Punch Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 Yeah, well, this is a professional team, isn't it? They may have to move Williams back to CB simply because they don't have anyone better. No kidding. What's your point? A starting safety moving to CB means there are backups at every secondary position. I'm not suggesting anything more.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 No kidding. What's your point? A starting safety moving to CB means there are backups at every secondary position. I'm not suggesting anything more. Well, then I guess we agree. All I was saying is that if your best "cornerback" happens to be your starting SS and your options to backfill SS are better, then you need to move the SS to CB to give your team the best chance to compete. Yes, I agree that's not rocket science, but you'd be surprised. It is management's fault for not addressing a clear deficiency. There's no excuse to have zero depth at CB. Bingo.
Punch Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 Well, then I guess we agree. All I was saying is that if your best "cornerback" happens to be your starting SS and your options to backfill SS are better, then you need to move the SS to CB to give your team the best chance to compete. Yes, I agree that's not rocket science, but you'd be surprised. Bingo. Gotcha. And I also agree the front office needed to address this in some fashion.
NoSaint Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 It is management's fault for not addressing a clear deficiency. There's no excuse to have zero depth at CB. how much depth do you want - our top 3 guys were out. what do you expect when guys 4-6 are on the field with a pair of backup safeties over the top?
BobChalmers Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 How could they not adjust to that is beyond me. Like play more zone maybe? Maybe - but the whole defensive system is predicated on pressure and good corner play. Lack of pressure from the front certainly added to the problem, but the bottom line on the defense is without our top two CB's we're going to have trouble. Not enough depth apparently - not that many teams can go 5-deep at CB w/o feeling it badly. It is management's fault for not addressing a clear deficiency. There's no excuse to have zero depth at CB. I think this statement is much more fair when addressing OG positions. Letting Levitre go w/o an adequate replacement plan was a major blunder. I can forgive them not planning for being without both Gilmore and McKelvin.
bobblehead Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 I'll just add that I saw Merton Hanks get his ass toasted in his rookie year, and he ended up ok. Not to compare the two at all, but I wouldn't give up on Rogers just yet.
KOKBILLS Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 I'll just add that I saw Merton Hanks get his ass toasted in his rookie year, and he ended up ok. Not to compare the two at all, but I wouldn't give up on Rogers just yet. OK...But Rogers is not a Rookie, and this is not his first trip to toast island...He was beat a ton last year as well...
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 how much depth do you want - our top 3 guys were out. what do you expect when guys 4-6 are on the field with a pair of backup safeties over the top? The Jaguars picked up something like 11 players between the final cuts and the start of the season. The Seahawks hit the ground running 4 years ago and made more transactions than any other team by far and away. This year something like 10 of their cuts were picked up by other teams. Sometimes, it makes sense to simply go with who you brought to camp; other times, not so much.
Simon Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 OK...But Rogers is not a Rookie, and this is not his first trip to toast island...He was beat a ton last year as well... And the year before that as well. This is now his 3rd season of being the pigeon every time he steps on the field. I was disappointed when he made the roster and then flat out horrified when they decided to pencil him in as a starter. I'm actually shocked it took this long for somebody to attack him for a whole game. This is not a problem that is going to get better with experience or coaching; he hasn't improved a single iota since the Bills began inexplicably giving him repeated live snaps. As long as he is on the field, this defense is compromised to a degree that it is going to be next to impossible to win games with a rookie QB and co-ordinator on the other side of the ball. If the Bills don't get him off the field this week, the credibility of this staff will take a significant hit in my book. how much depth do you want - our top 3 guys were out. what do you expect when guys 4-6 are on the field with a pair of backup safeties over the top? I find it troubling that both Brian Waters and Drayton Florence were available after Week 1 and to my knowledge the Bills showed no interest in exploring either of them as an option.
KOKBILLS Posted September 24, 2013 Posted September 24, 2013 I find it troubling that both Brian Waters and Drayton Florence were available after Week 1 and to my knowledge the Bills showed no interest in exploring either of them as an option. I can honestly say I thought Florence was going to be a Bill again the minute he got cut...Seemed like a no-brainer to me...If anyone on that Bills staff thinks Rogers is a more viable option at CB than Florence we are really screwed...Not to say Florence is the be all, end all...But still...Maybe it was just a FO thing...Who knows...
