planet who does or in any of the front offices of the NFL teams. So I don't know what you are getting at.

 

There has been a lot of commentary that the Rams are having an internal debate that although a player such as Suh and McCoy might be the safer pick their opportunity to get a franchise qb is in this draft. They passed up on Matt Ryan two years ago and last year they past up on Sanchez. Consequently, they are seriously considering taking a qb with the overall first pick. Another factor is that with the first pick they would rather pay the exorbitant contract for a qb than a DT.

 

You missed my central point about us selecting a qb with our first round pick at the nine spot. Your point that a qb taken in the first round is more likely to succeed than one taken in a lower round is obvious. I'm not nor are others arguing against something that is so obvious. That is common sense. There is a consensus that in this year's draft only two qbs have first round draft grades. A number of teams who have a need for a qb are drafting ahead of us. Although the Bills are qb deficient it doesn't make sense for us to reach to get a qb in the first round. I would prefer taking a LT or any other position with a first round grade rather than taking a qb with a lesser grade. That is simply my point.

[Doc]

Yeah, he had a season that was far below his usual standards. But only a stupid team figures future performance by looking only at one season, a season where an offensive lineman misses training camp. The fact that he leapt upwards the next year clearly shows how stupid.

 

 

And the other fact that Peters was ranked #3 among all tackles, left and right, right up till his injury in Week Six, shows how his season was affected by the injury to his ankle which he nonetheless fought through by playing injured.

 

As for the contract of the #9 pick, B.J. Raji's #9 deal last year was about $28.5 mill over 5 years, with about $18 mill guaranteed, and that was about a 40% increase in the total contract over the #9 guy the year before, Keith Rivers, and about 15% more guarantees. Which means we will likely pay more than $6 mill per year for the #9 man this year, knowing that there will be a roughly 50% chance he will be a flop. Yeah, that makes much more financial sense. We knew that Peters could play, we know that about half of all LT first-round picks bust and we could be facing the same problem for years. Yeah, sensible, in the Bizarro Universe, maybe. If you doubt that, look at the huge rush of teams trading their good LTs since the Bills did. I'm sure somebody else will do that in another 10 years or so.

 

One thing that you can guarantee about ANY good LT we manage to get in ... he will feel "entitled" to pay commensurate with his level of play, just as Peters was and is. And if we won't pay market value, the next one will turn just as surly as Peters did.

If only players could play partial seasons and be judged on those. Brad Butler was probably one of the best RT's in the NFL last season for those 2 games he played.

 

Peters had missed time at the end of both 2006 and 2007, so getting injured (and his play falling-off) wasn't exactly a fluke. And him tearing his groin at the end of the 2007 season was the reason I said that he needed to show up to One Bills Drive to be checked-out by the Bills before they made him the highest-paid LT in the NFL. Not only did he not do that, he skipped the entire off-season, showed-up a day before the season started, played poorly, and again demanded to be the highest-paid LT in the NFL based on what he did in 2007 (it appears the OT rankings for 2007 are incomplete, although for what I assume to be the first 7 games, he ranked 29th among OT's). To reward that would have been "stupid." And sorry but being the 8th best LT and 18th best OT last season did more to justify the Bills' decision than the Eagles'.

 

As for whether the LT the Bills take (if they do) with the 9th overall pick is worth the $6M/year he'll get, that remains to be seen. But I doubt he demands a new contract after just 2 years, much less sits out the entire off-season as a result.

[Thurman#1]

Aikmen was drafted in 1989 after Dallas already had LT Mark Tuinei and LG Nate Newton...it seems they got there O-line b4 and during the draft with there franchise QB... C Mark Stepnoski was drafted in round 2 of 1989...Nate Newton was switched to RT in 1990 and then switched back to LG in 1992, the year he went to the pro bowl along with his C Mark Stepnoski...so basically the Cowboys had 3 multi-pro bowl o-linemen on the team and then in 1990 they got TE Jay Novacek to help...The Cowboys switched arround there line a few times in the early 90's, but there LT was there a few years b4 they ever got Aikmen...so seems your sol on your assessment

 

 

 

On the contrary, he's dead on. They already had Tuinei and Newton when they got Aikman, right, but in no way did they already have two excellent tackles when they got Aikman. If your argument is that Dallas already had two guys who would later become excellent OLs, then you're dead on, but so does Buffalo, with Wood and Levitre.

 

Before they got Aikman, Newton was an OK left guard. He really became excellent in about 1992, his first pro bowl year. Check out the AV in this career stats list.

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/N/NewtNa00.htm

 

And Newton was one of those high-round picks that you want us to use for a tackle, right? Um, no, he was a UDFA, who played two years in the USFL before moving to Dallas. They didn't exactly break the draft pick bank when they picked him up, and he wasn't playing particularly well by the time they got Aikman.

 

As for Tuinei, he was also a UDFA, in 1983. He didn't start any games in his first three years, though he did get a sack in 1984. Because he was a defensive tackle, by the way. Switched to LT in 1987, he started eight games. The next year, he started four games, but wasn't playing left tackle. The closest I can figure from the stats is that he was playing defense again that year. Not exactly a resume that would make a new coach say "Well, we've got LT sewed up for the next 12 years."

 

The next year was Aikman's first, 1989, and was the year when Tuinei became LT for good. He was a solid but not great LT for the first few years, but developed and later in his career became excellent.

 

Neither of these guys was anywhere near being the franchise guy they later became in 1989. Yet somehow, instead of snagging a lineman, Jimmy Johnson's first pick was Troy Aikman.

 

You're the one whose argument is SOL.

