PJBrown Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 there has been 100% turnover from 2004..... LT Gandy replaces Jennings.....though JJ was good, he was hurt a lot and Gandy has quietly been solid LG - Tuten Reyes replaces Bennie Anderson/Lawrence Smith - 2 less penalties a game? C - Melvin Fowler replaces Trey Teague - though Teague didn't perform as poorly as some would think, Fowler is an upgrade IMO RG - Villarial picks up where he left off last year....though older, he is tough and his veteran leadership should have a positive impact on the younger players RT - Peters in his second year will outperform Mike Williams in any year My point: Our line just may night be a weak link this year...couple in a decent offense and playalling, they may even be good...I do like what I've seen from the starters so far this year..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift Sylvan Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 there has been 100% turnover from 2004..... LT Gandy replaces Jennings.....though JJ was good, he was hurt a lot and Gandy has quietly been solid LG - Tuten Reyes replaces Bennie Anderson/Lawrence Smith - 2 less penalties a game? C - Melvin Fowler replaces Trey Teague - though Teague didn't perform as poorly as some would think, Fowler is an upgrade IMO RG - Villarial picks up where he left off last year....though older, he is tough and his veteran leadership should have a positive impact on the younger players RT - Peters in his second year will outperform Mike Williams in any year My point: Our line just may night be a weak link this year...couple in a decent offense and playalling, they may even be good...I do like what I've seen from the starters so far this year..... 750863[/snapback] I miss Ross Tucker Besides aren't we the worst team in terms of talent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJBrown Posted August 24, 2006 Author Share Posted August 24, 2006 I miss Ross Tucker Besides aren't we the worst team in terms of talent? 750868[/snapback] Forgot Ross Tucker!...and Mike Pucillo... I do not believe we are anywhere near as bad or lacking talent as many here or the media (national) would lead you to believe.....watching the Cincinnati game I saw our first team O dominate the line of scrimmage and the D play pretty solidly, especially against the run...what hurt us were mistakes and I think we have the right coaching staff to correct that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift Sylvan Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Forgot Ross Tucker!...and Mike Pucillo... I do not believe we are anywhere near as bad or lacking talent as many here or the media (national) would lead you to believe.....watching the Cincinnati game I saw our first team O dominate the line of scrimmage and the D play pretty solidly, especially against the run...what hurt us were mistakes and I think we have the right coaching staff to correct that.... 750870[/snapback] I know I was just being sarcastic, my parents always encouraged me to do what I'm good at Seriously I think the line is quite improved, but I don't want to get my hopes up too high just in case someone gets injured. I also feel like JP is getting better protection as a result he will actually force ESPN to acknowledge that the city of Buffalo does exist. Oh and PAPAYA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 I thought that the starting unit did a pretty good job in the bengals game.....JP had plenty of time to throw the ball..... The thing is...this is a group that is going to get better over the course of the year.....they just need to get their time down when they get out and pull and move..... It is also a group that will not be out of gas in the 4th qtr..... I see us winning a lot of our games in the 4th qtr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eSJayDee Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 It's not that it hasn't been addressed, it's that it hasn't been SUCCESSFULLY addressed. We've had decent turnover, mostly in an attempt to improve it. (I'd be inclined that letting Jennings go was 'ignoring' the line, but I realize that it was a value decision AND that he is injury prone.) However, when you consider that our best linemen was an unsigned FA (at a position other than line at that) and that some are comparing him favorably to a 4th pick in the draft (who was a consensus pick that high), it only goes to show how futile & poor of a job we've done in trying to improve the line. (An aside, IMO MW was at one time playing very solidly but for whatever reason, most likely motivation, was unable to improve or even maintain that level.) I'm hopeful that we have indeed improved the line play. If we haven't, I think we are again destined to have one of worst offenses in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Agreed. This offensive line is a dam waiting to explode. While the starters are solid, if an injury were to happen, there is very little depth to be comfortable with. It's not that it hasn't been addressed, it's that it hasn't been SUCCESSFULLY addressed.We've had decent turnover, mostly in an attempt to improve it. (I'd be inclined that letting Jennings go was 'ignoring' the line, but I realize that it was a value decision AND that he is injury prone.) However, when you consider that our best linemen was an unsigned FA (at a position other than line at that) and that some are comparing him favorably to a 4th pick in the draft (who was a consensus pick that high), it only goes to show how futile & poor of a job we've done in trying to improve the line. (An aside, IMO MW was at one time playing very solidly but for whatever reason, most likely motivation, was unable to improve or even maintain that level.) I'm hopeful that we have indeed improved the line play. If we haven't, I think we are again destined to have one of worst offenses in the league. 