DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 Man, what a dreamer... What makes you think EJ is going to achieve any kind of success this year with a LG who graded as bad as Williams did last year for the Rams. "Dud: He may be a former first-rounder but Chris Williams (-21.8) is just a liability as a lineman. Far too much pressure, not enough good run blocking, and he’s the team’s weak link on offense." https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/01/13/2013-offensive-line-rankings/2/ Williams will start at LG because that 5.5 million guaranteed says he will. Doug Legursky will go back to being the backup center who graded as one of the worst LG's in the league. Not much really changed. How close this team is to the playoffs depends on the play of a second year QB, and his performance will depend on how well that line in front of him performs. I honestly don't know anything about him except that he's a former first rounder and that he didn't live up to his potential. What I AM pleased with is that he has a chip on his shoulder and Marrone apparently was the one gunning for him to come to Buffalo. This means Marrone will be having 1 on 1 sessions with him for sure. Plus he didn't hesitate to sign with us. Can't argue with anyone who wants to play for us at this point of our team win loss percentage. Plus I think it would be cool to have Glenn line up next to another "man of color" and then the 3 white boys next to them... Adds a little depth race wise lol. Now if only we could get Hairston back at RT but that doesn't seem promising.
Thurman#1 Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 The Bills have brought in two former first round picks, 1 at LB, 1 at O-Line, re-sign a clutch kicker, and brought in a Buffalo Native, Super Bowl champion at DB. With more signings possible in the future. I'm really happy with the Free Agents and think they will strengthen the team and improve the Bills chances of winning. I really don't get all the pissing and moaning around here. Byrd wanted to be free. Get over it. Byrd didn't want to be free. He wanted to be paid. Get over the "Byrd wanted to be free" nonsense. He's in New Orleans because they gave him a $9 million contract. That's what he's been looking for since last year. He was always very likely to get it. Now it looks like the Bills weren't even close. As for FA, not impressed yet. Whether a guy was drafted in the first round means nothing. If it did, we should go see if Mike Williams is still available. He was a first rounder too. The minute you're drafted, it's about what you do in the NFL. Corey looks like he might be a decent pickup. Carpenter was a guy they should have signed, so that's good. Other than that, don't see much that's promising. I'm hoping they know better than I do.
1B4IDie Posted March 14, 2014 Author Posted March 14, 2014 Byrd didn't want to be free. He wanted to be paid. Get over the "Byrd wanted to be free" nonsense. He's in New Orleans because they gave him a $9 million contract. That's what he's been looking for since last year. He was always very likely to get it. Now it looks like the Bills weren't even close. As for FA, not impressed yet. Whether a guy was drafted in the first round means nothing. If it did, we should go see if Mike Williams is still available. He was a first rounder too. The minute you're drafted, it's about what you do in the NFL. Corey looks like he might be a decent pickup. Carpenter was a guy they should have signed, so that's good. Other than that, don't see much that's promising. I'm hoping they know better than I do. Thanks for spouting the same uninformed BS as up thread. Good stuff. Up thread we ready established that the Bills offered Byrd more in the first 3 years then the Saints and that there is no way Byrd plays out that backloaded contract. So Byrd turned down more money from the Bills for less money from the Saints. So the missing fact that no has is what the guaranteed money was that the Bills offered Byrd. Right now that info is not public. If it comes out at significantly less than 28M then l'll concede but it looks it had to be in the same ballpark.
