Berni Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 I have read a couple of post wondiering that Stevenson has been cut or Sullivan or Gildon. However, in my opinion Sobieski is the number one surprise cut. He has had some injury problems in the past, but has been regarded as a flexible player with a lot of potential. - Maybe, the Bills' staff can no longer hear the "potential" word.
Rayzer32 Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 I have read a couple of post wondiering that Stevenson has been cut or Sullivan or Gildon. However, in my opinion Sobieski is the number one surprise cut. He has had some injury problems in the past, but has been regarded as a flexible player with a lot of potential. - Maybe, the Bills' staff can no longer hear the "potential" word. 19565[/snapback] Uhhh.........who???
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 I have read a couple of post wondiering that Stevenson has been cut or Sullivan or Gildon. However, in my opinion Sobieski is the number one surprise cut. He has had some injury problems in the past, but has been regarded as a flexible player with a lot of potential. - Maybe, the Bills' staff can no longer hear the "potential" word. 19565[/snapback] Absolutely. And keeping Pucillo over him??? Unless he's still eligible for the practice squad...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 I'll be surprised if he's not added to the PS. Overall I think the Bills did a good job keeping who they wanted and should be able to get everyone else they wanted on the PS.
IndyMark Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 I'll be surprised if he's not added to the PS. Overall I think the Bills did a good job keeping who they wanted and should be able to get everyone else they wanted on the PS. 19581[/snapback] Keeping Puccillo was surprising, yet, cutting Sobieski was not. He was thrown around by opposing DL every game. He literally got pancaked at least twice during pre-season games that I saw and it would not surprise me that after looking at film closely the coaches saw "red flags" about his play - more than any of us would imagine or admit. He did not appear to be real solid. Again, not that Puccillo was but maybe it was the lesser of two evils.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 Keeping Puccillo was surprising, yet, cutting Sobieski was not. He was thrown around by opposing DL every game. He literally got pancaked at least twice during pre-season games that I saw and it would not surprise me that after looking at film closely the coaches saw "red flags" about his play - more than any of us would imagine or admit. He did not appear to be real solid. Again, not that Puccillo was but maybe it was the lesser of two evils. 19596[/snapback] On one of the other message boards, one of the posters thought Sobieski was the best backup the Bills had. In any case, if the Bills (read: McNally) feel he's worth keeping, he'll be on the PS. If not, it will be interesting to see how his career unfolds, if at all. As for Pucillo, his work ethic gives him a chance to succeed at some point.
TigerJ Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 A little. I admit to not studying O-line play, so I was relying on what others have said.
Steven in MD Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 I am surprised that Sobieski got cut, but then again it is not like we kept a far inferior player (even Pucillo is not that much worse than Sobieski). The key is to watch what other teams do for depth. If they add cuts from the Bills than you have to imagine they have some talent.
Happy Days Lois & Clark Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 Most publications had him not even being drafted but the Bills took him in the 5th round
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 A little. I admit to not studying O-line play, so I was relying on what others have said. 19674[/snapback] The more certain and authoritative sounding that fan's comments are about the quality of an individual OL guys play are, the less they should be believed. I love the fan insight provided on TSW so don;t get me wrong. However, I'm pretty clear about what my judgments on line play as one who fortunately/unfortunately devotes too much time to watching the NFL. I know enough about line play to say authoritatively that I know i don't know enough to draw intelligent conclusions. Unfortunately, I think it is also true of most comments on TSW that so and so lineman sucked and so and so lineman is great that most of these comments merely show how false the conclusions we often draw about lineplay appear to be all wrong. The key missing elements for me (and other fans) are: 1. I have no idea what blocking scheme is being called on given plays. A player may get pancaked by an opponent, but even this usually seeable piece of evidence may be heavily influenced or flat out cauesed by a failure of a different player than the one we saw pancaked. Was the olayer given the wrog blocking assignment by the center? Was our pancaked player actually responsible for another player and seeing someone was unblocked took him on from a bad position? Was the player who was pancaked beaten because he is a bad player and nothing can fix the problem, or is the problem fixable by some relatively small adjustment in how he applies leverage, adjusts to linecalls or whatever so that this overwhelmed player is suddenly playing like an All-Pro. We can see a lot and can potentially draw correct conclusions, but we can miss alot also because we have no idea what the OL as a group or the indidivual player was trying to do. 2. How is communication going in the trenches- The NFL has become so over-systematized (in my view) that it is now more critical in terms of production on the field that players are trying to do the same thing rather than how good an individual is. The key to good OL production on the field strikes me as good communication so that the whole is doing the same thing, rather than the individual parts doing their thing very well but they are all doing different things. An example of this was Kent Hull. No one mistook him for th biggest OL player going who could lift more weight or run faster than anyone else. However, he had the great ability to communicate effectively to everyone what they were supposed to be doing and also had shown great off-field leadership so that his linemates trusted him explicitly and woud not freelance even if they were good enough players to do it. It's easy for me to see how the Bills braintrust is a true believer in Teague if they make a judgment that he understands what is going on better than anyone else on the OL and he can communicate this into effectively to both sides of the OL. This can be true even if I saw him getting run over on occaision. 3. How well does a player multi-task- In the current NFL, i think this factor is what separate the good centers from the great ones. On a particular play, a center may be called upon to diagnose the D, communicate by voice and feel with the QB, communicate the linecall to the OL, do a fast accurate shotgun snap, and be ready to fight off the getting bigger DTs. I think Teague for example does these individual things well. His understanding of what is going on exceeds most players from the consistent testimony of thrid parties over multiple years, Drew is comfortable with the rapport he and Teague have built by what he says and more important by how he acts, his peers on the OL voice no complaints or dissatisfaction with what they are told to do, but seem to kick themselves (or look at each other quizzically as MW and Pucillo did on a couple of sacks last year) for not doing what they were told to do, and Teague's shotgun snaps were an adventure early in his career at center but seem to me have improved in their accuracy over time (allowing DB to get quicker reads because he isn't concentrating on catching a wayward snap. The last item is the Teague problem in that he does seem to get flattened by on rushing DTs or even pushed back into his QB too often. This does not happen all the time or on every play. Teague has been part of an OL that has ledthe way for some good TH production over the past two years so claims by posters that he is always outmanned on every play are simply false. However, my sense is that Teague is a player who has not mastered the good multi-tasking that a good center does and it shows from time to time. These are all things that I can have little clue about what is really happening on the OL and actually seem to be only the more timportant tips of the iceberg of what I don't know and I think the vast majority of posters and all outsiders do not know. Does this means we can draw no conclusions at all? No! We;re fans and we can draw any conclusions we want, offer them and defend them because that is what we do and this is how the system works. As far as the NFL and the Bills as a business it matters less what we say as long as we are saying something about the Bills around the water cooler. However, it is simply rediculous for any of us to expect that these conclusions are correct given the naby key things no outsider can know about a particular play. I think there are things we outsiders can see or know, or be told. MW had big time problems, missed OTAs, was overweight, was demoted on the depthc chart and missed practices with an injury which put him on the bicycle. There was still alot we didn't know which was crucial to drawing correct conclusions (how did the coaches feel about his problems? how did his peers feel about his problems? how did he feel about his problems?) but we all could see we were in trouble. We can ask questions, draw conclusions and say whatever. Just don't expect it to be correct. This all relates to the Sobieski cut as we do not really know what the heck happened here. We'll get a good nugget of info at 5pm today when the PS squad can be done. It may be true that Sobieski (who never really gave anyone any evidence on the field that he was the Bills center of the future) simply did not get over the many injuries he had. It may be that he is top notch at numerous individual skills but simply cannot multitask. TD may have made a judgement that if he cut McFarland he would be snapped right up, but if he cut Sobieski there would be enough confusion in our opponents that they would not risk signing him to their PS right away and after 5 we could do what we had to do to nail them both down. Who knows? We'll know more soon. All I do know is that Teague has been the unquestioned candidate in the real world for being the Bills center for head into 3 years now and across numerous different OL coaches. I know that there have been possible alternatives like Jennings, Koons, Sobieski and the FA wire and Teague has beaten them all back and in fact got an extension from the Bills (not a certain endorsement as Sulky's case shows. I have learned from my own wrong conclusions about how bad Dusty Ziegler was as a center that i really don't know enough to be certain about my conclusions. An examination of his resume made for the obvious conclusion that he was not good enough, but he ended up in an SB at center and that is what count.
clayboy54 Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 Some of the truth that we likely will never know may be: 1. Sobieski's history of injuries are popping up again. He did hobble off the field in Detroit. He may still not have fully recovered. 2. When choosing who to release for the practice squad, the choices are often predicated by lack of interest by other teams. Since Sobieski is unknown he is an obvious candidate. 3. Pucillo may not be very good, but he is experienced and can be a bigger help to L Smith than a guy like Sobieski. If Sobieski goes unclaimed and makes the PS then you may see a mid-season move if we see an interior lineman go down.
stuckincincy Posted September 6, 2004 Posted September 6, 2004 Some of the truth that we likely will never know may be: 1. Sobieski's history of injuries are popping up again. He did hobble off the field in Detroit. He may still not have fully recovered. 2. When choosing who to release for the practice squad, the choices are often predicated by lack of interest by other teams. Since Sobieski is unknown he is an obvious candidate. 3. Pucillo may not be very good, but he is experienced and can be a bigger help to L Smith than a guy like Sobieski. If Sobieski goes unclaimed and makes the PS then you may see a mid-season move if we see an interior lineman go down. 19766[/snapback] Sounds right. IIRC, he was said to lack maturity and had a chip on his shoulder when he was drafted. Dunno for sure...
Recommended Posts