Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 I think the other part of it is that Fitz is just a quick decision maker. Not necessarily because of the oline There's a point at which quick decisions are the result of naturally fast mental processing, and there's a point at which slightly quicker decisions are the result of forced quickness and lead to undesireable mistakes. IMO part of what went on in the 2nd half of the season is that Fitz went from making decisions at his normal, fast tempo to trying to force them (the line was decimated by injuries and he was less mobile thus less able to buy himself time) I respect your view, I personally think the line had a lot to do with it.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 The Strength is a big thing to look at out of an elite top 3 prospect at ur position. The fact that he only lifted that much can lead people to believe that he may not be able to handle that many bull rushes. But it's not just the bench press, he has the most questions of any of the top 3 LT's because of stance and footwork also He's known for having good technique and footwork and agility. Those are his strengths as a finesse player not weaknesses. He's also know for getting into his stance and position quicker than any of the other OTs. This is one of the major scouting reports. I know there are a lot but this is a very reliable one, posing both strengths and weaknesses. Pass blocking: Athletic left tackle with natural bend, lateral agility and quick feet. Plays with a wide base to stand up against a strong punch. Anchors vs. bull rush, although stronger rushers get under his pads when he is not aggressive with his punch and hand placement. Takes defenders to the ground when they try to duck and bend around the edge. Easily helps inside to shut off blitz pressure. Can reset his hands and move laterally to mirror defenders, but occasionally stops his feet and reaches, allowing defenders to get around him with hands and quickness. Run blocking: Positional blocker with good feet and lateral agility to wall off defensive ends. Blocks through the whistle and pushes the pile. Moves to strong-side tight end on occasion to seal the edge on run plays. Has only average strength to move defenders in the trenches and loses leverage battle in short-yardage. Pulling/trapping: Does not trap inside often, but pulled around end on occasion. Lacks foot speed and consistency in sustaining to be special as a move blocker. Initial Quickness: Very good quickness off the line as a run blocker and in pass protection. Anticipates the snap as well as any college tackle, gets into his pass set quickly and moves out of his stance to pull. Downfield: Adequate straight-line speed for the position, but initial quickness and agility to make initial open-field blocks on outside runs and screens. Does not dominate or sustain open-field blocks; lacks foot quickness, leading to overextending to reach targets, and has average upper-body strength. Intangibles: Above-average football smarts and general intelligence. Plays with a nasty streak. Solid character and work ethic. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1695609
cody Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 The reason people are saying OT is a bigger need than WR is because they think te Bills will draft OT @ 10. There are OTs worth a top 10 pick. There are not WRs that will be there that are worth a #10 pick. If the Bills were not going OT in round 1, Bell would be re-signed.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 The Strength is a big thing to look at out of an elite top 3 prospect at ur position. The fact that he only lifted that much can lead people to believe that he may not be able to handle that many bull rushes. But it's not just the bench press, he has the most questions of any of the top 3 LT's because of stance and footwork also Sorry to nitpick but I think bench press and bull rush protection have a weak linkage at best. I would say that you have to be able to anchor with the lower body as the most important aspect of neutralizing a bull rush. JMO… carry on…
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 (edited) You realize you just compared our 7th-round pick that never played organized football until his sophomore year at Northwestern State, to Stanford's Jonathan Martin - the #2 or #3 rated LT prospect (depending on who you read) in the 2012 NFL draft, yes? Actually, he was comparing the Buffalo Bills starting left tackle in 2011, until his injury, to the #2 or#3 LT prospect. Edited March 24, 2012 by MOVALLEYRANDY
Kelly the Dog Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 There's a point at which quick decisions are the result of naturally fast mental processing, and there's a point at which slightly quicker decisions are the result of forced quickness and lead to undesireable mistakes. IMO part of what went on in the 2nd half of the season is that Fitz went from making decisions at his normal, fast tempo to trying to force them (the line was decimated by injuries and he was less mobile thus less able to buy himself time) I respect your view, I personally think the line had a lot to do with it. IMO, Gailey got here, evaluated the entire team, its strengths and weaknesses, and then designed the short passing game around two facts, the first and most important being the offensive line was terrible and couldnt hold the defenders off our quarterback for more than two seconds, and then secondly, the two QBs we had, Trent Edwards and Fitz were both smart cerebral QBs that could get the ball off fast, and neither of them excelled in the long game. The WR talent was an afterthought. Evans was fast, Roscoe was fast. Stevie wasnt even starting. Immediately Gailey realized that Trent could not function when there was any kind of rush in real games. And got rid of him after two games. Watching Fitz in action however, he realized that Fitz could read defenses quick, make quick decisive decisions, and was fearless and unrattled in the pocket under heavy rush, where Trent was stubborn and fearless but nervous and ineffectual. He then re-tooled the short passing game and what is now our offense on Fitz's strengths and the OL's weakness, providing no more than 2-3 seconds to throw. Evans was no longer needed as much because we really couldnt get the downfield. No other WR was a burner although both Stevie and Jones could sometimes get open deep. Now that the OL is in their third year and has a little more stability, Gailey WANTS to open it up a little bit, so there is more room to operate for Nelson and Chandler down the seams, Stevie on the short crossing routes, and Freddy and Spiller out of the backfield or slot. Hence the look for the big fast #2 like Meachem (and perhaps Floyd or Hill). But Gailey also is faced with the LT problem.
offyourocker Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 I have to disagree that the Bills' OL was "solid" last year. It was better than the disaster that it had been in the past, for sure, but the OL's pass blocking weakness was masked by the short-fast passing game that the offense adopted. Having better blocking OTs would enable Fitz to have more than a micro-second to stand in the pocket and open up a bit of a down-field passing threat. Bingo
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 Its fairly hypocritical to insist that the OL only appeared adequate because of our scheme, but not say the same about our WRs. The fact is that other than Stevie, none of our guys can "beat the guy across from them" with any consistency, or at all in some cases. They are 100% dependent on Chan's smoke and mirrors which can be stopped by good defenses, or simply good preparation. We don't have any NFL level WRs on this roster, other than Stevie - and Floyd is basically the definition of a Buddy Nix WR (size, physicality, versatility, vert, speed, hands, blocking... we've been through this list before). Also, enough already with the alcohol thing. The guy drank in college (the horror) but 100% righted the ship and disciplined himself thereafter. He's entering the draft with zero off-the-field worries, as far as I'm concerned. +1 for your first paragraph. Respectfully, disagree with the second. I think there are 20 receivers that look like pro material that you can get later on. Heck, Danny Coale from VaTech and T.Y. Hilton from Fla. Int'l have a decent chance of having better careers than Floyd. But if anyone watched the combine, after the first few linemen this group is really unathletic, as far as footwork goes. So I would lean towards a lineman in That respect, 'cuz the good ones may all be gone after pick #41. Buddy might blow us away and take Janoris Jenkins or Dre kirkpatrick. That's what makes the draft so exciting and why I have flown from So Cal. five times to see it. Should be tension filled once those picks start rolling in.
OldTimer1960 Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 Its fairly hypocritical to insist that the OL only appeared adequate because of our scheme, but not say the same about our WRs. The fact is that other than Stevie, none of our guys can "beat the guy across from them" with any consistency, or at all in some cases. They are 100% dependent on Chan's smoke and mirrors which can be stopped by good defenses, or simply good preparation. What part of "Indeed, both the OL and WR group had serious shortcomings that Gailey and the offensive staff did their best to hide." did you not understand? I never made the "fairly hypocritical" argument that the WRs were just fine. Did you only read the part that supported your argument?
NoSaint Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 Our oline was the best it was in years last year. I'm not saying it was fantastic but it was solid. Whether it was Hairston, Bell or Levitre at left tackle they all played well as did the whole oline. We also have a track record with being able to develop late round LT picks as well as undrafted players at LT into being good to great players. Jason Peters was an undrafted tight end that we molded into one of the best tackles in the league and Demetrius Bell who was a 7th round pick, while not great was built up into a solid starter. I believe our coaching staff can do the same with Hairston as well. I believe that we should give Hairston at least one shot to be our starting left tackle this year if it doesn't work out then we can just either draft someone to fill the void next year or draft someone in the 2nd, 3rd or middle rounds that can come in and compete with him for the starting spot. The only sure fire guy at tackle in the draft this year is Kalil who won't be there when we draft at 10 and there are questions about both Reiff and Martin especially Martin who had a lousy pro day and could only lift 225 pounds on the bench press 20 times as well as questions about his stance and footwork. Therefore, with that being said i believe the bills have to place their focus on two other players. I believe WR is our biggest need by far. You cannot look at the other wide receivers on this roster and say that you would be comfortable with any one of them starting opposite Stevie. Thats why i think our main player we should be targeting if he is there is Michael Floyd. This guy is just to good to pass up even if Martin or Reiff are there. There are to many questions about the other receivers after the top 2 even though it is deep. Floyd is the one WR that can come in and contribute and be a difference maker day one at the receiver position. If Floyd is not there then i believe we should go with Dre Kirkpatrick at CB from Alabama. This guy is huge at 6'3, has very good speed, is great in coverage and is not afraid to hit and will again have more of an impact than any of the left tackles we could take there. If neither one of these players are there i believe they can trade down and grab a LT at that point. All the draft talk doesn't much express need. Our line was schemed around very effectively, as it is still a weakness but numbers showed well on statlines. Imagine what we could do if fitz had more time to throw, or if we could line up and run a power running play on an and short situation. The heavy use of the spread goes hand in hand with getting the ball out quick for fitz and pulling bodies out of the middle for the running game. I suspect with a better line, we see the play book get opened up. And remind me which of our coaches helped Jason Peters along?
