Sound_n_Fury Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 ...what's funnier about it is the number of people who now want Wahle but had no idea who he was a month ago. 260538[/snapback] Amen, 'bro. Why is it the teams that do the biggest, splashiest deals right out of the FA gate seldom end up in the big dance? Yet we get all of these "experts" saying we're doomed since we didn't spend $18 million on signing bonuses for two slightly above average linemen.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Teague was originally signed to be LT, wasn't he? 260539[/snapback] Yes.
Sound_n_Fury Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Flashback - to March 2004 " WE MUST HAVE CHRIS BOBER " " Bober will be our starting Center ! " " Why isn't Bober here yet ? What's wrong with TD ? " " Has anyone seen Bober, MY BOY, at the Airport yet ? " No one knew who the hell this guy was, outside of McNally. Suddenly, many hyped him into a guy we couldn't live without. 260568[/snapback] Hey, don't let a good memory get in the way of this year's "facts!"
Arkady Renko Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Is being a RT so different from being an LT just because the LT is usually covering the blindside and thus will have to be better and block better rushers or does being on either side often feel so different that it is difficult to adjust? If much of the issue is just that it is difficult to adjust to different sides it seems like there would be some cost-savings in having a left-handed QB in that RTs are significantly cheaper than LTs.
Bear Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Hey, don't let a good memory get in the way of this year's "facts!" 260616[/snapback] What fact is that exactly?
Mark VI Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Does that change the fact that Bober would have helped the line last year? 260602[/snapback] He wanted to play OT and signed with KC. Moot point, since the Bills didn't need an OT at the time. From What I read, he missed many games in 2004 with a foot injury.
VABills Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Is being a RT so different from being an LT just because the LT is usually covering the blindside and thus will have to be better and block better rushers or does being on either side often feel so different that it is difficult to adjust? If much of the issue is just that it is difficult to adjust to different sides it seems like there would be some cost-savings in having a left-handed QB in that RTs are significantly cheaper than LTs. 260617[/snapback] It's not that the rushers are better, but they do tend to be a little quicker. LT have to be able to really man handle the guys with pure arm strength and speed and less on getting the defender into their bodies. Also the RT tends to be bigger and a better run blocker as most people are right handed, therefore stronger with their right hand, hence easier to hold onto the ball. So most running backs like plays that run to the right. I know I always did, and that was why the coach calls them up that way. It is ingrained from Little league through high school and into college.
Bear Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 He wanted to play OT and signed with KC. Moot point, since the Bills didn't need an OT at the time. From What I read, he missed many games in 2004 with a foot injury. 260624[/snapback] I guess my point is that bringing in Bober to play center (as everyone thought he would last year at this time) would have helped our line last year. We could have moved teague outside and either Jennings or Williams inside. We don't all have to be scouts to realize that we need help on the line. The players that are reguarded as the best in their position (or at least the best at their position in FA) are of course the ones we will be vocally fighting for! What exactly is wrong with that? Those that said last year that if we didn't upgrade the line we were going to have problems were right. I believe the same will be true this year.
Dan Gross Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Does that change the fact that Bober would have helped the line last year? 260602[/snapback] I take it you think he would have helped better than Villarial? It's not like we had the money to sign them both...Or would you have signed him instead of Vincent? The one player I remember we absolutely needed was Woody...
Bear Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 I take it you think he would have helped better than Villarial? It's not like we had the money to sign them both...Or would you have signed him instead of Vincent? The one player I remember we absolutely needed was Woody... 260654[/snapback] Both of our arguments are moot. I can't prove that adding one player would have made any difference, and you can't say that it worked out the way we did it. (since we didnt even make the playoffs) Either way, I don't understand why people are being trashed for wanting players brought in to help. Doesn't make sense.
Sound_n_Fury Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 What fact is that exactly? 260618[/snapback] Bober only started 2 games for the Chiefs last year, due to injuries. http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/192928
Bear Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Bober only started 2 games for the Chiefs last year, due to injuries. http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/192928 260680[/snapback] So, your are stating that it is fact if he had come here he would have suffered the same iinjury?
Mile High Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Good point SDS you might be right and I forgot about that article. I think that a need for a center is in the mix if that is the case. It could be that TD is talking to one right now via fa. They do generally come cheaper than ot and this might be a smart plan, if thats what he's up to. If Mc Nally were to rearrange the line it could look like this: (LT) Williams (LG) Tucker © ??????? (RG) Villarial (RT) Teague This makes sense doesn't it?
