Frez Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Was the addition of Melvin Flowler enough to improve our offensive line?
Mark VI Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 We have a draft coming up in 2 weeks and you believe we're done now ? This draft has several massive Guards who can step in and start immediately. Look for us to select one or two. The interior of the line was the biggest problem last season. Peters is raw but showed me excellent run blocking technique, which is paramount for a RT. Gandy did much better than people gave him credit for at LT. He has freakishly long arms and can steer the rush wide, which is doing his job. I never bought into the " I hate Gandy " dreck. Fowler is an upgrade over Teague. Teague was just horrid and lacked any functional strength to stop anyone from running over him at will. The Bills need better Guard play and I'll wait to see what they do up until camp before pressing the panic button.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 The thing about gandy is he's decent at best. Not a world beater and not horrible. He's definitly not a top tier lt and wouldn't start for most teams in the league. We'd be best served getting a guy who can fill that position once and for all. Improving one spot on the line can truly improve the entire line. I'd like gandy better as a guard or backup then as our starting lt. However I can deal with him there if major overhauls happen at the guard spots. Davin Joseph and Charles Spencer would be huge steps in the right direction.
Mark VI Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 The thing about gandy is he's decent at best. Not a world beater and not horrible. He's definitly not a top tier lt and wouldn't start for most teams in the league. We'd be best served getting a guy who can fill that position once and for all. Improving one spot on the line can truly improve the entire line. I'd like gandy better as a guard or backup then as our starting lt. However I can deal with him there if major overhauls happen at the guard spots. Davin Joseph and Charles Spencer would be huge steps in the right direction. 661749[/snapback] I'd never pass on a LT like Ferguson or say a Whitworth, if we traded down in Round 1 or by some miracle, was still there in Round 2. What you state is dead on but I'm thinking we can't solve it all in one off-season. Guard is the immediate need.
DeLuca1967 Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 The Bills don't have enough picks to address all their needs. It would have been great if they spent a little more attention on the O-line but you can't change that now. There are some OK lineman in the draft this year but the only problem is other teams need lineman to. The chances the Bills could draft a lineman who would even see the field this season is slim. The Bills seem happy whith the 'throw as much crap up against the wall and see what sticks' way of building a line. I just hope they have enough that sticks to give JP a little time in the pocket.
stinky finger Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Was the addition of Melvin Flowler enough to improve our offensive line? 661745[/snapback] Absolutely. If we draft another goshdarn OL, I'll be ripsh--.
bluv Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 The thing about gandy is he's decent at best. Not a world beater and not horrible. He's definitly not a top tier lt and wouldn't start for most teams in the league. We'd be best served getting a guy who can fill that position once and for all. Improving one spot on the line can truly improve the entire line. I'd like gandy better as a guard or backup then as our starting lt. However I can deal with him there if major overhauls happen at the guard spots. Davin Joseph and Charles Spencer would be huge steps in the right direction. 661749[/snapback] Now while Gandy definitely is not a Pro Bowl LT, but based on his play last year he would start for a lot of teams as most teams don't have a star franchise LT; most have a serviceable guy who at the very least can get the job done and Gandy can do that. You only really notice them when they are playing poorly. While I've never seen him make exceptional plays, I haven't seen him struggle much either. Remember Jonas Jennings; for the longest time we felt we needed an upgrade at LT for he wasn't spectacular and never noticed his play until he got hurt (which was often) and until he finally left and then we realized that you know what he wasn't that bad after all! I'm sure the Texans would have been glad to have Gandy the past few seasons. Overall, as was stated before, the interior of our line was our wekaness. If we make an upgrade their and get those guys to at a minmum be serviceable players then we can make some noise with the skill players and speed that we have. Look at the Pats; they never had a world beater OL like the Hogs were in the late 80's early 90s but they were servicable and this approach by keeping guys who aren't neccessarily the best but serviceable and affordable is the key to success in today's NFL. In this day and age you can't keep a superstar at every position so at nonglamorous positions such as OL and DT unless there is a clear weakness or an overpriced player why is there such a big push for a change to bring in an unknown component? I say fix the obvious weaknesses first and then worry about fine tuning IF you are confident that the serviceable component you are replacing is a definite upgrade; not just by name only. While we can use an upgrade at LT, DT & gauard are our greatest need followed by safety. I can see it now: we draft a tackle at #8, he struggles and the fans call him a bust after one season!
obie_wan Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 While we can use an upgrade at LT, DT & gauard are our greatest need followed by safety. I can see it now: we draft a tackle at #8, he struggles and the fans call him a bust after one season! 661780[/snapback] Expecting any T other than Brick to start at LT in 2006 is a complete fantasy.
Beerball Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 What you state is dead on but I'm thinking we can't solve it all in one off-season. 661752[/snapback] Nail meet hammer.
