thewildrabbit Posted November 27, 2013 Author Posted November 27, 2013 (edited) The thing with the Oline is you don't need an all-pro at every position but a weak-link like Collin Brown will be attacked unmercifully and lose you games - so did the Bills absolutely need Levitre? no! but you can't be replacing him with a weak-sister either. The Bills have quality players at the two most important Oline positions LT and C they just need solid players at the other three. As for the draft I think the Bills should still be in a BPA mode with extra consideration given to TE and LB if things are relatively equal. This is exactly right, and Doug Legurski was brought in to be the backup center and not the starting LG. There is still a big weak link at LG! That said, RT & RG aren't exactly manned by star players either, and are merely adequate at times. 77 hits on the Bills QB's puts them at #4 most in the NFL, and 8th worst in sacks allowed. Those stats alone tell me this line is still not as good as some are touting it to be. A few of the posters in this thread stated before the season started that this O line would be fine with Colin Brown at LG. Clearly the line wasn't fine at all because the Bills cut both starting LG Colin Brown and his backup, and that line is still not fine. It takes a small man to admit he is never wrong... Edited November 27, 2013 by FeartheLosing
thebandit27 Posted November 27, 2013 Posted November 27, 2013 Bandit, are you referring to our super bowl years when we had Will Wolford and House Ballard blocking for Thurman and Davis and Kelly? Looks like you've been dipping into the egg nog a little early? No way man...I said between 1998 and 2008...although I do love eggnog. Mrs. Bandit sometimes makes eggnog flavored cut-out cookies for Christmas...they're addicting. JPS, this was a GREAT post, but I must strongly disagree with this: >>>I think it may be among the worst O-lines the Bills ever had.<<< My friend, NO WAY!!! I want to refresh your memory if I may: Corey Hulsey Jamie Nails Terrance Pennington Aaron Merz Marcus Spriggs (one of the worst blockers I ever saw) Tutan Reyes Jerry Ostroski Greg Jerman (THE absolute worst blocker I have ever seen, to the point that I was literally worried about players getting killed) This line needs a LG, but none of our starters are as bad as those listed above. Pears isn't a star RT but he is clearly superior to these horrible players. ^ This is what I meant Cheddar LOL The Bills current edition is one of the better O-lines in the NFL, definitely top 3rd of the league and arguably top quarter of the league (top 8). To the subject: 1) If you follow the NFL closely you'll know that there are numerous truly horrific O-lines out there and that there are many fanbases who are dissatisfied with their team's offensive line. 2) There is not one single great offensive line out there right now and in fact this has actually been the case for several years now. 3) The biggest factor in offensive line success is having a great quarterback who understands protections, makes the correct protection calls, audibles into successful plays (pass or run) and gets rid of the ball on time. Funny how few people here seem to comprehend what a huge advantage it was having a QB like Ryan Fitzpatrick last year as opposed to essentially having 3 rookie starters this year. 5) Having a great offensive line featuring numerous highly-drafted players is a very rare occurrence both historically and in the present day. Most of the great offensive lines in history featured a mix of high draft picks, low draft picks, and unsigned free agents. 6) Offensive line play is as much about toughness, intelligence, and teamwork as it is anything. 7) The offensive line of the Buffalo Bills is not in any way limiting the team's success and is better than O-lines on teams which have recently won Super Bowls. 8) This offensive line didn't allow a single sack to the (then) highest sacking team in the NFL, the Kansas City Chiefs. This offensive line has played against some of the best defensive fronts in the NFL. When this team gets better QB play, only the O-line fetishists will still be clamoring for an improved offensive line.
