Last Guy on the Bench Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I know DT isn't our weakest position, but I keep thinking about what could really help the Bills make the leap this year. The number one answer is that JP improve as much this year as he did last year (i.e., basically move from middle of the pack to a top 10 QB). But I think turning the middle of our D line into a freaking shark tank is the next most effective maneuver. I think Branch will be long gone at 12, but a lot of people see him slipping a bit. If he were there, I'd take him without pause. He may be a little lazy, but he can play any DT position in any defense. If you have a rotation of Branch, McCargo, Triplett, Williams, and Walker, with no one playing more than about half of the snaps, by the 4th quarter the interior of the oppponents OL will be DONE. Won't be able to run. Won't be able to maintain a pocket. And our dudes will be fresh. Everyone else on the defense will look better. With that kind of DL interior, guys like Ellison and Crowell can really use their athleticism without having to fight through too much traffic, and you could pick up Buster Davis or HB Blades in the third round - two guys who could also use their great instincts to dominate in the kind of space the DL would create. (They're probably not physically gifted enough to play well behind a mediocre DL.) Okoye would also be good (and I know they might both be gone), but Branch is my current draft dreamboat. I think you improve your team more by having a dominant unit or two (particularly DL and OL) than you do by spreading your best players around at various positions. And to save all you witty bastards some typing, yes I am smoking very good crack as I ride the short bus to the park where I have a season pass on the retard roller-coaster.
apuszczalowski Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 the only problem with this is that, as long as Hargrove is retained, and Anderson is not, that leaves the Bills with 4 DE, and 4 DT's (Hargrove can also play both) so adding another DT to the roster gives them a total of 9. Thats alot to carry and have dressed for games, so where do you take that extra guy from to make room on the roster?
D_House Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 And to save all you witty bastards some typing, yes I am smoking very good crack as I ride the short bus to the park where I have a season pass on the retard roller-coaster.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I know DT isn't our weakest position, but I keep thinking about what could really help the Bills make the leap this year. The number one answer is that JP improve as much this year as he did last year (i.e., basically move from middle of the pack to a top 10 QB). But I think turning the middle of our D line into a freaking shark tank is the next most effective maneuver. I think Branch will be long gone at 12, but a lot of people see him slipping a bit. If he were there, I'd take him without pause. He may be a little lazy, but he can play any DT position in any defense. If you have a rotation of Branch, McCargo, Triplett, Williams, and Walker, with no one playing more than about half of the snaps, by the 4th quarter the interior of the oppponents OL will be DONE. Won't be able to run. Won't be able to maintain a pocket. And our dudes will be fresh. Everyone else on the defense will look better. With that kind of DL interior, guys like Ellison and Crowell can really use their athleticism without having to fight through too much traffic, and you could pick up Buster Davis or HB Blades in the third round - two guys who could also use their great instincts to dominate in the kind of space the DL would create. (They're probably not physically gifted enough to play well behind a mediocre DL.) Okoye would also be good (and I know they might both be gone), but Branch is my current draft dreamboat. I think you improve your team more by having a dominant unit or two (particularly DL and OL) than you do by spreading your best players around at various positions. And to save all you witty bastards some typing, yes I am smoking very good crack as I ride the short bus to the park where I have a season pass on the retard roller-coaster. Crack notwithstanding, I think you make a good point. I actually see the Bills taking more of a run-stuffing DT either in the 1st or 2nd round. We are set with Walker/Triplett/McCargo at the 3 technique. Williams and Branch (with McCargo on occasion) at the other spot would give us depth and turn our d-line into a dominating unit.
Sketch Soland Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 And to save all you witty bastards some typing, yes I am smoking very good crack as I ride the short bus to the park where I have a season pass on the retard roller-coaster. I must also this
Last Guy on the Bench Posted April 5, 2007 Author Posted April 5, 2007 please, never post again Can't promise that, but I can promise to take your incisive response into consideration as I continue to muse on this matter. You make several good points and present them very logically, but your post is a lot to take in in one sitting. Perhaps after I've had time to digest your argument, I'll come around to your point of view.
Last Guy on the Bench Posted April 5, 2007 Author Posted April 5, 2007 Crack notwithstanding, I think you make a good point. I actually see the Bills taking more of a run-stuffing DT either in the 1st or 2nd round. We are set with Walker/Triplett/McCargo at the 3 technique. Williams and Branch (with McCargo on occasion) at the other spot would give us depth and turn our d-line into a dominating unit. Exactly. I'm like most people in that I don't find a DT pick particularly exciting. A shiny new LB or RB would be more fun. But I think the team would see the greatest improvement by turning the interior DL into something to fear.
Tipster19 Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 Can't promise that, but I can promise to take your incisive response into consideration as I continue to muse on this matter. You make several good points and present them very logically, but your post is a lot to take in in one sitting. Perhaps after I've had time to digest your argument, I'll come around to your point of view. Don't, I agree with you but instead of Branch I've been clamoring for Carriker. Convert him to a DT, he's alot more versatile and motivated. Oh yeah, by the way, I sold him the crack.
The_Real Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 And to save all you witty bastards some typing, yes I am smoking very good crack as I ride the short bus to the park where I have a season pass on the retard roller-coaster. I'm not going to hate on your post or anything but you can't leave yourself this open for criticism. Not with the band of tough guys here on the wall. Here is the deal, I believe we will draft a DT this year but it won't be in the first round. The necessity dropped with the Takeo Spikes trade. MLB has to be our focus and Willis has to be our guy. I'll be blown away if he's not. The Real
Last Guy on the Bench Posted April 5, 2007 Author Posted April 5, 2007 the only problem with this is that, as long as Hargrove is retained, and Anderson is not, that leaves the Bills with 4 DE, and 4 DT's (Hargrove can also play both) so adding another DT to the roster gives them a total of 9. Thats alot to carry and have dressed for games, so where do you take that extra guy from to make room on the roster? Fair point, but it's not that unusual to carry nine DL. As for dressing them, probably not, but I could see dressing only 3 DEs or sitting out one of the DTs (there are always injuries anyway) and dressing 8 altogether. You could still have a nice 4-DT rotation on game day (and Denny can swing inside as well), and have a good chance that all 4 are pretty fresh and healthy (since you can sit the one who is most banged up at any given time).
nemhoff Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 With all due respect, this could be the reason that you're the last guy on the bench.
cieslak86 Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 What is this obsession with avoiding skill positions? We NEED a RB...it's not difficult to understand. We have made moves through trade (D. Walker), free agency (L. Walker, Dockery, Whittle), and re-signings (Kelsay) to improve both our offensive and defensive lines. We did this so we wouldn't have to draft at those positions. I realize that the lines are a huge part of the game, but lord, how many do we need? There are other positions beyond the 2 lines. At this point, the lines are a strong suit on paper and that's good enough for me. If we took an offensive or defensive lineman in any of the first 3 rounds, it would be a blatent ignoring of our real needs (RB, LB, WR, CB). Plus, Branch doesn't at all fit our defense. Our D favors smaller, quicker, penetrating D-lineman while Branch is a space-eater. He also is not known as a guy with a non-stop motor, which Marv and co. is obsessed with, so there is zero chance the Bills end up with Branch.
Last Guy on the Bench Posted April 5, 2007 Author Posted April 5, 2007 With all due respect, this could be the reason that you're the last guy on the bench. Nope. That's because I'm uncoordinated, legally blind, and 94 years old. (But I have good character.)
nemhoff Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 Nope. That's because I'm uncoordinated, legally blind, and 94 years old. (But I have good character.) But do you have a high motor and are you relentless? If so TD will draft you and MK Jr. will love you.
ncbillsfan Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 With McCargo and Williams being in their early 20s, and in their respective second years in the league, added on to the fact that we just traded for Walker, there is no chance in hell we take a DT in the draft..... McCargo has loads of potential and I doubt we take a DT in the first round again. Then again what do i know?
Kelly the Dog Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I, too, would strongly consider taking Branch or Okoye. It's a lot easier for an inferior LB to make a tackle on a RB who can't make it past the LOS because of the DL than it is for a superior LB to make that same tackle when the RB runs free into the secondary. Also, with regard to Hargrove, he is much more of a DE than a DT and also, I believe Walker has played some on the outside, and Okoye or Branch could very likely rush from the outside.
Last Guy on the Bench Posted April 5, 2007 Author Posted April 5, 2007 What is this obsession with avoiding skill positions? We NEED a RB...it's not difficult to understand. We have made moves through trade (D. Walker), free agency (L. Walker, Dockery, Whittle), and re-signings (Kelsay) to improve both our offensive and defensive lines. We did this so we wouldn't have to draft at those positions. I realize that the lines are a huge part of the game, but lord, how many do we need? There are other positions beyond the 2 lines. At this point, the lines are a strong suit on paper and that's good enough for me. If we took an offensive or defensive lineman in any of the first 3 rounds, it would be a blatent ignoring of our real needs (RB, LB, WR, CB). Plus, Branch doesn't at all fit our defense. Our D favors smaller, quicker, penetrating D-lineman while Branch is a space-eater. He also is not known as a guy with a non-stop motor, which Marv and co. is obsessed with, so there is zero chance the Bills end up with Branch. Well, first of all, I'm not obsessed with avoiding skill positions. I like them. Give me Peterson, trade for Turner, I'm happy. Draft Lynch, I'm cautiously optimistic. Secondly, unlike many of you, I don't think there is only one way to look at this draft. I can see a reasonable case for a lot of positions and a lot of different players. I don't think someone who wants to draft an RB or LB or even an OL (Bill in NYC) is crazy. I think those would be nice upgrades to have. I just think creating one dominating unit is the way to go, and if I had to pick one unit to focus on, it would be the DL. Whatever. Third, I don't think that is true about Branch. I think he will fit any kind of defense. As for the motor, that's what people are saying, and it might be true, but if it weren't there would be ZERO chance he was available at 12 (and even now there is only a small chance). Rotate him in for half of the plays. I guarantee no one will run on us. And the guy playing the other half of the plays at that spot (probably Williams, maybe McCargo) will be all fresh and pretty good as well. And finally, I'm not predicting the Bills will do this. I have no idea what they are thinking. I just think it might make sense.
Last Guy on the Bench Posted April 5, 2007 Author Posted April 5, 2007 Don't, I agree with you but instead of Branch I've been clamoring for Carriker. Convert him to a DT, he's alot more versatile and motivated. Oh yeah, by the way, I sold him the crack. Yeah, I'd be happy with him too, especially if he could move inside. Before the Kelsay signing, I thought there was a good chance the Bills would consider him. He's a man among boys at the college level.
Simon Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 Can't promise that, but I can promise to take your incisive response into consideration as I continue to muse on this matter. You make several good points and present them very logically, but your post is a lot to take in in one sitting. Perhaps after I've had time to digest your argument, I'll come around to your point of view.
JStranger76 Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I wouldn't mind a draftee come in and make Larry "THE BUST" Tripplett the odd man out. The guy did next to NOTHING last year and if Branch or Okoye are available when we pick and we select one of em', get rid of Trippletts sorry ass. Walker will fill his role of penetrator and mentor of the young guys. Hey, we'd save some money out of it too.
Recommended Posts