Call me crazy...

[Billsguy]

What a joke. Both CAR and CIN didn't even have all their top guys in there and they still ripped that O line apart.

 

Football gods help us, this line is lousy and you're dreaming if you think they can sustain top D guys a whole season.

 

I really hope I'm wrong, but the negativity is just flowing outta this team to make me think otherwise.

751054[/snapback]

 

 

The optimists like to think the OL whose best player was an undrafted free agent TE is going to be fine.

 

The center is a castoff from the Vikes, two are castoffs from the Bears, and the other is a castoff from Carolina.

 

Now the optimists will argue with the terminology "castoff", but the facts, as I see them, are that this line is no more than a patchwork of average lineman.

 

Now if the optimists are satisfied with an average patchwork line, who am I to argue?

 

I disagree, but the record will speak for itself. The optimists predicted the Bills would be 10-6 almost every year for the last few years.

 

I predict a best case scenario for this year would be 7 wins and a worst case scenario of 3 wins.

 

Looks like another 5 win season. I try to look at the facts as they are and not how I wish them to be.

 

I wish the Bills were a contender, but the realist in me says, "no way."

[Bill from NYC]

You can only make a judgement based on who was playing the game....based on that the O line held up pretty well against cinci

751088[/snapback]

 

Well, there WERE those sacks and fumbles....

 

John, you know as well as or more than anybody that a weak OL simply leaves a team exposed. Watch KC this year. They lost a great LT in Roaf, another starter is hurt, and Shields is how old?

Trent Greene is going to look like less of a cagey veteran and more like an old man with a suspect arm. Let's also see how Johnson runs. Oh, and their buffoon coach who more resembles a carnival barker isn't going to help.

I am starting to believe more in the Bills defense. The offense is a huge question mark, starting up front.

[stuckincincy]

You can only make a judgement based on who was playing the game....based on that the O line held up pretty well against cinci

751088[/snapback]

 

I tend toward what others have mentioned...an improvement over last year, but concerns about depth. And as somebody noted previously, depth under FA is a problem for most clubs.

 

I'm hopeful that the good playcalling so far will continue and be a big plus.

[TDRupp]

On the offenses identity;

 

We’re trying to establish the run game. I think the offensive line is doing a great job with that. There’s so much more confidence. They are so close and so tight; you can’t go in between those guys because they know what they want to do. It’s very exciting and very encouraging and its time for everyone else to start stepping up their games. That whole group alone leads the offense and gets this team going. We know who are line is and we know who they’re going to be. We know how good they are and how good they can be. They have set the tone for the whole camp and they’ve been the one constant group and they continue to get better everyday.

 

-JP Losman

750688[/snapback]

 

Hello, Crazy. Good to hear all is well and that your mistakes from the Cincy game are correctable. Please correct them before the NE and Mia games this Sept and maybe won't won't see #16 playing in October. Good luck.

 

Signed,

Not so crazy

[Swift Sylvan]

Could we be similar to the 2005 Bears?

 

And I don't mean the 5-11 version

[Pyrite Gal]

The optimists like to think the OL whose best player was an undrafted free agent TE is going to be fine.

 

The center is a castoff from the Vikes, two are castoffs from the Bears, and the other is a castoff from Carolina.

 

Now the optimists will argue with the terminology "castoff", but the facts, as I see them, are that this line is no more than a patchwork of average lineman.

 

Now if the optimists are satisfied with an average patchwork line, who am I to argue?

 

I disagree, but the record will speak for itself. The optimists predicted the Bills would be 10-6 almost every year for the last few years. 

 

I predict a best case scenario for this year would be 7 wins and a worst case scenario of 3 wins.

 

Looks like another 5 win season.  I try to look at the facts as they are and not how I wish them to be.

 

I wish the Bills were a contender, but the realist in me says, "no way."

751089[/snapback]

 

Definitely looking for this OL to do well is optimistic. However, what really strikes me as amusing is that any fans choose not to be optimistic as they reasonably can be at this point when every team is undefeated and tied for first.

 

Its a free country and everyone is entitle to do whatever floats their boat. However, what amuses me is that some fans seem to get the most enjoyment out of espousing a pessimistic rational view rather than an optimistic rational view.

 

The attitude one chooses to take is rational but it tends to say a lot more about the attitude of the poster than it does about the prospects of the team.

 

I think the key question here is what is rational and is it reasonable at all to hope for a good performance from this OL.

 

I think yes and easily so based upon the facts we know and real world occurences during the 2005 season. Specifically regarding player assessment:

 

LT- Gandy actually surprised many including this watcher with a performance on a horrible O which to most observers was at least adequate. Fell free to disagree, but I hope one has some other observations or stats to support this claim.

 

Will Gandy get better?

 

Cannot say one way or the other with any certainty, but given his age still heading toward his atletic peak, him having position coaching which has experienced success, and the impact confidence has on play it certainly is reasonable to expect him to have at least an adequate season and really to get better.

 

LG- I think it is superficial to merely look at Reyes being castoff (which is true) but then to simply dismiss the reasons why he was castoff and not resigned. Even an advocate for a view that he is done would have to admit that there is a difference between being castoff because you suck as a player and not being resigned because there is a younger and/or better player on the roster and as an FA the team is not gonna give you much a contract to resign or give you much of a chance to start.

 

Reyes was "castoff" by Carolina if you like, but the facts simply seem to be that they would have been happy to give new RG Mathis significant time last year and even have gone to him as a starter, but Reyes simply performed to well in 05 and the team had good chemistry so they started and played Reyes 16 games. Anyone who make a claim that his opinion is based on the |facts" provided by reality cannot simply ignore the facts of a players' 05 performance in assessing how he will be in 06.

 

Actually, there are more real reasons why one would question what the impact of Reyes will be for the Bills. He was an RG and not an LG as we are going to use him this year. If he was so solid last year, why did the Bills get him relatively cheaply this year.

 

However, pessimists do not choose to raise these points as their superficial ciews do not even recognize these legit questions and actually there are reasonable (but not proven) good answers for both of these concerns as he has started at LG several times as an NFL player and it also appears he did have opportunities to go elsewhere for more bucks, but he judged the Bills situation as his best chance to start and star as an NFL player who is still young enough to cash in with a big contract.

 

We;ll see.

 

C- Likewise with Fowler, one could truthfully pessimistically emphasize him not being resigned and thus "cast-off" by the Bikes. But this view is superficial enough to be laughable to anyone who really follows football. The Vikes had a choice betwenn multi-time Pro Bowler Matt Birk whom Fowler was signed to fill in for as Nirk was IRed last year.

 

It would simply be dumb to pay Fowler the started money which the market would give this natural center in 06 to sit on the bench and back-up Birk. To declare all cast-offs the same would be to judge Vike C Cory Withrow whom Fowler beat out last year and who was cut by the Vikes as being exactly the same as Fowler. One would have to ignore the reality of anedotal testimoney of Culpepper;s olat improving immediately with Fowler replacing Withrow and ignore the Vikes reeling off a 6 game winning streak with Fowler who end coincided with him going out,

 

Again their our legit questions to raise for the more rational observer, but again there are legit answers so the real answer is we will see but there are even better reasons to look for good things from Fowler than the good things to say about Reyes.

 

RG- Villarial is the weak link here in the improved player theory, but actually his likely replacement Preston fits the better player theory well if CV simply sucks.

 

RT- Peters is well known to be well regarded and he also fits the better player than MW theory quite well.

 

It is true that the production was not great against either the Carolina or Bengals starting unit. Yet, an optimist can legitimately hope that the lack of chemistry so far for this new OL combination playing in a new Bills O is at the heart of these problems.

 

One can legitimately choose also to be pessimistic about this, but again I think it says as much or more about the poster as it does about the team.

[Oneonta Buffalo Fan]

On the offenses identity;

 

We’re trying to establish the run game. I think the offensive line is doing a great job with that. There’s so much more confidence. They are so close and so tight; you can’t go in between those guys because they know what they want to do. It’s very exciting and very encouraging and its time for everyone else to start stepping up their games. That whole group alone leads the offense and gets this team going. We know who are line is and we know who they’re going to be. We know how good they are and how good they can be. They have set the tone for the whole camp and they’ve been the one constant group and they continue to get better everyday.

 

-JP Losman

750688[/snapback]

 

You're not crazy at all. Honestly people, This o-line is 5x better than they were last year.

[Billsguy]

The attitude one chooses to take is rational but it tends to say a lot more about the attitude of the poster than it does about the prospects of the team.

 

I think the key question here is what is rational and is it reasonable at all to hope for a good performance from this OL.