CSBill Posted November 27, 2013 Posted November 27, 2013 (edited) The Bills current edition is one of the better O-lines in the NFL, definitely top 3rd of the league and arguably top quarter of the league (top 8). To the subject: 1) If you follow the NFL closely you'll know that there are numerous truly horrific O-lines out there and that there are many fanbases who are dissatisfied with their team's offensive line. 2) There is not one single great offensive line out there right now and in fact this has actually been the case for several years now. 3) The biggest factor in offensive line success is having a great quarterback who understands protections, makes the correct protection calls, audibles into successful plays (pass or run) and gets rid of the ball on time. Funny how few people here seem to comprehend what a huge advantage it was having a QB like Ryan Fitzpatrick last year as opposed to essentially having 3 rookie starters this year. 5) Having a great offensive line featuring numerous highly-drafted players is a very rare occurrence both historically and in the present day. Most of the great offensive lines in history featured a mix of high draft picks, low draft picks, and unsigned free agents. 6) Offensive line play is as much about toughness, intelligence, and teamwork as it is anything. 7) The offensive line of the Buffalo Bills is not in any way limiting the team's success and is better than O-lines on teams which have recently won Super Bowls. 8) This offensive line didn't allow a single sack to the (then) highest sacking team in the NFL, the Kansas City Chiefs. This offensive line has played against some of the best defensive fronts in the NFL. When this team gets better QB play, only the O-line fetishists will still be clamoring for an improved offensive line. Great post and analysis San Jose Bill! I agree with everything you have posted, and I add these other thoughts: 9) It is much harder to build a longterm dominating line in the era of free agency. Think about this, if the Bills had/could have kept their best linemen over the past few year, you could add Jason Peters (whether we like him as a person or not, he is still one of the best in the NFL) and Andy LeV., and Butler could still be playing — with Wood, Urbik, and Glenn — now that has the potential to be a dominating offensive line. But with free agency, such things are not going to happen. Great line plays takes a lot of time to develop (chemistry, and all), and again, in this day and age, that is not going to happen . . . I doubt there is not a team in the NFL now that could not say they need to upgrade people on their offensive line. 10) I hope Chris Hairston is going to be back next season (does anyone know the specifics of his injury, and what his future status is?). If so, we have answered the RT position, and should we keep Pears around, he gives us a solid back-up situation at the tackle position . . . this is the best case scenario. 11) As for left guard, maybe one of the recent FA acquisitions can step up and be a real contributor there? Maybe? But, if the coaching staff and front office don't see this happening, then be aggressive in getting a quality draft pick there (even to the degree of being willing to trade for that pick it in the early rounds if needed), or, be aggressive in recruiting a quality starting FA for that position (I have no idea what might be available), but we certainly better be kicking the tires on that. Appendix: As for building this team going forward, like all teams, you cannot go wrong building a team with top linemen, both on offense and defense. So when you can get them, get them! And even better, do what you need to keep them! Right now we have quality players on both sides, but we need to do all we can to keep them, and to add to them when given the chance. A few of the posters in this thread stated before the season started that this O line would be fine with Colin Brown at LG. Clearly the line wasn't fine at all because the Bills cut both starting LG Colin Brown and his backup, and that line is still not fine. It takes a small man to admit he is never wrong... By the way, I was one of them . . . I don't think I've ever been more wrong in my Bills armchair GM perspective. Fortunately, they can't fire me. Edited November 27, 2013 by CSBill
ganesh Posted November 27, 2013 Posted November 27, 2013 10) I hope Chris Hairston is going to be back next season (does anyone know the specifics of his injury, and what his future status is?). If so, we have answered the RT position, and should we keep Pears around, he gives us a solid back-up situation at the tackle position . . . this is the best case scenario. Why is everyone assuming that Chris Hairston is a starter. He has not shown anything to be a consistent starter. He is a career back up. Pears is much better than Hairston.
clayboy54 Posted November 27, 2013 Posted November 27, 2013 [quote name='FeartheLosing' timestamp='1385557425' post='2987118' A few of the posters in this thread stated before the season started that this O line would be fine with Colin Brown at LG. Clearly the line wasn't fine at all because the Bills cut both starting LG Colin Brown and his backup, and that line is still not fine. It takes a small man to admit he is never wrong... So how do you know if you don't try? Brown had the attributes to be a promising prospect. That's why the Bills kept him around for so long. It didn't work out. Now we move on. Tough luck for Brown and for our OL but not an indictment against anyone. It happens every year on every team at one position or another.
