How I would approach the 2006 offseason

[AKC]

How about out of shape slobs such as Anderson and Williams fading as the game wears on? Or perhaps an old, injured Villarial not being able to last until the end?

592677[/snapback]

 

Conditioning is far more crucial to the guys on the other side of the line, but it can play a part. Ask yourself this question when assessing how much emphasis to put on it regarding the '06 Bills:

 

How much better is Benny Anderson in the first quarter than in the last?

[AKC]

You bring up an excellent point.  While I agree it could be the sideline coaching, it could also be the Bills conditioning program or it could be a couple of weak links on the line that don't bring their best  for four quarters of play.

592679[/snapback]

 

Among the limited body of "Truths" in the NFL game are these:

 

 

If with regularity your defense gives up progressively more running yardage each quarter, you've underinvested in your DLine and specifically at DT.

 

If with regularity your offensive production goes down each quarter, someone needs to have a come top Jesus with your OC (or whoever is developing strategy and calling plays).

[Bill from NYC]

Conditioning is far more crucial to the guys on the other side of the line, but it can play a part. Ask yourself this question when assessing how much emphasis to put on it regarding the '06 Bills:

 

How much better is Benny Anderson in the first quarter than in the last?

592683[/snapback]

 

I agree in most cases that conditioning does matter more on the defensive side in terms of line play. It simply comes down to which team is able to dictate to the other in terms of running plays in most cases.

 

The thing is, Anderson and Williams at times seemed barely able to get out of their stance as the games wore on, thus they were beaten on pass protection. Now, throw in a weak Teague, a rookie Peters, and an injured Villarial and you have the Bills season in a nutshell.

 

AKC, this cannot go on. A few years ago, we had Bryce, Bruce, Hansen, Ted, and every other top notch defender one could think of, but our problems were the same, no? I think that both of us know what happened to this team in the last few years. TD chose to build this team around the likes of Losman, Everett and Parrish.

 

Things are bleak, but I will never give up. Again, NOW is the time to turn things around.

 

GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JinVA]

Among the limited body of "Truths" in the NFL game are these:

If with regularity your defense gives up progressively more running yardage each quarter, you've underinvested in your DLine and specifically at DT.

 

If with regularity your offensive production goes down each quarter, someone needs to have a come top Jesus with your OC (or whoever is developing strategy and calling plays).

592692[/snapback]

You were talking about o-line production not O unit production. I just don't understand how bad playcalling makes the o-line less effective down the stretch.

[The Dean]

You were talking about o-line production not O unit production.  I just don't understand how bad playcalling makes the o-line less effective down the stretch.

592703[/snapback]

 

 

Well, AKC will do a better job than I at answering this, but I need to procrastinate just a little more.

 

One thing that makes a differnce down the stretch is how much run vs. pass blocking the O-line has been doing. When the team is running, the O-line gets to beat the snot out of the D-line. They (O-line) are the agressors and the d-line the defenders). By the 4th quarter, if the team has been pounding the ball, the d-line is beaten up and the o-line is running downhill.

 

It helps the backs as well, as most backs need reps. They start to see and feel where the holes are and what was a 1 or 2 yard gain in the first quarter is a 4 or 8 yard gain in the fourth quarter.

 

OK...I'll try to work again and look forward to a much more complete explanation from AKC and others.

[JinVA]

Well, AKC will do a better job than I at answering this, but I need to procrastinate just a little more.

 

One thing that makes a differnce down the stretch is how much run vs. pass blocking the O-line has been doing.  When the team is running, the O-line gets to beat the snot out of the D-line.  They (O-line) are the agressors and the d-line the defenders).  By the 4th quarter, if the team has been pounding the ball, the d-line is beaten up and the o-line is running downhill.

 

It helps the backs as well, as most backs need reps.  They start to see and feel where the holes are and what was a 1 or 2 yard gain in the first quarter is a 4 or 8 yard gain in the fourth quarter.

 

OK...I'll try to work again and look forward to a much more complete explanation from AKC and others.