Ozymandius Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 I think the Bills will invest two draft picks into the line, one of them very high.
bluv Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Expecting any T other than Brick to start at LT in 2006 is a complete fantasy. 661785[/snapback] Exactly. And since their aren't any free-agents who are afforadable and a definite upgrade ON THE FIELD not by name, going into 2006 with Gnady as ourstarting LT is the least of my worries; I'm more worried about who is starting next to him!
OnTheRocks Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 maybe Marv can convince Jim Ritcher and Kent Hull to come out of retirement. i am almost be willing to bet they would be an immediate upgrade.
krazykat Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Was the addition of Melvin Flowler enough to improve our offensive line? 661745[/snapback] We'll find out when we face NE on the road. I'm sure that the 2nd half tape will give the other teams that we play the pattern for beating us. Right now all we've done is replace Teague with Fowler and maybe Anderson with Gibson or one of last season's rookies. Sound "Marvy?"
OnTheRocks Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 We'll find out when we face NE on the road. I'm sure that the 2nd half tape will give the other teams that we play the pattern for beating us. Right now all we've done is replace Teague with Fowler and maybe Anderson with Gibson or one of last season's rookies. Sound "Marvy?" 661869[/snapback] just a prediction, but i doubt Gibson even lasts until July 1st.
cooldudeav Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 The line has improved but is still horrible. Without another two upgrades on the OL at least, JP (or whover has the ball) will have hardly enough time to look up.
beerme1 Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Was the addition of Melvin Flowler enough to improve our offensive line? 661745[/snapback] Yes. Absolutely. remeber how bad they were?
Bob in STL Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Was the addition of Melvin Flowler enough to improve our offensive line? 661745[/snapback] The draft is the key. Both guard positions are worrisome. There are 2 or 3 OG's in the draft that will push to start on our team right now. If we can land Reyes that will improve the line and Preston may develop. Fowler should be an upgrade over Teague. Gandy at LT is just adequate. We will draft his replacement somewhere in the first 3 rounds but its doubtful a rookie will start the season at LT (assuming Brick is not there at 8; Justice may be able to start as a rookie?). To upgrade the talent on OL, we should draft two offensive lineman on day 1 of the draft.
Orton's Arm Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Overall, as was stated before, the interior of our line was our wekaness. If we make an upgrade their and get those guys to at a minmum be serviceable players then we can make some noise with the skill players and speed that we have. Look at the Pats; they never had a world beater OL like the Hogs were in the late 80's early 90s but they were servicable and this approach by keeping guys who aren't neccessarily the best but serviceable and affordable is the key to success in today's NFL. . . . I can see it now: we draft a tackle at #8, he struggles and the fans call him a bust after one season! 661780[/snapback] JP's going into his third year with the Bills, but hey, who's counting? As for the other part of your post, the Patriots had a much better line than some may realize. In their Super Bowl against the Panthers, the Patriots' offensive line dominated the line of scrimmage from the very first snap. This, despite the fact the Panthers' defensive line was felt to be the strongest part of their very strong defense. Despite this, the Patriots barely escaped with a win. Take away this dominant Patriots' OL performance, and replace it with a Patriots OL that's merely "serviceable and affordable," and the Panthers get the Lombardi trophy at the end of the game. I don't want to see the Bills try to get by with a merely mediocre line. If they want to get the running game going like it should be, and if they want to give guys like Evans time to get open deep, the Bills will need an offensive line that's every bit as dominant as they can make it. The Bills have tried to take shortcuts with the offensive line for a very long time, but they've never built a successful offense while doing so.
colin Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 i think gandy is a better LT than jonas jennings (particularly since jonas can't block well from the IR). seeing that jonas got a 13 buck bonus and about 6 per, if we want a real improvement over gandy we will prolly have to spend a top 10 pick AND be lucky, or drop 40+ bucks on a tackle and hope he stays healthy. i think getting the best value guys (trading down and grabbing 2 or 3 top interior guys on day one for example) and getting depth is the best chance we have at a good line and can be done in the draft. if peters is ready to move to LT (or will be in a year) drafting a solid RT and some interior guys might be the best idea.
#1TN Bills Fan Posted April 14, 2006 Posted April 14, 2006 Was the addition of Melvin Flowler enough to improve our offensive line? 661745[/snapback] No, it wasn't. However, I do believe that we will fix this problem in the upcoming draft. We have ten picks with which to fix the O-line, D-line, and add depth at corner, LB, and SS. We will probably draft at least two interior linemen on the first day. Who knows, if we are able to trade away our 8th overall and pick within the top 15, we would then be able to add a couple of quality selections on day one.
(2).thumb.jpeg.6e78fe3142ec9e6bfedbf027610db26f.jpeg)
Recommended Posts