Thurman#1 Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 (edited) Time Graham has no idea what the contract that was refused by Byrd looks like. There are only two things that matter in an NFL contracts. Signing Bonus and Guaranteed Money. Average 7.5 Mill a year means nothing, Byrd only counts for 3.5 Mil against the 2014 Cap for the Saints. Because all the money was put into the signing bonus for 2014. The 3 Year 30 mil number even if it is all unguaranteed money will be more money in Buffalo than in the first 3 years of the Saints offer. Again its still irrelevant because all that matters is the signing bonus and the guaranteed money. If anyone thinks that Byrd will be playing under this contract in 2020 you're either clueless or gullible. Actually, Graham does have an idea. He had a source. Didn't make it up out of thin air. And tellingly, nobody has denied the Graham report except fans on message boards. Oh, and that's utter nonsense that only the guarantee and the signing bonus count. Everything counts. The day that nobody in the NFL plays past the contract guarantee, that'll be the day when only the guarantee counts. Everything counts. Sure, the guarantee and signing bonus are important. But so is everything else, including the total money, total years, back-loaded vs. front-loaded, incentives, roster bonuses ... bottom line, it's all important. I have to admit, you're correct, anyone who thinks Byrd will still be playing under this contract in 2020 is indeed very clueless. Especially considering the contract ends in 2019. If he's still playing with the Saints in 2020 it'll be on a new contract. Thanks for spouting the same uninformed BS as up thread. Good stuff. Up thread we ready established that the Bills offered Byrd more in the first 3 years then the Saints and that there is no way Byrd plays out that backloaded contract. So Byrd turned down more money from the Bills for less money from the Saints. So the missing fact that no has is what the guaranteed money was that the Bills offered Byrd. Right now that info is not public. If it comes out at significantly less than 28M then l'll concede but it looks it had to be in the same ballpark. Yeah, you did indeed establish that the Bills offered more in the first three years than the Saints. If only that were actually important, you'd have done something worthwhile. How much of that $30 million the Bills offered was guaranteed? Exactly. Nobody knows. How much came in incentives? Nobody knows. How much was the rest of the contract worth? Precisely. Nobody knows. And if you seriously can call that contract back-loaded, please don't tell your old high school math teacher. He or she would despair that you'd forgotten so much. The first three years of that contact will pay Byrd $27.9 mill., which is more than half the value of the contract. That, my friend is the definition of a front-loaded contract. Only slightly front-loaded, but absolutely NOT back-loaded in any definition. Edited March 14, 2014 by Thurman#1
Thurman#1 Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 Plus, the $30 million in three years report of the Bills offer has had doubt cast on it ... "Byrd suggested that a report saying he turned down a three-year, $30 million contract from the Bills was incorrect. '“I don’t want to get into details, but I will say any time you have something where it’s a source, an unnamed source, and the full details of the situation aren’t revealed, you can’t really believe everything you hear,' Byrd said." http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-to-the-bills/
Thurman#1 Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 (edited) That contract is slightly front-loaded. Here's the evidence. Actual cash received each year: 2014: $12.3 million, $11 million signing bonus and $1.3 million in base salary, all Guaranteed 2015: $8.1 million, $2 million base salary plus $6.1 mill roster bonus, all Guaranteed 2016: $7.5 million, $7.4 in base salary and 100K bonus, $6 million Guaranteed, but for injury only 2017: $8.3 million, $7.9 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed 2018: $8.8 million, $8.4 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed 2019: $9 million, $8.6 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed http://www.spotrac.c....s/jairus-byrd/ In other words, this contract is slightly front-loaded in terms of cash. Byrd will receive more than half (51.6%, actually) of his cash, $27.9 million, in the first three years, and only $26.1 mill, 48.4%, in the last three years. In other words, they don't expect to cut him before the last three years. If they didn't think he was worth $26.1 mill over three years at the