750903[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mary owen Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 i can't see how most are already calling it a failure. Around draft time, the main reason was because we didn't address it with one (or all) of our 1st day picks or that we didn't spend a king's ransom on a "big money" FA. the best thing for any line is that they perform well TOGETHER and execute the plays that are in their offensive scheme. So with a new offense, how the f*ck does anyone know weather or not the line is successful or not......especially when they haven't played 1 game yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 i can't see how most are already calling it a failure. Around draft time, the main reason was because we didn't address it with one (or all) of our 1st day picks or that we didn't spend a king's ransom on a "big money" FA. the best thing for any line is that they perform well TOGETHER and execute the plays that are in their offensive scheme. So with a new offense, how the f*ck does anyone know weather or not the line is successful or not......especially when they haven't played 1 game yet. 750989[/snapback] Right - one of the biggest problems we have had is far too much of a revolving door at O line. No other group of guys in team sports needs continuity more. While I understand that we needed to make major changes after last year, I hope they will make an effort at least to keep these guys together and maybe only switch one guy every 2 years or so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJBrown Posted August 24, 2006 Author Share Posted August 24, 2006 Right - one of the biggest problems we have had is far too much of a revolving door at O line. No other group of guys in team sports needs continuity more. While I understand that we needed to make major changes after last year, I hope they will make an effort at least to keep these guys together and maybe only switch one guy every 2 years or so... 751014[/snapback] And I think we sgould wait and actually see how thy perform before we dismiss them as "sucking".....as far as depth/injuries go, the same can pretty much be said for any position on any team in the salary cap era.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Forgot Ross Tucker!...and Mike Pucillo... I do not believe we are anywhere near as bad or lacking talent as many here or the media (national) would lead you to believe.....watching the Cincinnati game I saw our first team O dominate the line of scrimmage and the D play pretty solidly, especially against the run...what hurt us were mistakes and I think we have the right coaching staff to correct that.... 750870[/snapback] Yeah. 9 sacks in 2 games isn't so bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Yeah. 9 sacks in games isn't so bad. Nine sacks from the starting O-line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJBrown Posted August 24, 2006 Author Share Posted August 24, 2006 Nine sacks from the starting O-line? 751066[/snapback] in pre-season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Nine sacks from the starting O-line? 751066[/snapback] 9 sacks in 2 games is something that shouldn't be happening MBD. If it continues, we will start to argue who is to blame.....JP or the OL, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 9 sacks in 2 games is something that shouldn't be happening MBD. If it continues, we will start to argue who is to blame.....JP or the OL, right? 751081[/snapback] but, what if the starting 5 gave up only 3 sacks in 2 games, and the other 6 came from 2nd and third stringers? Thats not the starting OL's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 but, what if the starting 5 gave up only 3 sacks in 2 games, and the other 6 came from 2nd and third stringers? Thats not the starting OL's fault. 751102[/snapback] No, but think about it. How long were the starters in? Hey, I realize how good Carolina is. I also think that this unit will be improved at OC and RT.....perhaps LG if we are lucky. I am hoping just like you that things will get better, but the huge sack numbers have to slow down at some point or the team will not be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 No, but think about it. How long were the starters in? Hey, I realize how good Carolina is. I also think that this unit will be improved at OC and RT.....perhaps LG if we are lucky. I am hoping just like you that things will get better, but the huge sack numbers have to slow down at some point or the team will not be good. 751107[/snapback] Its just tough to judge sacks in preseason, because there are so many personnell changes throughout the course of the game. But continuity along the line will go a long way to at least upgrading the line from terrible to ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ1 Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 I also feel like JP is getting better protection as a result he will actually force ESPN to acknowledge that the city of Buffalo does exist. Oh and PAPAYA 750871[/snapback] This is an extreme hope considering ESPN's dope-personailty-index. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 but, what if the starting 5 gave up only 3 sacks in 2 games, and the other 6 came from 2nd and third stringers? Thats not the starting OL's fault. 751102[/snapback] Even by that !@#$ed up reasoning, then consider at best they played 1/2 a game each game. Although we know it was less. That works out to 3 sacks a game which is 48 sacks on the year. Sorry by any calculation that's bad. Add to that, Cincys defense isn't one of the top 20 in the NFL doesn't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts