Who will be the Bills starting offensive linemen in 2023 (LT-LG-C-RG-RT)?

[Warriorspikes51]

2 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

McD trusting a rookie to protect his multimillion-dollar QB, I think, might be a bit of a stretch.

 

I think Bates starts at RG at the beginning of the season.  But Torrence will get some reps and eventually take over as the starter.  Bates will then be the interior backup and not a tackle.   

 

That puts me in the minority because I chose Dawkins-McGovern-Morse-Bates-Brown as our opening-day OL.  

 

I worry about Mitch and his concussions.  

 

I thought Edwards might get some love, considering that he started for the Rams for three years, including their SB victory.  Then again, he wasn't a particularly good starter.  From 2019-2021 (I'm disregarding 2022 because of his own concussion problems), he averaged something like 66 on PFF's scoring system which rates him as a good backup.  

 

 

 

 

 

The rookie is likely better than anyone else on the line. 0 sacks, 0 penalties. 

Dawkins - Bates - Morse - O'Cyrus - Not currently on roster  (hoping for a good veteran RT via signing, summer cuts / trade) 

Edited May 23, 2023 by Warriorspikes51

[LABILLBACKER]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Agreed, and I am surprised there are 12 votes for lineups in the poll that doesn't include Torrence.  Our guard play was so bad last year I feel like any guard off the street at any moment could have stepped in and not been any worse.  

 

Sure, it's possible Torrence struggles in camp and preseason and they go with veteran presence and bring Torrence along slower.  But IMHO, Torrence is just too good of a prospect to where I find a hard time seeing him start the season on the bench while one of the lesser inspiring veterans start.  

 

IMHO, if Brown can build on the potential he showed as a rookie and put last year behind him, our OL has a shot at being significantly better this year.  Brown is the key, because by adding both McGovern and Torrence, along with Bates, our guard spot now has depth and I am sure we can find a 2 man combo amongst those 3 that will be better than any combo at guard we trotted out last year.  But RT is still biggest question mark where I don't know if we have a quality option there until we see what version of Brown we get as there isn't much behind him to make you feel comfortable if Brown struggles.  

2 of the most serious hits that Josh took last year came from Quessenberry and Brown. Both RT.  I'm thrilled we've upgraded the guard positions and I have faith Mitch will give us one final good year.  It's Brown and his slow ass feet that concerns me the most, not Torrence. 

[Buffalo716]

13 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

 

The rookie is likely better than anyone else on the line. 0 sacks, 0 penalties. 

Dawkins - Bates - Morse - O'Cyrus - Not currently on roster  (hoping for a good veteran RT via signing, summer cuts / trade) 

Most teams don’t trade good tackles unless there’s baggage 

[RoyBatty is alive]

To start the season, I think you go with vets so my two guards are McGovern and/or Edwards/Bates but soon thereafter i would go with Torrence and McGovern.

[Doc]

3 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

McD trusting a rookie to protect his multimillion-dollar QB, I think, might be a bit of a stretch.

 

I think Bates starts at RG at the beginning of the season.  But Torrence will get some reps and eventually take over as the starter.  Bates will then be the interior backup and not a tackle.   

 

That puts me in the minority because I chose Dawkins-McGovern-Morse-Bates-Brown as our opening-day OL.  

 

I worry about Mitch and his concussions.  

 

I thought Edwards might get some love, considering that he started for the Rams for three years, including their SB victory.  Then again, he wasn't a particularly good starter.  From 2019-2021 (I'm disregarding 2022 because of his own concussion problems), he averaged something like 66 on PFF's scoring system which rates him as a good backup. 

 

Bates is the fallback for Morse.  And good thing that Edwards is being paid like a backup.

[Doc]

 

And I don't see the reason to complicate things for the rookie by having him learn more than 1 position, much less opposite to the side he played and dominated at in college.  Maybe a move next year to the left side might be in the offing, but for now, KISS.

[PBF81]

6 hours ago, NewEra said:

Oh sorry, I didn’t realize this turned into another bash Beane conversation. Have fun

 

Just pointing out that it's difficult to do what you said when ..., we'll, you don't do it.

