C.Biscuit97 Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 McKelvin makes our secondary complete? We'll now keep Brady and Co. at bay because of the McKelvin addition? I don't care who your corners are, unless you get the push up front you will continue to get lit up. Don't get me wrong, good CBs help, obviously, but unless Stroud comes in and does what he is projected to do, not much else will change. If Stroud can't command double teams freeing up your edge guys (who aren't world beaters to begin with) your CBs will be exposed regardless. As far as your sarcasm regarding OL, well, a C may not have been the pick @ 11 a particular G would have helped tremondously. Schobel, Kelsay, and Denney combined for 26.5 sacks (more than the Giants big 3) in 2006 playing next to Larry Tripplet and Tim Anderson. So did they magically all become terrible? I'm assuming no. The biggest difference was no Nate Clements. D-line helps the secondary and the secondary helps the d-line. Funny that all the people complaining about not picking oline don't point out that the last 2 Super Bowl champs picked corners in the 1st round.
eball Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 How did the OL look on 3rd and short? Did you see any push from the Center position? Let me know because I do want to hear about it. As for the corners in 07, do you think that a better pass rush might have helped them even a little? If you are happy about a football team in Buffalo devoting its top resources to the secondary time and again, that is great. My point is that others mights disagree. Also, losses shouldn't surprise you. How much money was devoted to the OL prior to the 2007 season, when Dockery, Walker, and Whittle were signed in FA? Does that amount qualify as "top resources?" After Peters became the starter at LT, was he not rewarded with a handsome contract extension to lock him up long-term? Granted, that contract will likely need to be redone sooner rather than later, but it still amazes me that you act as though the Bills -- since Donahoe left town -- have ignored the OL at the expense of the secondary. It just ain't true.
stuckincincy Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 Funny that all the people complaining about not picking oline don't point out that the last 2 Super Bowl champs picked corners in the 1st round. Perhaps because they spent previous time and draft picks keeping a good OL, and were able to go for corners? Dunno....
colin Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 Schobel, Kelsay, and Denney combined for 26.5 sacks (more than the Giants big 3) in 2006 playing next to Larry Tripplet and Tim Anderson. So did they magically all become terrible? I'm assuming no. The biggest difference was no Nate Clements. D-line helps the secondary and the secondary helps the d-line. Funny that all the people complaining about not picking oline don't point out that the last 2 Super Bowl champs picked corners in the 1st round. if you were a dog i'd pet you biscuit!!!!! the 11th pick on a guard who what, might start at RG? maybe move someone to C? if we keep 9 men out of the box we can run block just fine -- we need talent on our d and that's what we went out and got. it's just laughable that every highly rated OL is just assumed by fans to be able to come in and be a probowler right away, while secondary players on D are all just chumps who are a waste because all that matter is the pass rush which of course means the front 4 should be able to get there before anyone has to even cover. DRUGS!!! THIS BOARD IS ON DRUGS!!
todd Posted May 12, 2008 Author Posted May 12, 2008 Perhaps because they spent previous time and draft picks keeping a good OL, and were able to go for corners? Dunno.... Yeah. Check FA 2007 for Buffalo. I'd say the paid a boatload of $$ to upgrade the OL. Buffalo couldn't go another year without replacing losses at CB.
Bill from NYC Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 How much money was devoted to the OL prior to the 2007 season, when Dockery, Walker, and Whittle were signed in FA? Does that amount qualify as "top resources?" After Peters became the starter at LT, was he not rewarded with a handsome contract extension to lock him up long-term? Granted, that contract will likely need to be redone sooner rather than later, but it still amazes me that you act as though the Bills -- since Donahoe left town -- have ignored the OL at the expense of the secondary. It just ain't true. It isn't all about the OL. Jauron/Levy wasted far too many resources on the secondary on a team with a questionable foundation, let alone that sometimes plays in the elements, where passing often matters less. Forget the multiple free agent dbs, how about a #8, #11, an early 3rd, and 2 4ths in 3 drafts? Not excessive? OK, let me know when enough is enough.
colin Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 It isn't all about the OL. Jauron/Levy wasted far too many resources on the secondary on a team with a questionable foundation, let alone that sometimes plays in the elements, where passing often matters less. Forget the multiple free agent dbs, how about a #8, #11, an early 3rd, and 2 4ths in 3 drafts? Not excessive? OK, let me know when enough is enough. we've rebuilt our entire secondary with the exception of mcgee. that's 8-11 guys in total bill. the free agents we got were lower tier cheap ones. we let vincent, milloy, and clements go. we've spent picks or signed big FAs in every position with the exception of WR until round 2 this year.
HarkinBanks Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 From Peter King's article: According to NFL playing-time documents, the average third corner in the league played 57 percent of his team's defensive snaps last year. I had no idea it was that high. Not only that, we play in a division with the Patriots. Any discussion regarding our need for more than two starting corners is now dead. 57% of snaps for what used to be called a dime corner? Wow. I'm surprised. We might as well be discussing whether or not we need 3 starting LBs. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writ.../11/mmqb/1.html You know what is really interesting about this....remember the Oilers/Greatest Comeback game? As memory serves, the Bills switched from a dime defense to the base 3-4 in the second half and did a much better job against the run and shoot...that's when the whole game turned around. IMO, at some point, it's all about having your best players on the field, regardless of alignment.
stuckincincy Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 Yeah. Check FA 2007 for Buffalo. I'd say the paid a boatload of $$ to upgrade the OL. Buffalo couldn't go another year without replacing losses at CB. Yes...you pay a boatload of $$$ to buy FAs when you do things like this year...grabbing their 1st OL at pick #219 in the 7th of this draft. 22 of 32 clubs picked an OL by rnd. 4 this year...
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 Perhaps because they spent previous time and draft picks keeping a good OL, and were able to go for corners? Dunno.... The Giants o-line: Kareem McKenzie (free agent, former 3rd rounder) Chris Snee (2nd rounder, impregnated Couglin's daughther) Shawn O'Hara (UDFA) Rich Seubert (UDFA) David Diehl (5th rounder) The Colts o-line: Ryan Diem (4th rounder) Charlie Jonson (6th rounder) Jeff Saturday (UDFA) Ryan Lilja (UDFA) Tony Ugoh (2nd rounder) The Pats oline: Nick Kaczur (3rd round) Stephen Neal (UDFA) Dan Koppen (5th rounder) Logan Mankins (1st rounder) Matt Light (2nd round) The Bills oline: Langston Walker (FA, former 2nd rounder) Brad Butler (5th round) Melvin Fowler (FA, former 3rd rounder) Derrick Dockery (FA, former 3rd rounder) Jason Peters (UDFA) And if you add in sometime starter Duke Preston (3rd round), the Bills have 3 players on their line picked in the 3rd or higher. The Giants have 2, the Colts have one, and the Pats have 3. Again, there is more than one way to build a football team. This notion of drafting o-line high to achieve success is clearly outdated.
Huuuge Bills Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 The Giants o-line: Kareem McKenzie (free agent, former 3rd rounder)Chris Snee (2nd rounder, impregnated Couglin's daughther) Shawn O'Hara (UDFA) Rich Seubert (UDFA) David Diehl (5th rounder) The Colts o-line: Ryan Diem (4th rounder) Charlie Jonson (6th rounder) Jeff Saturday (UDFA) Ryan Lilja (UDFA) Tony Ugoh (2nd rounder) The Pats oline: Nick Kaczur (3rd round) Stephen Neal (UDFA) Dan Koppen (5th rounder) Logan Mankins (1st rounder) Matt Light (2nd round) The Bills oline: Langston Walker (FA, former 2nd rounder) Brad Butler (5th round) Melvin Fowler (FA, former 3rd rounder) Derrick Dockery (FA, former 3rd rounder) Jason Peters (UDFA) And if you add in sometime starter Duke Preston (3rd round), the Bills have 3 players on their line picked in the 3rd or higher. The Giants have 2, the Colts have one, and the Pats have 3. Again, there is more than one way to build a football team. This notion of drafting o-line high to achieve success is clearly outdated. What's wrong with you? Why did you have to go and bring actual facts into this debate? Clearly there is one way to build a team, one clear-cut, black and white formula. You ALWAYS draft lineman with your first 5 picks, then you get any other players in late rounds. And if you have your standard 47 pro-bowl caliber linemen on the roster, then and only then are you allowed to maybe draft a RB or LB in the 3rd or 4th round.
