JStranger76 Posted January 3, 2007 Posted January 3, 2007 I"m just saying the people who think with our current 5 we could gel are drinking it. I simply disagree. It's cool man. As for my only upgrade at RG comment, I'm only saying that is the very least we could do to make me personally feel OK. I believe BOTH guard positions should be upgraded and probably RT too. This IS a lot to ask so that is why I said I'd like AT THE VERY LEAST upgrade the weakest link, RG ( Deilman or L. Davis ) not some scrap piece like Reyes or Anderson.
Koufax Posted January 3, 2007 Posted January 3, 2007 Our O-Line is not good, and people have to be careful not to judge it as good. I want to pick up a fourth DT to go with Larry, Kyle, and John, but to consider this a priority above RG is crazy (not saying which pick for which, because often you can find value lower for OG). Same with LB unless Fletcher walks. It is an area I'd like to upgrade, but not a crucial need like O-Line. So weaknesses on the O-Line right now: #1 RG - Preston can return to the backup role and try to climb the depth chart at starting center. We need a new RG. #2 LG - Gandy has seen his ceiling and it is called "okay". He hasn't sucked like he did at LT, but there is a reason that even though most of our running was the left, we often went outside. If we can find a second guard better than him for a decent value I would love to make the upgrade here as well. #3/4 RT/C - I don't think we upgrade three O-Line positions, which would neglect other areas, but neither Pennington nor Fowler really shined. Pennington is big and young, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed he can develop, and would definitely get my starting nod right now. Fowler is smart and does his job, even if he doesn't have the size and strength to be better than that. I hope Preston or Merz pushes him out over the next couple years on merit, but I'm not going to use resources adding another center right now. Obviously we have only one of five positions that shines, and that is Left Tackle. Peters is a joy. Watch him for a whole game just focusing on him (BuffaloBills.com cam if you want). He made Gandy look better than he was (like Preston made Pennington look worse than he was), and is a true joy to have on this team long term.
2003Contenders Posted January 3, 2007 Posted January 3, 2007 The line is far from being set, but I am more encouraged heading into the off-season than I have been, really, since the early 90s. We all know that LT is by far the hardest position on the line to fill. That spot has mercifully been filled by Jason Peters, who performed even better than I hoped he would. He's only going to get better -- and I think he borders on Pro Bowl quality now. After LT, I'd say that the next most important line position to fill is Center. Fowler may not be an elite Center, but has developed a strong re pore with JP -- and by all accounts is highly intelligent. Thus, 2 of the most important 3 spots are in very good shape. We could conceivably use an upgrade at any of the remaining 3 positions -- and the good news is that those positions are easy enough to find in the middle rounds of the draft -- and usually in free agency. Thus, for the first time in a lo-o-o-ong time I actually would NOT advocate drafting an OL in the first round -- and maybe not even in the second round, unless the value was just too much to pass up. I'd much rather focus on DL and LB early in the draft, pending whatever happens with Nate.
Adam Posted January 3, 2007 Posted January 3, 2007 How good is our offensive line? Answer: Not very good. I know that many of you on this board have an inflated opinion of our offensive line (in the context of evaluating our starting running back). The fact remains that we were tied for 25th in the league in sacks allowed (even though we have a pretty mobile QB) and were 27th in the league in rushing. Let's not kid ourselves. If this team is going to be successful, we have to upgrade the offensive line (as well as the defensive line). I'd like to get Diehlman and Levi Brown....then move Pennington to guard. That would be a very good line
Ozymandius Posted January 3, 2007 Posted January 3, 2007 I'd like to get Diehlman and Levi Brown....then move Pennington to guard. That would be a very good line Pennington's too damn tall to be a guard. His length is valuable as an edge protector. On the inside, you want guys who are a little bit shorter and can gain leverage easier.
ganesh Posted January 3, 2007 Posted January 3, 2007 On the inside, you want guys who are a little bit shorter and can gain leverage easier. And Bigger.
