BarleyNY Posted July 26, 2019 Posted July 26, 2019 1 hour ago, Buffalo716 said: Every team gets hit with injuries and that's a fact We have trotted out John DiGorgio at MLB Justin Rodgers at outside corner, Jeff tuel and Thad Lewis at QB, Kelvin Benjamin WAS a liability last year Your weakest players CAN HURT YOU That’s a different argument. Having good depth players is better than having poor ones. But that was not what the OP said. He said that a team is only as good as it’s weakest link. That’s very different. Kelvin Benjamin was our starter (sadly). Replace him with a difference maker like Deandre Hopkins or OBJ and you see what I’m taking about. Lots less to worry about who our 4th or 5th WR is in that case. The depth of the roster is for special teams, developmental and role players. You want them to be serviceable when pressed into action, but except for Nick Foles which of them wins you games?
Buffalo716 Posted July 26, 2019 Author Posted July 26, 2019 (edited) 18 minutes ago, BarleyNY said: That’s a different argument. Having good depth players is better than having poor ones. But that was not what the OP said. He said that a team is only as good as it’s weakest link. That’s very different. Kelvin Benjamin was our starter (sadly). Replace him with a difference maker like Deandre Hopkins or OBJ and you see what I’m taking about. Lots less to worry about who our 4th or 5th WR is in that case. The depth of the roster is for special teams, developmental and role players. You want them to be serviceable when pressed into action, but except for Nick Foles which of them wins you games? Well I'm OP and weakest link is subjective You bring up replacing Benjamin with Hopkins but again what if they get hurt? INJURIES ALWAYS HAPPEN. We still need depth If EJ Gaines is thrust into starting we are good. When Justin Rodgers started he had one of the worst games in NFL history That's weakest link . Rodgers wasn't NFL caliber We will not be stuck with non NFL talent There is a reason Beane is always upgrading the bottom half of the roster The weakest link doesn't have to be the last one to make the roster. He is just physically the one playing the worst... And those guys do play in the NFL I bring up the Rodgers because he is the epitome of the weakest guy so gle handedly losing a game Edited July 26, 2019 by Buffalo716
BarleyNY Posted July 26, 2019 Posted July 26, 2019 11 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said: Well I'm OP and weakest link is subjective You bring up replacing Benjamin with Hopkins but again what if they get hurt? INJURIES ALWAYS HAPPEN. We still need depth If EJ Gaines is thrust into starting we are good. When Justin Rodgers started he had one of the worst games in NFL history That's weakest link . Rodgers wasn't NFL caliber We will not be stuck with non NFL talent There is a reason Beane is always upgrading the bottom half of the roster If your goal is to win a championship then you need elite players. If a bunch of them get injured then you are out. If you don’t have them in the first place then you are out. Serviceable replacements are needed, but those are not players that are going to get you to a championship. Your elite players are the ones that’ll do that.
Buffalo716 Posted July 26, 2019 Author Posted July 26, 2019 1 minute ago, BarleyNY said: If your goal is to win a championship then you need elite players. If a bunch of them get injured then you are out. If you don’t have them in the first place then you are out. Serviceable replacements are needed, but those are not players that are going to get you to a championship. Your elite players are the ones that’ll do that. I don't think I ever said you don't need elite players But having a bottom heavy roster with Dan Marino won't net you a SB
BarleyNY Posted July 26, 2019 Posted July 26, 2019 9 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said: I don't think I ever said you don't need elite players But having a bottom heavy roster with Dan Marino won't net you a SB It seemed like your focus was on roster depth. Quality depth is good, but the focus of building a championship team should be difference makers. That’s all I’m saying.
Buffalo716 Posted July 26, 2019 Author Posted July 26, 2019 4 minutes ago, BarleyNY said: It seemed like your focus was on roster depth. Quality depth is good, but the focus of building a championship team should be difference makers. That’s all I’m saying. Totally agree 1
Misterbluesky Posted July 26, 2019 Posted July 26, 2019 8 hours ago, MAJBobby said: Not really true. But the reality in many years past we used to have starters that would not even play in the CFL. Now well we don’t Much more talented offensively..my only regret was not getting Cook from the Raiders.
ganesh Posted July 27, 2019 Posted July 27, 2019 13 hours ago, BarleyNY said: Honestly, in today’s NFL with the hard salary cap it doesn’t really work that way. It’s about fielding as many difference makers as possible (including a QB) to go along with solid starters and good role players. The bottom of the roster means little. This is what Whaley tried to do with his "Top Heavy" approach. But that talent did not turn into blue chip players and cost the bills requiring a salary cap purge.
BarleyNY Posted July 27, 2019 Posted July 27, 2019 1 hour ago, ganesh said: This is what Whaley tried to do with his "Top Heavy" approach. But that talent did not turn into blue chip players and cost the bills requiring a salary cap purge. Gotta get that QB. Whaley never did. I wonder what Schwartz’s defense could’ve done here with a stud QB and quality offense opposite it.
TtownBillsFan Posted July 27, 2019 Posted July 27, 2019 15 hours ago, CLTbills said: I don't get all the hate for this post. There are multiple position groups that are going to see guys that might be the #2 on another team get cut. WR, CB, and RB all come to mind. It's a good problem to have, trying to decide which ones to keep when they're all capable of producing. There are guys that started on this (#2 overall) defense last year that may get cut because we've brought more talent in. Definitely the first time in a long time I can remember having this kind of depth of quality talent. Not like having 3-4 great players and a bunch of backups in starting roles. Just think back to last year. We were trotting out Vlad Ducasse as a STARTER, and he started yesterday with the third string OL. The point that I think the OP is trying to make is this. If our worst player is a guy we don't want to get rid of because he's actually a dang good player that can start on another team, that's a pretty good problem to have. Lay off, all you Negative Nancy's Agreed fully! Great depth of talent across the board (minus maybe special teams, but I haven't checked that heavily, and depth is normally where ST's get their players, so probably good there too! Was thinking of the PK/KR/P roles though). The starting talent AND depth appears to be in place; it's going to come down to how well JA does. And I bought only one jersey this year! I'm thinking we have a team worthy of winning 10+ minimum!
Mark Vader Posted July 27, 2019 Posted July 27, 2019 23 hours ago, Buffalo716 said: As your weakest link... I have learned that this is very true in the game of football. IT IS A TEAM GAME. 1-53... More often than not #53 gets thrust into action and he needs to be able to play and not be a liability For years and years and years our weakest link has always been bad, usually really bad Going through our roster and how it might be compiled I am getting even more excited for the season. Our weakest link might actually be a pretty dang good player BILLIEVE Did you get this line from Mr. Hart from "9 to 5"?
PlayoffsPlease Posted July 27, 2019 Posted July 27, 2019 20 hours ago, Mark80 said: I could have been the 53rd man on the Pats roster for the last 20 years and they would still have 6 titles. /end thread 1.) good depth is nice to have 2) the 53rd man on your roster is the most important factor on a team Many posters seem to think 1 and 2 mean the same thing. They do not . There are many factors much more important than the quality of the 53rd man on the roster.
Nextmanup Posted July 27, 2019 Posted July 27, 2019 On 7/26/2019 at 3:02 AM, JoPar_v2 said: YAWN have another one. Seriously. It all looks so good and promising this time of year in Bills Land! Every year!
Figster Posted July 27, 2019 Posted July 27, 2019 (edited) On 7/26/2019 at 8:32 AM, Forward Progress said: I agree with the OP if you define the weakest link as the weakest player on the field. The weakest player on defence gets targeted more than any other player and likely has a greater effect on the game than the strongest defender who is avoided. The weakest member of the O-Line will be targeted in the pass rush. Weak receivers can be shut down in single coverage by average defenders leaving double coverage for the top receiving threats. When comparing the top-heavy Whaley rosters with a deep and balanced roster (like I think we are building here), I believe the deep and balanced rosters are more successful. Elite players are great. On the other hand for every elite player on a football team having good depth and a balanced roster becmes harder to accomplish IMO. How many elite players do the Patriots have? Not many IMO, and when you go to find a weak link? Edited July 27, 2019 by Figster
Recommended Posts