The Dean Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I didn't even see x.benedict's comment earlier....how funny lol 737769[/snapback] I can't believe no one acknowleged it for that long. This kind of thing needs to be encouraged! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 With haggan getting reps with the first team in spikes absence, no way he's getting cut anytime soon. I think watson is fairly secure behind fletcher as well. The next LB to go would be this digiorgio guy, and then ezekiel. People like liam because he beat the stojan out of a kicker, not because he has any skill. 737582[/snapback] My thoughts exactly. Haggan is actually a great match for a Tampa 2 Sammy, and Ezekiel will be bagging my groceries at Wegmans this September. Here's what the LB roster should look like: WOLB1: Crowell WOLB2: Ellison MLB1: Fletcher-Baker MLB2: Watson SOLB1: Spikes SOLB2: Haggan 7th Reserve LB: Stamer One of our strongest units.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I can't believe no one acknowleged it for that long. This kind of thing needs to be encouraged! 737775[/snapback] LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbonehawaii Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Good for Posey, no doubt, but I was hoping he could have provided a dangerous pass rush. 737248[/snapback] Yeah. Me too, but that didn't ever happen with him here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 True (see Troy Vincent 2006). 737381[/snapback] Eddie Robinson was not coming off a year where he tied for the team lead both in IBTs and funbles recovered. Eddie Robinson was not in a situation where he was a forner pro bowler as a cover guy who had correctly moved himself to a position with less need for speed and who had 2 rookie safety players and a rookies CB on the team who could benefit from an older hand. Eddie Robinson was also not so respected by his peers that they voted him the NFLPA Prez and were the team to cut him with any sense that he had something to give to this team because of his on-field production in turnovers the year before and because the defensive scheme switch is making his role fit his play style better the team MIGHT be judged willing to hurt their football play to prove some point of doctrine. They both are the same as they both are well inside the backsides of their careers, but to ignore the other realities of the situation would simply be to ignore realities regarding football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Eddie Robinson was not coming off a year where he tied for the team lead both in IBTs and funbles recovered. Eddie Robinson was not in a situation where he was a forner pro bowler as a cover guy who had correctly moved himself to a position with less need for speed and who had 2 rookie safety players and a rookies CB on the team who could benefit from an older hand. Eddie Robinson was also not so respected by his peers that they voted him the NFLPA Prez and were the team to cut him with any sense that he had something to give to this team because of his on-field production in turnovers the year before and because the defensive scheme switch is making his role fit his play style better the team MIGHT be judged willing to hurt their football play to prove some point of doctrine. They both are the same as they both are well inside the backsides of their careers, but to ignore the other realities of the situation would simply be to ignore realities regarding football. 737862[/snapback] My, aren't we defensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I hope folks are not surprised to see that though I defended Posey against attacks on his play in 2003 and 2004, I think this cut of him at this point in the season is a great sign for the Bills! 1. As K F&B points out probably the most important thing about the Bills feeling comfortable with cutting him right now is the implication that the Bills seem to feel pretty comfortable that TKO will resume play as a starter. If not, then I doubt the Bills would cut a former starter LB so quickly. Those who observed that an LB with a diagnosis of a torn achilles could well end up with his career being over as has happened and should at least expect it will be a while before he resumes reasonable play were correct. However, what appears to likely be the case here is that while TKO hoing on IR was merited because he needed to go under the knife, it appears once the docs got in there they found that the injury likely was not one of the cases of a torn tendon that knocks a player out of the game. IF this is the case, TKO should be back at good speed soon and this appears to be the case from the decision to cut Posey, This is not for sure but the tea leaves look good. 2. While there is a reasonable chance that the TKO injury is still so severe that it may take some time for him to come back or that he might re-injure himself either rehabbing on the field or slipping in the shower, this cut means the Bills have a good deal of confidence in Crowell, Haggan and the rest of LB crew. 3. TKO did not live up to the expectations of the pundits or many fans which stemmed from his 8 sacks in Tex or the ardor that saw TD sign him so quickly as the FA period began, However, this mistake probably says AS MUCH about poor assessment by pundits and many fans as it does about TD's assessment. A poster above blithely asks for someone to point out even one play where Posey played well. Though focusing on individual plays is not the best way to measure a player's performance this is actually fairly easily done, In 2003 against Tex, it was a Posey sack of Carr which injured him badly enough it not only knocked him out of the game but injured him for several games. In 2004 he got a sack on a 3rd down play in a win against Cleveland and also tackled stud rusher Seattle;s Alexander for a loss of yards on a play. A better measure of his performance is one which looks at whether he played a critical role on a productive D and was he so weak that OCs picked on him producing big gains and TDs for the opponents. The fact is that Posey started 16 games in all three years he was here and logged a bunch of minutes in productive Ds in 03 and 04. I'm surprised that anyone who watched the games with any modicum of are could not recall any plays he did well as even though it seems he was quickly removed from the bb.com site, I can remember the three indiviudual plays above which reflect the role he played in a productive D. In fact the stats can be wrong but the burden of proof now switches to those who want