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 IMO, Gailey got here, evaluated the entire team, its strengths and weaknesses, and then designed the short passing game around two facts, the first and most important being the offensive line was terrible and couldnt hold the defenders off our quarterback for more than two seconds, and then secondly, the two QBs we had, Trent Edwards and Fitz were both smart cerebral QBs that could get the ball off fast, and neither of them excelled in the long game. The WR talent was an afterthought. Evans was fast, Roscoe was fast. Stevie wasnt even starting. Immediately Gailey realized that Trent could not function when there was any kind of rush in real games. And got rid of him after two games. Watching Fitz in action however, he realized that Fitz could read defenses quick, make quick decisive decisions, and was fearless and unrattled in the pocket under heavy rush, where Trent was stubborn and fearless but nervous and ineffectual. He then re-tooled the short passing game and what is now our offense on Fitz's strengths and the OL's weakness, providing no more than 2-3 seconds to throw. Evans was no longer needed as much because we really couldnt get the downfield. No other WR was a burner although both Stevie and Jones could sometimes get open deep. Now that the OL is in their third year and has a little more stability, Gailey WANTS to open it up a little bit, so there is more room to operate for Nelson and Chandler down the seams, Stevie on the short crossing routes, and Freddy and Spiller out of the backfield or slot. Hence the look for the big fast #2 like Meachem (and perhaps Floyd or Hill). But Gailey also is faced with the LT problem. I can't disagree for the most part - good analysis (Nit: how can one be fearless and nervous/ineffectual at the same time? Aren't "fearless" and "nervous" somewhat antonyms?)
BuffaloPride Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 How many remember the rep count on Bell's 225? 20 is more than twice, I'm not a Martin supporter, but the bench press means little to me. The answer was 9 Do you have a link for that because I find that hard to believe. 225 is not a lot of weight and I can't believe a big guy like Bell only got off 9 reps. I do more than that and I weigh 200 lbs.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 I can't disagree for the most part - good analysis (Nit: how can one be fearless and nervous/ineffectual at the same time? Aren't "fearless" and "nervous" somewhat antonyms?) Actually it was always something that struck me as odd about Trent. In college, and in Buffalo, when the rush came, he would just stand in there and stubbornly take a pounding. He rarely tried to escape much, and he would usually look downfield, and then get abused. Even before the concussion in Arizona. After being pummeled, he would just get up and stand there the next time and take a beating again. Both at Stanford and on the Bills, and both had terrible lines. So I always thought of him as fearless and stubborn (as well as being tough to withstand the punishment). But he also seemed to react very poorly when there was a rush. He didn't make quick decisive decisions. He would often throw erratically when he did, or just do his little checkdown thing when he seemed nervous to me. It was like he didnt mind getting battered most of the time, and wouldnt run away or duck to avoid it, but it still noticeably rattled him into making very poor decisions. Do you have a link for that because I find that hard to believe. 225 is not a lot of weight and I can't believe a big guy like Bell only got off 9 reps. I do more than that and I weigh 200 lbs. Ask and you shall receive -- http://nflcombineresults.com/nflcombinedata.php?year=2008&pos=OT&college=
SoFFacet Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 What part of "Indeed, both the OL and WR group had serious shortcomings that Gailey and the offensive staff did their best to hide." did you not understand? I never made the "fairly hypocritical" argument that the WRs were just fine. Did you only read the part that supported your argument? Tbh I did only skim your post. It seemed to be a restatement of your previous posts, so I wasn't very worried about missing anything. However, it appears that you did indeed admit that our WRs are just as (un)solid as our OL, my bad.
808 Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 i know all kinds of guys with stick legs who can bench a lot. its like tryna equate bench press with punching power and its not related at all. id much rather see these guys do dead lifts and squats if we are gonna judge them by weight lifting standards and hoping they become football players.
spartacus Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 You didn't see any connection between Bell and Wood going down and the whole team falling apart in the 2d half of the year?? Levitre is a G, not a T. Bell isn't on the team any longer Hairston is a RT and besides, they need another T no matter where he plays. Whether or not the top prospects are worth picking at 10 is debatable but you'd have to be blind to think LT is not a need for the Bills. Whether or not the top prospects are worth picking at 10 is debatable but you'd have to be blind to think LT is not a need for the Bills. Blind- or in charge of evaluating talent and building the roster for the Bills for the last 15 years. we wil see if things change this year because Ralph is basically senile, but my guess is that as long as Ralph lives, he will continue his pledge to not draft a LT in the first round.
Best Player Available Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 Its fairly hypocritical to insist that the OL only appeared adequate because of our scheme, but not say the same about our WRs. The fact is that other than Stevie, none of our guys can "beat the guy across from them" with any consistency, or at all in some cases. They are 100% dependent on Chan's smoke and mirrors which can be stopped by good defenses, or simply good preparation. We don't have any NFL level WRs on this roster, other than Stevie - and Floyd is basically the definition of a Buddy Nix WR (size, physicality, versatility, vert, speed, hands, blocking... we've been through this list before). Also, enough already with the alcohol thing. The guy drank in college (the horror) but 100% righted the ship and disciplined himself thereafter. He's entering the draft with zero off-the-field worries, as far as I'm concerned. I agree with this and Floyd would probably have less risk at being a bust then a LT in the 1st. But LT is just as important in our offensive needs. Hairston for the people that believe in the "short arms theory" Has short arms for a LT. He was projected as a RT and is a RT. time to keep players where they belong on the team. Hairston does have promise as a good RT. Guys like Easley who some have all this hope for should be reminded he has zero catches in a regular season game since being drafted. If the Bills breakthrough this season we cannot hope these other receivers finally get it or stay healthy. Wishful thinking to believe Jones, etc. is "close" to breaking through. They will draft a wide receiver early.
OldTimer1960 Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 Tbh I did only skim your post. It seemed to be a restatement of your previous posts, so I wasn't very worried about missing anything. However, it appears that you did indeed admit that our WRs are just as (un)solid as our OL, my bad. Do you mean a previous post in this thread where I said: "I agree that the Bills need another top-level WR and I agree to some degree that Floyd is a good prospect there. I just don't see him as elite or better than players available at other positions - players who don't have the off-field red-flags that Floyd does." ? I think if you take the time to read my posts that you'll find that I am usually pretty fair and balanced and rarely see things as completely black and white. I freely acknowledge the I don't know everything. My point all through this thread is that while WR is certainly a big need and Floyd is certainly a talented prospect, I am worried about the alcohol problem. I personally don't think it should be minimized to "he's just a college kid who had some drinks". As another poster noted, he had 3 alcohol related incidents, one of which was a DUI -pretty serious. He put his college career in jeopardy. True, he cleaned up for his Senior year. Maybe he has matured and addressed that issue and it won't surface again or maybe it will get worse when he has lots of money. I don't know, I am just arguing that I'd rather not take that chance on the 10th pick in the draft. I was also arguing in this thread the exact opposite of what you accused me of being hypocritical about. I think the original premise of this thread was that "Bills need a WR and a LT, but LTs can be found late and developed while WRs are harder to do that with". There is no doubt that the Bills need both an upgrade at LT and WR. There is no debate that both would help open up the Bills' offense. My point there is that they should try to address both needs and the higher in the draft they address each, the better chance they can improve those positions.
missthe kgun Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 Hey People, The line didn't fall apart until Wood went down, and we didn't have a back up Center! We need to draft one of those in the later rounds for some insurance! We Need LBs and WRs more than we need a LT early...With that said, if none are worth that pick, then we need to trade back and get one. I don't want to hear any talk of how the Bills don't trade back picks, because that goes right along with the Bills don't spend money in Free Agency, and we clearly see that is not the case this year. Go Bills!!!!!
BobChalmers Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 I'm not saying that it's not a need I'm just saying it's not the biggest need If Bell is not re-signed, we don't really have one, so yeah, it's a pretty huge need - hard to think of a position more so. Hairston with noone behind him is not a good situation. Moving Levitre to T was a disaster last year we don't want to repeat.
Recommended Posts