obie_wan Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 The MLB means so much to the Cover-2- don't be surprised if the Bills do move up into the top 10 to secure Willis.
John from Riverside Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I think moving up would be a huge mistake....Polz is another good LB in this draft....
Mike formerly from Florida Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 do you know what type of track it was on? He ran 4.62 at the combine I am pretty amazed he dropped his time by a quarter of a second (0.25). 4.37 is superhuman for a middle linebacker. That surpasses Cornelius Bennett's times. I doubt that number is real.
obie_wan Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I think moving up would be a huge mistake....Polz is another good LB in this draft.... Polz does not hae the speed to play the middle in cover-2.
stuckincincy Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Or quarterback. Lest we forget, Neil O' Donnell could bench over 400lbs. Wow! I was sorry he got drummed out of Cincy after a year. He played it very safe for a very poor club. Beat the Lions, and the Steelers twice for a 3 - 13 mark. No doubt the 2 wins against the Steelers made the guy smile. 1998: 212 for 343 61.8% 2216, 6.5, 15 td 4 int.
John from Riverside Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Polz does not hae the speed to play the middle in cover-2. No but Angelo Crowell does
DrDawkinstein Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Does Puz have the speed to play ANY LB position in the Tampa-2 we run?
Stl Bills Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 4.37 is superhuman for a middle linebacker. That surpasses Cornelius Bennett's times. I doubt that number is real. Its a pro-day number which always come out to be better than the combine. The year before DeAngelo Hall came out of school he worked out a VT's proday just for the hell of it and was rumored to run a 4.18. Nobody runs a 4.18! And as a previous poster mentioned, arm length is never considered in bench press numbers but should be. Guys with longer arms tend to bench less reps but doesn't necessarily effect functional strength (shedding blocks and what not)
Mile High Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Wow. His weight could have been a factor in his 40 time. He weighed 242 at the combine and at his pro day he weighed 237. I can't really see shedding those 5 lbs. that much of a difference. It sounds scewed to me. That 40 time is faster than 95% of the cb's at the combine. Plus I really don't think it will matter because he'll have to bulk up a little more for the NFL. His playing weight should be between the 245-250 range. These guys drop weight to improve they're 40, short shuttle and cone times.
obie_wan Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 No but Angelo Crowell does too bad he plays the middle like Fletcher - retreating instead on attacking the line of scrimmage. there is a reason he was considered an OLB prospect when he came out even though he played MLB in college.
stuckincincy Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Does Puz have the speed to play ANY LB position in the Tampa-2 we run? Who isn't a candidate to add something? It's not like last year's Tampa-2 thing resulted in a defense that humbled opponents one and all... I've hope for next year, that some current players will show better, but...
R. Rich Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 too bad he plays the middle like Fletcher - retreating instead on attacking the line of scrimmage. there is a reason he was considered an OLB prospect when he came out even though he played MLB in college. Crowell played ILB in a 3-4 @ UVA.
obie_wan Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 The MLB means so much to the Cover-2- don't be surprised if the Bills do move up into the top 10 to secure Willis. With Houston giving up picks and moving down to #10, the Bills just found their trade partner. Houston can afford to move down and still take Levi Brown. Marv will leapfrog SF and deal with Houston to secure Willis. The bad back Lynch is too big a risk to be a consolation prize.
Pyrite Gal Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 With Houston giving up picks and moving down to #10, the Bills just found their trade partner. Houston can afford to move down and still take Levi Brown. Marv will leapfrog SF and deal with Houston to secure Willis. The bad back Lynch is too big a risk to be a consolation prize. I hope not. Its likely to be a very painful 07 if we draft Willis to start at MLB (though he probably is a good investment for the future) and it will be doubly painful if we choose to trade away resources we could use to get depth and potential starters at our multiple other positions of need. Perhaps now that he is a GM Marv has given up on the idea that he offered in his book that a HC who prepares well for the future will not last long as your HC in the present. Perhaps if we pick Willis we start him at OLB (some folks high on him feel he can also play this position) and play Crowell as Marv has said at MLB. In any case, I agree with the earlier post which pointed to MLB as a key position in the Cover 2 since this player is required to tackle like a DT on run plays and cover pass plays like a safety. It sounds like Willis will eventual learn to be a good vet, but he is a rookie now and OCs will be salivating at the prospect of facing a rookie at MLB whom it will be easier for them to take a step back thinking it is a pass on run plays or even worse a step in to stop the run while a fleet-footed WR zips by him running a post pattern. It would be stupid to interpret this as me saying Willis or all rookies are stupid. I am just saying it is quite doubtful this rookie will read plays like a vet his first year and particular given his pass coverage struggles in the Senior Bowl , it is quite likely that a pick of Willis to start at MLB means that the Bills are conceding no real attempt even at making the playoffs in 07. I hope not.
The Jokeman Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 too bad he plays the middle like Fletcher - retreating instead on attacking the line of scrimmage. there is a reason he was considered an OLB prospect when he came out even though he played MLB in college. He didn't play MLB in college he played ILB in a 3-4. As much as people think it's the same position it's not. As looking back John Holocek was a pretty good ILB in a 3-4 but don't think anyone advocate for him to play in the middle if we played a 4-3. It sounds like Willis will eventual learn to be a good vet, but he is a rookie now and OCs will be salivating at the prospect of facing a rookie at MLB whom it will be easier for them to take a step back thinking it is a pass on run plays or even worse a step in to stop the run while a fleet-footed WR zips by him running a post pattern. It would be stupid to interpret this as me saying Willis or all rookies are stupid. I am just saying it is quite doubtful this rookie will read plays like a vet his first year and particular given his pass coverage struggles in the Senior Bowl , it is quite likely that a pick of Willis to start at MLB means that the Bills are conceding no real attempt even at making the playoffs in 07. I hope not. I have seen you routinely rip the idea of WIllis at MLB as a rookie, can you please tell me what you invision us doing next year? With the roster as it stands now and likely will be after the draft I'm expecting another medicore ie 9-7 or 7-9 next season. To me you take the lumps of using Willis as a rookie at MLB as truly don't think the difference between him and Crowell at MLB would truely make a significant difference in 2007 but could in 2008 as might be able to address some of the other question marks with that draft and/or through free agency especially with recent reports that none of our current expected starters are due to be UFAs after 2007.
Koufax Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 That 40 time is 95% faster than most of the cb's at the combine. 95% faster? Wow...that's really really fast
Pyrite Gal Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 He didn't play MLB in college he played ILB in a 3-4. As much as people think it's the same position it's not. As looking back John Holocek was a pretty good ILB in a 3-4 but don't think anyone advocate for him to play in the middle if we played a 4-3.I have seen you routinely rip the idea of WIllis at MLB as a rookie, can you please tell me what you invision us doing next year? With the roster as it stands now and likely will be after the draft I'm expecting another medicore ie 9-7 or 7-9 next season. To me you take the lumps of using Willis as a rookie at MLB as truly don't think the difference between him and Crowell at MLB would truely make a significant difference in 2007 but could in 2008 as might be able to address some of the other question marks with that draft and/or through free agency especially with recent reports that none of our current expected starters are due to be UFAs after 2007. My general sense is that like pretty much everyone else on TSW that predicted neither that the Bills would chose Whitner last year with the #1 or even WM with the #1 in when he was chosen, I really have no clue what the Bills are going to do. Certainly all of those who had these picks down (and can easily link to the post where they showed their superior football knowledge) can easily as far as I am concerned express great certainty about what the Bills will do, but I start with saying that I think I can say what they should not do. I also think I can say what I think they will do (though I and others will likely be wrong). But it all comes with that caveat. This being said, i think that Marv is generally right about it all starting with running and stopping the run. I am pleased with what has been done to strengthen the OL and with that and also the trade of our #1 RB, though I really dislike the idea of spending a #1 on an RB since I agree with those who point out that good RBs can be found later in the draft (though this is no guarantee we will find one), I am afraid this adds up to us probably investing in an RB. A lot probably depends on whether or how far Peterson falls. In either case, my sense is that the Bills can and should trade down in order to secure additional picks which will allow us to create more competition for our several holes. This move probably makes particular sense because we really have no one on the roster, even with the resigning of Thomas who is really a credible option for #1 RB. I was pleased with Thomas's work as #2 last year and at least he for first time in his career at least was able to appear in all 16 games. However, starting and appearing are two different things and since the last time he even rushed for 1000K in a season was 2003 and he his his maximum # of starts in his career at 13, I do not think he is a credible starter. Prior to us getting rid of WM, I was advocating picking an RB on the second day we thought could offer some competition for WM. Now, in addition to that player, i think we need to pick an RB on the 1st day though I do not find today's favorite flavor Lynch worth a #12. Most mocks seem to have him at around #18 or have us reaching for him at #12. I rather see us trade down and either go with Hunt or if we pick up enough extras in trade maybe go for Irons. In terms of extra picks we got for WM and from trading down, this gives us a lot of room to move Crowell to MLB (I can see folks arguing he would simply be another F-B but i was willing to pay this cost to the extent I would likely have even franchised Fletch to keep him around for a year while we developed an LB to take his place). I actually think that folks badmouth Crowell's ability a bit too much. While it is doubtful he is much of an upgrade in production over F-B, I think his stat lines support what I see in him that: 1. You can see he knows the D well through his play in pre-season in his second year when he spelled F-B and took over playcalling duties. Further, I think the Bills moved him in to fill in for TKO as WLB when he tore his Achilles and then at SLB when his strained hammy forced him out last season even though this was a change of positions because he had shown he knew the positions well through his playcalling ability and that he was the best back-up LB on the roster. 2. He has shown very good pass coverage techniques with him pulling in 2 INTs in a season shortened by injury when Fletch led the team with 4. His INT against Miami in the first game was critical to our win IMHO and he rang up a number of passes defended at both Will and Sam. 3. The question will be whether he is the attacking LB we want, but again his stats indicate that he may well be as he rang up two sacks last year (again in shortened season he was near the top among LBs) and was credited with roughly 125 tackles when he replaced TKO and his 80+ in a shortened season last year are good indicators he will hit as well as pass cover. No one should assume that he will be the answer to our LB concerns, but no one should panic either and the complaints about his play seem to not take into account his stats were not bad and showed the diversity of skills we need from and MLB in a Cover 2. Even though Willis is almost certainly faster than Crowell and has a rep as a tackling machine, unless those who root for Willis being taken want to somehow support an argument that this rookie is gonna read plays like a vet (he sure struggled with pass coverage in the Senior Bowl) its hard to see anything more than wishful thinking and the usual fact-free opinions claiming that his first year is gonna be much more than some great episodes but in general a lot of painful moments. My personal feeling is that the Golden Boys are not as sanguine as some posters seem to be about the idea of picking Willis because he secures the MLB position for the future. If Ralph was actually as patient as some propose, I think rather than dumping WM now, the potential (if not likelihood) of far better performance from him in a contract season of 07 behind a likely significantly improved OL with a more effective JP running the O, barring injury the Bills still had franchising rights to him next off-season and barring injury we would have had a shot at getting out first back. Ralph seems to know that there are no guarantees at his age and he is happy to dump players rather than play the contract game and likewise I doubt he will settle for going through a similar development curve with the quarterback of the defense he went through with the quaterback of the offense. So the options I guess (and/or endorse) are: 1. Trade down 2. Pick Okoye if he is available and I have to pick someone to answer your question. I think it is a misread to conclude the reason we had trouble stopping the run was due to F-Bs failings. He played the game we asked him to play and as shown by him leading the team and NFL LBs in INTs, the sheme tended toward him pass covering and he did this. One can complain about him making an intial hit to deep in our backfield, but given he led the Bills easily in tackles and his solo tackles outweighed his assisted ones 2:1, the problem was not necessarily him being too weak or light to bring an opponent down. His rep is that of a wise vet and also of the high motor guys the Bills love. I think his late hits were because our scheme had him play that way and if you want to see LB hits nearer the LOS, the first thing we need to do is strengthen the DT play because if F-Bs first hit is in our backfield by definition the runner avoided or rant through our DTs.
patamunzo Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 I have him at a 4.51 from the combine, but I agree, its a significant drop either way. I have no idea what type of surface he ran it on. Patrick Willis LB Willis (6-1, 237 pounds) ran the 40-yard dash in 4.37 and 4.38. He also had a 4.37 short shuttle and 7.10 three-cone drill. He stood on his numbers from the Combine for the rest.(The workout was held indoors on FieldTurf. ) Source: NFL.com
obie_wan Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 2. Pick Okoye if he is available and I have to pick someone to answer your question. I think it is a misread to conclude the reason we had trouble stopping the run was due to F-Bs failings. He played the game we asked him to play and as shown by him leading the team and NFL LBs in INTs, the sheme tended toward him pass covering and he did this. One can complain about him making an intial hit to deep in our backfield, but given he led the Bills easily in tackles and his solo tackles outweighed his assisted ones 2:1, the problem was not necessarily him being too weak or light to bring an opponent down. His rep is that of a wise vet and also of the high motor guys the Bills love. I think his late hits were because our scheme had him play that way and if you want to see LB hits nearer the LOS, the first thing we need to do is strengthen the DT play because if F-Bs first hit is in our backfield by definition the runner avoided or rant through our DTs. We need to improve LB play at all 3 positions. Why you think Crowell will be an improvement over Fletcher (and better than Willis) when he has never played MLB in the cover-2 in a real game is simply wishful thinking. Bills are moving closer to signing Chris Brown to elimiante another gaping hole to be filled in the draft. By drat time, there will be one unfilled hole - MLB. Unfortuantely there is really only 1 player in the draft who they would be comfortable with attemptin gto start in 2007. Just like the tunnell vision from last year in locking onto Whitner because they needed a starter, it seems they will draft Willis even if they have to move up to get him. Especially if the draft plays out like the latest PFT mock, which leaves nothing of value for teh Bills at #12.
Pyrite Gal Posted March 22, 2007 Posted March 22, 2007 We need to improve LB play at all 3 positions. You are right, this is a good argument for trading down (rather than shooting the whole 1st round wad on merely 1 LB) and getting more early picks to draft more better LBs.
Recommended Posts