 

Not bashing anyone, but it's a fact that the reason why we ar not where yousaidwe need to be, A, has nothing to do with me, and B, does have to do with a methodology that's been negligent in that way. 

 

Who do you assess with the reason why we're not where you said we need to be?  Safeties coach too?  

 

 

3 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

I mean this is such an inaccurate statement, and so obviously biased against the Bills with no perspective on what other teams are actually doing and going through, that it completely invalidates any other point you may be making.

 

KC loses and flips guys constantly. They just lost their OT and replaced him with a lower graded player.

Cincy is STILL trying to build an OL, and just stole said KC OT. Which is about to lose them their other OT.

Philly just lost OT Andre Dillard AND OG Isaac Seumalo

 

The list goes on.

 

There is a huge dearth of OL talent available. Beane could do better to focus on it, but almost every team is feeling that pain.

 

So IYO, Cincy & KC don't have better OLs than we do.  

 

We'll, OK.  Because that's what you're saying by disagreeing.  

 

I could not disagree more on that note.

 

 

[DrDawkinstein]

3 hours ago, PBF81 said:

So IYO, Cincy & KC don't have better OLs than we do.  

 

We'll, OK.  Because that's what you're saying by disagreeing.  

 

I could not disagree more on that note.

 

 

 

Not at all. That isnt even close to the topic you and @NewEra were discussing. Come back on track. The discussion was on chemistry, and keeping OLs together, and that it is difficult to do in modern times. YOU even started the topic when you said "Chemistry as a single unit with the same guys in the same spot however is an undervalued thing among fans."

 

And then you said, verbatim, "other teams do it routinely, at least a bunch and our biggest competitors".

 

And no they dont.

 

Please dont make me recap an entire conversation for you again, when you can go back and read your own posts yourself.

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Not at all. That isnt even close to the topic you and @NewEra were discussing. Come back on track. The discussion was on chemistry, and keeping OLs together, and that it is difficult to do in modern times. YOU even started the topic when you said "Chemistry as a single unit with the same guys in the same spot however is an undervalued thing among fans."

 

And then you said, verbatim, "other teams do it routinely, at least a bunch and our biggest competitors".

 

And no they dont.

 

Please dont make me recap an entire conversation for you again, when you can go back and read your own posts yourself.

Thanks bro.  When I saw his reply I thought to myself, “this will be a colossal waste of my time.  It’s not worth it”.  was it?  🤣 
 

 

[DrDawkinstein]

14 hours ago, NewEra said:

Thanks bro.  When I saw his reply I thought to myself, “this will be a colossal waste of my time.  It’s not worth it”.  was it?  🤣 
 

 

 

It's the offseason and I was bored so... it killed 5min of my day.

[PBF81]

On 5/23/2023 at 9:02 PM, DrDawkinstein said:

And then you said, verbatim, "other teams do it routinely, at least a bunch and our biggest competitors".

 

And no they dont.

 

Please dont make me recap an entire conversation for you again, when you can go back and read your own posts yourself.

 

Yes they do.  You seem to have interpreted and implied that when I said "other," I meant "all,"  but I simply meant that, other, as in some other teams.  KC's done it.  NE's done a superb job over the years for an extended period of time, even if not to the same extent recently.  Cincy seems to be in the process of doing it.  

 

If you want to discuss this, then we need to look at the particulars, which you probably aren't interested in doing.  But I'll sum it up, and I'm happy to put the data behind it if you really want to discuss it, it's simply and quick to look up.  

 

But our OL besides Dawkins and Morse, has largely been a commutative exercise driven by a series of largely 1-year signees on the OL with an occasional 2-year signee, typically on the cheap.  McGovern has been an exception, not the rule.  

 

The problem with such an approach, which neither Cincy, KC, nor Philly have used by the way, is that you're never going to draw the type of talent that's going to provide the kind of OL that they and teams with better OLs do.  Getting back to the "chemistry" angle, you're working against yourself if you build an OL that way in relation to chemistry.  That's simply common sense.  

 

Since it's verboten to criticize Beane, no sense in discussing our approach to the OL via the Drafts.  

 

 

 

[GreggTX]

Don't count out Edwards-Torrence at the starting G spots either.