Dibs Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Anyone have the stats for the OL ranked after the bye. That would be some very interesting stats. I've quickly done some basic stats for the 1st 7 games & the next 9 games(before & after bye). Pre bye JPL.....197 attempts, 21 sacks......sacked 1 in 10.4 attempts(not including scrambles) Post bye JPL....232 attempts, 26 sacks......sacked 1 in 9.9 attempts(not including scrambles) Pre bye JPL.....19 rushes(2.7/game) Post bye JPL....19 rushes(2.1/game)(should have more rushes due to knee-downs at end of winning games) As you can see, splitting at the bye actually shows that the pass protection became worse.....not better. I'm going to stop the analysis here though.......and split it pre & post HOU game where the OL had had a couple of games to adjust & more importantly, JPL was given more freedom to play 'his' game. Here are some quickly done some basic stats for the 1st 9 games & the next 7 games(before & after HOU). Pre HOU JPL.....224 attempts, 30 sacks......sacked 1 in 8.5 attempts(not including scrambles) Post HOU JPL....205 attempts, 17 sacks......sacked 1 in 13.1 attempts(not including scrambles)(note:-3 sacks taken in each of the last 5 games....that would average to 27 over 9 games.....or only marginally better than pre HOU. I feel it valid to mention this due to opposing teams having a few weeks to figure out the 'new' JPL & 'new' offence) Pre HOU JPL.....23 rushes(2.6/game) Post HOU JPL....15 rushes(2.1/game)(should have more rushes due to knee-downs at end of winning games) I think the stats clearly show an improvement in pass protection from the HOU game onwards. IMO it was a combination of better OL play(repositioning after bye), better QB play(freeing up of JPL to play 'his' game) & better play calling for the personnel at hand(less 7 step drops, more shotgun, etc) OK......the running game......this will require a bit more effort to figure the stats.....I'll just do pre/post HOU. *note* I'm compiling from individual game 'net yards rushing' & 'rushes' Pre HOU .....259 rushes 968 yards(107.6 yards/game)(3.74 yards/carry) Post HOU ....177 rushes 635 yards(90.7 yards/game)(3.59 yards/carry)(should have more rushes & therefore lower average due to knee-downs at end of winning games & running the ball at end of winning games) It should be noted that our best RB actually missed 2(pretty much) games from the 1st 9 games & only 1 from HOU onwards. It should also be noted that the opposing run defences were of similar caliber pre/post HOU..... Opposition Run D rankings by week. Pre HOU.....5, 8, 24, 1, 6, 21, 5, 13, 32.....5 out of 9(56%) were top 10 Run Defences.....1 was terrible Post HOU....20, 4, 7, 24, 8, 30, 2.....4 out of 7(57%) were top 10 Run Defences.....1 was terrible If anything I'd say it looks like the OL performance in run production has gotten worse since the adjustment......I can't be bothered looking through all the play-by-play but I'd be certain the short yardage rushing has not improved, meaning it is still terrible. In summary of the stats I'd say that if not for the freeing up of JPL & the changes to the play-calling there was only minor improvement on the OL after the change & that the running game in fact regressed. .....which means we need better OGs Sorry for the length of post.
billybob Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 The line improved from god awful to slightly below average- the question is how much better can they get- Peters was good and can get better- Pennington had a better rookie season than Mike Williams, he is suppose to have some athletic limitations but I've seen a lot of stiff right tackles who can do the job- he's a big strong guy with long arms and he's not a fat ass, I'd think he could become a mid-level type tackle- Preston is a big smart guy but he really needs to hit the weights hard and get stronger he'll never be a great athlete but getting stronger and losing a little fat can't hurt- So overall if the 3 young guys continue to improve individually plus the they improve from playing together I think they could go from slightly below average to slightly above average which would be pretty good compared to the crap I've been seeing for the last seven years
Fan in Chicago Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Sorry for the length of post. Wow - all that great work and you have to apologize ? Thanx a bunch, sir.
Fan in San Diego Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I've quickly done some basic stats for the 1st 7 games & the next 9 games(before & after bye). Pre bye JPL.....197 attempts, 21 sacks......sacked 1 in 10.4 attempts(not including scrambles) Post bye JPL....232 attempts, 26 sacks......sacked 1 in 9.9 attempts(not including scrambles) Pre bye JPL.....19 rushes(2.7/game) Post bye JPL....19 rushes(2.1/game)(should have more rushes due to knee-downs at end of winning games) As you can see, splitting at the bye actually shows that the pass protection became worse.....not better. I'm going to stop the analysis here though.......and split it pre & post HOU game where the OL had had a couple of games to adjust & more importantly, JPL was given more freedom to play 'his' game. Here are some quickly done some basic stats for the 1st 9 games & the next 7 games(before & after HOU). Pre HOU JPL.....224 attempts, 30 sacks......sacked 1 in 8.5 attempts(not including scrambles) Post HOU JPL....205 attempts, 17 sacks......sacked 1 in 13.1 attempts(not including scrambles)(note:-3 sacks taken in each of the last 5 games....that would average to 27 over 9 games.....or only marginally better than pre HOU. I feel it valid to mention this due to opposing teams having a few weeks to figure out the 'new' JPL & 'new' offence) Pre HOU JPL.....23 rushes(2.6/game) Post HOU JPL....15 rushes(2.1/game)(should have more rushes due to knee-downs at end of winning games) I think the stats clearly show an improvement in pass protection from the HOU game onwards. IMO it was a combination of better OL play(repositioning after bye), better QB play(freeing up of JPL to play 'his' game) & better play calling for the personnel at hand(less 7 step drops, more shotgun, etc) OK......the running game......this will require a bit more effort to figure the stats.....I'll just do pre/post HOU. *note* I'm compiling from individual game 'net yards rushing' & 'rushes' Pre HOU .....259 rushes 968 yards(107.6 yards/game)(3.74 yards/carry) Post HOU ....177 rushes 635 yards(90.7 yards/game)(3.59 yards/carry)(should have more rushes & therefore lower average due to knee-downs at end of winning games & running the ball at end of winning games) It should be noted that our best RB actually missed 2(pretty much) games from the 1st 9 games & only 1 from HOU onwards. It should also be noted that the opposing run defences were of similar caliber pre/post HOU..... Opposition Run D rankings by week. Pre HOU.....5, 8, 24, 1, 6, 21, 5, 13, 32.....5 out of 9(56%) were top 10 Run Defences.....1 was terrible Post HOU....20, 4, 7, 24, 8, 30, 2.....4 out of 7(57%) were top 10 Run Defences.....1 was terrible If anything I'd say it looks like the OL performance in run production has gotten worse since the adjustment......I can't be bothered looking through all the play-by-play but I'd be certain the short yardage rushing has not improved, meaning it is still terrible. In summary of the stats I'd say that if not for the freeing up of JPL & the changes to the play-calling there was only minor improvement on the OL after the change & that the running game in fact regressed. .....which means we need better OGs Sorry for the length of post. Very interesting stats. Thanks for doing that. I was surprized to see that the stats really didn't improve except the sacks went down since letting JP move around and call screen plays. I guess we do need that LG , C and RG change in the off season.
dhgold Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I didn't have the patience to read this whole thread, but a couple of opinions. 1. For the last few games of the season, the run defense was a bigger problem than the o-line. Not that the OL doesn't have a lot of room for improvement, but it improved after the bye, unline RD which seemed to get worse. 2. I've seen Leonard Davis' name pop up in at least a couple of threads as a free agent acquisition that would fix the OL. I assume we're talking about Davis of the Cardinals, a team with a terrible OL -- definitely worse than the Bills. Why do people think that a lineman the Cardinals didn't want to keep would improve the Bills' line?
Dan Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Very interesting stats. Thanks for doing that. I was surprized to see that the stats really didn't improve except the sacks went down since letting JP move around and call screen plays.I guess we do need that LG , C and RG change in the off season. I agree, very interesting indeed. (also, excellent work Dibs!). I've been cautiously optimistic about our line improvement. Just from watching the games, it seems they're playing much better. But, then we play a truly good team (Baltimore) and don't look so great. And it's interesting that these stats seem to bear that out. (Granted for that game I couldn't watch it all, so I can't speak as confidently of how our offense looked) I think the key is that the position we need to upgrade (OGs) are easier than in previous years (OTs). So, that's a good thing. I think it also becomes important to the discussions regarding Mcgahee and drafting receivers and all. It would seem we still need ot spend a fair amount of attention on our lines and LBs.
The Big Cat Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I didn't have the patience to read this whole thread, but a couple of opinions. 1. For the last few games of the season, the run defense was a bigger problem than the o-line. The Ravens game excluded.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 The line is still bad, probably in the lowest 6-7 of the league. It was horrible as a run blocking unit the entire year, with flashes of mediocrity. It was horrible as a pass blocking unit at least half the year. We became thrilled with the fact that Losman had time to set up and get it away quickly, it's not as if he had time to survey the field. It rarely held up against good defenses. It rarely opened large holes. It consists of precisely one very good and becoming great player, one mediocre center, two below average guards and one nobody who played over his head to become consistently erratic. The line needs a lot of time together and at least two more serious interior upgrades.
Dan Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 ... and one nobody who played over his head to become consistently erratic. Excellent!
JStranger76 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Because dhgold, Davis plays LT for the Cardinals, I'd want him to play RG or LG here, where he was awesome as a rookie.
frogger Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Gandy looked bad against Baltimore, and I don't mean bad meaning good, he was bad meaning bad. If we keep him I can't see him staying LG, maye RG if we're able to land Steinbach, but if we got Davis instead, I could see him staying then. I think a TE could be just as valuable, most sacks come from over load blitz packages. Add a TE you not only do you have a hot route, but if he's good the LBs have to stay aware of him, menaing less blitzing. also I am worried about Pennington, he got the label Lazy for a reason. He could have Robert Hicks written all over him. I would consider drafting a tackle day one, one who is able to play Guard or tackle, like an aaron sears. if he's there in the third round it would be nice.
JStranger76 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Aaron Sears is solid and dependable. Would be a great 3rd round pick. He could play G or RT.
Peter Posted January 4, 2007 Author Posted January 4, 2007 I've quickly done some basic stats for the 1st 7 games & the next 9 games(before & after bye). Pre bye JPL.....197 attempts, 21 sacks......sacked 1 in 10.4 attempts(not including scrambles) Post bye JPL....232 attempts, 26 sacks......sacked 1 in 9.9 attempts(not including scrambles) Pre bye JPL.....19 rushes(2.7/game) Post bye JPL....19 rushes(2.1/game)(should have more rushes due to knee-downs at end of winning games) As you can see, splitting at the bye actually shows that the pass protection became worse.....not better. I'm going to stop the analysis here though.......and split it pre & post HOU game where the OL had had a couple of games to adjust & more importantly, JPL was given more freedom to play 'his' game. Here are some quickly done some basic stats for the 1st 9 games & the next 7 games(before & after HOU). Pre HOU JPL.....224 attempts, 30 sacks......sacked 1 in 8.5 attempts(not including scrambles) Post HOU JPL....205 attempts, 17 sacks......sacked 1 in 13.1 attempts(not including scrambles)(note:-3 sacks taken in each of the last 5 games....that would average to 27 over 9 games.....or only marginally better than pre HOU. I feel it valid to mention this due to opposing teams having a few weeks to figure out the 'new' JPL & 'new' offence) Pre HOU JPL.....23 rushes(2.6/game) Post HOU JPL....15 rushes(2.1/game)(should have more rushes due to knee-downs at end of winning games) I think the stats clearly show an improvement in pass protection from the HOU game onwards. IMO it was a combination of better OL play(repositioning after bye), better QB play(freeing up of JPL to play 'his' game) & better play calling for the personnel at hand(less 7 step drops, more shotgun, etc) OK......the running game......this will require a bit more effort to figure the stats.....I'll just do pre/post HOU. *note* I'm compiling from individual game 'net yards rushing' & 'rushes' Pre HOU .....259 rushes 968 yards(107.6 yards/game)(3.74 yards/carry) Post HOU ....177 rushes 635 yards(90.7 yards/game)(3.59 yards/carry)(should have more rushes & therefore lower average due to knee-downs at end of winning games & running the ball at end of winning games) It should be noted that our best RB actually missed 2(pretty much) games from the 1st 9 games & only 1 from HOU onwards. It should also be noted that the opposing run defences were of similar caliber pre/post HOU..... Opposition Run D rankings by week. Pre HOU.....5, 8, 24, 1, 6, 21, 5, 13, 32.....5 out of 9(56%) were top 10 Run Defences.....1 was terrible Post HOU....20, 4, 7, 24, 8, 30, 2.....4 out of 7(57%) were top 10 Run Defences.....1 was terrible If anything I'd say it looks like the OL performance in run production has gotten worse since the adjustment......I can't be bothered looking through all the play-by-play but I'd be certain the short yardage rushing has not improved, meaning it is still terrible. In summary of the stats I'd say that if not for the freeing up of JPL & the changes to the play-calling there was only minor improvement on the OL after the change & that the running game in fact regressed. .....which means we need better OGs Sorry for the length of post. Very interesting. Thanks for all that hard work.
Recommended Posts