Coach Tuesday Posted September 24, 2013 Posted September 24, 2013 I can honestly say I thought Florence was going to be a Bill again the minute he got cut...Seemed like a no-brainer to me...If anyone on that Bills staff thinks Rogers is a more viable option at CB than Florence we are really screwed...Not to say Florence is the be all, end all...But still...Maybe it was just a FO thing...Who knows... $$$ The Bills rarely, if ever, invest in veteran depth after August.
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 24, 2013 Author Posted September 24, 2013 I find it troubling that both Brian Waters and Drayton Florence were available after Week 1 and to my knowledge the Bills showed no interest in exploring either of them as an option. I only find it troubling because of the phrase, "to my knowledge" -- because I know you have some connections. Otherwise I would just think that maybe they tried and were rebuffed. $$$ The Bills rarely, if ever, invest in veteran depth after August. Kraig Urbik, Scott Chandler, Lawyer Milloy, Jim Leonhard, Jay Ross, Lee Smith, Shawne Merriman, Jamon Meredith, Corey McIntyre, and Leon Joe beg to differ. But all of these guys besides Leon Joe kind of suck.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 24, 2013 Posted September 24, 2013 $$$ The Bills rarely, if ever, invest in veteran depth after August. Other than QB (assuming someone would call Kevin Kolb a QB), they don't invest in veteran depth before August either. By my count, there are only 2 players on the roster that are not listed as starters with more than 5 years of experience -- and both of them get plenty of playing time.
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 24, 2013 Author Posted September 24, 2013 Other than QB (assuming someone would call Kevin Kolb a QB), they don't invest in veteran depth before August either. By my count, there are only 2 players on the roster that are not listed as starters with more than 5 years of experience -- and both of them get plenty of playing time. I think that often happens with young first year head coaches who want to mold their team and build a program. It would be more surprising if they don't stock the cupboard with some vets next year.
NoSaint Posted September 24, 2013 Posted September 24, 2013 I think that often happens with young first year head coaches who want to mold their team and build a program. It would be more surprising if they don't stock the cupboard with some vets next year. That and going cover 2 to 34 to 43 to our current d really kind of kills the depth before it even has a chance to develop
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 24, 2013 Author Posted September 24, 2013 That and going cover 2 to 34 to 43 to our current d really kind of kills the depth before it even has a chance to develop Well, yeah.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 24, 2013 Posted September 24, 2013 I think that often happens with young first year head coaches who want to mold their team and build a program. It would be more surprising if they don't stock the cupboard with some vets next year. I agree that it often happens here. But, I just gave 2 examples up thread of teams that were very aggressive in terms of new coaches restocking their rosters. Teams that didn't just settle for the best 53 out of the guys they brought to camp. PS: The Rams had 60% turnover in 2012, though they did get younger and Fisher isn't a rookie. PPS: The Eagles, Browns, and Bears were in the top 10 spenders in free agency with rookie head coaches this year. http://www.nfl.com/n...ongterm-success (BTW, Marrone got the nod for 1st to go in this article.)
C.Biscuit97 Posted September 24, 2013 Posted September 24, 2013 I agree that it often happens here. But, I just gave 2 examples up thread of teams that were very aggressive in terms of new coaches restocking their rosters. Teams that didn't just settle for the best 53 out of the guys they brought to camp. PS: The Rams had 60% turnover in 2012, though they did get younger and Fisher isn't a rookie. PPS: The Eagles, Browns, and Bears were in the top 10 spenders in free agency with rookie head coaches this year. http://www.nfl.com/n...ongterm-success (BTW, Marrone got the nod for 1st to go in this article.) All of those teams have losing records except the Bears.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 24, 2013 Posted September 24, 2013 All of those teams have losing records except the Bears. I think you missed the point. Obviously most teams that fire their coaching staffs and hire new ones, which is the only way a rookie head coach gets a job, weren't exactly winning the Super Bowl the previous year. The point is that several teams with rookie head coaches were more than average active in free agency, which means that they were necessarily bringing in veterans in that coach's first year as only veterans are eligible for free agency. It's not good to try draw generalities and norms from the operation of the Bills and Browns.
The Helmet of Posted September 24, 2013 Posted September 24, 2013 I just finished watching the game for the first time on NFL gamepass. Justin Rogers was the worst player on the field. He played awful, and was the biggest reason for the loss.
Recommended Posts