thewildrabbit Posted November 27, 2013 Author Posted November 27, 2013 (edited) Why is everyone assuming that Chris Hairston is a starter. He has not shown anything to be a consistent starter. He is a career back up. Pears is much better than Hairston. ganesh, this coaching staff was looking at Hairston to push Pears for that starting RT job this year, and or at least be a solid back up. He is neither as he has been on IR all year. http://www.buffaloru...ury-2013-season " Hairston was slow to recover from an ankle/foot injury, and ostensibly picked up an illness of some sort along the way. He was originally pegged as a starter." http://www.rotoworld.../chris-hairston who knows... So how do you know if you don't try? Brown had the attributes to be a promising prospect. That's why the Bills kept him around for so long. It didn't work out. Now we move on. Tough luck for Brown and for our OL but not an indictment against anyone. It happens every year on every team at one position or another. Really? Seriously? Name me some players penciled in as starters that were outright cut by their team after 5 weeks, along with their backups. Let me add that the mere fact that some posters were so wrong about that O line being fine with Brown and Young, and refuse to admit they were wrong is an indictment as to why i choose to ignore them. They choose to keep their heads in the sand, or other dark areas is fine by me. Some posters here have already admitted they were wrong and I salute their honesty, an integrity. cheers Edited November 27, 2013 by FeartheLosing
thebandit27 Posted November 27, 2013 Posted November 27, 2013 ganesh, this coaching staff was looking at Hairston to push Pears for that starting RT job this year, and or at least be a solid back up. He is neither as he has been on IR all year. http://www.buffaloru...ury-2013-season " Hairston was slow to recover from an ankle/foot injury, and ostensibly picked up an illness of some sort along the way. He was originally pegged as a starter." http://www.rotoworld.../chris-hairston who knows... Really? Seriously? Name me some players penciled in as starters that were outright cut by their team after 5 weeks, along with their backups. Have a look at Carolina's litany of guards after they cut Geoff Hangartner....must be why they can't win. Or Dallas cutting staring LG Nate Livings on September 5th. Those are just off the top of my head...I'm sure someone could do the digging if they were so inclined.
Cheddar's Dad Posted November 27, 2013 Posted November 27, 2013 Why is everyone assuming that Chris Hairston is a starter. He has not shown anything to be a consistent starter. He is a career back up. Pears is much better than Hairston. Oh boy do I agree with this; with the first three sentences at least. I'd put Hairston and Pears together in the inadequate/below average bag and leave that bag on someone else's doorstep in another city.
CSBill Posted November 27, 2013 Posted November 27, 2013 (edited) Why is everyone assuming that Chris Hairston is a starter. He has not shown anything to be a consistent starter. He is a career back up. Pears is much better than Hairston. Wasn't he a starter in the 2nd half of his rookie season, 5 of last 7 games was starting LT? And last year, until he was hurt: • at SF (10/7), Started at left tackle ... part of an offensive line that only allowed one sack throughout the contest • at Ari. (10/14), started at left tackle and helped pave the way for 165 yards on the ground • vs. Ten. (10/21), made his third straight start at left tackle and helped lead a rushing attack that amassed 166 yards • at Hou. (11/4), started at right tackle and helped offense produced 308 yards of total offense • at NE (11/11), started at right tackle... part of an offense that produced season bests of 481 total yards and a time of possession of 33:50 • vs. Mia. (11/15), started at right tackle, part of an offense that produced 120 yards on the ground • at Ind. (11/25): started at right tackle, part of an offense that produced a 100-yard rusher (C.J. Spiller - 107) and a 100-yard receiver (Stevie Johnson - 106) for the first time since 11/21/10 at Cin. (F. Jackson - 116 rush, Stevie Johnson - 137 rec.) • vs. Jac. (12/2), started at right tackle, part of an offense that produced 232 rushing yards and did not give up a sack ... left the game in the third quarter and did not return Edited November 27, 2013 by CSBill
Recommended Posts