Way to go DiCesare!

[GG]

And since 2002 the Bengals have spent four 1st-day draft picks on:

a) skill position players QB-RB-WR

b) Offensive linemen

?

 

JDG

536728[/snapback]

 

Yes.

[30dive]

TN, I have to agree with you, Even two quality O-linemen will make a difference, they will bring leadership and fire. Kids like Luke Preston will benefit from that and only get better as a group, next a quality DT and safety.

 

Side Note: I must say that Justin Bannon's play in the first half of the Denver game was pretty impressive. No he is NOT the answer but could become better with another quality DT and a real O-line to work against during the week.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Luke Preston

\

536735[/snapback]

 

Or even Duke Preston.

[Orton's Arm]

If we get a competent GM, a few good FAs, draft well and have a bit of luck (JP turns out to be more Carson Palmer and less Kyle Boller), the Bills can be right back in the thick of things in a hurry.

Looking at the offensive and defensive lines, the only player who deserves to be a starter is Aaron Schoebel. As far as building the team from the trenches goes, this is basically an expansion franchise.

 

Looking at offensive skill positions, I'm concerned about McGahee's lack of motivation, Losman's lack of accuracy, Moulds' lack of youth, and Parrish's lack of size. Also, if you're going to use a second round pick on a player that small, you'd expect more explosiveness than what Parrish has shown. As far as proven offensive skill positions go, you're basically looking at Evans and McGahee.

 

On defense, Nate Clements has been having a bad year, and McGee played poorly today also. There's really nobody at safety, so you're looking at a very questionable starting secondary. Takeo Spikes and London Fletcher are good linebackers, but they're not getting any younger. The only proven long-term talent at LB is Angelo Crowell.

 

To summarize, this team's young but proven players are: Aaron Schoebel, Lee Evans, Willis McGahee, Terrence McGee, and Angelo Crowell. That's not much of a core to build around. Even in the unlikely event Losman turns out to be an above-average QB, you're still looking at a major rebuilding project.

[Gary M]

I am convinced that we are four stud players away from a playoff team.  three of the players are offensive linemen and the other is a  first rate Defensive Tackle. I think our d-backs (keeping Clements, of course) have another year in them, the linebackes with Spikes are competitive. and our O-backs, receivers and qb (Losman) can get us into serious competition for a playoff spot.  But getting four stud players isn't all that easy, and Losman has to continue to develop.  This can be turned around by building from the trenches out.

536723[/snapback]

 

DING DING DING

 

We have a winner.

[jester43]

i think a lot of people are missing the point. it is not that TD hasn't TRIED to shore up BOTH lines, it is that he is incapable of drafting/signing the CORRECT players to do so.

 

that's is why i have to laugh at people who are rooting for the bills to lose so we can get a top-5 pick. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE WE PICK IF WE CAN'T PICK GOOD PLAYERS. as we all know, the best tackle in the '02 draft was taken 10th. also, new england seems to get production out of their draft picks even though they come from the end of each round.

 

that is why donohoe has to go. no disrespect to the guy, i actually like him, but he can't make personnel decisions.

[OnTheRocks]

I am convinced that we are four stud players away from a playoff team.  three of the players are offensive linemen and the other is a  first rate Defensive Tackle. I think our d-backs (keeping Clements, of course) have another year in them, the linebackes with Spikes are competitive. and our O-backs, receivers and qb (Losman) can get us into serious competition for a playoff spot.  But getting four stud players isn't all that easy, and Losman has to continue to develop.  This can be turned around by building from the trenches out.

536723[/snapback]

 

 

i would have to add a playmaking DE.

Schobel is an "ok" #1 DE. He would be a great #2 DE.

The Bills need a dominating DE who can make plays while being double teamed to allow Schobel to make plays while he is being played man to man.

That extra preasure...along with as you say a stud DT....will make Nate Clemments and Terrance McGee look like Pro Bowl CB's.

[OnTheRocks]

I will say it again.  WE ARE ONE PLAYER AWAY on offense.

 

All we need is a right tackle.

 

Peters-Gandy-Preston/Teague-Villareal-RT?

 

That is an above-average line right there.  As bad as this season has been, I really don't think we need major changes.  One RT, 2 DTs, I think we're set.

 

I'm serious.

536703[/snapback]

 

 

i can't disagree more. you have just shuffled players to new positions. crappy players being moved to new positions just means you have a crappy OL with problems at different places.

[30dive]

No Problem here.....I don't think that Mr. Wilson is content....I do sometimes, more often lately, think that TD thinks that is all that important though!

 

Not to pick on you, but what has made anyone think Ralph is content with losing as long as the stadium sells out?

536702[/snapback]

[30dive]

Duke, Luke If he can play I'll call him Mr. Preston

 

Or even Duke Preston. 

536738[/snapback]

[Orton's Arm]

that's is why i have to laugh at people who are rooting for the bills to lose so we can get a top-5 pick. 

If we get a top-five pick, chances are TD is gone. Losing kills two birds with one stone. The last thing we need is a repeat of last year's flash in the pan late season run.

[Guest BackInDaDay]

Not to pick on you, but what has made anyone think Ralph is content with losing as long as the stadium sells out?

536702[/snapback]

 

In 46 years Ralph's Bills have accumulated 322 wins, 346 losses, and 8 ties.

If you remove the 4 SB years of 49 wins and 15 losses you're left with 42 years of 273 wins, 331 losses, and 8 ties.

 

Are these the numbers you'ld expect to see from an owner actively pursuing excellence?

 

Now make no mistake, those 4 SB runs were fantastic and may never be equaled, but 4 seasons out of 46 is the exception rather than the rule.

[Typical TBD Guy]

I will say it again.  WE ARE ONE PLAYER AWAY on offense.

 

All we need is a right tackle.

 

Peters-Gandy-Preston/Teague-Villareal-RT?

 

That is an above-average line right there.  As bad as this season has been, I really don't think we need major changes.  One RT, 2 DTs, I think we're set.

 

I'm serious.

536703[/snapback]

 

I can see Peters as a good LT in the future, though not for a couple more years. And does JP have a couple more years? Doubtful. It'd be much easier to just draft our future LT.

 

Gandy is a career backup at either G or T. Doesn't have great lateral movement, and commits way too many penalties for a veteran. He can hold his own against average opponents, but gets totally dominated by good ones. Starting guards are among the easiest positions to fill...if you're a halfway decent GM. It's time to raise the bar for this future OL.

 

I was excited about Preston earlier in the year, but if he can't beat out Anderson and Teague at this point, can he be ready by next season? I'd feel much better with a LeCharles Bentley or a 2nd round C than Preston...though I wouldn't be mortified if we stuck with this guy in 2006.

 

Teague is the main reason why McGahee is averaging less than 4 yds per carry. A significant percentage of 1st and 10's become 2nd and 8's/9's because of this one single player who simply doesn't have the power and leverage to handle your standard-sized NFL DT's. Like Gandy, he's a decent backup but an awful starter.

 

I don't yet have an opinion on CV's future. He's had an unusually terrible year, but injuries may have been the reason for this. Part of me wants to upgrade at RG, but the other part of me knows that there are only so many players you can cut before you have no choice but to expect another season of 4-12. Hey, let's assume for the moment that Big Vagina Williams would take a pay cut...anyone think moving BVW to starting RG would be a good solution?

[Tortured Soul]

In 46 years Ralph's Bills have accumulated 322 wins, 346 losses, and 8 ties.

If you remove the 4 SB years of 49 wins and 15 losses you're left with 42 years of 273 wins, 331 losses, and 8 ties.

 

Are these the numbers you'ld expect to see from an owner actively pursuing excellence?

 

Now make no mistake, those 4 SB runs were fantastic and may never be equaled, but 4 seasons out of 46 is the exception rather than the rule.

536810[/snapback]

If there are 32 owners that want to win - and I believe there are at least 28-30 - then there will be winners and losers regardless of effort.

 

We can't all be winners, but that doesn't mean we're not trying. Right?

[Dan III]

Yes, thank you Bob Dicesare for highlighting the failure of Bills drafting OLs in early rounds, especially when compared to Denver - which got their starting line from - 1st Rd, 4th Rd, 6th Rd, 7th Rd & UDFA. 

 

Good thing that Denver did as well with their 3rd Rd pick this year.

 

We now return you to your regularly scheduled rants.

536690[/snapback]

I posted this http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=34420&hl= a month ago..

 

Only one person attempted to answer my question... I'm not trying to defend TD's win-loss record. I'm just tired of people challenging TD's drafting, without doing their homework to criticize specific choices. Bob Dicesare is perfect example of a guy unwilling to do his homework.

[Guest BackInDaDay]

If there are 32 owners that want to win - and I believe there are at least 28-30 - then there will be winners and losers regardless of effort. 

 

We can't all be winners, but that doesn't mean we're not trying.  Right?

536970[/snapback]

 

Well, if Ralph's 'efforts' in building his successful business ventures were as unsuccessful as his 'efforts' in building a successful football franchise, we wouldn't be having this conversation because the man would have been broke by now.

 

Of course, he doesn't measure the success of this franchise in wins and losses.

It's measured in profits and losses, and by those standards, it's very successful.

[Tortured Soul]

Well, if Ralph's 'efforts' in building his successful business ventures were as unsuccessful as his 'efforts' in building a successful football franchise, we wouldn't be having this conversation because the man would have been broke by now.

 

Of course, he doesn't measure the success of this franchise in wins and losses.

It's measured in profits and losses, and by those standards, it's very successful.

537023[/snapback]

That's like saying if a kid gets and A in math, the only reason he gets a C in English is lack of effort.

 

In business, everyone can win. in fact, that's how economies grow. Competition is healthy. There are not defined winners and losers, as there are in football. And most of the other owners made their money, too, by being shrewd businessmen.

 

If he measured the success of this franchise by proifits, we wouldn't be having this debate, because they would be the Los Angeles Bills.

[Guest BackInDaDay]

If he measured the success of this franchise by proifits, we wouldn't be having this debate, because they would be the Los Angeles Bills.

537034[/snapback]

 

That's a misconception that has served Wilson well over the last 40 years.

I remember when he was threatening Gov. Rockefeller about moving the Bills to Seattle if the public didn't build him a new stadium.

 

The guys got a sweet thing going in Erie County.

His 20K investment has returned him a stake in a highly profitable, revenue-sharing sports business, his stadium and field house have been subsidized by local businesses and public funds, his team has a loyal fan base, his operating costs aren't as high as those of large-market franchises and his only competion for fan interest are the Sabres and UB football.

 

He would have been foolish to move, and he's no fool.