Trader Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I hear this but I'm not sure I understand what it means. And was play-calling responsible for Jackson averaging over 5 yards a carry? Or is he the best running back since Barry Sanders? Or is the offensive line better than you think it is? And if you mean that the offense is designed for Fitz to get rid of the ball quicker, then he must make his reads quicker than any QB in the league and his numbers at this point are even more impressive considering his coach doesn't allow him to wait as long as anyone else to throw the ball. Maybe we just got a steal with that new contract. Or maybe the offensive line is better than you think it is. He makes his reads very quickly Ryan commented on it before the game. It's a strength and it's also a weakness which he explioted the first game. In the second not so much. The O Line needs help especially at OT. They need two players there. Perhaps Bell, Hariston and Pears will develop but they have a ways to go.
RealityCheck Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Our o-line is overrated. The run-blocking is a big weakness. If some people don't see it that way, that's fair. I just see it a little differently. I see our guys getting blown up a little too often at the point of attack on run plays.
DocLawless Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I hear this but I'm not sure I understand what it means. And was play-calling responsible for Jackson averaging over 5 yards a carry? Or is he the best running back since Barry Sanders? Or is the offensive line better than you think it is? And if you mean that the offense is designed for Fitz to get rid of the ball quicker, then he must make his reads quicker than any QB in the league and his numbers at this point are even more impressive considering his coach doesn't allow him to wait as long as anyone else to throw the ball. Maybe we just got a steal with that new contract. Or maybe the offensive line is better than you think it is. Truth is that Fitz has one of the quickest releases in the NFL along with play calling of short throws (because the line will def not give fitz the time to sit back in the pocket) and Fred Jackson really is a an elusive, hard to bring down, all purpose back. Both of them hide a lot of the flaws in our o-line. Understand though the o- line is young and inexperienced and has had to shuffle around a lot this season. This would make things tough on a any line and it shows we have drafted some players with potential, versatility, and heart. I really billieve this team has a bright future! See you next week at OBD
Sisyphean Bills Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Truth is that Fitz has one of the quickest releases in the NFL along with play calling of short throws (because the line will def not give fitz the time to sit back in the pocket) and Fred Jackson really is a an elusive, hard to bring down, all purpose back. Both of them hide a lot of the flaws in our o-line. Understand though the o- line is young and inexperienced and has had to shuffle around a lot this season. This would make things tough on a any line and it shows we have drafted some players with potential, versatility, and heart. I really billieve this team has a bright future! See you next week at OBD You've got it about Fitz and Fred. It isn't really Fitz' release so much as that his pre-snap reads are excellent and he has great trust in them. He knows where he is going with the ball before it is snapped and is unafraid to sling it in there. He is what he is: a very cerebral QB with less than elite physical tools. Sacks, while often brought up on the board, are a meaningless statistic. Ben Roethlisberger takes a ton of hits and sacks but he's led his team to championships and extending the play is just part of his game. Aaron Rodgers has taken lots of sacks in prior years and is in the top 5 this year. Trent Edwards didn't get sacked much. Curtis Painter hasn't been sacked much this year, yet that hasn't helped the Colts to a single win.
metzelaars_lives Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I get that everyone is micro-analyzing why the sack number is low. But will just one person other than myself say, "ya know what, the offensive line has played pretty tough this year?"
John Cocktosten Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 For the most part the O Line has played pretty well. But a 3 step drop game and a QB with a quick release can make you look a whole lot better than you are. Hopefully Wood comes back healthy.
2003Contenders Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I get that everyone is micro-analyzing why the sack number is low. But will just one person other than myself say, "ya know what, the offensive line has played pretty tough this year?" Probably not -- and this isn't the best time to be making that argument, given that they may be coming off their worst performance of the year. In fact, the loss of Fred and insertion of Spiller and (ouch!) Choice into the lineup yesterday served to illustrate just what a superior back that Fred is. The OL got very little push up front -- and on that final drive when the Jets knew they had to pass, they got plenty of pressure on Fitz. I will say that the OL deserves credit for playing hard and trying to make their best of a very unenviable situation. Three of the five spots on the line were manned by backups yesterday. But there certainly are deficiencies that have been masked by play calling, Fitz's ability to get of the ball quickly and Fred's ability to gain positive yardage with little room.