[Thurman#1]

It seems to me that we "lost the O-line" after McNally retired. Sean Kugler was probably not ready or simply not as good at evaluating talent. Clearly the injuries hurt, but the "reckless" decisions fall clearly on Mr. Kugler as the position coach. I wonder what Ray Brown thought about the choices made in the 2009 preseason...

 

 

 

Then why did Kugler get a job immediately as the Steelers OL? Again, that's the Steelers, the best organization in football.

 

Kugler did an EXCELLENT job with the OL last year. You won't find a player or coach to say a negative word, and you will find many many positive words. He melded a lot of replacements together, got the new guys playing up to their abilities very quickly, and generally was terrific.

 

The problem was that we simply did not have the talent. Mouse had Jason Peters. Peters will make you look a lot better than Demetrius Bell will. Kugler also lost our best lineman last year, Butler, for the season in the second game.

 

And for all that, we didn't give up all that many sacks because even though we lacked individual talent, he maximized their talent and had them playing pretty well as a unit.

 

And if you are blaming Kugler for getting rid of Peters, or for switching Walker from a position he was good at to a position he was bad at ... you will be pretty much the first person to find him responsible.

[Thoner7]

Peters is gone. Now lets draft a player just like him to play RT, and a player better than him to play LT, and a good G. Then we would have an OL! (no depth though)

[JohnC]

If only players could play partial seasons and be judged on those. Brad Butler was probably one of the best RT's in the NFL last season for those 2 games he played.

 

NKM, Even during the rare period of time he was healthy Brad Butler was an average player at best. To claim that he was an upper tier caliber of player is a stretch, to put it it kindly.

[PDaDdy]

If only players could play partial seasons and be judged on those. Brad Butler was probably one of the best RT's in the NFL last season for those 2 games he played.

 

Peters had missed time at the end of both 2006 and 2007, so getting injured (and his play falling-off) wasn't exactly a fluke. And him tearing his groin at the end of the 2007 season was the reason I said that he needed to show up to One Bills Drive to be checked-out by the Bills before they made him the highest-paid LT in the NFL. Not only did he not do that, he skipped the entire off-season, showed-up a day before the season started, played poorly, and again demanded to be the highest-paid LT in the NFL based on what he did in 2007 (it appears the OT rankings for 2007 are incomplete, although for what I assume to be the first 7 games, he ranked 29th among OT's). To reward that would have been "stupid." And sorry but being the 8th best LT and 18th best OT last season did more to justify the Bills' decision than the Eagles'.

 

As for whether the LT the Bills take (if they do) with the 9th overall pick is worth the $6M/year he'll get, that remains to be seen. But I doubt he demands a new contract after just 2 years, much less sits out the entire off-season as a result.

 

 

They are BS negotiating tactics that 1 Bills Drive used and some fans bought it. Peters went on to get a probowl nomination every year since. Just another pittiful example of the Bills letting talent go with no one to replace them. Pat Williams, Antowaine Winfield, London Fletcher, etc ....etc.

[PDaDdy]

Peters is gone. Now lets draft a player just like him to play RT, and a player better than him to play LT, and a good G. Then we would have an OL! (no depth though)

 

Who do you have in mind to draft better than Peters to play LT? I would love it if we got THAT guy. 3 probowl appearances his 2nd, 3nd and 4th years playing LT. HOT DAMN ....I can't wait!!!!!

 

What's THAT guys name again?

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Then why did Kugler get a job immediately as the Steelers OL? Again, that's the Steelers, the best organization in football.

 

Kugler did an EXCELLENT job with the OL last year. You won't find a player or coach to say a negative word, and you will find many many positive words. He melded a lot of replacements together, got the new guys playing up to their abilities very quickly, and generally was terrific.

 

The problem was that we simply did not have the talent. Mouse had Jason Peters. Peters will make you look a lot better than Demetrius Bell will. Kugler also lost our best lineman last year, Butler, for the season in the second game.

 

And for all that, we didn't give up all that many sacks because even though we lacked individual talent, he maximized their talent and had them playing pretty well as a unit.

 

And if you are blaming Kugler for getting rid of Peters, or for switching Walker from a position he was good at to a position he was bad at ... you will be pretty much the first person to find him responsible.

I said probably not ready or not as good at evaluating talent. The decision to jettison Peters, switch Walker to LT, then cut him, and go with Bell had nothing to do with the OL coach?

[Lori]

I said probably not ready or not as good at evaluating talent. The decision to jettison Peters, switch Walker to LT, then cut him, and go with Bell had nothing to do with the OL coach?

Brandon/Jauron/et al. might have asked Kugler's opinion on those players, but no, assistant coaches normally aren't the ones making roster decisions.

[Doc]

NKM, Even during the rare period of time he was healthy Brad Butler was an average player at best. To claim that he was an upper tier caliber of player is a stretch, to put it it kindly.

I was being facetious JC.

[John from Riverside]

I said probably not ready or not as good at evaluating talent. The decision to jettison Peters, switch Walker to LT, then cut him, and go with Bell had nothing to do with the OL coach?

 

I gotta agree with Thurman there......

 

How all of our QB's didn't end up on IR given the injuries to our line is a testament to how good the OL coach was......

[JohnC]

I was being facetious JC.

 

NKM' Sometimes your rare breed of humor is elusive to grasp.

[Doc]

They are BS negotiating tactics that 1 Bills Drive used and some fans bought it. Peters went on to get a probowl nomination every year since. Just another pittiful example of the Bills letting talent go with no one to replace them. Pat Williams, Antowaine Winfield, London Fletcher, etc ....etc.

The Bills handled a bad situation with Peters in textbook fashion. And being named to the Pro Bowl has proven to be a joke.

[BADOLBILZ]

The Bills handled a bad situation with Peters in textbook fashion.

 

They've been using that same textbook for a decade.