O-Line (would you be happy if they matched the

[MrLocke]

I was thinking about the o-line in 2004 and was quite happy with how they played for most of that season. They really started to come together once Ross Tucker was inserted into the starting line up.

 

Willis rushed for about 1100 yards starting in only 11 games. Drew was sacked the fewest time in his career.

 

The starters were; Jennings, Tucker, Teague, Villarriall and Williams. Do the players on the Bills on the o-line now possess significantly less talent than this group? Would you be happy if they matched the level of performance for the final 11 games of 2004? Is it doable with the talent the Bills have now?

[Dibs]

I was thinking about the o-line in 2004 and was quite happy with how they played for most of that season. They really started to come together once Ross Tucker was inserted into the starting line up.

 

Willis rushed for about 1100 yards starting in only 11 games. Drew was sacked the fewest time in his career.

 

The starters were; Jennings, Tucker, Teague, Villarriall and Williams. Do the players on the Bills on the o-line now possess significantly less talent than this group? Would you be happy if they matched the level of performance for the final 11 games of 2004? Is it doable with the talent the Bills have now?

699713[/snapback]

Hell yes.

This shows to me the importance of team chemistry/confidence/motivation/drive.

Arguments over how talented each player may or may not be is a bit irrelevant. How often is it that players(esp. O-linemen) change teams & perform at a much reduced level for their new team.

If the group we have meshes well, are coached well & play with confidence & drive, I see no reason why they cannot produce at a quality level.

[C.Biscuit97]

I was thinking about the o-line in 2004 and was quite happy with how they played for most of that season. They really started to come together once Ross Tucker was inserted into the starting line up.

 

Willis rushed for about 1100 yards starting in only 11 games. Drew was sacked the fewest time in his career.

 

The starters were; Jennings, Tucker, Teague, Villarriall and Williams. Do the players on the Bills on the o-line now possess significantly less talent than this group? Would you be happy if they matched the level of performance for the final 11 games of 2004? Is it doable with the talent the Bills have now?

699713[/snapback]

 

In terms of the numbers, I would definitely take that. however, I would be disappointed if they weren't better. The 2004 benefited from a weak schedule (including the defense challenge NFC West). Looking at it now, I expect Reyes and Fowler to be upgrades over Tucker and Teague. As for our tackles, Jennings is the better player than Gandy and Williams (despite our contempt) in 2004 is better than a developing Peters. However given the ages and the hope this line can stay together, it could gel into a very solid unit.

[C.Biscuit97]

Hell yes.

This shows to me the importance of team chemistry/confidence/motivation/drive.

Arguments over how talented each player may or may not be is a bit irrelevant.  How often is it that players(esp. O-linemen) change teams & perform at a much reduced level for their new team.

If the group we have meshes well, are coached well & play with confidence & drive, I see no reason why they cannot produce at a quality level.

699723[/snapback]

 

Dibs, I honestly really enjoy reading your posts. You have a very good grasp of football knowledge. Just wondering how you became a Bills fan down under? Keep up the good work.

[Dibs]

Dibs, I honestly really enjoy reading your posts.  You have a very good grasp of football knowledge.  Just wondering how you became a Bills fan down under?  Keep up the good work. 

699736[/snapback]

Gosh, thanks

I became a Bills fan because the first NFL game I ever saw was the Bills Superbowl loss to the Giants. At the start of the game, I picked one team(the Bills obviously) to root for. I picked the Bills over the Giants for 2 reasons...

1. The giants have a boring logo.

2. My buddy who introduced me to football(a Niners fan) told me the Bills had this RB who was really fun to watch. Not surprisingly, TT is still one of my favourite players.

Needless to say I fell in love with the game(mainly the definitive tactics & precision of it) & have followed as close as I can from afar ever since.

 

Thanks for being interested....it's fun to share.

[Rico]

Yes, I would be happy if they matched the 2004 OL performance in 2006.... but I think they'll remind us more of the 2001 OL, especially if there are any kind of injuries. The coaching may be a lot better now, but the talent level is pretty comparable IMO.

[Scraps]

I was thinking about the o-line in 2004 and was quite happy with how they played for most of that season. They really started to come together once Ross Tucker was inserted into the starting line up.

 

Willis rushed for about 1100 yards starting in only 11 games. Drew was sacked the fewest time in his career.

 

The starters were; Jennings, Tucker, Teague, Villarriall and Williams. Do the players on the Bills on the o-line now possess significantly less talent than this group? Would you be happy if they matched the level of performance for the final 11 games of 2004? Is it doable with the talent the Bills have now?

699713[/snapback]

 

No. My recollection of that line was they let to much pressure up the middle.

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

12 sacks allowed in the last 9 games over a 16 game season only equating to 21 sacks allowed which would be 22 less sacks then they gave up last season. Hell yes I'd be happy if they matched that kind of play. It would also mean less excuses for JP Losman either he'll get better or he wont. It could also mean we generally have a higher focus on offense of a run themed offense with low risks passes taken chances when the time calls for it, and not out of a forced situation, as was the case last season.

[Bill from NYC]

Would you be happy if they matched the level of performance for the final 11 games of 2004? Is it doable with the talent the Bills have now?

699713[/snapback]

 

Very good question. You are talking about the part of 04 after Henry was benched.

That part of 04 was probably when MW (now in Tampa ) peaked. Villlarial was 2 years younger and healthy for much of this time. Jennings was playing for a new contract and more than held his own, and Tucker did a reasonable job. So......

 

Jennings vs. Gandy: Some would disagree, but I give a clear edge to Jennings.

 

Tucker vs. ?????: Unknown

 

Teague vs. ?????: Unknown, but I expect an upgrade over Teague.

 

Villarial 04 vs. Villarial 06: Villy 04 gets the edge. I hope that a better player steps up and takes over the RG spot.

 

Williams vs. Peters: Edge to Peters on passing downs, but again, 04 was as good as it got for Big Mike, and he had some good games wrt run blocking.

 

So as to not avoid your question, I would be pleasantly surprised but not elated if they could play at the post Henry level of 04.

As a group, our OL is still a vagabond bunch, sans any major talent (other than the promise Peters shows). We do have young players, but they were shunned by other teams in the early rounds of the draft. Maybe there is a good OG in the bunch, and maybe Reyes is better than Carolina thinks.

 

We can only hope.

[Pyrite Gal]

I'd be disappointed if they had the exact same season as the initial situation was so bad (centering around the near meltdown of Williams) that this unit simply needs to show more stability than that crew.

 

The good news is that on the face of it the likely 06 starter look like better players almost across the board than the 2004 crew.

 

Peters v. MW- Peters has actually more potential to be a very good RT than MW turned out to have. This ain't a done deal at all as potential simply means you have not done anything yet. However, I like theunprove peters more than what MW proved to be.

 

Villarial v. Villarial- I think this is actually the weakest comparative position we have as Villarial was entering the backside of his career when we got him and losing starts and games to injuries which would have been nicks he played through before is what he is. The real question I think is how good will Preston be when he has to start for him once again.

 

 

Fowler v. Teague- I can see why the Bills feel thi s is an upgrade as Fowler was an impressive and highly draftable center in college who has come to the pros and while he has not immediately forced his way into the starting line-up has proved to be a quite competent fill in for consistent Pro Bowler Matt Birk of the Vikes when Birk was hirt last year. Fowler was not given a contract by the Vikes in 06 not because he was bad, but because the market was going to give this FA starter money and the Vikes were only gonna give starter $ at C to Birk. Fowler is no dead lock certainty to be a great starter forever at C for the Bills and almost certainly will not become the next Kent Hull. However, it is a fairly good bet that the Bills have upgraded at C where Teague proved to be a competent though not great LT who became a competent and not great C.

 

Fowler will get the chance to make his mark at C and may well do so.

 

Reyes v, eventually Tucker in 04 and now Anderson- The Bills have not found a competent LG despite years of trying different players there. JMac made a point of saying he brought a bunch of successful experience as an OL position coach to the position (most recently building an SB berth achieving unit for NYG based upon FA acquisitions like Glenn Parker at LT and Dusty Ziegler at C) but that he was no miracle worker. Both of these claims could be seen with JMac's work with the Bills as he A: Made a nice assessment and acquisition of Chris Villarial to replace our loss of our only OL vet Ruben Brown and stabilize things as best h could around inherited bust Mike Williams, B: He did a nice carrot/stick reclamation job on Williams whp was busy melting down after the death of the Grammy that raised him, it was too late to save this failed choice but JMac squeezed what little there was to be gotten out of him, C: Has found and prmoted a real diamond in the rough overseeing the switch of UDFA Peters from TE to RT where he seemingly has nailed down the starter role, D: Made a nice acquisition on the cheap of Gandy who was adequate (no more and no less) at LT last year.

 

However, JMac looks like he struck out pretty badly with acquistion of high priced FA Bennoe Anderson at LG last year. It would not be so bad if Anderson had been someone gotten from the crapshoot known as the draft because a player can be very good in college and simply suck as a pro (MW, Ryan Leaf, etc.) it happens. However, Anderson was simply a bad choice by us to invest major $ in. Even worse, he failed last year because his attention simply seemed to wander at times and he was inconsistent. its odd since JMac had already used a Ravens trained player plucked from their PS, Lawrence Smith to be inadequate at LG, but still an upgrade over the inherited Sully and Pacillo. In 2004 he eventually stabilized the LG slot using Ryan Tucker, but an injury led to us cutting him lose in favor of Anderson (at least their is the solace that Tucker still has not recovered from the injury as it would be really bad if we chucked him for Anderson and Anderson imploded while Tucker proved to be a capable starter elsewhere.