to claim that our 03 and 04 D performance was actually bad or that the good (but not great as we missed the playoffs) D performance was in spite of Posey. This is what I asked for from the complainers about Posey who said he turned the wrong way or was out of position. I still have read no one siting any anecdotes from 03 and 04 where players ran through his tackles for big gains or TDs and players he likely was covering caught passes on him Posey was never a great player, but he did the job for us in 03 and 04 and actually though the D was bad last year and Posey was a part of this poor play, it is arguable that TD got our money's worth out of him in the two years he joined with TKO and Fletcher to form one of the best LB groups in the NFL. So overall, I think Posey played well enough his first year here and was pretty good his second year. However, he seemed to have hit the wall of his productivity in his third year of play for us. The really great news is that we seem to be solid enough at LB to let this former NFL starter go early in camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 3. TKO did not live up to the expectations of the pundits or many fans which stemmed from his 8 sacks in Tex or the ardor that saw TD sign him so quickly as the FA period began, However, this mistake probably says AS MUCH about poor assessment by pundits and many fans as it does about TD's assessment. A poster above blithely asks for someone to point out even one play where Posey played well. Though focusing on individual plays is not the best way to measure a player's performance this is actually fairly easily done, 737874[/snapback] I think you mean "Posey" here. No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Anyone know what his cap hit is? 737284[/snapback] His 'dead cap' hit is $437,500 The total 'cap savings' is $1,750,000....oh goody, more money we can't spend this season. Why are so many down on Posey? As far as I've ever heard, he was a well respected & honorable player. So he didn't play as good as we were hoping....Why do people have to throw schit? Why can't he be wished well in his further career instead of given the metaphoric boot? If he was an A-Hole, I'd understand but.... The mentality baffles me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 My, aren't we defensive. 737870[/snapback] Nah! Tke Bills are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I think you mean "Posey" here. No? 737879[/snapback] Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I hope folks are not surprised to see that though I defended Posey against attacks on his play in 2003 and 2004, I think this cut of him at this point in the season is a great sign for the Bills! A better measure of his performance is one which looks at whether he played a critical role on a productive D and was he so weak that OCs picked on him producing big gains and TDs for the opponents. The fact is that Posey started 16 games in all three years he was here and logged a bunch of minutes in productive Ds in 03 and 04. I'm surprised that anyone who watched the games with any modicum of are could not recall any plays he did well as even though it seems he was quickly removed from the bb.com site, I can remember the three indiviudual plays above which reflect the role he played in a productive D. In fact the stats can be wrong but the burden of proof now switches to those who want to claim that our 03 and 04 D performance was actually bad or that the good (but not great as we missed the playoffs) D performance was in spite of Posey. This is what I asked for from the complainers about Posey who said he turned the wrong way or was out of position. I still have read no one siting any anecdotes from 03 and 04 where players ran through his tackles for big gains or TDs and players he likely was covering caught passes on him. 737874[/snapback] Count me among those who view the Bills' 03-04 defenses as "paper tigers." The Bills always seemed to beat up on the poor QBs and offenses, and fall apart when facing the "real" teams. The 04 season ending debacle against Pittsburgh's backups is the poster child for what sort of a defense this was. Therefore, I question the assessment that Posey contributed as part of a "productive" defense. The bottom line is that many of us saw Posey as an invisible man. I recall games in which I never heard his name mentioned. Has that ever been true for Spikes or Fletcher? I'm not going to attack Posey and I wish him well, but three memorable plays over three years is hardly evidence of productivity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Yep 737886[/snapback] There it is. The all-time shortest FFS, Dik Smub, whoever post. ONE WORD. *applauds* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 There it is. The all-time shortest FFS, Dik Smub, whoever post. ONE WORD. *applauds* 737943[/snapback] Not that I'm having a go at PGs typically long posts but..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Eddie Robinson was not coming off a year where he tied for the team lead both in IBTs and funbles recovered. Eddie Robinson was not in a situation where he was a forner pro bowler as a cover guy who had correctly moved himself to a position with less need for speed and who had 2 rookie safety players and a rookies CB on the team who could benefit from an older hand. Eddie Robinson was also not so respected by his peers that they voted him the NFLPA Prez and were the team to cut him with any sense that he had something to give to this team because of his on-field production in turnovers the year before and because the defensive scheme switch is making his role fit his play style better the team MIGHT be judged willing to hurt their football play to prove some point of doctrine. They both are the same as they both are well inside the backsides of their careers, but to ignore the other realities of the situation would simply be to ignore realities regarding football. 737862[/snapback] I have stated this even before the start of camp. If some of their young safeties look good early on in preseason (Baker/Simpson), that Troy Vincent should & will get cut. I dont know if you watched any games last year Pyrat Gal, but my recollection last year of Troy Vincent was getting dragged all over the field by any number of running backs in the league & always arriving 3 seconds too late to break up a play. But he is a good union rep, so he has that going for him. Im sure that aspect will get us over the hump against belijerk & the boys September 10th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts