Sporting News has the Bills LB Unit

[pkwwjd]

No big surprise, but nice to know.

 

No link -- I got my issue in the mail today.

 

JFYI

[BillsGuyInMalta]

With Boulware gone from the Ravens, I'm not surprised we were rated the best group. I know a lot of people here are rough on Posey, but I can think of at least 25 other teams that would LOVE to have him on their roster.

[CentralVaBills]

With Boulware gone from the Ravens, I'm not surprised we were rated the best group.  I know a lot of people here are rough on Posey, but I can think of at least 25 other teams that would LOVE to have him on their roster.

339490[/snapback]

This is great and all, but the problem is......the LB spot in the NFL is probably the most easy to find good players. It would be a lot nicer to have the best D-Line, O-Line, TE's or something like that.

[OGTEleven]

This is great and all, but the problem is......the LB spot in the NFL is probably the most easy to find good players.  It would be a lot nicer to have the best D-Line, O-Line, TE's or something like that.

339513[/snapback]

I'll give OL, maybe DL, but I'd certainly prefer the best LBs to the best TEs.

[drnykterstein]

This is great and all, but the problem is......the LB spot in the NFL is probably the most easy to find good players.  It would be a lot nicer to have the best D-Line, O-Line, TE's or something like that.

339513[/snapback]

Tell that to the Lions, Chiefs, 49ers, Cardinals, Vikings, Rams and Browns

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I hereforth issue the Posey Challenge!!!

 

Some very good football minds like Simom have posted about the failings of Posey. He has disappointed me because when he was acquired by TD as the first FA signing in the league in 2003 I bought the line that he was an incredibly cheap acquisition who would build off the 8 sacks he logged for the expanision Texans to put up double-digit sack numbers for the Bills.

 

Yet, 2003 saw him get off to a pretty slow start for the Bills and though he eventually logged 5.5 sacks that year (more than Spikes or Fletcher got last year when they were great BTW) I was disappointed (despite one of them being a tough hit that knocked David Carr out- I don't root for injuries but he rung his bell). He logged a mere 1 sack last year and many of the Bills faithful called for his head.

 

However, as usual when fans start calling for a player to be cut, it is time to take a second look.

 

As best as I can tell Posey did get off to a lousy start, but my guess is that much of this came from him learning how to work in a 4-3 rather than a 3-4. Even tougher was that he did this while working to learn a new D scheme (the LeBeau run-blitz). Still there a two reasons why I think Posey can be assesed as doing a good job. First he eventually got it together and played his assigned sackmaster role. Second the Bills D was statistically very good (top 4 in the nFL) and Posey started 16 of 16 games.

 

Rather than be even more disappointed with his lackluster sack totals for 2004, I think the real measure is that the Bills D was even more successful last year and Posey once again played a big role starting all 16 again.

 

Watchers such as Simon claim that Posey seemed to turn the wrong way and looked lost out there a significant portion of the time.

 

The POSEY CHALLENGE is this. Please educate me and the rest of TSW as to where your observations of bad play by Posey made a tangable difference.

 

If one could site horrible statisitcal performance by a D where Posey logged a lot of PT then maybe he is one of the culprits. The D was not perfect (witness giving up over 100 yards to a Pitts scrub rusher) but this D was good and it does not surprise me that the LB corps (including Posey) get come credit for this.

 

If Posey is just riding on the coattails of a bunch of great players who produced good cumulative stats then simply tell me the plays where the bad work overwhelmed by the good work was Posey's faults. When was he beaten for TDs because he was turned the wrong way? When did he drop sure INTs? I know he only logged one sack, but the team as a whole was one of the best sack crews in football and part of this was not 11 guys running after the QB like their hair was on fire, but a few players staying back in demonstrably effective coverage because the QB had no one to throw to and got sacked.

 

I know folks complain about Posey and his sole sack was disappointing, but i think he did a good job last year.

 

That being said it certainly does not mean for this fan that he gets to rest on his laurels. I thin TD is right that competition is good and i would love to see Posey get beat out because someone plays better. However, I do not see this happening because Stamer who is behind him on the depth chart strikes me as producing more as a #2 LB than the more highly regarded Haggan and Crowell the last two years, but I do not see Stamer as a good enough player to be a starter.

 

Haggan and Crowell have shown flashes of productivity on ST and both have better pedigrees than the more productive at position play Staer. However, both are not challenging Posey on the depth chart and unless something about their play forces a move for them which does not involve unseating Spikes or Fletcher it ain't happenin.

 

So please educate us all and give some of the broader statiscal examples or the specific play examples of lack of production by Posey. Failing that I am happy to accept the judgment he is an important contributing part of one of the best LB corps in the NFL.

[IDBillzFan]

The good news is we have what Sporting News considers the best LB corp in the NFL.

 

The bad news is we're about to pair that LB corp with an offense using a new, unproven quarterback.

 

I look forward to when we have all of these positions at a high level at the same time. A three-legged dog can't run very fast.

[brihs2005]

I agree with FFS... Adding my two cents... i don't remember any game changing plays that Posey has made (maybe the INT against the Jets) but i don't think you can single him out as saying he blew a play, got beat by a TE, or failed to bring down a runner in open field. He is solid, and consistently solid. Doesn't make a big mistake, and doesn't make a big error. With all the playmakers we have on D, i don't mind a consistant down by down player who will solely be responsible for giving up a big play.

[drnykterstein]

I dont agree with FFS, but I'm too lazy to look up an example, and can't think of anything off the top of my head.

[San-O]

This is great and all, but the problem is......the LB spot in the NFL is probably the most easy to find good players.  It would be a lot nicer to have the best D-Line, O-Line, TE's or something like that.

339513[/snapback]

 

 

Good point. Also, the ability of the LBs is also very dependant on

the D-line being able to keep O-linemen from getting to the second level.

[stuckincincy]

With Boulware gone from the Ravens, I'm not surprised we were rated the best group.  I know a lot of people here are rough on Posey, but I can think of at least 25 other teams that would LOVE to have him on their roster.

339490[/snapback]

 

Bouleware didn't play last year.

[BillsGuyInMalta]

Bouleware didn't play last year.

339580[/snapback]

I know, but last year's ratings (done before the season started as these ratings are) would have assumed he WOULD have been healthy to play last season, giving the Ravens the edge over us in terms of these paper rankings in 2004.

 

With Boulware (and Hartwell I think) gone, the Ravens LBs would be broken up, leaving us with the best LBs on paper.

[Ramius]

I agree with FFS... Adding my two cents... i don't remember any game changing plays that Posey has made (maybe the INT against the Jets) but i don't think you can single him out as saying he blew a play, got beat by a TE, or failed to bring down a runner in open field.  He is solid, and consistently solid.  Doesn't make a big mistake, and doesn't make a big error.  With all the playmakers we have on D, i don't mind a consistant down by down player who will solely be responsible for giving up a big play.

339538[/snapback]

 

exactly, the team is about having players, not all superstars...posey is a solid linebacker, and while hes not razzle dazzle, hes there, play after play, making the stops when he should...he does what hes supposed to, and removing that type of player from the team would definitely hurt...plus, our LB corps will be even stonger this year as its their 3rd year playing together...and you cant say enough about team chemistry...

[stuckincincy]

I know, but last year's ratings (done before the season started as these ratings are) would have assumed he WOULD have been healthy to play last season, giving the Ravens the edge over us in terms of these paper rankings in 2004.

 

With Boulware (and Hartwell I think) gone, the Ravens LBs would be broken up, leaving us with the best LBs on paper.

339587[/snapback]

 

 

NE's seem to do well on the field, if not on paper.

[eball]

The good news is we have what Sporting News considers the best LB corp in the NFL.

 

The bad news is we're about to pair that LB corp with an offense using a new, unproven quarterback.

 

I look forward to when we have all of these positions at a high level at the same time. A three-legged dog can't run very fast.

339536[/snapback]

 

i'll take "unproven" over "proven to be mediocre at best" any day of the week.

 

have you seen a three-legged dog run? i have -- i was amazed at how he hauled ass.

 

the bills are in good shape. 16-0, baby! i look forward to an expensive dinner on your behalf.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Good point.  Also, the ability of the LBs is also very dependant on

the D-line being able to keep O-linemen from getting to the second level.

339572[/snapback]

 

Exactly. This is why the idea of improving the Bills merely by targetting the elimination of Posey may not result in much improvement and in fact may be a really poor investment of limited salary cap dollars.

 

If it cost more to acquire a quality OLB to replace Posey than it would to upgrade the DL (perhaps we should have offered a bit more to Phat Pat, perhaps that is the FA purchase we should have made) then replacing Posey would not result in improvement.

 

I agree with laziness being a good reason for a normal soul to not research the games for actual tangible episodes of Posey hurting the Bills rather than fact-free opinion that he sucks which is not supported by the overall results of the D or specifc evidence of scores or big gains on Posey. (If folks notice my own too lengthy pieces are done mostly in theory, memory or quick looks at last years stats while sitting on the conference calls I get paid for with work, rather than doing real research om football). I can relate to not looking stuff up.

 

However, my challenge if met will involve folks looking stuff up because I think the fact the D did well with Posey getting a lot of PT and no one has yet listed a number of times where Posey errors cost us points or big gains means that evidence of him causing our D to be bad does not exist.

[jarthur31]

I hereforth issue the Posey Challenge!!!

 

Some very good football minds like Simom have posted about the failings of Posey.  He has disappointed me because when he was acquired by TD as the first FA signing in the league in 2003 I bought the line that he was an incredibly cheap acquisition who would build off the 8 sacks he logged for the expanision Texans to put up double-digit sack numbers for the Bills.

 

Yet, 2003 saw him get off to a pretty slow start for the Bills and though he eventually logged 5.5 sacks that year (more than Spikes or Fletcher got last year when they were great BTW) I was disappointed (despite one of them being a tough hit that knocked David Carr out- I don't root for injuries but he rung his bell). He logged a mere 1 sack last year and many of the Bills faithful called for his head.

 

However, as usual when fans start calling for a player to be cut, it is time to take a second look.

 

As best as I can tell Posey did get off to a lousy start, but my guess is that much of this came from him learning how to work in a 4-3 rather than a 3-4.  Even tougher was that he did this while working to learn a new D scheme (the LeBeau run-blitz). Still there a two reasons why I think Posey can be assesed as doing a good job. First he eventually got it together and played his assigned sackmaster role. Second the Bills D was statistically very good (top 4 in the nFL) and Posey started 16 of 16 games.

 

Rather than be even more disappointed with his lackluster sack totals for 2004, I think the real measure is that the Bills D was even more successful last year and Posey once again played a big role starting all 16 again.

 

Watchers such as Simon claim that Posey seemed to turn the wrong way and looked lost out there a significant portion of the time.

 

The POSEY CHALLENGE is this. Please educate me and the rest of TSW as to where your observations of bad play by Posey made a tangable difference.

 

If one could site horrible statisitcal performance by a D where Posey logged a lot of PT then maybe he is one of the culprits. The D was not perfect (witness giving up over 100 yards to a Pitts scrub rusher) but this D was good and it does not surprise me that the LB corps (including Posey) get come credit for this.

 

If Posey is just riding on the coattails of a bunch of great players who produced good cumulative stats then simply tell me the plays where the bad work overwhelmed by the good work was Posey's faults. When was he beaten for TDs because he was turned the wrong way?  When did he drop sure INTs? I know he only logged one sack, but the team as a whole was one of the best sack crews in football and part of this was not 11 guys running after the QB like their hair was on fire, but a few players staying back in demonstrably effective coverage because the QB had no one to throw to and got sacked.

 

I know folks complain about Posey and his sole sack was disappointing, but i think he did a good job last year.

 

That being said it certainly does not mean for this fan that he gets to rest on his laurels.  I thin TD is right that competition is good and i would love to see Posey get beat out because someone plays better.  However, I do not see this happening because Stamer who is behind him on the depth chart strikes me as producing more as a #2 LB than the more highly regarded Haggan and Crowell the last two years, but I do not see Stamer as a good enough player to be a starter.

 

Haggan and Crowell have shown flashes of productivity on ST and both have better pedigrees than the more productive at position play Staer. However, both are not challenging Posey on the depth chart and unless something about their play forces a move for them which does not involve unseating Spikes or Fletcher it ain't happenin.

 

So please educate us all and give some of the broader statiscal examples or the specific play examples of lack of production by Posey.  Failing that I am happy to accept the judgment he is an important contributing part of one of the best LB corps in the NFL.

339525[/snapback]

 

 

Amen. What posters fail to realize is that you can get any sacks while you're in coverage. Rarely was Posey used to rush the passer from TOS. That's how we used Paup when he was here. But when Bryce signed with the Jags and made him cover, people all over were wondering why his sack numbers were down. LOL.

[stuckincincy]

Amen.  What posters fail to realize is that you can get any sacks while you're in coverage.  Rarely was Posey used to rush the passer from TOS.  That's how we used Paup when he was here.  But when Bryce signed with the Jags and made him cover, people all over were wondering why his sack numbers were down.  LOL.

339628[/snapback]

 

Well, if Posey fell back in coverage, he was slightly less than stellar in the 2 NE games...and perhaps others.

[IDBillzFan]

i'll take "unproven" over "proven to be mediocre at best" any day of the week.

 

have you seen a three-legged dog run?  i have -- i was amazed at how he hauled ass.

 

the bills are in good shape.  16-0, baby!  i look forward to an expensive dinner on your behalf. 

339598[/snapback]

A three-legged dog always looks fast when it's running by itself.

 

16-0...dinner's on me.

[CentralVaBills]

Tell that to the Lions, Chiefs, 49ers, Cardinals, Vikings, Rams and Browns

339523[/snapback]

My point exactly. I guess the other 25 teams are OK. Hell, it seems every team in the league always thinks it has under-rated LB's.

 

Easiest position in football to find functional players is at LB.