Fan in Chicago Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 He said at the beginning of last season that if he had his way - the line would be reshuffled. However, due to the perception that we could make a playoff run - he had to stick to the current configuration while the potential pieces are in place. Perhaps, now with JP at the helm, they have just decided to rearrange the deck according to McNally's previous wishes and are now moving forward under his guidance? 260515[/snapback] Okay, I admit I am confused. - If McNally wanted to shuffle the line but expected us to make a playoff run with the same configuration, then why did he want to shuffle the line ? Is it because the line we had last year was the best for DB ? - If he now wants to reshuffle and we lost JJ, are we looking at yet ANOTHER rebuilding year ? - Are you saying that the line will be okay with existing players because JP can run away from the pressure ? I don't think that is a smart way to play as we would be even with last year then. We needed to bolster the line and then take advantage of JP to make some killer plays. SDS, what am I missing ?????
Dan Gross Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Both of our arguments are moot. I can't prove that adding one player would have made any difference, and you can't say that it worked out the way we did it. (since we didnt even make the playoffs) Either way, I don't understand why people are being trashed for wanting players brought in to help. Doesn't make sense. 260674[/snapback] It's not as much people wanting players to come in to help, it's those that insist that we are DOOOOMED unless we sign player X. Oh, and last I checked, Kansas City didn't make the playoffs last year either.
Dan III Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Okay, I admit I am confused.- If McNally wanted to shuffle the line but expected us to make a playoff run with the same configuration, then why did he want to shuffle the line ? Is it because the line we had last year was the best for DB ? - If he now wants to reshuffle and we lost JJ, are we looking at yet ANOTHER rebuilding year ? - Are you saying that the line will be okay with existing players because JP can run away from the pressure ? I don't think that is a smart way to play as we would be even with last year then. We needed to bolster the line and then take advantage of JP to make some killer plays. SDS, what am I missing ????? 260687[/snapback] The idea was you don't wait until training camp to shuffle your line. If you're going to ask guys to change positions, you want to do it in March that way they can get the extra work in the OTAs.
Bear Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 It's not as much people wanting players to come in to help, it's those that insist that we are DOOOOMED unless we sign player X. Oh, and last I checked, Kansas City didn't make the playoffs last year either. 260693[/snapback] Well, I don't think we are doomed if we don't bring in payer X, but I do think we will have some major problems if we don't bring in anyone. I see there is an increase in posts, after only 1 full day of FA, where people are thinking we can get it done without bringing people in. I disagree 100%. I'm also not freaking out yet, becuase I believe there is still time to do something about it. There are some simple facts staring me in the face right now: The Oline was not that good last year. Not horrible, but not that good. We have a first year QB starting now. We just lost our LT. We have made no moves (as far as we all know) to bring anyone in to fix it.
Sound_n_Fury Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 So, your are stating that it is fact if he had come here he would have suffered the same iinjury? 260684[/snapback] I'm saying that he was just another guy. He didn't help the Chiefs, let alone the Bills. These guys come and go every year. Last year it was Bober, this year it's Shelton. Unless they're in the Pace/Jones category, the gap between #3 and #30 in talent isn't that large and has more to do with schemes and surrounding talent than actual player ability. Bottom line: I'd like to snag another guy like Chris Vilarial a few weeks into the FA period at a reasonable price than overpay just to pull the trigger quickly.
Mile High Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Anyone else feel that is was or is key to keep Price on this team as a back up ot? Afterall he IS a decent replacement if there is an injury, to the left or right side.
Fan in Chicago Posted March 3, 2005 Posted March 3, 2005 Well, I don't think we are doomed if we don't bring in payer X, but I do think we will have some major problems if we don't bring in anyone. I see there is an increase in posts, after only 1 full day of FA, where people are thinking we can get it done without bringing people in. I disagree 100%. I'm also not freaking out yet, becuase I believe there is still time to do something about it. 260709[/snapback] I agree with you completely. Recall that almost every year for the past 5 years, we are given this same damn message 'we will be fine with what we have'. Bulls**t ! We continually ignore the OL and go through another year of mediocrity. While JJ may not have been the best at his position, retaining him would have provided some consistency and still given McNally a chance for the shuffle dance. We need to get some half-way decent FAs as the draft is a crapshoot. last thing I want is to design an offense on JP's scrambling capabilities alone and turn him into a Vick type of player. I would rather he develop into a favre-type player who scrambles when plays break down. If we do not give JP a decent OL, he will suck and then we will pronounce him a bust giving YET ANOTHER excuse for not making the playoffs in 2005. Again, I am not hitting the panic button, but I don't see any FA OL left out there who are decent. I am just hoping TD is working behind the scenes and not just prepping us for 'we have all the talent we need' nonsense.
Recommended Posts