592715[/snapback]

That makes alot sense actually. I've often heard people talk about this but never really understood why and never bothered to ask. Thanks

[Simon]

Pickett has surely made a strong statistical showing in the middle of that line, but do you have no concerns that over the course of his career the Rams have moved from a middle of the league rush D steadily down into the toilet?

I didn't realize that but honestly it doesn't bother me much as I'm not real big on stastical analysis in football, particularly at the DT position. I just have a hard time extrapolating a team performance into an evaluation of a single player.

 

Look at it this way- how could some awful OLine unit open up games dominating their opponents, only to get measurably less effective as the game goes on?

I think a lot of it had to do with our OC maybe being one of those guys who's a good coach 6 days a week, kinda like Cowher who he last worked for. He's solid in the filmroom and knows what he's doing in a set piece battle, but when things become fluid he just couldn't keep up.

 

How much better is Benny Anderson in the first quarter than in the last?

How about out of shape slobs such as Anderson and Williams fading as the game wears on? Or perhaps an old, injured Villarial not being able to last until the end?

I thought Bennie Anderson was the biggest liability to this offense at any time in the game. The guy killed more drives with whiffs and penalties than anybody since Jamie Nails.

And while I agree with Bill that Vilarial was never right after opening the season in the hospital, I have a hard time pinning much of our troubles on WIlliams since he only played in a handful of games.

 

Anderson and Williams at times seemed barely able to get out of their stance as the games wore on, thus they were beaten on pass protection. Now, throw in a weak Teague, a rookie Peters, and an injured Villarial and you have the Bills season in a nutshell.

AKC, this cannot go on.

I agree that the Bills need to get better up front on offense, but they have a few solid players right now and I do not want to see them focus on that unit to the exclusion of other areas.

I liked what I saw from Gandy, I think Peters is a legitimate NFL Tackle right now, I like Vilarial if he can get healthy and I liked what I saw from Preston earlier before he hit the rookie wall. I'm even willing to give BigMike one more year to show his mettle so that if we do cut him we don't take such a big cap hit.

If they will give the bucks to Bentley to anchor at center and use just one first day pick on an OLinemen, I think they'll be OK up front.

I'm a lot more concerned about the swinging gate that is currently the interior of our defensive line. imo, that needs a lot more attention than anything else right now.

Cya

[AKC]

Well, AKC will do a better job than I at answering this, but I need to procrastinate just a little more.

 

One thing that makes a differnce down the stretch is how much run vs. pass blocking the O-line has been doing.  When the team is running, the O-line gets to beat the snot out of the D-line.  They (O-line) are the agressors and the d-line the defenders).  By the 4th quarter, if the team has been pounding the ball, the d-line is beaten up and the o-line is running downhill.

 

It helps the backs as well, as most backs need reps.  They start to see and feel where the holes are and what was a 1 or 2 yard gain in the first quarter is a 4 or 8 yard gain in the fourth quarter.

 

OK...I'll try to work again and look forward to a much more complete explanation from AKC and others.

592715[/snapback]

 

You'd of course get the vast majority of Olinemen in the league to agree with you that they'd rather be run blocking all game long for those very reasons- you're on offense instead of defense and defense in most cases works harder. There's exceptions, Jonas Jennings for instance who barely tolerates run blocking but will give you all he can in Pass Pro.

 

That said, one place where "less demanding to play offense" doesn't hold up is in pass blocking- even on "defense" while protecting a QB the Olineman still less exertion than the DLineman simply because the DLineman has to travel more distance to his goal and if the play is drawn up and executed correctly find a way around at least one body trying to stop him. So even when the D is pass rushing and playing "offense" they still require more stamina than their opponent.

 

Proof of this is that you've never seen any fool coach by design running an offensive line rotation, and yet any coach not running a defensive line rotation would be a fool of equal stature.

 

BTW- I'm jumping in the car for Mammoth in an hour- if you're in SF and get an itch to watch the big game with us give me a head's up, we've got extra rooms.

[AKC]

I agree that the Bills need to get better up front on offense, but they have a few solid players right now and I do not want to see them focus on that unit to the exclusion of other areas.

 

I'm a lot more concerned about the swinging gate that is currently the interior of our defensive line. imo, that needs a lot more attention than anything else right now.

Cya

592737[/snapback]

 

You've got my vote as guest manager for the offseason.

 

BTW- I am beginning to wonder if Chris V will ever play another full 16-game season?

[Dawgg]

I live in SF but I'm going to Detroit for the big game!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

BTW- I'm jumping in the car for Mammoth in an hour- if you're in SF and get an itch to watch the big game with us give me a head's up, we've got extra rooms.

592941[/snapback]

[The Dean]

You'd of course get the vast majority of Olinemen in the league to agree with you that they'd rather be run blocking all game long for those very reasons- you're on offense instead of defense and defense in most cases works harder. There's exceptions, Jonas Jennings for instance who barely tolerates run blocking but will give you all he can in Pass Pro.

 

That said, one place where "less demanding to play offense" doesn't hold up is in pass blocking- even on "defense" while protecting a QB the Olineman still less exertion than the DLineman simply because the DLineman has to travel more distance to his goal and if the play is drawn up and executed correctly find a way around at least one body trying to stop him. So even when the D is pass rushing and playing "offense" they still require more stamina than their opponent.

 

Proof of this is that you've never seen any fool coach by design running an offensive line rotation, and yet any coach not running a defensive line rotation would be a fool of equal stature.

 

BTW- I'm jumping in the car for Mammoth in an hour- if you're in SF and get an itch to watch the big game with us give me a head's up, we've got extra rooms.

592941[/snapback]

 

 

Thanks for the invite...but, i won't make it this weekend. i should be coming down for fun in the not too distant. I'll let ya know

[Orton's Arm]

I think this would put us in position to challenge for the AFCEast this year with a flexible roster that has some depth to it and a nice combination of youth and experience.

It's true your plan would make the Bills competitive in 2006. But it wouldn't win them the Super Bowl.

 

The most direct path to achieving a Super Bowl ring is to achieve greatness in three areas: OL, DL, QB. The Bills have drafted only one proven starter in any of these three areas, and Aaron Schobel isn't above average for a starter.

 

- Trade away everyone over 30: Moulds, Spikes, Fletcher, Holcomb, Adams, even Vincent and Milloy if someone would give me picks for them. Rebuilding teams shouldn't refuse to trade away old guys.

 

- If Cutler is better than any of the QBs we'd have a shot at next year, I say draft him. The Bills haven't found a proven successor to Kelly, and the franchise can't win any Super Bowls until we do.

 

- Go OL with picks 2, 3 and 3.

 

- Use the picks for Moulds, Fletcher, etc. on a TE, and on defense.

 

- Use most 2nd day 2006 picks on defense.

 

- Use the 2007 draft on defense.

 

- Franchise Clements, then either sign him or trade him away.

 

By 2007, the Bills would be strong at QB (either Losman or Cutler), OL, TE, WR, RB, and most defensive positions. Whatever weaknesses the defense had at that time could be addressed via free agency. It would probably take another year for this team to gel, but the Bills would be good in 2007, and potential Super Bowl champions in 2008.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

It's true your plan would make the Bills competitive in 2006. But it wouldn't win them the Super Bowl.

 

The most direct path to achieving a Super Bowl ring is to achieve greatness in three areas: OL, DL, QB. The Bills have drafted only one proven starter in any of these three areas, and Aaron Schobel isn't above average for a starter.

 

- Trade away everyone over 30: Moulds, Spikes, Fletcher, Holcomb, Adams, even Vincent and Milloy if someone would give me picks for them. Rebuilding teams shouldn't refuse to trade away old guys.

 

- If Cutler is better than any of the QBs we'd have a shot at next year, I say draft him. The Bills haven't found a proven successor to Kelly, and the franchise can't win any Super Bowls until we do.

 

- Go OL with picks 2, 3 and 3.

 

- Use the picks for Moulds, Fletcher, etc. on a TE, and on defense.