back (in a cap environment that will have a lot more money available), they wouldn't have given him $27.9 in the first three years (in the current less generous cap environment). It's not the kind of contract Nate Clements signed where his last two years with the Niners, he was due a total of $24 million. Outside of going heavy that first year with the big bonus, every other year of Byrd's contract is less than the yearly average of the contract, except the last year which is for exactly the average, $9 mill. Pretty evenly loaded, in other words, but slightly towards the front. However, if his level of play falls, then yeah, they're not in a bad position to cut him after those first three years or after four or five years. Smart contract. One that he stands a good chance of playing out, but not so punishing for the Saints that if he starts aging early or gets injured that they're forced to keep him. And as the cap rises to $150 mill over the next couple of years, it will seem less and less high as contract values rise. Great contract for both parties. Obviously, he won't be cut during the first two years if they can possibly help it, because the first two years are guaranteed. So, how about the other years? Let's look at dead money and cap hits. Cut him after the second year, before the 2016 season, and the Saints would save $900K on their cap. They'd be able to avoid paying Byrd $7.5 mill but would have to pay $6.6 mill in dead money. You don't cut Byrd to save $900 K. You just don't. Cut him after the 3rd year, before the 2017 season, and you avoid paying him $8.3 mill in salary and bonuses, but you get $4.4 in dead money, so you save a big $3.9 million against the cap. Not going to happen. Cut him after the 4th year, before the 2018 season, and you save paying him $8.8 million in salary and bonuses, but you get $2.2 mill in dead money, so you only save $6.6 mill. Heck, the Bills were willing to pay him more than that last year, knowing he’d likely miss a training camp when a new defensive system was being installed. Cut him after the 5th year, before the 2019 season, the final year of the contract, and you save paying him $9 million. There's no dead money. By that time, the franchise tag will be much higher and the NFL will have seen a lot of salary inflation. But you know what? If you don't want to pay him $9 mill, you don't give him a $9 mill per year contract. If they cut him or threaten him to try to get him to re-negotiate, it'll likely be before that final year. Me, I don't see that happening. Don't get me wrong, if his level of play falls along the way, he'll be cut. But the guy keeps in superb shape, he studies hard and he's serious. I don't see his level of play falling by then, although it's likely to start somewhere around that area, 32 - 34 years of age. But don't kid yourself, that contract is put together to make it very difficult for the Saints to cut Byrd early if he's still playing well. http://www.spotrac.c...ts/jairus-byrd/ Edited March 14, 2014 by Thurman#1
Thurman#1 Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 Why So Serious is on point...are we leading the league in big name front page free agent signings...NO, did we try to sign Byrd to a lucrative multi year extension YES, Did he want to stay here,,,NO, Good on you for buying the seasons. But this is sour grapes about Byrd. There's no evidence whatsoever that he didn't want to be here and a ton of evidence that he'd have been happy to be here if he'd gotten the money. Since last year and Mark Kelso, it's been clear he wants $9 mill. That's what he got. If the Bills had given it to him, it's almost certain he'd still be here.
Gordio Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 I honestly don't know anything about him except that he's a former first rounder and that he didn't live up to his potential. What I AM pleased with is that he has a chip on his shoulder and Marrone apparently was the one gunning for him to come to Buffalo. This means Marrone will be having 1 on 1 sessions with him for sure. Plus he didn't hesitate to sign with us. Can't argue with anyone who wants to play for us at this point of our team win loss percentage. Plus I think it would be cool to have Glenn line up next to another "man of color" and then the 3 white boys next to them... Adds a little depth race wise lol. Now if only we could get Hairston back at RT but that doesn't seem promising. I am so sick of hearing "oh he wanted to play for us". He wanted to play for us because we were probably the only team stupid enough to guaranty him 5.5 million. But let's low ball our best ball player & let him walk out the door for nothing. What a great idea!
