daquixers Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 I have believed the entire time Troy Vincent was a big deal to our defense and this injury he was not nursing. Now we have proof: http://www.billsdaily.com/news/index.shtml#120204 It says 2 players sidelined for the SEASON with this same injury.
DeeRay Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 The Bills are ranked #3 in D without Vincent. He's irrelevent... he can stay on the injured list as long as he wants. In 11 seasons, he's only played 4 full ones. So, why would I, or anyone else, expect that he's going to play more than half or two thirds of a season? To sign him to a big contract was stupid... all along the Bills could have lived with McGee. Now, if Vincent comes back and gets 5 picks and locks down his receiver... then I might change my tune. But, I think he's basically an average corner with a liltte more experience than others. I don't even think he's as good as Winfield.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 vincest is best 144883[/snapback] Vincent is toast.
stevestojan Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 I have believed the entire time Troy Vincent was a big deal to our defense and this injury he was not nursing. Now we have proof: http://www.billsdaily.com/news/index.shtml#120204 It says 2 players sidelined for the SEASON with this same injury. 144818[/snapback] Then why isnt he on IR???
Yard Monkey Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 The Bills are ranked #3 in D without Vincent. He's irrelevent... he can stay on the injured list as long as he wants. In 11 seasons, he's only played 4 full ones. So, why would I, or anyone else, expect that he's going to play more than half or two thirds of a season? To sign him to a big contract was stupid... all along the Bills could have lived with McGee. Now, if Vincent comes back and gets 5 picks and locks down his receiver... then I might change my tune. But, I think he's basically an average corner with a liltte more experience than others. I don't even think he's as good as Winfield. 144857[/snapback] Are you kidding me? Vincent has: * been in 5 of the last 5 pro bowls * missed just 16 out of a possible 192 games because of injury before this season * never sat more than three games in a row (in 9 NFL seasons) Nice hindsight. I'm fine with McGee, but he's been up and down and nobody was sure he would be any good last offseason.
Guest BADOL Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 The Bills are ranked #3 in D without Vincent. He's irrelevent... he can stay on the injured list as long as he wants. In 11 seasons, he's only played 4 full ones. So, why would I, or anyone else, expect that he's going to play more than half or two thirds of a season? To sign him to a big contract was stupid... all along the Bills could have lived with McGee. Now, if Vincent comes back and gets 5 picks and locks down his receiver... then I might change my tune. But, I think he's basically an average corner with a liltte more experience than others. I don't even think he's as good as Winfield. 144857[/snapback] Please don't tell me people are getting arrogant about this defensive ranking. The last two times this defense was on in prime time(KC last year, NE this year) they absolutely got their assses handed to them. They've twice relinquished leads this season on long final drives by the opponent. The less it matters, the better they do. Until they've done it when the pressure is on, they haven't done anything.
34-78-83 Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 Please don't tell me people are getting arrogant about this defensive ranking. The last two times this defense was on in prime time(KC last year, NE this year) they absolutely got their assses handed to them. They've twice relinquished leads this season on long final drives by the opponent. The less it matters, the better they do. Until they've done it when the pressure is on, they haven't done anything. 145225[/snapback] Of course that has nothing to do with the offense throughout 2003 and up until recently this year helping soooo much with 3 and outs, turnovers, huge losses in the field position and time of posession battles.
zevo Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 Vincent is toast. 144912[/snapback] just poking fun at the title
ICE Posted December 3, 2004 Posted December 3, 2004 Are you kidding me? Vincent has:* been in 5 of the last 5 pro bowls * missed just 16 out of a possible 192 games because of injury before this season * never sat more than three games in a row (in 9 NFL seasons) Nice hindsight. I'm fine with McGee, but he's been up and down and nobody was sure he would be any good last offseason. 145032[/snapback] No he isn't kidding, the guy only has about 4 complete seasons to his name. The guy got to the probowl on his NAME. you remember just like ruben brown. Look this defense is doing just fine with him on the sidelines. Let them keep building chemestry and DON'T Screw stuff up!
ROCCEO Posted December 4, 2004 Posted December 4, 2004 No he isn't kidding, the guy only has about 4 complete seasons to his name. The guy got to the probowl on his NAME. you remember just like ruben brown. Look this defense is doing just fine with him on the sidelines. Let them keep building chemestry and DON'T Screw stuff up! 145324[/snapback] Calm down a little, i remember about a year and a half to 2 years ago vincent making some really nice plays for philly, one especially where he laid out in the back of the end zone and picked it off. Is he still that guy? I dunno, but his record speaks for itself.
BillsSouth Posted December 4, 2004 Posted December 4, 2004 I can sell people here some good real estate on the moon if anyone believes Vincent will ever be a Pro Bowler again. His body is done. Now, he doesn´t seem someone who would accept a pay cut. Which means he´ll be a salary cap albatross.
BADOLBILZ Posted December 4, 2004 Posted December 4, 2004 Of course that has nothing to do with the offense throughout 2003 and up until recently this year helping soooo much with 3 and outs, turnovers, huge losses in the field position and time of posession battles. 145255[/snapback] No, the instances I mentioned did not have a great deal to do with the sorry play of the offense. That's why I mentioned those in particular. Relinquishing a lead(and game) in the closing seconds twice, despite very good defensive field position? What does that have to do with the offense? What does giving up a score on nearly every defensive series against KC and NE have to do with the offense? Donahoe admitted this much last offseason, the team lacked mental toughness(translate:no heart), and that team includes this talented but choke susceptible defense. Let's not forget, one of the worst performances in franchise history was just over two weeks ago, when the team had a chance to make a stand against an AFC/divisional rival and get right back into the thick of the playoff race only to fall flat on their face in stunning fashion.
Bill from NYC Posted December 4, 2004 Posted December 4, 2004 No, the instances I mentioned did not have a great deal to do with the sorry play of the offense. That's why I mentioned those in particular. Relinquishing a lead(and game) in the closing seconds twice, despite very good defensive field position? What does that have to do with the offense? What does giving up a score on nearly every defensive series against KC and NE have to do with the offense? Donahoe admitted this much last offseason, the team lacked mental toughness(translate:no heart), and that team includes this talented but choke susceptible defense. Let's not forget, one of the worst performances in franchise history was just over two weeks ago, when the team had a chance to make a stand against an AFC/divisional rival and get right back into the thick of the playoff race only to fall flat on their face in stunning fashion. 145423[/snapback] What you you consider the major defensive problem? Coaching? Safety? Posey? Lack of pass rush?
34-78-83 Posted December 4, 2004 Posted December 4, 2004 No, the instances I mentioned did not have a great deal to do with the sorry play of the offense. That's why I mentioned those in particular. Relinquishing a lead(and game) in the closing seconds twice, despite very good defensive field position? What does that have to do with the offense? What does giving up a score on nearly every defensive series against KC and NE have to do with the offense? Donahoe admitted this much last offseason, the team lacked mental toughness(translate:no heart), and that team includes this talented but choke susceptible defense. Let's not forget, one of the worst performances in franchise history was just over two weeks ago, when the team had a chance to make a stand against an AFC/divisional rival and get right back into the thick of the playoff race only to fall flat on their face in stunning fashion. 145423[/snapback] You are going WAY out on a limb there with your personal interpretation of what Donahoe stated about mental toughness, but that's fine it's your opinion and can't be disputed any more than my opinion. Relinquishing a lead on a game ending drive very often DOES have a lot to do with an offense's production throughout said game. Constant three and outs generate both fatigue and a natural human reaction by defenders to think that "I need to make a big play here to change the game" when they should be focussing on their role as a component of the defensive scheme. I think that happened a lot under GW. If you remember in the KC game and NE game this year the Defense played much better early than later although you are right that they didn't play particularly well in either overall. I really do understand what your point was, and it certainly has some credibility but I just don't believe it's as cut and dry as you made it out to be. Along with that, I've got a real with anyone who would consider a defense with TKO, Fletcher, Milloy, PW, and Schobel as it's foundation lacking in heart.
JStranger76 Posted December 4, 2004 Posted December 4, 2004 I disagree with the lack of heart comment but like I said when we play teams with a top notch Oline we get exposed. I don't expect us to have 4 Pro Bowl defensive lineman but we need another pass rusher or two. Not even everydowners but guys who can get the QB when we don't rush DB''s or LB's. Read the below statement. And I don't mean when we are up by 3 TD's and a DB gets 3 sacks.
Guest Jeff Posey's Mom Posted December 4, 2004 Posted December 4, 2004 What you you consider the major defensive problem? Coaching? Safety? Posey? Lack of pass rush? 145434[/snapback] alright, i know this is off thread topic but that doesnt seem to be a crime around here, so... why do people insist that Posey is such a weakness to this defense?? Sure, he doesnt have all the sacks we were expecting but they RARELY blitz him. RARELY. He's in or around almost every tackle whether the play is at him or to the other side of the field. He hasnt broken down in coverage. No team can run outside on us. AND he does all this with no great DE in front of him (Schobel included). Ok, yes, it could be better, he's no Arrington or whoever else you want him to be. But he doesnt have to be. And as a matter of fact, i dont think they WANT him to be this huge superstar cause then we wont be able to afford to keep him here. He gets the job done, he doesnt make mistakes, he doesnt commit penalties, everything Belechick asks of his LBs. He's soild. He's consistent. What more do you want? I have a feeling if the internet were here 15 years ago, people who gripe about Posey would be the same people to gripe about Phil Hansen. Doesnt put up a ton of numbers but is a solid player. We have one of the best starting LB cores in the league, Posey may be the weakest of the three but that doesnt mean he's not a great player, it means he's being compared to Spikes and Fletcher. Give him a break already alright, im done... for now
Recommended Posts