BillsVet Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 If sacks allowed were the only metric to grade an OL on, they'd be great. Their OT's, even with Bell, are extremely weak and vulnerable against speed rushers. They also took some bad penalties. BTW, 19 carries for 55 yards for the starting RB yesterday. That's not a swipe at Spiller, though he needs better vision between the tackles, but I would hardly credit the OL when you can't average 3 yards per carry. That's not getting the job done, but cue the person who'll cite injuries as the only reason that happened.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I get that everyone is micro-analyzing why the sack number is low. But will just one person other than myself say, "ya know what, the offensive line has played pretty tough this year?" If I were to post on this subject again (which I'm doing… sigh) I would be crusading. And I try not to crusade. I feel this O-line is a very good, up-and-coming unit. They are young and have good talent. The concurrent injuries to Wood, Bell and Hairston really hurt the team but even in spite of the injuries, they have held their own… what offensive line in the NFL could sustain 3 equivalent injuries and maintain their level of play? The answer is none. On the interior, as long as they stay healthy, Wood, Levitre, Urbik, and Rinehart are about as good a top 4 as you're gonna find. All of them are tough and talented and can play at least two positions. At tackle, Bell plays well when healthy but he has a hard time doing so. Hairston is a total stud and will start at one of the positions. Pears is tough and smart but physically ordinary… like many starting O-linemen in the league. In spite of what some on this board ignore, if you over-invest draft picks into one area, you'll come up short in other areas. There is not an offensive line in the NFL that has highly-drafted players at each position. As I've documented in the past, NFL offensive lines are necessarily (due to the 7 round draft) populated with undrafted and low-drafted players who developed after a few years such as Tyson Clabo for instance. If the guys have a bit of talent, are smart and tough and well-coached, they can meld into a good to great unit. Then when you look at all the highly drafted O-linemen that have busted even in the last 3-4 years (Sam Baker, Eugene Monroe, Jason Smith, Chris Williams, Gosder Cherilus), you have to understand that you shouldn't reach for players simply out of need. Value has to meet opportunity. The Bills wanted Trent Williams or Russell Okung two years ago but both were gone when we drafted. The Bills didn't want to spend #9-11 picks on Oher or Bulaga… and both of those players appear destined to careers as good right tackles. Regardless of who they did draft, were the Bills wrong to use premium picks on guys that projected to good right tackles? In my opinion the Bills basically need to get one more offensive tackle because Bell is a free agent and often injured and because Pears (another free agent), while perfectly adequate, can be improved upon. But I maintain it's a young, smart group which will remain in the top 3rd of the league. As a hierarchy of needs I think (regarding the first round) that the Bills have bigger needs at pass rusher (DE/OLB/Hybrid) and wide receiver and arguably bigger needs to stop the run (DL or ILB). Also, you have to take the best player available whenever possible. You don't pass up a guy like AJ Green or Patrick Peterson because you're obsessed with drafting an offensive lineman. The OL got very little push up front -- and on that final drive when the Jets knew they had to pass, they got plenty of pressure on Fitz. I will say that the OL deserves credit for playing hard and trying to make their best of a very unenviable situation. Three of the five spots on the line were manned by backups yesterday. But there certainly are deficiencies that have been masked by play calling, Fitz's ability to get of the ball quickly and Fred's ability to gain positive yardage with little room. Yes they got very little push but again, this was not our top 5 guys. How well do the Jets play without Mangold? On top of that, entering the game, the Jets were 9th in the league in averaging 4.0 yards per rush… and they've been improving. Mike DeVito, Sione Puha, and M. Wilkerson are seriously immovable run defenders and David Harris is a great linebacker… as good as anyone in the league in stopping the run.
Dr. Trooth Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Aren't you giving Bell too much love and Hairston not enough? I mean they both only have 4 starts this season and Hairston hasn't been a turnstyle like Bell. I kinda think Bell has lost his starting job at LT.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Aren't you giving Bell too much love and Hairston not enough? I mean they both only have 4 starts this season and Hairston hasn't been a turnstyle like Bell. I kinda think Bell has lost his starting job at LT. Who are you replying to?
Dorkington Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I get that everyone is micro-analyzing why the sack number is low. But will just one person other than myself say, "ya know what, the offensive line has played pretty tough this year?" Not going to be me... I think they've been mediocre at best. We can't block for more than a couple seconds, there are no long drops by Fitzpatrick. We can't do standard formations for run plays, we have to use spread formations and misdirection to get any yards on the ground, and FJ is extremely adept at finding creases (like Marcus Allen, imo). They aren't the worst in the league, probably, but imo, our OL is pretty bad.
Stormin Norman Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) I do like the way our offensive line has battled all year long. It is undeniable that the scheme has helped (quick throws) but we must acknowlwdge that our lack of a deep threat is partially due to the O-line (among other things). Imagine Freddy's impact if we could stretch the field more with our passing game! They have looked every bit the part of a line learning on the fly but offering some nice upside potential...moments where they look very solid and others where they're clearly overmatched. With that said, the offensive line has been a pleasant surprise. Now, the defense on the other hand... Edited November 28, 2011 by Stormin Norman
maryland-bills-fan Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) I agree. Some posters really stretch to find something worng. If you have a QB who is ponderous and needs a lot of time to make his passes ,,,, well we have a lousy o-line for that. If you have a coach, who draws up plays that take a lot of time to develop,,,, well we have a lousy o-line for that. If you have RB's who need a power running game set up for him and clearned out holes and can not figure out which option is suddenly what is happening, so he needs to have clearnly defined holes........ well we have a lousy o-line for that Above are three ways to compare our o-line to other situations where they will come up short. BUT If you have a QB who is quick in getting out the ball out, a coach who can put in a system that does that and a line which can stuff the early rush and block & get down field for plays associated with these,,,, then we have a good o-line- even with the injuries. If the right tool to use is a hammer, then don't bring me a screwdrive and B word like hell that there is a slotty-pointy thing on the end. Edited November 28, 2011 by maryland-bills-fan
cody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Another O-line stat that looks like it means something: If Levitre starts at LG, the team plays well and either wins or loses by less than 7 points. If Levitre stats at any other position, the offense is ineffective.
Mike in Syracuse Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I'm willing to give them another year as a group with a full off season and mini-camps. Pears was widely referred to as a scrub here and has been a pleasant surprise. Wood and Levitre are rock solid. Bell is developing and Hairston is not far behind. Grab another couple of draft choices and perhaps a FA and lets see where we are.
John Cocktosten Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I'm willing to give them another year as a group with a full off season and mini-camps. Pears was widely referred to as a scrub here and has been a pleasant surprise. Wood and Levitre are rock solid. Bell is developing and Hairston is not far behind. Grab another couple of draft choices and perhaps a FA and lets see where we are. Unfortunately,I believe Bell and Pears are unrestricted free agents.
Bill from NYC Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Wow. The resuscitation of this thread really makes you wonder what the motivation is for those who want to resuscitate it. The Bills have 13 man-games lost to injury on the offensive line. They're down their starting center and their starting left tackle. At the same time they were down their top swing tackle. Previous to that, Urbik missed two games at right guard. They had their best O-lineman starting three games at left tackle and then tried to play him at center. How do you think the Jets O-line would be playing without Mangold and D Ferguson (and whomever their top swing tackle is)? What offensive line in the NFL would be playing well with injuries equivalent to what the Bills have suffered? The answer is none. There isn't a great offensive line in the NFL today… much less one that would be able to overcome a slew of injuries to key starters. IMO, the Bills O-line has held up fairly well considering the injuries and the shuffling that has resulted from them. But my point isn't about how good the O-line is now. My point is why would someone want to reprise this thread after the team has suffered a slew of injuries? There's only a few possible explanations and none of them have to do with seeking out the truth of the matter. The players we have lost are a 5th round rookie (who is back), Wood, who has been either injured or ineffective until this year (he was playing very well), and a small, weak (though agile) Bell, who is injured FAR more often than he is healthy. A top LT needs two things: 1) The strength and agility to protect the blindside. 2) Strength to dominate his opponent on running plays. Again, Bell is very agile, but unlike top LTs, he is frequently not as strong as the defender he faces. The guy did what, 9 reps at the combines with 225? One would expect that much from Spiller. And, the above doesn't take his health into account. Not everyone can play LT in the NFL, you know? Jonas Jennings was much stronger (and better) than Bell, but his body couldn't take it. Levitre is a very good guard, and I am fond of Urbik so far. But like it or not, Pears and Bell are question marks. And yes, Fitz does make this OL better with his mobility and quick release. Bottom line? This OL, even before the injuries, was somewhere around the middle of the pack. This btw was a huge improvement for the Bills. It is unlikely to get better unless they devote some major resources to the OT position. They need to get a quality LT and not trade him away.
C.Biscuit97 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I think we have the foundation of a very good offensive line and are finally developing some depth. I want everyone back and would like to sprinkle in a rookie or 2 and maybe a solid vet.
Fan in San Diego Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I'd say that according to all metrics, we indeed, thus far have the best O-Line in the NFL, and if not, then who's better? We have the third best rusher, second best rushing offense, and 1 sack. Yes, Ftizy moves the ball consistently under 3 seconds, but last time I checked how fast your QB got rid of the ball wasn't part of the measurement.. Tim- Denver and San Diego have better O-lines if you ask me.
Recommended Posts