xsoldier54 Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 That contract is slightly front-loaded. Here's the evidence. Actual cash received each year: 2014: $12.3 million, $11 million signing bonus and $1.3 million in base salary, all Guaranteed 2015: $8.1 million, $2 million base salary plus $6.1 mill roster bonus, all Guaranteed 2016: $7.5 million, $7.4 in base salary and 100K bonus, $6 million Guaranteed, but for injury only 2017: $8.3 million, $7.9 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed 2018: $8.8 million, $8.4 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed 2019: $9 million, $8.6 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed http://www.spotrac.c....s/jairus-byrd/ In other words, this contract is slightly front-loaded in terms of cash. Byrd will receive more than half (51.6%, actually) of his cash, $27.9 million, in the first three years, and only $26.1 mill, 48.4%, in the last three years. In other words, they don't expect to cut him before the last three years. If they didn't think he was worth $26.1 mill over three years at the back (in a cap environment that will have a lot more money available), they wouldn't have given him $27.9 in the first three years (in the current less generous cap environment). It's not the kind of contract Nate Clements signed where his last two years with the Niners, he was due a total of $24 million. Outside of going heavy that first year with the big bonus, every other year of Byrd's contract is less than the yearly average of the contract, except the last year which is for exactly the average, $9 mill. Pretty evenly loaded, in other words, but slightly towards the front. However, if his level of play falls, then yeah, they're not in a bad position to cut him after those first three years or after four or five years. Smart contract. One that he stands a good chance of playing out, but not so punishing for the Saints that if he starts aging early or gets injured that they're forced to keep him. And as the cap rises to $150 mill over the next couple of years, it will seem less and less high as contract values rise. Great contract for both parties. Obviously, he won't be cut during the first two years if they can possibly help it, because the first two years are guaranteed. So, how about the other years? Let's look at dead money and cap hits. Cut him after the second year, before the 2016 season, and the Saints would save $900K on their cap. They'd be able to avoid paying Byrd $7.5 mill but would have to pay $6.6 mill in dead money. You don't cut Byrd to save $900 K. You just don't. Cut him after the 3rd year, before the 2017 season, and you avoid paying him $8.3 mill in salary and bonuses, but you get $4.4 in dead money, so you save a big $3.9 million against the cap. Not going to happen. Cut him after the 4th year, before the 2018 season, and you save paying him $8.8 million in salary and bonuses, but you get $2.2 mill in dead money, so you only save $6.6 mill. Heck, the Bills were willing to pay him more than that last year, knowing he’d likely miss a training camp when a new defensive system was being installed. Cut him after the 5th year, before the 2019 season, the final year of the contract, and you save paying him $9 million. There's no dead money. By that time, the franchise tag will be much higher and the NFL will have seen a lot of salary inflation. But you know what? If you don't want to pay him $9 mill, you don't give him a $9 mill per year contract. If they cut him or threaten him to try to get him to re-negotiate, it'll likely be before that final year. Me, I don't see that happening. Don't get me wrong, if his level of play falls along the way, he'll be cut. But the guy keeps in superb shape, he studies hard and he's serious. I don't see his level of play falling by then, although it's likely to start somewhere around that area, 32 - 34 years of age. But don't kid yourself, that contract is put together to make it very difficult for the Saints to cut Byrd early if he's still playing well. http://www.spotrac.c...ts/jairus-byrd/ They can cut him after two years and save over 7 million in cap money. He took a risk. The 6 Million guaranteed in the third year is in case of injury. He wanted out and he took a risk in order to get out. Don't blame Buffalo's FO for that.
1B4IDie Posted March 14, 2014 Author Posted March 14, 2014 (edited) That contract is slightly front-loaded. Here's the evidence. Actual cash received each year: 2014: $12.3 million, $11 million signing bonus and $1.3 million in base salary, all Guaranteed 2015: $8.1 million, $2 million base salary plus $6.1 mill roster bonus, all Guaranteed 2016: $7.5 million, $7.4 in base salary and 100K bonus, $6 million Guaranteed, but for injury only 2017: $8.3 million, $7.9 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed 2018: $8.8 million, $8.4 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed 2019: $9 million, $8.6 in base salary and 400K workout and roster bonuses, none guaranteed http://www.spotrac.c....s/jairus-byrd/ In other words, this contract is slightly front-loaded in terms of cash. Byrd will receive more than half (51.6%, actually) of his cash, $27.9 million, in the first three years, and only $26.1 mill, 48.4%, in the last three years. In other words, they don't expect to cut him before the last three years. If they didn't think he was