Pyrite Gal Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 netween himself and Thomas in the area of rushing skills to win the #2 RB job. Gates was quite impressive showing a nose for the endzone far above what was denonstrated by Thomas. Landing on his feet after getting helicoptered by a lower hit and still keeping his legs moving to back into the endzone and scrambling to successfully get a TD last week were simply great plays. As a runner though he did not show any of the breakaway ability one would expect from an RB starter, i think he clearly was a better rusher than Thomas showed this pre-season. However, though this will impress those who only think of the RB position as running for yards, it appears he did not show as much in the other essential jobs for an RB back-up and unless someone who attended more practices so they can provide info which was not apparent in the written descriptions, I will not be surprised to see Jauron opt for the vet player he knows over a talented youngster unless he demonstrated proficiency whicjh is difficult or impossble to see merely watching the pre-season games. I think Thomas showed some good production tomight as a check-dpwm option reciever getting pretty good gains on checkdown oasses from both Holcomb and JP. I think this checkdown pass will be a critical part of our offense this year as we attempt to pull off out version of the Rams style offense. On many pass plays when the QB does not get the isolation coverage he wants on our WRs so that he would be forced to throw into a cover 2 type D or when their slant or crossing patterns do not give the WRs the necessary separation, JP will be asked to turn to the RB working as a safety valve. McGahee has already sung the praises of being asked now to be more of an athlete than just a runner. Since our #2 RB will be asked to step in for WM to give him a blow or to fill in for him if he is hurt, it is going to be essemtial that our #2 RB shows the ability. Yhoufg Gates clearly was a more impressive rusher that Thomas in pre-season games, unless he showed some ability to be a big time contributor on check-downs, Jauron may well go with Thomas who demonstrated he can be a positive force on checkdowns. The other items which I found difficult to gauge from the pre-season games were: 1. How did Gates do on blitz pick-up. As a vet Thomas has demonstrated he can play this role such that he was once a quality starter. Did Gates provide ny demonstration he has mastered this job younger players usaully have difficulty getting down until they get some reps. 2. How did Gates do on ST. If we get lucky our back0up RB will only see limited time when WM is exhausted from making a long gain, This means unless the reserve RB shows good ST ability he would contribute nothing to the team. Particularly given the Bills emphasis on ST, Gates will need to show good ST ability in addition to his rushing talent to gain the #2 RB jpb or force the Bills to cut Williams instead of him. 3. The run blocking ability of the #2 RB will likely be a secondary if not a tertiary issue for the player chosen as FB runs will likely not be a big part of our offense. However. the end=a=round will apparently be a staple of our efforts to get Evans and the speedy WRs into the offense and make th DBs think and hesitate. The back-up RB will likely need to show some blocking ability or willingness and I do not know whether Gates has shown this ability. Gates seems like a better runner that Thomas right now and clearly has more long-term upside, but Gates has not shown himself to be such a great runner that Thomas may not beat him out for the #2 job unless the coaches have seen the above proficiencies in the Gates game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 Didn't Gates have a bum ankle or something, going into the cincy game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 I'm sorry. Do you ever make a post that doesn't require a scroll down to finish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffan00 Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 I'm sorry. Do you ever make a post that doesn't require a scroll down to finish? 758585[/snapback] I was thinking the same thing!!! LOL 6 mos. 1000+ posts...man can you say Carpal Tunnel??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 I'm sorry. Do you ever make a post that doesn't require a scroll down to finish? 758585[/snapback] You actually finished one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 You actually finished one? 758589[/snapback] Once or twice. I'm really not trying to be mean, it's just really hard to read that much in this kind of format. It stops being a conversation and turns into a soliloquy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 ...Yhoufg Gates...758379[/snapback] How 'bout that, he converted to Islam right in the middle of your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 Once or twice. I'm really not trying to be mean, it's just really hard to read that much in this kind of format. It stops being a conversation and turns into a soliloquy. 758592[/snapback] I wasn't trying to be mean either - I've honestly never been able to get through these massive missives, for reasons you've already cited! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 I'm sorry. Do you ever make a post that doesn't require a scroll down to finish? 758585[/snapback] maybe something along the lines of 'lol poop' would be more up your alley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 maybe something along the lines of 'lol poop' would be more up your alley. 758623[/snapback] No, not really. It's possible to make a point w/o filling up an entire 3 screen scroll fest. Observe. This isn't a blog, it's a message board, posts end up being more conversational in nature. If you have a point to make that's cool, but at least try to be concise about it. Over the past 1,000+ posts (550+ on this user name, 500+ on my old one) I have put up some ridiculously long LAMPs as well, but for the most part they're short and to the point. My comment was based upon my observation that nearly every post this person makes is of the ridiculously long variety. Personally, I would rather read 3 short to mid-length posts from the same person on the same topic, with additional comments offered in by others, than read one long post that takes up 3/4 of a page (not screen, page) that requires scrolling all over the place and clicking back and forth to follow the flow of the conversation. I'd rather have a discussion with someone re: their topic rather than listen to their entire POV all at once. When you talk to someone I assume you don't present your entire 20 minute thesis on every topic w/o allowing a response, right? I ask that you don't do it here either. It gets tedious. If you have to scroll your own text box to read your whole post before you submit it getting long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 BTW... lol poop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 Once or twice. I'm really not trying to be mean, it's just really hard to read that much in this kind of format. It stops being a conversation and turns into a soliloquy. 