 

- Use most 2nd day 2006 picks on defense.

 

- Use the 2007 draft on defense.

 

- Franchise Clements, then either sign him or trade him away.

 

By 2007, the Bills would be strong at QB (either Losman or Cutler), OL, TE, WR, RB, and most defensive positions. Whatever weaknesses the defense had at that time could be addressed via free agency. It would probably take another year for this team to gel, but the Bills would be good in 2007, and potential Super Bowl champions in 2008.

593248[/snapback]

 

I do not see why anyone would have any desire to draft Cutler or any other QB. This would kill the Bills for not simply a year if we were lucky, but more likely for several years.

 

If folks are looking for an example from the recent past of how this would impact the team then look no further than the RJ/DF scenario.

 

When the Bills signed RJ with a big bonus they essentially gave him the starting job sooner or later (sooner in this case as he was a vet) or they were committing to having Ralph pay millions for a guy to sit on the bench.

 

By signing Cutler to the big bucks of the #8 draft slot, in essence we are committing to have him develop as quickly as he can for a cap manageable contract initially but commiting to starting him later or to have Ralph pay him big bucks to sit on the bench.

 

By drafting him an making this commitment, we are declaring either the end of the JP effort and we cut him and Ralph pays him millions to play elsewhere, OR we try to make it work with him and the result is definitely going to be that Ralph pays one of these two players millions to sit and watch.

 

When DF hit his incentives, it simply put the Bills into a position where for the 1999 season under the contracts we had agreed to with RJ and DF we had over $10 million allocated from our salary cap to the starting QB position (I do not remember the exact #s but 5+ in salary and prorated bonus to RJ, and 6+ in achieved 1998 incentives allocated to the 99 cap + these achieved incentives being rolled over into his salary.

 

We were forced to sign DF to a long-term deal which prorated as much of his salary as possible into bonus. Even with this more manageable situation, we were still forced to cut higher priced vets who might have stayed in their lanes avoiding the Home-Run Throw-up against TN, but instead we had to use rookies on ST who TN burned when they ran straight to the ball instead of staying in their lanes.

 

By drafting Cutler (Young, Keinart or any QB) we would lock two 1st round QB salaries into our cap, and one of them would be guaranteed to be useless on the field.

 

Drafting a QB with our 1st round pick is simply not an option if we want to win the game.

[JDG]

- If Cutler is better than any of the QBs we'd have a shot at next year, I say draft him. The Bills haven't found a proven successor to Kelly, and the franchise can't win any Super Bowls until we do.

 

Why are you so convinced we couldn't be 3-13 next year? With Losman as the starter anything is possible.....

 

JDG

[RuntheDamnBall]

It's true your plan would make the Bills competitive in 2006. But it wouldn't win them the Super Bowl.

 

The most direct path to achieving a Super Bowl ring is to achieve greatness in three areas: OL, DL, QB. The Bills have drafted only one proven starter in any of these three areas, and Aaron Schobel isn't above average for a starter.

 

- Trade away everyone over 30: Moulds, Spikes, Fletcher, Holcomb, Adams, even Vincent and Milloy if someone would give me picks for them. Rebuilding teams shouldn't refuse to trade away old guys.

 

- If Cutler is better than any of the QBs we'd have a shot at next year, I say draft him. The Bills haven't found a proven successor to Kelly, and the franchise can't win any Super Bowls until we do.

 

- Go OL with picks 2, 3 and 3.

 

- Use the picks for Moulds, Fletcher, etc. on a TE, and on defense.

 

- Use most 2nd day 2006 picks on defense.

 

- Use the 2007 draft on defense.

 

- Franchise Clements, then either sign him or trade him away.

 

By 2007, the Bills would be strong at QB (either Losman or Cutler), OL, TE, WR, RB, and most defensive positions. Whatever weaknesses the defense had at that time could be addressed via free agency. It would probably take another year for this team to gel, but the Bills would be good in 2007, and potential Super Bowl champions in 2008.

593248[/snapback]

You thought losing Pat Williams was rough on this defense? Imagine the demoralizing effect of that loss and multiply it by 100 and you'd get a rough idea of what losing Spikes and Fletcher would mean to the Bills' D. Particularly without reasonable replacements in line. If we ditch everyone over 30, we've got dead cap space up the wazoo. Last year would look like a parade compared to next.

[Orton's Arm]

You thought losing Pat Williams was rough on this defense?  Imagine the demoralizing effect of that loss and multiply it by 100 and you'd get a rough idea of what losing Spikes and Fletcher would mean to the Bills' D.  Particularly without reasonable replacements in line.  If we ditch everyone over 30, we've got dead cap space up the wazoo.  Last year would look like a parade compared to next.

593292[/snapback]

Good. I'd welcome a ton of dead cap space next year, because it would free us up cap-wise for 2007. Any time you have dead cap space, it's like paying off credit card debt.

 

I agree this would absolutely cripple our defense for 2006; helping the Bills draft near the very top of the 2007 draft. The point is to win the Super Bowl in 2008, so those draft picks we'd would have gotten in 2006 for trading away our veteran core would help the 2008 team a lot more than a bunch of defenders at the ends of their careers.

[Orton's Arm]

Drafting a QB with our 1st round pick is simply not an option if we want to win the game.

593274[/snapback]

If the Bills don't draft Cutler, one of two things will happen:

- Losman will work out

- Ralph Wilson will die without a Super Bowl ring

 

The Bills could draft Cutler, and make him spend most or all of his rookie year on the bench. If Losman works out, the Bills would have one QB too many on the roster. As for cap space: it's usually better to spend it on your own draft picks than on trying to buy a team in free agency. The Bills would have enough cap space to keep every young player worth keeping.

 

In any case, if Losman plays especially well next year, the Bills could always trade Cutler away. Would they get back what they invested in him? No, but they'd get back something substantial.

 

Now if Losman didn't work out, Cutler would have had a full year to study the playbook, learn in practice, learn in preseason, and otherwise prepare himself. Maybe he'd even have gotten some playing time his rookie year. Cutler could be the starter in his second year, and hopefully get things figured out by his third.

[JDG]

You thought losing Pat Williams was rough on this defense?  Imagine the demoralizing effect of that loss and multiply it by 100 and you'd get a rough idea of what losing Spikes and Fletcher would mean to the Bills' D.  Particularly without reasonable replacements in line.  If we ditch everyone over 30, we've got dead cap space up the wazoo.  Last year would look like a parade compared to next.

593292[/snapback]

 

Agreed, cutting Spikes and Fletcher and everyone else over 30 has to be one of the dumbest ideas proposed by anyone on the Board ever....

 

JDG

[stuckincincy]

Now if Losman didn't work out, Cutler would have had a full year to study the playbook, learn in practice, learn in preseason, and otherwise prepare himself. Maybe he'd even have gotten some playing time his rookie year. Cutler could be the starter in his second year, and hopefully get things figured out by his third.

593426[/snapback]

 

Well, only one game, I know - but in the Senior Bowl playing against a defense hobbled by "no-blitz-me" rules, and also having the advantage of the snap count and wr's knowing where they are going and db's having no idea where they are going...Cutsie-Boy looked pretty pedestrian to me....

[Orton's Arm]

Agreed, cutting Spikes and Fletcher and everyone else over 30 has to be one of the dumbest ideas proposed by anyone on the Board ever....

 

JDG

593456[/snapback]

Yours is a ridiculous statement. Or do you think the Bills will win the Super Bowl this year or next, when players like Spikes, Fletcher, etc. still have something to offer? Take off the rose colored glasses, pal.

 

The Bills are a rebuilding team. Maybe with Spikes, Fletcher, etc., they'll go 6-10 for the next two years, instead of 3-13. Who cares? I want a Super Bowl ring, and the soonest the Bills can get one is 2007 - 2008. By then the aging veterans I want traded away will have little to offer. But the draft picks we would have gotten from trading those guys away--well, by 2007, those picks would really start to do some good!