Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 26, 2006 Author Posted December 26, 2006 Nice to see that you're back to your bitter and broken, pessimistic self. I've been worried about you and your starry-eyed almost optimism the last few weeks. Welcome back to the board. Merry Christmas. 877475[/snapback] What in that post was pessimistic? IT WAS REALISM. Apparently, you've had your head up your ass for 7 years. This team hasn't had interior dominance for well, forever. Until it does, it will persist in the 6-10 to 8-8 range. That's a fact you can take to the bank, hero. Mery Christmas.
ExWNYer Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 This is just more of the same. Sure, they're better than last year, but they're still looking down the barrel of 7-9. Xmas wish list: 1) PLEASE get rid of the cover-2. Use a scheme that acutally, you know, STOPS someone. 2) Use FA dollars to shore up the lines. Draft speed at WR. 3) Give Jauron tape of Jimmy Johnson, Bill Parcells, and Bill Belichick. Explain to him that THIS is how to coach. It's hard to be or not to be disappointed. They're better, yes. But they're still just NOT good enough. I stand by my prediction of 8-8 next year, and MAYBE a run in 2008. Maybe. If we're extremely lucky in drafting/FA. Maybe. 877368[/snapback] What in that post was pessimistic? IT WAS REALISM. Apparently, you've had your head up your ass for 7 years. This team hasn't had interior dominance for well, forever. Until it does, it will persist in the 6-10 to 8-8 range. That's a fact you can take to the bank, hero. Mery Christmas. 878000[/snapback] Yeah, there's nothing pessimistic there. No free agent moves yet for 2007 OR 2008. No players taken yet in either the 2007 OR 2008 drafts. No allowing for the maturation of current players, coaches, or our first year GM. But "if we're extremely lucky in drafting/FA. Maybe." There's a difference in a realist and a pessimist. Just because you consider yourself a realist doesn't mean you're not a pessimist. Many people on this board are realists, myself included. Look at the majority of your posts this year. You ARE a pessimist. And, no, I haven't "had my head up my ass for 7 years" as you so eloquently put it. I'm as frustrated as everyone else and have advocated shoring up both lines for years. Sorry some of the sarcasm was lost in translation and I didn't use a smilie emoticon for you. I know you enjoy being a combative dickhead. It's who you are, "hero".
Mike formerly from Florida Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 Hey chicken little, the sky isn't falling. Tough loss today, which prevents us from getting our hopes crushed next week (Baltimore at home with a win meaning a bye was not going to be an easy win). This year's team was not a playoff team and was not supposed to make the playoffs. I'm very excited they stepped up and played quality football in the second half to make the season fun and give these guys a taste of playing with the season on the line which will carry for next year. 1) Don't ditch the cover-2. Dick knows more than we do, it isn't the scheme but the execution of it, and we will be better next year. 2) O-Line is still our biggest need, and I would love to see two new high level guards, but that might be easier said than done, so at least one. 3) D-Line did not play very well this season, but Kyle will be better as the #4, McCargo will be back as one of the top 3, and Larry is fine as one of the top 3. I would like to add one to be in the top three in the rotation, which can be the #1 or the #3 depending on what's available and where our best value is. 4) DJ did not have a perfect season, and I was one of the first to rip him today when we should have run the ball (3rd and 1 in the second quarter, and three straight plays if needed on the last series after 2nd and 4. But he gets his players to play for him, is teaching a very young team a new system, and had better than expected results. He is not without fault, and not in the Bellichick elite, but is a solid coach who I hope sticks around for a long time. 5) There is nothing "typical" or lack of "magic at the ralph" about this. It was football, and we got beaten by a very hot team playing some bad D. 6) The 2007 Bills will be a playoff contender from the start, which this team was not. Hopefully we aren't counting tie breaker scenarios with two weeks to play, but are talking playoff seeding. 877417[/snapback] Not so much responding to your thread as much as to the subject of this thread: The Bills won't resign Nate. He is a me-first player. Historically, Ralph will not dish out the big $$ no matter how good the player is (see Pat Williams) which is why the Bills never ever get over the top. You can argue what you want, but Ralphy is cheap. I don't care how many FAs we signed last year, if he wasn't cheap, he would have signed Hutch, not Reyes. The Bills drafted Youboty to replace Nate..end of story! I believe we will re-sign London because he is older and will not get the money he is looking for elsewhere. Kelsay as well. Saying all that, I have no idea who we will sign in FA, but I don't expect the Bills to break the bank trying to get Lance Briggs or Steinbach. So we should stop dreaming about it. We will make small underwhelming signings to increase our depth and not much more. I believe we will go into the season with 15MM+ left in open cap space. Ralph has pretty much made it clear this year about the state of the Bills' finances and we should not expect much from him as he will keep the shackles on Marv. Another source of debate is Spikes. A lot of you know more about football than I do, but I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt and we should give him one more offseason and see how he responds next pre-season. His progress was slowed down by a hammy and various other injuries. Give the guy a chance...he is a warrior. The Bills lost some of these games at the end of the games because the O couldn't get the crucial first down necessary to stay on the field and eat up the clock. It actually happened in both halves on Sunday and in San Diego. Saying that, we need a tall possession receiver, and a quick pass-receiving third back (see Leon Washington) to go along with a solid guard in the draft. Reyes will be back to replace Preston next year slightly upgrading the other guard position. I think we will have to live with Fowler. They seem to like him. I believe this will have to be enough to go into the season on O next year. On Defense, I think the Bills will push Kyle Williams to gain 10 to 15 pounds. I really don't see them changing their philosophy and drafting another D-lineman. I think they will expect the young guys to get better. But, I do think this will be a mistake. Keith Ellison is an upcoming stud and is already better than Crowell and will start. But Crowell is a good player, just not the run-stuffing type linebacker we need. Both are light players as is London, and if Spikes especially, is not what he once was, we will need a bulldog tackling machine to replace one of the backers in the starting rotation. If we are not going to get bigger in the middle of the d-line, we better get bigger at the backer position...Fletcher or no Fletcher! Also, expect the Bills to draft a corner as well because Marv always believed you can't have enough d-backs. This is how I see the draft going by "Marv's" priorities based on these conditions and not considering the players available at the time of their draft position (and considering they do not sign any FAs): 1. Linebacker 2. Wide Receiver 3. Guard 4. Runningback 5. Cornerback 6. Linebacker
Fan in San Diego Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 Tripplett showed lots of promice as a first year starter. And Williams is a rookie. Give it time guys. 877387[/snapback] But Tripplet is a vet who's supposed to know this scheme ? Unless your being sarcastic ?
Fan in San Diego Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 Not so much responding to your thread as much as to the subject of this thread: The Bills won't resign Nate. He is a me-first player. Historically, Ralph will not dish out the big $$ no matter how good the player is (see Pat Williams) which is why the Bills never ever get over the top. You can argue what you want, but Ralphy is cheap. I don't care how many FAs we signed last year, if he wasn't cheap, he would have signed Hutch, not Reyes. The Bills drafted Youboty to replace Nate..end of story! I believe we will re-sign London because he is older and will not get the money he is looking for elsewhere. Kelsay as well. Saying all that, I have no idea who we will sign in FA, but I don't expect the Bills to break the bank trying to get Lance Briggs or Steinbach. So we should stop dreaming about it. We will make small underwhelming signings to increase our depth and not much more. I believe we will go into the season with 15MM+ left in open cap space. Ralph has pretty much made it clear this year about the state of the Bills' finances and we should not expect much from him as he will keep the shackles on Marv. Another source of debate is Spikes. A lot of you know more about football than I do, but I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt and we should give him one more offseason and see how he responds next pre-season. His progress was slowed down by a hammy and various other injuries. Give the guy a chance...he is a warrior. The Bills lost some of these games at the end of the games because the O couldn't get the crucial first down necessary to stay on the field and eat up the clock. It actually happened in both halves on Sunday and in San Diego. Saying that, we need a tall possession receiver, and a quick pass-receiving third back (see Leon Washington) to go along with a solid guard in the draft. Reyes will be back to replace Preston next year slightly upgrading the other guard position. I think we will have to live with Fowler. They seem to like him. I believe this will have to be enough to go into the season on O next year. On Defense, I think the Bills will push Kyle Williams to gain 10 to 15 pounds. I really don't see them changing their philosophy and drafting another D-lineman. I think they will expect the young guys to get better. But, I do think this will be a mistake. Keith Ellison is an upcoming stud and is already better than Crowell and will start. But Crowell is a good player, just not the run-stuffing type linebacker we need. Both are light players as is London, and if Spikes especially, is not what he once was, we will need a bulldog tackling machine to replace one of the backers in the starting rotation. If we are not going to get bigger in the middle of the d-line, we better get bigger at the backer position...Fletcher or no Fletcher! Also, expect the Bills to draft a corner as well because Marv always believed you can't have enough d-backs. This is how I see the draft going by "Marv's" priorities based on these conditions and not considering the players available at the time of their draft position (and considering they do not sign any FAs): 1. Linebacker 2. Wide Receiver 3. Guard 4. Runningback 5. Cornerback 6. Linebacker 878397[/snapback] I agree with alot of your points, the one about not getting the 3rd and shorts is not using the A-Train correctly. On 3rd and short use a power runner like A-Train or someone we draft for that prupose. Assuming we have an OC that can that can think about more than just one RB in the backfield.
deep2evans Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 Keith Ellison is an upcoming stud and is already better than Crowell and will start. 878397[/snapback] whoa whoa whoa.... Ellison looks promising and has certainly made some plays, but if there is anyone on this team that looks like they may be the next real deal...its Crowell. If Ellison is going to replace anyone, my bet is on Spikes (as much as it pains me to say it)
bizell Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 to those who say "ditch the cover 2"... did the current bears and tampa bay of the past 10 years magically start dominating once they implemented the cover 2? no, it took a little while. i wish we had a dunce icon here.
KOKBILLS Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 dominating once they implemented the cover 2? no, it took a little while. 878461[/snapback] Well sure...and the fact that both those Defenses have/had multiple Pro Bowlers...The Bills are no where near the talent level of either the old Tampa, or the current Bears D...Not even remotely close... All that being said I do think the D will improve in 2007...It's just a matter of how much, and will it be enough?...
bizell Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 Well sure...and the fact that both those Defenses have/had multiple Pro Bowlers...The Bills are no where near the talent level of either the old Tampa, or the current Bears D...Not even remotely close... All that being said I do think the D will improve in 2007...It's just a matter of how much, and will it be enough?... 878467[/snapback] and did those multiple pro bowlers just magically appear after one year?
smokinandjokin Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 Reyes will be back to replace Preston next year slightly upgrading the other guard position. I think we will have to live with Fowler. They seem to like him. 878397[/snapback] I'm not sure about this entire quote. Reyes will be back next year? Are you nuts? I agree, Preston did not impress, but there's a reason Reyes was benched. He was the worst lineman on a horrible line. The line (and the team) were 10 times better when Reyes was taken out of the lineup and the players re-shuffled. As for Fowler, what do you mean by "we'll have to live with him?" He was a stablizing force in the middle, extremely mobile and intelligent, and behind Peters he was the 2nd-best lineman on the team. He can be criticized as slightly undersized and suceptable to an occasional bull rush, but so is every center. I thought, overall, Fowler was a very nice pickup and I'd be happy if he anchors this line at C with Peters at LT for another 4-5 years. Keith Ellison is an upcoming stud and is already better than Crowell and will start. But Crowell is a good player, just not the run-stuffing type linebacker we need. Both are light players as is London, and if Spikes especially, is not what he once was, we will need a bulldog tackling machine to replace one of the backers in the starting rotation. If we are not going to get bigger in the middle of the d-line, we better get bigger at the backer position...Fletcher or no Fletcher! 878397[/snapback] Ellison played admirably this year but you're nuts if you're counting on him being a force as a starting backer. Crowell is a much better all-around player.
gobillsinytown Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 The "Tampa 2" or "Cover 2" defense can be very effective, but it relies a lot on teamwork and chemistry. The DL position in this scheme must be smart, quick and most importantly, experienced. It takes time to develop into an effective defense, but once it does, it can be very good for a long time. The problem with the traditional 34 or 43 is that you must have at least one fat guy in the middle to clog the run. This creates problems on passing downs, because unless that guy is big and fast enough to rush the passer, he has to come out. The "Tampa 2" system relies on smaller, quicker guys that can be rotated without losing run stopping power. All that being said, schemes don't really matter in the long run, it's how well a defense plays as a unit. IMHO, the team with the best defense at the end of the year wins it all. One thing I think everybody has missed so far in this thread: The Bills need at least a consistent TE in a big way.
Recommended Posts