758592[/snapback] To his credit, he has repeatedly said he writes as he thinks things through and that he apologizes if the length of his rambles are excessive, but more to the point, he has admitted many times that he does not care if you read the whole thing...or even at all. He may not be for everyone, but I dig the fact that he doesn't give a crap what people think...and he means it. You rarely, if ever, see him taking swipes at people for taking swipes at him. He leaves that stuff to us pros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffan00 Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 No, not really. It's possible to make a point w/o filling up an entire 3 screen scroll fest. Observe. This isn't a blog, it's a message board, posts end up being more conversational in nature. If you have a point to make that's cool, but at least try to be concise about it. Over the past 1,000+ posts (550+ on this user name, 500+ on my old one) I have put up some ridiculously long LAMPs as well, but for the most part they're short and to the point. My comment was based upon my observation that nearly every post this person makes is of the ridiculously long variety. Personally, I would rather read 3 short to mid-length posts from the same person on the same topic, with additional comments offered in by others, than read one long post that takes up 3/4 of a page (not screen, page) that requires scrolling all over the place and clicking back and forth to follow the flow of the conversation. I'd rather have a discussion with someone re: their topic rather than listen to their entire POV all at once. When you talk to someone I assume you don't present your entire 20 minute thesis on every topic w/o allowing a response, right? I ask that you don't do it here either. It gets tedious. If you have to scroll your own text box to read your whole post before you submit it getting long. 758642[/snapback] Agreed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 This thread stands as an exception. Many folks complain about a lengthy post with a word or two, after quoting the whole da*n thing in their response... "Ask not for whom the wheel scrolls, it scrolls for thee". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted September 1, 2006 Author Share Posted September 1, 2006 To his credit, he has repeatedly said he writes as he thinks things through and that he apologizes if the length of his rambles are excessive, but more to the point, he has admitted many times that he does not care if you read the whole thing...or even at all. He may not be for everyone, but I dig the fact that he doesn't give a crap what people think...and he means it. You rarely, if ever, see him taking swipes at people for taking swipes at him. He leaves that stuff to us pros. 758668[/snapback] Many thanks as that is basically what I am doing. My apologies to those who do not have the personal discipline to not waste their precious time slogging through the overly verbose posts and my thank you to those who do find something of value or amusement within the muck and are nice enough to take the time to respond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nostradamus Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 I'm sorry. Do you ever make a post that doesn't require a scroll down to finish? 758585[/snapback] I'm sure a full page of reading really challenges your mental capablities. But let me pose a question. Who do we want more of on this board? People who provide thoughtful insight on the Bills, or people of limited intellect aka morons, whose sole purpose is to insult and demean others. Well, we already have enough of the latter, so I'm happy when someone like Pyrite Gal posts. Thanks Pyrite Gal!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 I think Thomas wins the job. A)Passing game asset B) Was a shoestring away from 4 open field runs this preseason. Even if he has lost a step, he puts himself in the right place to have a chance to break one. C)More meat in bad weather. He's done it for Chicago which plays in similar conditions. If he outplays Gates in a dome, imagine what 3 years of 1000+yds experience will do for him when it is 20 and snowing at the Ralph. Shaud actually looked quick against the 3rd team. I thought he would have been gone, but Tasker made a good point about him being the only real change up back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Long Beach Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 I agree with you, In my eyes he hasn't quite done enough to seperate himself. I'm rooting for him, but... I think that he has more potential, but the game is still about right here, right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 How 'bout that, he converted to Islam right in the middle of your post. 758605[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trip Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 I think Thomas wins the job. A)Passing game asset B) Was a shoestring away from 4 open field runs this preseason. Even if he has lost a step, he puts himself in the right place to have a chance to break one. C)More meat in bad weather. He's done it for Chicago which plays in similar conditions. If he outplays Gates in a dome, imagine what 3 years of 1000+yds experience will do for him when it is 20 and snowing at the Ralph. Shaud actually looked quick against the 3rd team. I thought he would have been gone, but Tasker made a good point about him being the only real change up back. 758737[/snapback] I think so, too and I didn't believe it when he was signed. He doesn't look like he's lost a step to me. In fact, he looks fast again compared to last year with the Cowboys when I thought he was done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts