ddaryl Posted July 27, 2010 Posted July 27, 2010 this year is much different no 1st time starters at the OT position new head coach who actually understand the O part of this game
BillsVet Posted July 27, 2010 Posted July 27, 2010 I know people are touting Oher at LT, but he'll likely stay at RT. And in the 5 games (weeks 5, 6, 14, 15, and 16) he started at LT last year, the team went 2-3 and he had average to poor games against the Bengals, Vikes and Steelers, with the team losing all 3 games (he had good games against, and they beat, the Lions and Bears). It's ironic that when Buffalo chose to trade Jason Peters, a lot of Bills fans said LT's didn't win games so the need at the position wasn't great. Now, someone cites Oher as a big reason behind Baltimore's going 2-3 in games he started (as a rookie I might add against teams with decent to an outstanding pass rush). Not to mention, Buffalo is entering 2010 with maybe the worst tandem of OT's in the NFL. I guess whatever's convenient to make the point that LT's aren't important, unless it's time to marginalize a guy like Peters or Oher. And who's in football circles saying he'll remain at RT? Guys rarely are drafted 23rd overall to play RT anyway.
sllib olaffub Posted July 27, 2010 Posted July 27, 2010 They are looking at depth for the Guard position, which is good, because we need depth everywhere. I think they planned on making the defense a respectable unit first and foremost, and couldn't pass on Spiller because he's a once-in-a-generation kind of talent. They knew the tackle positions were questionable, but they also knew they might have talen there - it just depended on health and how these youngsters play in game situations. So, I think they were counting on evaluating the tackles in pads, and if they needed to add a veteran, then they will, for a season or two, until their young guys are ready, or until they can draft a replacement. I'd say we'll see the line shift a little between now and pre-season, and that we'll maybe even see an addition of a veteran G, and Tackle.
ChasBB Posted July 27, 2010 Posted July 27, 2010 Someone please explain how passing on Oher was Nix's fault. +1 Apparently some on this board don't want to let facts interfere with a good rant.
Doc Posted July 27, 2010 Posted July 27, 2010 It's ironic that when Buffalo chose to trade Jason Peters, a lot of Bills fans said LT's didn't win games so the need at the position wasn't great. Now, someone cites Oher as a big reason behind Baltimore's going 2-3 in games he started (as a rookie I might add against teams with decent to an outstanding pass rush). Not to mention, Buffalo is entering 2010 with maybe the worst tandem of OT's in the NFL. I guess whatever's convenient to make the point that LT's aren't important, unless it's time to marginalize a guy like Peters or Oher. And who's in football circles saying he'll remain at RT? Guys rarely are drafted 23rd overall to play RT anyway. You might want to re-read what I wrote. I said that the team went 2-3 and Oher had poor performances in the losses. You can draw your own inferences if you wish.
PromoTheRobot Posted July 27, 2010 Posted July 27, 2010 We used to have a pro bowl LT. We won 7 games. Then we got rid of him and we won 6. Frankly I don't understand what everyone is hyperventilating about. The O-line is more than one position. PTR
theranter Posted July 27, 2010 Posted July 27, 2010 I hope I'm wrong, but it feels like 2009 all over again. We went into the season with an unproven rookie at LT and no depth. When we lost our starting tackles to injury we were screwed, scrambling the rest of the year to send out healthy bodies regardless of effectiveness. Fast forward one year: we have the same problem at LT (unproven-coming off knee surgery) and a Raider cast off at RT, and no experienced depth. The tackle situation is worrisome at best. We may be bitching the entire year why we didnt address the problem more seriously. Green-Wang were the best Nix could do? If this situation blows up in our faces again this year I might fill my BILLS golfbag full of cow crap and send it to Nix's office! Don't believe the propaganda about Bells' athleticism and we're gonna run it most of the time so it doesn't really matter. If we don't win this year because of our tackles ineptitude I will have made up my mind on Nix. It was our biggest offseason need along with QB. Nix said he didn't agree with the fans that our tackle situation was that bad-I hope he's right! Are you comfortable with our tackles going into camp or should we have done more to date? WHERE DID YOU HEAR THIS? ARE YOU SURE? OMGNO! RUN, EVERYBODY RUN! RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY! OH DEAR, OH DEAR!
mpl6876 Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 I know people are touting Oher at LT, but he'll likely stay at RT. And in the 5 games (weeks 5, 6, 14, 15, and 16) he started at LT last year, the team went 2-3 and he had average to poor games against the Bengals, Vikes and Steelers, with the team losing all 3 games (he had good games against, and they beat, the Lions and Bears). The point is we should have taken him. It doesn't matter if he is Baltimore's RT or LT. He would have been our LT because we have no quality LT.
mpl6876 Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 It still makes no sense that people think the Bills will be one of the worst teams in the league, much less worse than last year. They won 6 games with a worse OT situation (especially after Butler went down in game 2), had 2 rookies starting on the O-line and up to 4 rookie/rookie starters on the O-line at one time because of injuries, Lynch was out of shape and missed the first 3 games, Nelson was a rookie, and the OC'ing was lousy. On defense, they couldn't stop the run and wore down as games went on. And the ST's were a disappointment all around. Now on the downside, the Bills lost TO, who was the only other proven WR beside Evans and Reed, who is also gone. Still, I don't think that WR is enough to kill the team. No, it's just another area that the Bills are weak in. Another area where teams can exploit our lack of receivers and tee off on the QB and our running game. No balance or lack of equals big trouble for our offense. God help Gailey and company.....
mpl6876 Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 this year is much different no 1st time starters at the OT position new head coach who actually understand the O part of this game Your right things are going to be different but does that equate to W's.
mpl6876 Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 +1Apparently some on this board don't want to let facts interfere with a good rant. Please explain to me why Nix didn't address the OL this year? +1 for me.
Hossage Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 Look, its that gutless troll mpl6876 saying something bad about the bills!
Ramius Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 Please explain to me why Nix didn't address the OL this year? +1 for me. Because he said we couldn't address all of our needs in one offseason. If the Bills took an OT in round 2 for example, you'd be here bitching that we didn't address the NT position.
mpl6876 Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 Because he said we couldn't address all of our needs in one offseason. If the Bills took an OT in round 2 for example, you'd be here bitching that we didn't address the NT position. IMO, we could have adequately address both of our needs with this draft, free agency pick up, or a trade. We didn't have to draft Spiller. Cam Thomas went to the Chargers in the fourth round. I would argue his is as good or better than Troup. I am not one who likes to make excuses for the front office. Maybe you are that kind of person?
mpl6876 Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 Look, its that gutless troll mpl6876 saying something bad about the bills! Quite frankly, you don't bother me. However, I must say you are the rudest person I have ever seen here.
Ramius Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 IMO, we could have adequately address both of our needs with this draft, free agency pick up, or a trade. We didn't have to draft Spiller. So which LT would you have drafted at #9? Bulaga who didn't go until the mid-20s? Or Davis who had some serious work ethic concerns and red flags?
mpl6876 Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 So which LT would you have drafted at #9? Bulaga who didn't go until the mid-20s? Or Davis who had some serious work ethic concerns and red flags? I don't think I am qualified to answer that question. I don't know what happened in the draft room. I think I would have tried to trade the pick and get more picks knowing we could have gotten our NT or OT. Could have gotten Davis, NT WIlliams, Buluga, Etc... The one thing that really bothered me on draft day was the way the Bills ran up to the podium and picked Spiller. They had ten fing minutes to see if anyone could have offered them a trade. They didn't even consider it. I believe that was a huge error. There was no reason to rush the pick. I know your going to say that was their guy and they grabbed him. Still, I think maybe a better offer may have been there if they waited... I can answer you question by saying I wasn't happy with the Spiller pick.
Swift Sylvan Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 We used to have a pro bowl LT. We won 7 games. Then we got rid of him and we won 6. Frankly I don't understand what everyone is hyperventilating about. The O-line is more than one position. PTR As a means to improve our team we look for specific areas of weaknesses. The fact that tackle is arguably our least talented position and comparatively is the worst position we have. That being said, you are correct losing Jason Peters cost us 1 game at most. Of course we also need to consider why we lost the games who on the team could excel with better talent around while we need to figure out who just is not good enough to succeed with the right scheme and abilities. Maybe if we were to improve our LT position then our Guards would look even better and suddenly our line would go from terrible to average. Who knows? I sure don't.
sllib olaffub Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 It's not really logical to say that losing Peters lost us only one game. Sure, our overall record went down by one, but had he been here, our line might have been totally different, and we might have avoided some of the pitfalls we experienced last season, and came out on top of some of the close games, and maybe finished 9-7; with that reasoning his absence might have cost us 2 wins. You never know either way. Anyway, when I look at our situation with Gailey and our O-line and recievers and such, an analogy of sorts comes to mind. What if Jauron was coaching Green Bay two years ago? Two years ago they finished what? - 6-10 or something? Their O-line was terrible, their QB was running for his life, and yet, a year later they have virtually the same offense and are one of the best teams in the league. You never know what someone else could have done with our talent, and without the injuries. So, when people say we don't have recievers, we don't have tackles, etc., I know where they're coming from, but I'm holding out hope that a different staff, with different ways of coaching and play calling, can make the same group look totally different, and end up with totally different results. Here's hoping that Gailey can accomplish the same type of turn around as Green Bay did (they even swithced to the 3-4, and year one were one of the top 3 defenses). In fact, I think our team's changes will resemble that of Green Bay's and that of Miami of a few years ago.
billsfan89 Posted July 28, 2010 Posted July 28, 2010 Except he is a RT. But no biggie. PTR If Oher instead of Maybin was on this team how much better would our O-line be? Even as a RT Oher would be a huge upgrade and the Ravens are putting him at LT this season over their proven starter Gaither who they shifted to RT.
Recommended Posts