Adam Posted January 15, 2007 Posted January 15, 2007 I'm worried that we might not be in for a playoff season- its a lot easier to go from bad to decent, that from decent to playoff team. I don't see this as a strong defensive draft, and after yesterday, I think Clements will end up as a seahawk. Playoffs are not out of the question- if anyone can get us there it is Jauson and Levy. If we don't get a solid DT in the 1st round, we probably will be hoping for strong development from McCargo- I think we will see better gap control from the returners anyways. Good chance Youbouty starts if we lose Clements. I wonder if Gandy and Kiwaukee Thomas return?
2003Contenders Posted January 15, 2007 Posted January 15, 2007 I'm worried that we might not be in for a playoff season- its a lot easier to go from bad to decent, that from decent to playoff team. I don't see this as a strong defensive draft, and after yesterday, I think Clements will end up as a seahawk. Playoffs are not out of the question- if anyone can get us there it is Jauson and Levy. If we don't get a solid DT in the 1st round, we probably will be hoping for strong development from McCargo- I think we will see better gap control from the returners anyways. Good chance Youbouty starts if we lose Clements. I wonder if Gandy and Kiwaukee Thomas return? The good news is that in today's watered down league, you don't have to be better than decent to make it into the playoffs. With what looks to be an easier schedule in 2007, we could make it into the playoffs with the team that ended the 2006 season.
Cornerville Posted January 15, 2007 Posted January 15, 2007 The good news is that in today's watered down league, you don't have to be better than decent to make it into the playoffs. With what looks to be an easier schedule in 2007, we could make it into the playoffs with the team that ended the 2006 season. You do not even have to be great to be 14-2. Just look at the Chargers.
Olaf Fub Posted January 15, 2007 Posted January 15, 2007 I'm worried that we might not be in for a playoff season- its a lot easier to go from bad to decent, that from decent to playoff team. I don't see this as a strong defensive draft, and after yesterday, I think Clements will end up as a seahawk. Playoffs are not out of the question- if anyone can get us there it is Jauson and Levy. If we don't get a solid DT in the 1st round, we probably will be hoping for strong development from McCargo- I think we will see better gap control from the returners anyways. Good chance Youbouty starts if we lose Clements. I wonder if Gandy and Kiwaukee Thomas return? I like Kiwaukee Thomas a lot. I remember after the Chargers game someone asked him what the team plays for, now that they had been practically eliminated from the playoffs. You could tell he was a little POed by the question and he answered, "We fight!" He's a good role player and that's the kind of character Marv is always talking about. If we lose London and Nate, we've got to replace them both, plus we've got to get better at running the ball and stopping the run. If the Bills can do all that, I think we'll be a solid playoff team. It's doable but it might be a tall order for one off-season.
obie_wan Posted January 15, 2007 Posted January 15, 2007 I'm worried that we might not be in for a playoff season- its a lot easier to go from bad to decent, that from decent to playoff team. I don't see this as a strong defensive draft, and after yesterday, I think Clements will end up as a seahawk. Playoffs are not out of the question- if anyone can get us there it is Jauson and Levy. If we don't get a solid DT in the 1st round, we probably will be hoping for strong development from McCargo- I think we will see better gap control from the returners anyways. Good chance Youbouty starts if we lose Clements. I wonder if Gandy and Kiwaukee Thomas return? This defense does not stress gap control. That is your first problem. The defense is built on attacking the backfield through the gaps. The LBs are supposed to fill the vacated holes.
Adam Posted January 15, 2007 Author Posted January 15, 2007 This defense does not stress gap control. That is your first problem. The defense is built on attacking the backfield through the gaps. The LBs are supposed to fill the vacated holes. Yes, but each player is responssible for maintaining that one gap- our guys just run after the ball at times- they have to get better at that
BADOLBILZ Posted January 15, 2007 Posted January 15, 2007 I'm worried that we might not be in for a playoff season- its a lot easier to go from bad to decent, that from decent to playoff team. The last two times the Bills were in this position they traded Peerless Price for a first round pick that provided no help to that team that season and let Pat Williams walk. Those two players were critical losses to those teams at that time. They need to retain Clements if they want to take that next step, IMO.
Adam Posted January 15, 2007 Author Posted January 15, 2007 The last two times the Bills were in this position they traded Peerless Price for a first round pick that provided no help to that team that season and let Pat Williams walk. Those two players were critical losses to those teams at that time. They need to retain Clements if they want to take that next step, IMO. I'd trade Clements and our 2nd round draft pick to get Pat Williams back
The Jokeman Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 I'd trade Clements and our 2nd round draft pick to get Pat Williams back Because Pat Williams was so good to help lead the Vikings to the top rated rush defense but only for a 6-10 record including to a loss our beloved Buffalo Bills? Better yet let's bring back Antoine Winfield who helped the Vikings become the 31st pass defense.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Because Pat Williams was so good to help lead the Vikings to the top rated rush defense but only for a 6-10 record including to a loss our beloved Buffalo Bills? Better yet let's bring back Antoine Winfield who helped the Vikings become the 31st pass defense. They had the best run defense in the league. I honestly believe that if you simply had Pat Williams instead of Tim Anderson on this team we would have won two or even three more games. We were that close in numerous games and our downfall IMO was our inability to stop the run more than any other single factor.
Adam Posted January 16, 2007 Author Posted January 16, 2007 Because Pat Williams was so good to help lead the Vikings to the top rated rush defense but only for a 6-10 record including to a loss our beloved Buffalo Bills? Better yet let's bring back Antoine Winfield who helped the Vikings become the 31st pass defense. Not saying bringing back old players would be the move every time- Pat Williams would be the perfect player for our defense- he's a fantastic run stuffer, and he can penetrate the line of scrimmage as well. One of the best DT's as well.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Better yet let's bring back Antoine Winfield who helped the Vikings become the 31st pass defense. Which is why I think if Clements winds up anywhere it'll be with the Vikings and not the redskins. Fred Smoot is awful. I still await the day he's cut someone saying "We should sign fred smoot to replace Nate". My biggest worry about losing Nate is not so much how good he is and he is damn good. It's the collective experience of the secondary. Lose Nate and the oldest guy in our secondary is 29 year old Kiwaukee Thomas. Who just is not good enough to be a #1 or #2 corner. Assuming we even sign Kiwaukee. Plus I still have my doubts about McGee being a #2 corner. There's something to be said for experience in this league, and taking away our best and most experienced db who will be only 28 next december is not the way to build a winning team.
Adam Posted January 16, 2007 Author Posted January 16, 2007 Which is why I think if Clements winds up anywhere it'll be with the Vikings and not the redskins. Fred Smoot is awful. I still await the day he's cut someone saying "We should sign fred smoot to replace Nate". My biggest worry about losing Nate is not so much how good he is and he is damn good. It's the collective experience of the secondary. Lose Nate and the oldest guy in our secondary is 29 year old Kiwaukee Thomas. Who just is not good enough to be a #1 or #2 corner. Assuming we even sign Kiwaukee. Plus I still have my doubts about McGee being a #2 corner. There's something to be said for experience in this league, and taking away our best and most experienced db who will be only 28 next december is not the way to build a winning team. I think Clements will go to Seattle- they need a guy like him back there. I think Youbouty may end up starting- Thomas is a free agent
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 I think Clements will go to Seattle- they need a guy like him back there. I think Youbouty may end up starting- Thomas is a free agent Insane how much money Seattle has; they've made a competitve to above-market offer to every one of their star free agents (losing only Hutch on a poison pill). I will be ticked if Clements ends up there.
The Jokeman Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Which is why I think if Clements winds up anywhere it'll be with the Vikings and not the redskins. Fred Smoot is awful. I still await the day he's cut someone saying "We should sign fred smoot to replace Nate". My biggest worry about losing Nate is not so much how good he is and he is damn good. It's the collective experience of the secondary. Lose Nate and the oldest guy in our secondary is 29 year old Kiwaukee Thomas. Who just is not good enough to be a #1 or #2 corner. Assuming we even sign Kiwaukee. Plus I still have my doubts about McGee being a #2 corner. There's something to be said for experience in this league, and taking away our best and most experienced db who will be only 28 next december is not the way to build a winning team. I just hope that Fewell and Jauron can convince Marv and Ralph just how good Clements is. I'm worrisome that Levy will feel that CBs are easy replaceable based on us able to get DBs at will in his previous tenure as head coach. Of course we did have a better surrounding cast then too. I honestly don't care about Marv's promise and would franchise Nate again. If he pouts then look to trade him but to be honest think he's just too valuable to let go for nothing. Insane how much money Seattle has; they've made a competitve to above-market offer to every one of their star free agents (losing only Hutch on a poison pill). I will be ticked if Clements ends up there. I could see Nate ending up in San Francisco. I don't know why but know they have a buttload of cap space and need some help in the secondary. I also saw they let go of their D-coordinator and who knows Jerry Gray might end up there too.
Adam Posted January 16, 2007 Author Posted January 16, 2007 I just hope that Fewell and Jauron can convince Marv and Ralph just how good Clements is. I'm worries that Levy will feel that CBs are easy replaceable based on us able to get DBs at will in his previous tenure as head coach. Of course we did have a better surrounding cast then too. I honestly don't care about Marv's promise and would franchise Nate again. If he pouts then look to trade him but to be honest think he's just too valuable to let go for nothing. I think it was in his contract that we cant franchise him....I could be wrong
Prognastic Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Best way to make the playoffs next year? Petition the league for a move to the NFC North or West division.
Tcali Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 They had the best run defense in the league. I honestly believe that if you simply had Pat Williams instead of Tim Anderson on this team we would have won two or even three more games. We were that close in numerous games and our downfall IMO was our inability to stop the run more than any other single factor. Pat s too old for the price you mentioned--he will be 35.
Tcali Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 They had the best run defense in the league. I honestly believe that if you simply had Pat Williams instead of Tim Anderson on this team we would have won two or even three more games. We were that close in numerous games and our downfall IMO was our inability to stop the run more than any other single factor. Oh sorry that was adam not you..-Pat would have been a big improvement----but by their mid thirties athletes(and all people) start to take a quick physical nosedive..sad but true. Pat has one great year left in him
Kelly the Dog Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Pat s too old for the price you mentioned--he will be 35. I didn't mention any price. But surely there are players that it is well worth it to over-pay, especially if you have the cap room, because they make a LOT of players on your team better. A DT like Pat Williams makes virtually every player on the defense better. EDIT: i see that you changed it, no problem. But still, I was more referring to paying Pat previously, so that he was still a Bill. I will admit, however, at the time, I didnt think we could break the bank for Pat either, and thought he was asking too much. I was wrong. In retrospect, he was worth more than he was asking for.
Recommended Posts