 

At any rate, we now Reyes who did a good job at RG last year for Carolina and whose MO looks similar to Fowler in that he was not offered big FA $ by Carolina not due to incompetence on his part (if they had a problem they were ready to go with 05 first day pick Evan Mathis as soon as he was ready, but Reyes was playing well at RG and the O was productive so why switch). Reyes has played LG as a pro before and he looks like a definite upgrade in performance here. In addition though JMac made a point of mentioning other starters last year by name and that we looked forward to imprivement this year in the games of folks like Peters and Gandy he did not do so at all with Anderson. Yet, we have already invested bonus money in him that is spent and he will get a chance to right his play for the Bills this pre-season before we throw him out of the airlock completely.

 

Gandy v. Jennings- I'm not sure why fiolks seem to be foaming at the mouth that TD made such an error in failing to resign JJ, because in significant part if was JJ's injury issues during the 04 season (and record during his career) that led me to wish im well with a new team but urge him not to let the door hit him on the way out.

 

I felt Jennings proved to be a far more competent LT than I suspected he would be when the Bills gave him that role in 02. However, he is only second to RJ in my mind of deserving the lable injury prone. There is simply no way I thought he merited what the market was likely to provide him as an FA, and there is no way the Bills should have done anything but give a lowball offer to JJ and hope that the bullrush which led to overpayments of many LTs at the level of a Luke Peitigout had loced in enough teams to dry of the market. Instead, SF had finally settled their owner dispute and entered the marketplace looking for their LT of the future and gave a huge deal to JJ. it was no schock whatsoever to me that he basically ended on the IR in the first games last year and their is a well worn track already in the Bay Area running from JJs house to the hospital and to the bank to count his money.

 

In 4 years as a Bill JJ never played a full season at LT which doing this at least once in his four years was essential to me to merit a big contract. His last year saw him miss two starts, but when you figure he also ended up sitting early with injuries in the two games prior to missing those starts, we actually saw JJ miss time in 4 out of 16 games that season. Not only did the market require you to pay big bucks to JJ (thanks to SF foolishness), but yiu needed to also pay for a Marcus Price back-up who is going to see serious time at LT in a quarter of the games that season.

 

JJ's injuries would not have been problematic if it was always one particular injury which can be fixed surgically or needs to be watched and assessed. however, this week it is a leg injury, the next week a concussion, the third week some other nick that limits his play. I have no problem with folks faulting TD for the OL as it sucked. however, it seems more football intelligent to fault him for drafting a player not worthy of more than his rookie contract at LT rather than blame him for notresigning or extending JJ, because JJ simply was not worth the money.

 

Gandy on the other hand also surprised me that this athlete who was cut by Chicago could actually be an adequate LT for us. Yet adequate he was (no more than that but also no less than last year) and that pedestrian level was about the best OL play by a Bill last year. it was the first time in his career he started all 16 games as well, but the fact he had not done so does not mean you give him a try at LT if you think he can do it, it simply means you do not give him the bog buck contract SF gave to JJ because you hope he can stay healthy when he never has before.

 

As long as Gandy stays healthy and is adequate and has a low-budget contract he is fine by me on our OL..

 

I would say at 4 of 5 positions the quality and potential of the starters is better than the reality of what the Bills had in '04. the question to me is whether the back-ups are adequate as none of our starters are a certainty to be excellent (or more than adequate) or healhy for 16 games.

 

Right now I would say I feel good about Preston as a back-up to Villarial (the most likely Bill on the OL to go down with injury) and hopeful about Anderson who is not starter quality, but if we already have paid him the bonus he may not be a bad back-up at either guard spot. Aaron Gibon is an intruguing back-up at RT but the jury is still way out on whether this inially well-regarded big guy can be a player. The rest of the back-ups like Morgan, Thomas, Merz, Jerman, or McFarland strike me as real problems if they have to play and folks like Butler, Pennington,Merz are at least a year away from contributing.

[Astrobot]

1740 words, 7321 characters, 12.0 Flesch-Kincaid grade level.

[Dibs]

1740 words, 7321 characters, 12.0 Flesch-Kincaid grade level.

699884[/snapback]

I hope you didn't sit there & count the characters one by one.

[Sisyphean Bills]

I hope you didn't sit there & count the characters one by one. 

700326[/snapback]

 

Microsoft Word.

[Fan in Chicago]

Microsoft Word.

700579[/snapback]

Is that a comment on your math skills or your laziness ?