worth $26.1 mill over three years at the back (in a cap environment that will have a lot more money available), they wouldn't have given him $27.9 in the first three years (in the current less generous cap environment). It's not the kind of contract Nate Clements signed where his last two years with the Niners, he was due a total of $24 million. Outside of going heavy that first year with the big bonus, every other year of Byrd's contract is less than the yearly average of the contract, except the last year which is for exactly the average, $9 mill. Pretty evenly loaded, in other words, but slightly towards the front. However, if his level of play falls, then yeah, they're not in a bad position to cut him after those first three years or after four or five years. Smart contract. One that he stands a good chance of playing out, but not so punishing for the Saints that if he starts aging early or gets injured that they're forced to keep him. And as the cap rises to $150 mill over the next couple of years, it will seem less and less high as contract values rise. Great contract for both parties. Obviously, he won't be cut during the first two years if they can possibly help it, because the first two years are guaranteed. So, how about the other years? Let's look at dead money and cap hits. Cut him after the second year, before the 2016 season, and the Saints would save $900K on their cap. They'd be able to avoid paying Byrd $7.5 mill but would have to pay $6.6 mill in dead money. You don't cut Byrd to save $900 K. You just don't. Cut him after the 3rd year, before the 2017 season, and you avoid paying him $8.3 mill in salary and bonuses, but you get $4.4 in dead money, so you save a big $3.9 million against the cap. Not going to happen. Cut him after the 4th year, before the 2018 season, and you save paying him $8.8 million in salary and bonuses, but you get $2.2 mill in dead money, so you only save $6.6 mill. Heck, the Bills were willing to pay him more than that last year, knowing hed likely miss a training camp when a new defensive system was being installed. Cut him after the 5th year, before the 2019 season, the final year of the contract, and you save paying him $9 million. There's no dead money. By that time, the franchise tag will be much higher and the NFL will have seen a lot of salary inflation. But you know what? If you don't want to pay him $9 mill, you don't give him a $9 mill per year contract. If they cut him or threaten him to try to get him to re-negotiate, it'll likely be before that final year. Me, I don't see that happening. Don't get me wrong, if his level of play falls along the way, he'll be cut. But the guy keeps in superb shape, he studies hard and he's serious. I don't see his level of play falling by then, although it's likely to start somewhere around that area, 32 - 34 years of age. But don't kid yourself, that contract is put together to make it very difficult for the Saints to cut Byrd early if he's still playing well. http://www.spotrac.c...ts/jairus-byrd/ Very good break down. Seriously thanks for posting this is the kind of info that raises the discussion. Thank you. Byrd's contract is back loaded contract in terms of cap commitment to the franchise which is why he will not play out this contract. The players always get the signing bonus money upfront so in that regard you can call it front loaded but generally when someone calls a contract backloaded it's from the perspective of the team and their cap cost. At least that's my understanding. If you notice his base salary increases every year. The cap load if he is on the roster increases and the dead money decreases. Meaning they can cut Byrd in 2017 when Brees retires and not have a 30 year old Free Safety that costs 11mil toward the cap. Which I believe Byrd being cut in 3-4 years is an extremely high probability. Byrd might be ok with that because as you pointed out he got over 50% of the contract already (in your terms front loaded.) In 3-4 years Byrd is a free and if he can still perform he can sign a new contract and get those two most important things a signing bonus and guaranteed money. Obviously significantly smaller than his current contract or the numbers that are on paper for 2017-2020 but more than zero. That's how the NFL works and why the average salary per year is nonsense in the NFL. We're saying the same thing in terms of frontloaded and backloaded just from different perspectives. Still Byrd would make more in Buffalo in the first three years. It is then cheaper for the Bills to keep a 30+ year old (slower) free safety in the last three years of the contract. Which again Byrd may want to get cut and get a 3rd contract if he fills the team won't keep him throughout. (3rd Not counting the franchise year) Look at Nnamdi Asomugha he renegotiated his contracts multiple times and had many contracts each time getting more money in his pockets today and not worrying about what his base salary would be at the end of the contract. Those numbers are fantasy numbers. Look at Julius Peppers giant contract he didn't play that out. You think Mario is not gonna get cut or reno before 2016? The answer is Yes. There are two things that are most important guaranteed money and signing bonus. The rest is pixie dust and good wishes. BTW the contract expires in March of 2020 ;-) Edited March 14, 2014 by Why So Serious?
birdog1960 Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 pixie dust and good wishes....about all there is for bills fo apologists to hold onto now
thewildrabbit Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 I honestly don't know anything about him except that he's a former first rounder and that he didn't live up to his potential. What I AM pleased with is that he has a chip on his shoulder and Marrone apparently was the one gunning for him to come to Buffalo. This means Marrone will be having 1 on 1 sessions with him for sure. Plus he didn't hesitate to sign with us. Can't argue with anyone who wants to play for us at this point of our team win loss percentage. Plus I think it would be cool to have Glenn line up next to another "man of color" and then the 3 white boys next to them... Adds a little depth race wise lol. Now if only we could get Hairston back at RT but that doesn't seem promising. Well, what is interesting is that Marrone was "hands on" the field last off season, lining up along side his players, and teaching them technique, and all but Glenn regressed. Two young backups that Marrone thought he could "coach up" in Colin Brown, and Sam Young were so bad at replacing Levitre that both were cut after week six. The back up for center was forced into the LG position because the only backups to the OG after him were directly off the waiver wire. Now Eric Wood didn't grade as well last year as he had previously, and that could be that Andy Levitre was no longer there to his left side. The Bills did kinda overwork him tho considering 71% of the run plays went right up the middle. Anyway, perhaps because of the failure with both OG's Brown and Young, that Marrone now feels the need to prove he can coach up the O line....or this simply could be like BillsVet stated that the Bills are just running the same, lame routine they have been running the last 14 years. We will soon see.
jumbalaya Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 I honestly don't know anything about him except that he's a former first rounder and that he didn't live up to his potential. What I AM pleased with is that he has a chip on his shoulder and Marrone apparently was the one gunning for him to come to Buffalo. This means Marrone will be having 1 on 1 sessions with him for sure. Plus he didn't hesitate to sign with us. Can't argue with anyone who wants to play for us at this point of our team win loss percentage. Plus I think it would be cool to have Glenn line up next to another "man of color" and then the 3 white boys next to them... Adds a little depth race wise lol. Now if only we could get Hairston back at RT but that doesn't seem promising. We have to quit banking on guys that have a chip on their shoulder. If he didn't have it in his first 5 years he won't all of a sudden get it. i don't buy this argument.
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 Thank you i get blasted for saying this stuff, glad to see i'm not the only one that doesn't get signing 1st rounders that flame out & such but hey it's apparently just me … If you're signing them to anchor your team, that's one thing. If you're picking them up to be effective situational role players a la Lawson, Branch, Hughes, then it can actually end up working out. Putting talent in a good position to succeed is never a bad thing.
stuckinny Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 Well, what is interesting is that Marrone was "hands on" the field last off season, lining up along side his players, and teaching them technique, and all but Glenn regressed. Two young backups that Marrone thought he could "coach up" in Colin Brown, and Sam Young were so bad at replacing Levitre that both were cut after week six. The back up for center was forced into the LG position because the only backups to the OG after him were directly off the waiver wire. Now Eric Wood didn't grade as well last year as he had previously, and that could be that Andy Levitre was no longer there to his left side. The Bills did kinda overwork him tho considering 71% of the run plays went right up the middle. Anyway, perhaps because of the failure with both OG's Brown and Young, that Marrone now feels the need to prove he can coach up the O line....or this simply could be like BillsVet stated that the Bills are just running the same, lame routine they have been running the last 14 years. We will soon see. exactly, if Marrone didn't work any magic last year, what makes people think this year he gets the line to run block?
stony Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 Man, what a dreamer... What makes you think EJ is going to achieve any kind of success this year with a LG who graded as bad as Williams did last year for the Rams. "Dud: He may be a former first-rounder but Chris Williams (-21.8) is just a liability as a lineman. Far too much pressure, not enough good run blocking, and he’s the team’s weak link on offense." https://www.profootb...ine-rankings/2/ Williams will start at LG because that 5.5 million guaranteed says he will. Doug Legursky will go back to being the backup center who graded as one of the worst LG's in the league. Not much really changed. How close this team is to the playoffs depends on the play of a second year QB, and his performance will depend on how well that line in front of him performs. So EJ Manuel's play this season hinges on the play of Chris Williams? Got it. Thanks for the insight. And the entire OL will now suffer as a result of Chris Williams being on the team. Very good. I was thinking it had something more to do with being healthy, the continued evolution of learning the hardest position in all of pro sports, his young core of WRs taking a positive leap forward, the fact Colin Brown or Doug Legursky aren't at LG etc. etc.
thewildrabbit Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 (edited) exactly, if Marrone didn't work any magic last year, what makes people think this year he gets the line to run block? Run blocking isn't what I'm particularly concerned with at this point, as the Bills will continue to overwork Wood. If nothing else the Bills proved that they could amass quite a bit of yardage by running mid guard. Lord help them should Wood suffer a severe injury, as Legursky would then take over at center...then they won't be running the ball whatsoever tho. Utter chaos will ensue should Glenn, or Wood go on IR. Anyway, what I am concerned about is the development and protection of that corps of young QB's, and especially EJ. I dunno, maybe this coaching staff, and new GM Whaley believe in baptism by fire. Thinking those young QB's won't learn quickly enough how to cope under duress in crunch time if they don't endure it all the time. I'm a firm believer in building a superior O line, building a power run game to control the line like the 2008 Ravens did, and allowed Joe Flacco to develop at his own pace. The guy is a statue and needed great blocking in front of him. So EJ Manuel's play this season hinges on the play of Chris Williams? Got it. Thanks for the insight. And the entire OL will now suffer as a result of Chris Williams being on the team. Very good. I was thinking it had something more to do with being healthy, the continued evolution of learning the hardest position in all of pro sports, his young core of WRs taking a positive leap forward, the fact Colin Brown or Doug Legursky aren't at LG etc. etc. Exactly how will EJ develop properly if is he is taken down every other play like a bowling pin? Has any QB succeeded in the last 14 years, or since Jim Kelly? Oh yea, I forgot that they all sucked!! I suppose that is what everyone will say about EJ, Lewis, and Tuel in two years after they are beaten down and shell shocked behind craptastic lines. Last year the Bills allowed 108 hits and *48 sacks and ranked 28th in pass blocking. So yea, a big part of the QB's play will depend on how well his LG, and line plays. Just like every team in the NFL, as it is a team sport. Edited March 14, 2014 by FeartheLosing
Pete Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 we were 6-10 last year. and the year before. and the year before. The question is- are the Bills better then they were at this point last year? We are losing Byrd, Moats, Carrington. We gained Graham, Williams, Rivers. Have we made moves to go beyond 6 moves? And no **** there is still a draft. Thats not the question
BillsVet Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 The new narrative is that these moves should not be opined on given that the QB position is uncertain. In other words, one cannot provide an opinion because we don't know if there's a veritable starting QB on this team. And we're not allowed to judge a QB yet either, so there's that too.
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 14, 2014 Posted March 14, 2014 Well, what is interesting is that Marrone was "hands on" the field last off season, lining up along side his players, and teaching them technique, and all but Glenn regressed. Two young backups that Marrone thought he could "coach up" in Colin Brown, and Sam Young were so bad at replacing Levitre that both were cut after week six. The back up for center was forced into the LG position because the only backups to the OG after him were directly off the waiver wire. Now Eric Wood didn't grade as well last year as he had previously, and that could be that Andy Levitre was no longer there to his left side. The Bills did kinda overwork him tho considering 71% of the run plays went right up the middle. Anyway, perhaps because of the failure with both OG's Brown and Young, that Marrone now feels the need to prove he can coach up the O line....or this simply could be like BillsVet stated that the Bills are just running the same, lame routine they have been running the last 14 years. We will soon see. The O-Line is 5 players but really have to play as one... Colin Brown really made the guy to his left and the guy to his right look bad so I wouldn't say Glenn regressed at all... He looked good to me. We just need to fix the LG position and like I said, I know nothing of this new guy but if I were a betting man, I'd say he isn't worse than Colin Brown. Obviously I think we still draft a LG either in the 2nd or 3rd round. Defense looks good especially if we do somehow land Spikes. I say we draft heavy on offense n maybe draft 3 defensive players at most.
Recommended Posts