 

751320[/snapback]

 

My brain hurts after trudging through all the bad grammar, bad punctuation, bad spelling and tortured logic in that post.

 

After watching the Bills for 45 years, I know a patchwork OL when I see one. This line is looking very mediocre. I don't think any of them (with Peters as the only longshot possibility) has any aspirations of ever making the Pro Bowl.

 

This is a realistic point of view. Don't question my loyalty as a Bills fan if I choose to look at the team for what it is at present.

 

 

What is rational and reasonable about hoping for a good performance from the OL? Hope is based on faith and belief. There is nothing rational or logical about it.

 

I hope the Bills do well, but based on the current situation I am not foolish enough to ignore the many deficiencies that exist.

 

You can ignore them if you want.

[Dibs]

My brain hurts after trudging through all the bad grammar, bad punctuation, bad spelling and tortured logic in that post.

 

After watching the Bills for 45 years, I know a patchwork OL when I see one. This line is looking very mediocre. I don't think any of them (with Peters as the only longshot possibility) has any aspirations of ever making the Pro Bowl.

 

This is a realistic point of view. Don't question my loyalty as a Bills fan if I choose to look at the team for what it is at present.

What is rational and reasonable about hoping for a good performance from the OL? Hope is based on faith and belief. There is nothing rational or logical about it. 

 

I hope the Bills do well, but based on the current situation I am not foolish enough to ignore the many deficiencies that exist.

 

You can ignore them if you want.

751324[/snapback]

To me, what you wrote(in bold) is precisely the optimistic/pessimistic 'problem'.

To an optimist....

a mediocre or average OL this season is a huge upgrade over last season. It is a reason to feel good about which direction the line & team in general is taking. It is just cause for feeling we should be improved over last year and with a bit of luck might be greatly improved.

To a pessimist....

a mediocre or average OL means that it was not adequately addressed in the off-season. It is a reason to feel bad about the priorities of Bills management. It means we(in all likelihood) will not be contenders this year & unless it is address next off-season, we will likely be in the same position as we are now in 2007.

 

I understand where PG is coming from re: pessimism.

It's one thing to logically conclude that we won't be very good this year. To me that is totally understandable.

It's another thing entirely to discount & ignore the concept that we just might be improved. To me....I cannot understand how a fan can dogmatically ignore positive possibilities.

[Dibs]

......what happens if Mike Gandy or Fowler goes down.

750887[/snapback]

Ummm, I didn't know they were that way inclined.

 

....not that there's anything wrong with that.....

[generaLee83]

I think our starting 5 up front will be fine. 

 

If one of them goes down, that's where I get worried.

750707[/snapback]

 

 

I couldn't agree more. Starting five seem decent, backups worry the sh-t outta me.

[Pyrite Gal]

My brain hurts after trudging through all the bad grammar, bad punctuation, bad spelling and tortured logic in that post.

 

After watching the Bills for 45 years, I know a patchwork OL when I see one. This line is looking very mediocre. I don't think any of them (with Peters as the only longshot possibility) has any aspirations of ever making the Pro Bowl.

 

This is a realistic point of view. Don't question my loyalty as a Bills fan if I choose to look at the team for what it is at present.

What is rational and reasonable about hoping for a good performance from the OL? Hope is based on faith and belief. There is nothing rational or logical about it. 

 

I hope the Bills do well, but based on the current situation I am not foolish enough to ignore the many deficiencies that exist.

 

You can ignore them if you want.

751324[/snapback]

 

Dibs has trudged through my garbage (my apologies, I tend to be less clear and accurate when I am multi-taking and listening to a conference call while composing- I am sort of lik Trey Teague who hike well, OR line call well. OR block well, but he had real trouble doing all three at the same time) to get what I was trying to say.

 

I was not saying at all that you or anyone else who judges our OL to be inadeqate I do actually) or crap (I don't actually as these two are different things) is not a Bills fan or a bad fan. These wo judgments are rational.

 

What I was saying is that it says something about a fan whether they choose to enjoy the game by being optimistic about the rational possibilities or pessimistic about the rational possibilities.

 

In addition, to totally discount either the possibility they will be crappy performers (it can happen and did last year, OR to totally discount the possibilty they can be adequate (I think they were in 2004 with the win streak, good blocking for WM, and better blocking for DB than in 2003) would be irrational in either case.

 

For someone to recognize that Reyes and Fowler showed some very good things in 2005 and claim they are simply castoffs is irrational.