Jerry Jabber Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/7/19/...t-tackle-battle An interesting take on the LT competition. I agree with the author that it's a big gamble on Nix & Gailey's part to let a former 7th rounder & a former practice squad member battle it out for one of the most important positions on offense.
mike oxhurtz Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/7/19/...t-tackle-battle An interesting take on the LT competition. I agree with the author that it's a big gamble on Nix & Gailey's part to let a former 7th rounder & a former practice squad member battle it out for one of the most important positions on offense. The article sums it up. Let's hope we have a hidden gem at LT on the roster.
Jerry Jabber Posted July 19, 2010 Author Posted July 19, 2010 The article sums it up. Let's hope we have a hidden gem at LT on the roster. Even if Bell Or Meredith don't develop into probowl LT's, if they can get decent production from either one, then that's huge for the Bills FO. If the experiment fails, the offense is going to struggle...again.
Meark Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/7/19/...t-tackle-battle An interesting take on the LT competition. I agree with the author that it's a big gamble on Nix & Gailey's part to let a former 7th rounder & a former practice squad member battle it out for one of the most important positions on offense. Interesting take or regurgitation? You decide! I'll go with the latter. Damn July sucks for NFL news..
buffaloaggie Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 The article sums it up. Let's hope we have a hidden gem at LT on the roster. The recipe for a left OT seems to include gifted athletic ability. Wang was a former TE as was Peters and his parents were both Olympians. Bell's daddy was Karl Malone. Seems we have some of the ingredients in those two.
Leonidas Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/7/19/...t-tackle-battle An interesting take on the LT competition. I agree with the author that it's a big gamble on Nix & Gailey's part to let a former 7th rounder & a former practice squad member battle it out for one of the most important positions on offense. http://www.amazon.com/Blindsided-Overrated...s/dp/0470124091
KD in CA Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 http://www.amazon.com/Blindsided-Overrated...s/dp/0470124091 Seeing the word "Blindside" in a LT thread just pisses me off. Friggin Maybin over Oher.
theranter Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 Interesting take or regurgitation? You decide! I'll go with the latter. Damn July sucks for NFL news.. regurgitation of regurgtitions, but I applaud his effort, on behalf of all Bills! junkies everywhere, I thank everyone trying to come up with anything Bills! footballl..... 10 days to go! C'mon, healthy camp! GO BILLS!
Orton's Arm Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 http://www.amazon.com/Blindsided-Overrated...s/dp/0470124091 The above link is to a book which claims to demonstrate that the LT position is overrated. However, while the book's author (Joyner) represents his book as being statistics-driven, those who reviewed the book are far from convinced this was the case. Rather, they portray the book as representing Joyner's opinions, with a few statistics thrown around in a rather cursory fashion. Below is a quote from one review of the book: There are two kinds of books with this goal: books that attempt to solve these problems with statistical reasoning, and books that attempt to tease the problems out simply by talking about them and applying their perspective. The first I am very interested in, the second I care very little about. The book masquerades as the first, but ends up being far more the second, with the author bringing up stats initially, but always abandoning them for self-indulgent rambles. For example, there is a chapter inquiring which is the best defense ever. It is clear from the phrasing used that the author has long believed that the best defense is not the 85 Bears, but instead the mid-70s Steelers, and has written the chapter to make that case. He admits at the beginning of the chapter that he loved the Steelers as a child. His initial point is that the Steelers allowed fewer points than the Bears. And that concludes his statistical analysis. No reference to the fact that the 70s had fewer points scored generally than the 80s (thus skewing the numbers), no inquiry as to whether or not Chicago played a schedule with better offenses. He then goes on to compare the teams position by position in a subjective 'who is better' style, and predictably, the Steelers come out far ahead by his reckoning. . . . This chapter is representative of the book as a whole, because it opens with stats, applies far too little rigor with them, and then ends with opinionated pontification, reasoned though it may be. Based on reviews such as the above, I've concluded that the analysis in the book is far more indicative of Joyner's own personal opinions, than it is a case of anything that's been conclusively demonstrated with statistics. On a gut level, I don't think the importance of the LT position is overrated at all. I'm willing to modify that opinion in light of additional evidence; but reviews such as the above make me extremely doubtful that such evidence has been presented in Joyner's book.
Thoner7 Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 Competition? There is no competition. They all pretty much suck. Start Wang and see if he can play. Bell has no acl and Merideth is not going to develop into some stud LT. solid RT at most..
Thurman#1 Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/7/19/...t-tackle-battle An interesting take on the LT competition. I agree with the author that it's a big gamble on Nix & Gailey's part to let a former 7th rounder & a former practice squad member battle it out for one of the most important positions on offense. Did the writer screw up, or did Chan Gailey? The writer has this quotation about Bell: "He went in and played as rookie. He started as a rookie. You don't know how hard that is especially at offensive line. And quarterback and offensive line may be the hardest places to start in this league as a rookie. And he went in and did that and held his own. Now, he made some mistakes and you hope the second year he doesn't make those mistakes. But he is really a very good athlete." But of course, we all know that Bell wasn't a rookie last year. He was a second-year man. Maybe that's why Gailey thought Bell might have a future ... he looked at the film and thought "Geez, that's not good, but hey, for a rookie, not so horrible, now if he were a second-year man, this would be unacceptable, but maybe for a rookie it's possibly understandable. Somebody needed to tell Gailey before the draft that Bell wasn't a rookie!!
milehiLou Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 halfway decent to good play calling will help these young linemen. lack of no huddle this season should also help.
Roc Bronson Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 I believe with the right tutelage Bell could have some potential.. Not one of use on here would have believe Peters would have been a pretty good left tackle comin from the TE position but that piece of **** prove with the right coachin' it could be done. For the goodness of mankind let's pray one of these guys can at least handle the position....
transient Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 Did the writer screw up, or did Chan Gailey? The writer has this quotation about Bell: "He went in and played as rookie. He started as a rookie. You don't know how hard that is especially at offensive line. And quarterback and offensive line may be the hardest places to start in this league as a rookie. And he went in and did that and held his own. Now, he made some mistakes and you hope the second year he doesn't make those mistakes. But he is really a very good athlete." But of course, we all know that Bell wasn't a rookie last year. He was a second-year man. Maybe that's why Gailey thought Bell might have a future ... he looked at the film and thought "Geez, that's not good, but hey, for a rookie, not so horrible, now if he were a second-year man, this would be unacceptable, but maybe for a rookie it's possibly understandable. Somebody needed to tell Gailey before the draft that Bell wasn't a rookie!! This was discussed in a different thread a while back. More a case of semantics. Bell was inactive his entire rookie season (If I'm not mistaken was on practice squad for the majority of the year, and was elevated to roster but not active for last game, or something like that). Last year was not his rookie season, but he was technically a first year player having never been on the active roster before, making him a second year player this year. Regardless, prior to the cap we would routinely "season" OL players for 3-5 years before starting them, so suggesting a player can't develop further because he is now three years out from being drafted is kinda silly.
JimKelly12 Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 This was discussed in a different thread a while back. More a case of semantics. Bell was inactive his entire rookie season (If I'm not mistaken was on practice squad for the majority of the year, and was elevated to roster but not active for last game, or something like that). Last year was not his rookie season, but he was technically a first year player having never been on the active roster before, making him a second year player this year. Regardless, prior to the cap we would routinely "season" OL players for 3-5 years before starting them, so suggesting a player can't develop further because he is now three years out from being drafted is kinda silly. I'm so sick of the LT troubles....let's just find a lefty QB and worry about the RT for a change.... Obviously I'm kidding. Just a slow day and had to throw it out there.
Doc Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 halfway decent to good play calling will help these young linemen. lack of no huddle this season should also help. No no-huddle, a more pro-style offense, and keeping the OC and LT that were with the team the entire training camp and pre-season will help everyone on offense. This was discussed in a different thread a while back. More a case of semantics... Pretty much. For all intents and purposes, a guy who is inactive all season long during his rookie year, is pretty much still a rookie when he finally hits the field. But I don't think he'll be a factor in the LT battle anyway.
hammie65 Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/7/19/...t-tackle-battle An interesting take on the LT competition. I agree with the author that it's a big gamble on Nix & Gailey's part to let a former 7th rounder & a former practice squad member battle it out for one of the most important positions on offense. It is a gamble but, after all, it is also the first year for Nix and Gailey who have never even seen the field with these players. For LT as well as with QB it will be a "see what we got" kind of year and then IMO, they will fix whatever needs fixing or filling next season. I believe "Rome wasn't built in a day" will be their approach. We'll either hit a home run or bomb out and get a high pick or two next draft and there is supposedly several highly touted offensive tackles that will be available then (See todays article on www.nfl.com by Gil Brandt). I also believe they will focus on running the ball enough and with enough different looks as to possibly offset the "weakness" at left tackle.
Jerry Jabber Posted July 19, 2010 Author Posted July 19, 2010 It is a gamble but, after all, it is also the first year for Nix and Gailey who have never even seen the field with these players. For LT as well as with QB it will be a "see what we got" kind of year and then IMO, they will fix whatever needs fixing or filling next season. I believe "Rome wasn't built in a day" will be their approach. We'll either hit a home run or bomb out and get a high pick or two next draft and there is supposedly several highly touted offensive tackles that will be available then (See todays article on www.nfl.com by Gil Brandt). I also believe they will focus on running the ball enough and with enough different looks as to possibly offset the "weakness" at left tackle. Good post. I agree 100%.
Orton's Arm Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 Competition? There is no competition. They all pretty much suck. Start Wang and see if he can play. Bell has no acl and Merideth is not going to develop into some stud LT. solid RT at most.. If Meredith wins the battle at LT, and Brohm is made the starting QB, then our starting QB/LT players would recognize each other from last year's Packers practice squad.
PDaDdy Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 The article sums it up. Let's hope we have a hidden gem at LT on the roster. Finding a hidden gem is not a PLAN for success. It's like having winning the lottery as your retirement plan. That being said I'm hopeful we find something because it will be another LONG season if we don't. At the same time if we do strike gold again like we did with Peters we'll only end up losing the guy in 3 years because we won't pay him what he's worth either. There is an old saying that goes "it ain't where you're from...it's where you're at". The Bills want to pay these "hidden gems" based upon where they came from not what they developed into.
Recommended Posts