Ryan "Rick" Bates Watch Thread

[Hapless Bills Fan]

12 hours ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

He played well in 2020 so hard to predict he was going to decline like he did.  Seems too that his problem was his decision apparently made on his own to lose the weight to become quicker, quicker to the bench.  Will be interesting to see if he decides this year to put the weight back on.   When he originally signed, the first two years was a good signing.  They originally traded for Bates so their judgement was good their.  Spain worked out well the first year.

 

It's hard in general.  We started the season with 3 guys who had played well down the stretch, until the last game, not playing as well:  Dawkins, Williams, and Feliciano.  But last season, we struggled to run the ball and it seems like this season, we expected something to be different by doing the same thing.  Was a healthy Ford supposed to make a difference?  But my understanding is in college, Ford was a good run blocker in space, not in a zone scheme.  A healthy Feliciano?  There was a disconnect, somewhere.

 

In part, IMHO, the poor OL play had less to do with the OL per se and more to do with strategic decisions on the offense - fundamentally, the decision to become a spread offense and abandon the run some weeks.  That really allows the defense to just tee off on the OL as they abandon any need for gap integrity in favor of overloading one or the other side of the OL.  IMO McDermott is 100% correct when he says 'there needs to be at

 

It follows that the better OL play had to do with more commitment to run, a return to the gap and pin-and-pull blocking that succeeded in 2019 so that the run game was more successful, use of 6 OLmen and/or a fullback to block and other changes, as well as using more designed runs by Josh.

 

With Feliciano, there's also the "dents and dings" argument - Feliciano came back Week 8 last season and provided a spark, no question.  Whether he didn't play as well to start this season due to a feeling of entitlement, due to weight loss, or something else (more time watching conspiracy podcasts and tweeting about them, less time watching film?) - who knows?

 

Anyway, my point is:

1) the OL problems against Pittsburgh, Mia, the Jaguars weren't all on the OLmen starting those games

2) the OL looking better at the end of the season wasn't all on the OLmen starting those games

 

Bates looked very good to finish the season and I'd like him back, but I can hear it now if we pay him $5M or $6M and he fails to look as good next year under a different OL coach.

 

 

 

 

[Canadian Bills Fan]

Any update??

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

If this guy leaves we are probably going to have to use a 1st or 2nd rounder on a Guard. That might not be popular but….I don’t know what the alternative would be at this stage. Ford really can’t start here IMO

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, ScottLaw said:

My concern as well… they have thrown endless money at fixing the defensive line and the rotation while the starting offensive line seems secondary… don’t really understand it myself, especially in an offensive driven league.

Worked for the rams. 

[finn]

Well, it's not like the coaches didn't know what Bates was capable of. They might have been surprised how well he gelled with Morse and Dawkins, but I trust their judgment on his monetary value. Based on that, they appear to see him as a marginal starter and excellent backup. I'm hoping they're willing to let him go for the same reason they let Levi Wallace go at cornerback: They finally (finally!) want to upgrade the position. We haven't had an excellent set of guards since, what? Jim Ritcher and Glenn Parker in 1992?

 

Imagine having excellent guards AND excellent corners. Didn't have that in 1992. Or maybe ever. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, MrEpsYtown said:

I would have kept Anderson over Feliciano when he was plucked from the practice squad. He had a nice upside and high RAS. He wound up starting a couple of games for Philly. But again I think this regime was loyal to a fault when we saw how long they stuck with players who weren’t getting it done. Trent Murphy, Feliciano etc etc. 

 

Dude, you've presented yourself as knowing OL and having serious cred in OL evaluation, but IMHO this is a straight up "listen to the fans, wind up sitting with them" revisionist history take.

 

We all know that high RAS doesn't make a functional NFL OLman.  It indicates potential.  They need to have blocking technique.  They need intimate knowledge of all the protection calls and their variations for different defensive looks.

 

Anderson was signed off our PS by Philly after Game 2, where we thumped the Dolphins 35-0.  Feliciano was starting at that point.

 

No aspect of Anderson's preseason play led any of the press or fans watching at the time to flag him as an immediate NFL starter.  Nor did it impress the coaches that way, since they cut him and put him on the practice squad to develop.  He was neither the starter, nor the 2nd nor 3rd string at that point and no one watching the pre-season from the fan seats had a question with that based on what we saw.

 

Anderson went on to start one (1) game for the Eagles, Week 17 where they were resting some starters and lost to Dallas 26-51.  Other than that, he got 7 snaps a couple weeks previous, I don't know whether that was as a 6th OL or substituting for an injury.

 

There's a very valid point that the Bills should have upgraded on OL last season more than they did.  Very valid. 

 

But to suggest cutting Feliciano (a guy who has proven he can play at an NFL level at both OG positions and at C, albeit not at the level we want) to elevate a 7th round draft pick to the active roster after week 2 this season because he has a better RAS - C'mon Man, that's not rational knowledge-based OL e v a l.

 

22 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

If this guy leaves we are probably going to have to use a 1st or 2nd rounder on a Guard. That might not be popular but….I don’t know what the alternative would be at this stage. Ford really can’t start here IMO

 

Again, as others have said - we need to use a high draft pick on an OG regardless of whether or not Bates leaves.  We arguably should have done so last off-season.

(I'm not going to say 1st or 2nd round because I don't know what the general assessment of depth in the draft at OL may be)

 

Saffold for 1 year is NOT a long-range IOL plan.

[Magox]

This would be one loss that would hurt.

 

So far, the off season on paper has been a success but I do think there are two potential mistakes/miscalculations Beane has made.

 

Letting Levi Wallace slip away when he could have been had for $4m a year was a mistake.

 

And the other is here with Bates, I think there are too many putting an overemphasis on "too small a sample size". Yes, it's true that the sample isn't that large, but he was really good during that stretch.  He gave up by far the least amount of pressures, very mobile and it's not a coincidence the O line began playing much better once he was inserted.   This loss would stink and I absolutely believe the Bills would end up regretting it.

 

 

Edited March 26, 2022 by Magox

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 minutes ago, Magox said:

This would be one loss that would hurt.

 

So far, the off season on paper has been a success but I do think there are two potential mistakes/miscalculations Beane has made.

 

Letting Levi Wallace slip away when he could have been had for $4m a year was a mistake.

 

I think the Levi Wallace signing was one reason Beane was so P/O'd at the Washington Commanders over McKissic.

 

8 minutes ago, Magox said:

And the other is here with Bates, I think there are too many putting an overemphasis on "too small a sample size". Yes, it's true that the sample isn't that large, but he was really good during that stretch.  He gave up by far the least amount of pressures, very mobile and it's not a coincidence the O line began playing much better once he was inserted.   This loss would stink and I absolutely believe the Bills will end up regretting it.

 

 

 

I think the root issue is that based on recent history, if there's one place where fans have reason to mistrust player personnel evaluation decisions or resource committment, it is on OL.

 

I think Bates did look really good when he played, but whether that suits the direction Kromer and Dorsey want to take the line, or no - can't tell you.  At this point, the Bills seem to feel that for $4.2M cap hit this year, Saffold is an upgrade to Bates at LG so it makes sense that they wouldn't want to put almost the same amount into a 2nd round tender ($3.986M, basically almost $4M)

 

Or to put it another way for those clamoring for a 2nd round tender on Bates, for $0.2M more against the cap, the Bills signed Saffold.

 

I can't tell you whether they think Bates would be just as good at RG as he showed at LG.  He says he can play any position on the line, but the sample size is small.

 

[SCBills]

2 minutes ago, Magox said:

This would be one loss that would hurt.

 

So far, the off season on paper has been a success but I do think there are two potential mistakes/miscalculations Beane has made.

 

Letting Levi Wallace slip away when he could have been had for $4m a year was a mistake.

 

And the other is here with Bates, I think there are too many putting an overemphasis on "too small a sample size". Yes, it's true that the sample isn't that large, but he was really good during that stretch.  He gave up by far the least amount of pressures, very mobile and it's not a coincidence the O line began playing much better once he was inserted.   This loss would stink and I absolutely believe the Bills would end up regretting it.

 

 

I completely disagree on Levi.  Decent player, but I have zero regrets not having him in a secondary that has to face Hill/Waddle for the next few years, twice per year.   
 

We need more speed in the secondary.  I expect that wherever we draft corner, they will be guy(s) who have some speed/athleticism.  If we don’t, then sure.. we can rehash this discussion… at the very least, they wouldn’t be 4M per guys. 
 

In terms of Bates, I’d be more inclined to worry about OG e v a l if we didn’t hire Kromer.  The guy is one of the best in the business, and Beane is very aware of needing to protect Allen.  They way they seem to be viewing him essentially says to me that they like him as an emergency starter/fantastic depth.   IMO, they want to upgrade both OG positions.  So far they’ve done that on one with Saffold.. im ok waiting to see what the other move is. 
 

 

[TheBeaneBandit]

Just bring Williams back as a stopgap for RG. Draft a developmental type this year or go higher next year. We gotta get faster in this draft imo.

[Doc]

36 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

If this guy leaves we are probably going to have to use a 1st or 2nd rounder on a Guard. That might not be popular but….I don’t know what the alternative would be at this stage. Ford really can’t start here IMO

 

3 minutes ago, TheBeaneBandit said:

Just bring Williams back as a stopgap for RG. Draft a developmental type this year or go higher next year. We gotta get faster in this draft imo.

 

This is the fallback.  There's also Trai Turner.

[Magox]

9 minutes ago, SCBills said:

I completely disagree on Levi.  Decent player, but I have zero regrets not having him in a secondary that has to face Hill/Waddle for the next few years, twice per year.   
 

We need more speed in the secondary.  I expect that wherever we draft corner, they will be guy(s) who have some speed/athleticism.  If we don’t, then sure.. we can rehash this discussion… at the very least, they wouldn’t be 4M per guys. 
 

In terms of Bates, I’d be more inclined to worry about OG e v a l if we didn’t hire Kromer.  The guy is one of the best in the business, and Beane is very aware of needing to protect Allen.  They way they seem to be viewing him essentially says to me that they like him as an emergency starter/fantastic depth.   IMO, they want to upgrade both OG positions.  So far they’ve done that on one with Saffold.. im ok waiting to see what the other move is. 
 

 

Levi had arguably his best year as a Bill this past year and always wins out the DB position battle.  With that said, I would have still wanted to pick an early round DB to compete and hopefully replace Levi at some point.   There is a really good chance that as of right now, the opening week boundary starting CB's will be Dane Jackson and ???.   White may not be ready which leaves the Bills with some potential FA CB acquisition and/or a rookie DB.

 

I would have liked to have kept Levi as the short-term guy who we know will give good steady DB play and then going after a rookie DB.  

 

In regards to Bates, I think they miscalculated and didn't believe he would garner this much interest and hoped that the tender was going to work.   I bet if they had to do it all over again they would have given him the 2nd round tender.    What you are implying for both Bates and Wallace is a hope that the Bills will address it with something better.   A hope that either a rookie or FA acquisition will be better than two players who provided above average play last year.  That is a lot to ask for, specially so out of a rookie.   

 

If we don't get two FA acquisitions to replace those two guys that are not viewed on paper as upgrades and go into the draft hoping that the draft choices pan out to be above average players as a rookie, then I think we will come to regret it.

[BuffaninSarasota]

15 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I’m not sure what you mean by “perhaps the plan is” and  “fill the other with a vet”

 

One of our first FA signings was Rodger Saffold, released by Tenn as a cap casualty (they saved $10M).

So it’s been very clear from the start of FA that the plan at LG was veteran Rodger Saffold.

 

It’s not so clear what the plan is at RG, but since Bates has very few snaps at RG, it’s not clear he’s the plan their either

 

asking a question to those who may know more about OL play on a technical level; is there a huge difference between playing LG/RG (other than being on a strong side with a TE) ?

 

since Bates is lauded nonstop for his positional versatility, flexibility, and smarts, why would RG not be a seamless transition for him?

[Doc]

2 minutes ago, BuffaninSarasota said:

 

asking a question to those who may know more about OL play on a technical level; is there a huge difference between playing LG/RG (other than being on a strong side with a TE) ?

 

since Bates is lauded nonstop for his positional versatility, flexibility, and smarts, why would RG not be a seamless transition for him?

 

He started at RG in the 2nd Cheaters game.  Boettger got injured about a quarter of the way through so I don't know/recall if Bates then moved to LG or stayed at RG the rest of the game.

[Don Otreply]

The odd thing about Bates analysis by the Bills coaches is that he played as well or better than who he replaced on the O line, yet he was benched when those guys were able to play again, happened repeatedly, we could certainly stand to re-sign him, I don’t understand their reluctance, oh well, 

Edited March 26, 2022 by Don Otreply

[DCbillsfan]

9 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

The odd thing about Bates analysis by the Bills coaches is that he played as well or better than who he replaced on the O line, yet he was benched when those guys were able to play again, happened repeatedly, we could certainly stand to re-sign him, I don’t understand their reluctance, oh well, 

It appears the Bills only view him as a backup oline guy and gave him the lowest tender possible.  If he leaves so be it so to speak.  One of quite a few surprises.  I thought Bates was going to be the starting LG this upcoming season.

[Pags24]

I'm a big supporter of keeping Bates and will fully admit to being a homer.  I just have a lot of belief in his ability and future.  Hoping that the more time that passes with this 5-day deadline....is a good sign and indicates Beaner is trying to make it work.  I mean if it was a ridiculous number that CHI offered our FO might've said, forget it right away right?  Again this could be just wishful thinking on my part, we'll see.   

[Einstein]

I’m genuinely surprised that Beane allowed a measly $1 million to be the difference between keeping and losing Bates.

[Doc]

38 minutes ago, Pags24 said:

I'm a big supporter of keeping Bates and will fully admit to being a homer.  I just have a lot of belief in his ability and future.  Hoping that the more time that passes with this 5-day deadline....is a good sign and indicates Beaner is trying to make it work.  I mean if it was a ridiculous number that CHI offered our FO might've said, forget it right away right?  Again this could be just wishful thinking on my part, we'll see.   

 

You might be onto something with the delay in them matching or not.  But we'll find out soon enough.

 

 

Just now, Einstein said:

I’m genuinely surprised that Beane allowed a measly $1 million to be the difference between keeping and losing Bates.

 

They can find the money to add him if they want.  What I surmise is that Beane had an idea of Bates' true value but Bates asked for way more, so he slapped the lowest tender figuring he'd match any offer in a certain price range.

[HurlyBurly51]

55 minutes ago, Pags24 said:

I'm a big supporter of keeping Bates and will fully admit to being a homer.  I just have a lot of belief in his ability and future.  Hoping that the more time that passes with this 5-day deadline....is a good sign and indicates Beaner is trying to make it work.  I mean if it was a ridiculous number that CHI offered our FO might've said, forget it right away right?  Again this could be just wishful thinking on my part, we'll see.   

I'm thinking the opposite - they see the offer, and if it fits within their range they match it.  Maybe they're just making room, but I think he's as good as gone.