Bill from NYC Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 The Ginn choice was indefensibe. That was an idiotic pick. It was indefensible because they had bigger needs up front. In hindsight, he did not produce but other than this, in what way was this different from the Bills taking Spiller?
Coach Tuesday Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 In hindsight, he did not produce but other than this, in what way was this different from the Bills taking Spiller? Complete lack of college production.
Bill from NYC Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 Complete lack of college production. I am also guessing that they thought he would score in various ways (returns, etc.), add excitement to their product, and increase profit.
Coach Tuesday Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 I am also guessing that they thought he would score in various ways (returns, etc.), add excitement to their product, and increase profit. That is definitely how they're similar, and I share your concerns that this pick could backfire. But I think CJ is a MUCH safer pick. 600 caries in college, serious production in every facet of offense and special teams, ZERO fumbles! The track records are completely different. Ginn was a glorified punt returner with bad hands.
Bill from NYC Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 That is definitely how they're similar, and I share your concerns that this pick could backfire. But I think CJ is a MUCH safer pick. 600 caries in college, serious production in every facet of offense and special teams, ZERO fumbles! The track records are completely different. Ginn was a glorified punt returner with bad hands. We are on the same page. I am not saying that Siller will not play better than Ginn. I am only suggesting that they were picked under similar circumstances for similar reasons.
thewildrabbit Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 This is exactly what I'm talking about, BillsVet. Statements like the one above hurt your credibility because you don't mention: The starting left tackle was cut less than one week before the season opener. Four linemen who started during the season finished on injured reserve. Due to injuries there were nine different starting line combinations during the season. Due to injuries, eleven different linemen started games for the Bills. Center Geoff Hangartner was the only lineman to play every game at the same position. The Bills 2009 Week One offensive line had only 91 combined career starts. That number was the lowest in the NFL with the next most inexperienced team having 66 more starts. Despite the injuries and inexperience and lack of a passing attack, the Bills still managed to rush for 1867 yards, which was 16th best in the league and averaged 4.4 yards a carry for 8th best. The O-line only allowed a toal of of 37 rushes for negative yards which was 12th lowest in 2009. The Bills had a questionable offensive scheme, and a SEVERE rash of injuries, and very inexperienced linemen who were put in a position to fail. You ignore these facts when you state that the O-line will be as bad as last year. It is because of those facts that most fans realize the Bills needed to upgrade both tackle and center positions. The Bills addressed the RT by signing Cornell Green ...another washed up free agent who has been with 5 teams the past 12 years, 48th out of 77. slightly better then what they had, still nothing significant Both Wood and Bell are coming off severe season ending injuries... G Levitre rated 74 out of 84 (LG) 14 G Wood 65 out of 84 (RG)10 LT Bell 74 out of 77 (LT)8 RT Jonathon Scott (LT) 7 (RT)3 -59 out of 77 RT Kirk Chambers (LT)1 (RT) 11 57 out of 77 C Hangartner 27 out of 34 Nobody on the Bills line last season played well, each and every player was rated near the worst at their positions and Bell was about the worst LT in the NFL last season. Derrick Dockery was cut by the Bills and rejoined the Redskins and his play 24 out of 84 was far superior then any Bills player last season. Richie Incognito was better then any Bills player and they let him go to Miami, makes no sense. Sorry, but the O line was Buffalo's weakest area by far, and they neglected it again this year in the draft. All I see is a team setting themselves up to fail, just like last season.
Lurker Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 I don't think that having a fast 40 time is really important to lineman holding blocks. The key is the ability to read the block, make a decision and hit the hole. You can be the fastest guy in the league, but if you juke back and forth in the backfield too much, you'll never get to utilize your speed. Fast 40 times are good for breaking away from the safety on a TD run, or getting around the corner. Hence the reason why Jackson was more effective than Lynch last year...better vision and the ability to hit the cut-back lane, rather than simply trying to move the pile as the play was written up. Spiller looks like he's exceptional at seeing gaps and has the 'quicks' to hit whatever holes are available. This may allow the O-line to simply seal the backside and let C.J. cut back to daylight.
Lurker Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 No one wants your fancy words and logic SDS. It complicates things too much for people - they can't break it down into easily digestible pieces of thought that fit nicely in their short attention spans. Much easier to take any critical thought out of the process. It's like they're talking about football machines, not people. Isn't that how it's done on Madden?
Coach Tuesday Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 If I recall correctly, the knock on Tomlinson when he came out of college was very similar to the criticism being heaped on Spiller - too small, can't run between the tackles, will be wasted in a (then) poor offense, not an every-down back. And Spiller is bigger and more explosive than Tomlinson...
Lurker Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 in what way was this different from the Bills taking Spiller? Spiller will get 15-20 touches a game, probably three-times the number Ginn had...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 It is because of those facts that most fans realize the Bills needed to upgrade both tackle and center positions. The Bills addressed the RT by signing Cornell Green ...another washed up free agent who has been with 5 teams the past 12 years, 48th out of 77. slightly better then what they had, still nothing significant Both Wood and Bell are coming off severe season ending injuries... G Levitre rated 74 out of 84 (LG) 14 G Wood 65 out of 84 (RG)10 LT Bell 74 out of 77 (LT)8 RT Jonathon Scott (LT) 7 (RT)3 -59 out of 77 RT Kirk Chambers (LT)1 (RT) 11 57 out of 77 C Hangartner 27 out of 34 Nobody on the Bills line last season played well, each and every player was rated near the worst at their positions and Bell was about the worst LT in the NFL last season. Derrick Dockery was cut by the Bills and rejoined the Redskins and his play 24 out of 84 was far superior then any Bills player last season. Richie Incognito was better then any Bills player and they let him go to Miami, makes no sense. Sorry, but the O line was Buffalo's weakest area by far, and they neglected it again this year in the draft. All I see is a team setting themselves up to fail, just like last season. Fair enough. I don't completely disagree with you. What I'm saying is that too many critics don't balance the argument validly. A person with a different view could state just as validly that the three rookies (Levitre, Wood, and Meredith) and the virtual rookie, Demetrius Bell, will be much improved this year after their inaugural seasons. Further, that there's no way the line will be hit with as many injuries as last year (11 starters, 9 O-line combos). Further, that the Bills offensive strategists will be more effective than last year's group. No OC was going to succeed with the restraints placed upon him by Jauron...and to compound that we thrust a guy who'd never been an OC into the job one week before the season. These facts alone counterweight the assertion that our O-line will be worse than last year. I'm not saying this will be a great O-line, but I have a hard time believing that when you factor in the above points that it won't be improved.
Lurker Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 G Levitre rated 74 out of 84 (LG) 14 G Wood 65 out of 84 (RG)10 LT Bell 74 out of 77 (LT)8 RT Jonathon Scott (LT) 7 (RT)3 -59 out of 77 RT Kirk Chambers (LT)1 (RT) 11 57 out of 77 C Hangartner 27 out of 34 Whose ratings are these?
thebandit27 Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 It is because of those facts that most fans realize the Bills needed to upgrade both tackle and center positions. The Bills addressed the RT by signing Cornell Green ...another washed up free agent who has been with 5 teams the past 12 years, 48th out of 77. slightly better then what they had, still nothing significant Both Wood and Bell are coming off severe season ending injuries... G Levitre rated 74 out of 84 (LG) 14 G Wood 65 out of 84 (RG)10 LT Bell 74 out of 77 (LT)8 RT Jonathon Scott (LT) 7 (RT)3 -59 out of 77 RT Kirk Chambers (LT)1 (RT) 11 57 out of 77 C Hangartner 27 out of 34 Nobody on the Bills line last season played well, each and every player was rated near the worst at their positions and Bell was about the worst LT in the NFL last season. Derrick Dockery was cut by the Bills and rejoined the Redskins and his play 24 out of 84 was far superior then any Bills player last season. Richie Incognito was better then any Bills player and they let him go to Miami, makes no sense. Sorry, but the O line was Buffalo's weakest area by far, and they neglected it again this year in the draft. All I see is a team setting themselves up to fail, just like last season. If you want to have a reasonale discussion about offensive line play, you cannot always base your entire opinion on the subject off of interpreted ratings from profootballfocus.com. I can just as easily post a link to footballoutsiders.com that says that Buffalo had the 12th-best run blocking OL in the NFL. Here: http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol Which would lead me to believe--if I were the type to base my opinion off of someone else's ratings--that Buddy Nix's comments are 100% accurate with regard to Spiller. Put an explosive RB behind an OL who's run blocking ranks in the top 1/3 of the league and I bet the running game improves, wouldn't you say?
Adam Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 That freaking stupid Bill Parcells down in Miami wasting a #1 overall pick on OLT Jake Long when all he really needed was a speedy RB...go figure. Cam Cameron got it all wrong the year before by drafting a speedy WR in Ted Ginn Jr, wow all he really needed to do was draft a speedy RB... simple, but huge mistake A Jake Long caliber OL was not available when we picked. Ted Ginn was a great college player, but probably won't amount to much in the NFL. I think Spiller will be very good and is something to build on. When you aren't a player or two away, reaching for a player in the draft can set you back several years- like we have been doing for a decade
Mr. WEO Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 If I recall correctly, the knock on Tomlinson when he came out of college was very similar to the criticism being heaped on Spiller - too small, can't run between the tackles, will be wasted in a (then) poor offense, not an every-down back. And Spiller is bigger and more explosive than Tomlinson... Tomlinson is 25 lbs heavier than Spiller. Spiller is the same size as Evans....
John from Riverside Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 We did have an awful lot of injuries guys
BillsVet Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 This is a very frustrating line of thought that so many fans get caught up in. Each player's performance rises, falls, or plateaus based upon their own unique circumstances. How can you say a line with 2 rookies, a young LT, a new coaching staff and philosophy will be just as bad as it was under different circumstances? It doesn't make any sense. Very true fearless leader. I take that into account when stating where I think the line falls and it would be hard to get worse than last year. 46 sacks allowed (a subjective stat occasionally) and an inability to convert in short yardage were the factors in my mind. Someone wrote this as well, but I see the LOT spot being manned by someone who's not played the position or Bell who's returning from a semi-serious injury. The position requires great agility, and it's no guarantee he'll handle it. Levitre acquitted himself well considering he was a rookie, but the kid was a 2nd round pick as well. Hangartner is mediocre, nothing more and nothing less. Wood's injury was serious and 310 pound men don't recover quickly from that sort of break. Cornell Green will be 34 on gameday, which is about 7 years older than Butler would be. No one could anticipate Butler retiring, thereby opening another hole, but Green isn't even a stopgap in my mind. The offense is a mess, and they chose to draft another skill player. It doesn't get better until they upgrade the OL, specifically at both tackle spots and project players don't count.
vincec Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 This is a very frustrating line of thought that so many fans get caught up in. Each player's performance rises, falls, or plateaus based upon their own unique circumstances. How can you say a line with 2 rookies, a young LT, a new coaching staff and philosophy will be just as bad as it was under different circumstances? It doesn't make any sense. Usually player turnover, coaching changes and philosophy changes are not good for an offensive line. Offensive lines thrive on continuity and familiarity. Obviously, the players, coaching and system need to be good to start with but it's hard to see how two new starters, a new staff and a new philosophy will provide much help- at least this season.
Dr. K Posted April 30, 2010 Posted April 30, 2010 But this line of thinking is just the opposite. Unreasonable optimism. The Bills looked pretty good against the Pats* for about the first three quarters. That's what often happens, because Belichick's genius is breaking down film and figuring out how to beat an offense, and he simply had no film and no idea what the offense would do. After the first three quarters, he'd seen enough that in the fourth quarter, the Bills offense hit a stone wall. As for Tampa Bay, is it that surprising that even the Bills could look decent against a 3 - 13 team that was 27th in defense and 32nd, dead last, in defense against the run? That's not a case of the Bills doing well. It's a case of Tampa being genuinely horrific. The Bills offense did not "hit a stone wall" in the fourth quarter against the Pats. In fact, they rose to the occasion after the Pats spent the first 5:49 of the fourth quarter driving for a field goal to make the score 17-13 Bills. After the ensuing kickoff, the Bills drove 62 yards in 14 plays, eating up 6:11 of the clock to score a touchdown to make it 24-13. The Bills offense did not touch the ball again until the Pats had scored their second touchdown after this, with only seconds left on the clock, to make the score 25-24. The Pats did not shut down the Bills offense in the fourth quarter of that game. If you are going to make an argument, at least REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED. You are entitled to your own opinion, but you ARE NOT ENTITLED TO MAKE STUFF UP in order to support those opinions.
Recommended Posts