stuckincincy Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 The Giants o-line: Kareem McKenzie (free agent, former 3rd rounder)Chris Snee (2nd rounder, impregnated Couglin's daughther) Shawn O'Hara (UDFA) Rich Seubert (UDFA) David Diehl (5th rounder) The Colts o-line: Ryan Diem (4th rounder) Charlie Jonson (6th rounder) Jeff Saturday (UDFA) Ryan Lilja (UDFA) Tony Ugoh (2nd rounder) The Pats oline: Nick Kaczur (3rd round) Stephen Neal (UDFA) Dan Koppen (5th rounder) Logan Mankins (1st rounder) Matt Light (2nd round) The Bills oline: Langston Walker (FA, former 2nd rounder) Brad Butler (5th round) Melvin Fowler (FA, former 3rd rounder) Derrick Dockery (FA, former 3rd rounder) Jason Peters (UDFA) And if you add in sometime starter Duke Preston (3rd round), the Bills have 3 players on their line picked in the 3rd or higher. The Giants have 2, the Colts have one, and the Pats have 3. Again, there is more than one way to build a football team. This notion of drafting o-line high to achieve success is clearly outdated. I guess it depends on who is doing the picking, whatever round....clearly. And it's fairly easy to crow about an OL pass protection that was near the basement in passes attempted. Let's see what happens when (if) the Bills with Hardy approach at least middle-of the-pack in attempts, as well as deeper patterns. We can only wait and see what the new OC does...
todd Posted May 12, 2008 Author Posted May 12, 2008 22 of 32 clubs picked an OL by rnd. 4 this year... That's wonderful. Did they spend as much money on OL as the Bills did last year?
stinky finger Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 Schobel, Kelsay, and Denney combined for 26.5 sacks (more than the Giants big 3) in 2006 playing next to Larry Tripplet and Tim Anderson. So did they magically all become terrible? I'm assuming no. The biggest difference was no Nate Clements. D-line helps the secondary and the secondary helps the d-line. Funny that all the people complaining about not picking oline don't point out that the last 2 Super Bowl champs picked corners in the 1st round. Assuming you watched this past SB, wasn't it the constant pressure that forced Brady to play like a mere mortal? Schobel, Denney and Kelsay have no more excuses. The pieces, in theory, are in place for each to shine. We shall see.
stinky finger Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 That's wonderful. Did they spend as much money on OL as the Bills did last year? Does spending that money mean success? Ask the Redskins.
Lori Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 You know what is really interesting about this....remember the Oilers/Greatest Comeback game? As memory serves, the Bills switched from a dime defense to the base 3-4 in the second half and did a much better job against the run and shoot...that's when the whole game turned around. IMO, at some point, it's all about having your best players on the field, regardless of alignment. Absolutely true: 'Dime' shelved as Buffalo's 3-4 finds the zone In the first half of Sunday's AFC wild-card playoff game, the Buffalo Bills' defense looked like it usually does against the Houston Oilers -- clueless. Only this was worse than usual. But after yielding 284 yards and 28 points the first 30 minutes, the Bills found their defensive bearings and allowed just 145 yards and three points the rest of the game. Bills defensive coordinator Walt Corey chucked the six-defensive back package the Bils had been playing and went back to the Bills' regular 3-4 alignment the entire second half. "Unfortunately, they were moving the ball on us, and Coach Corey said the only thing we really have left is our regular defense," said linebacker Carlton Bailey, who played the whole second half. "We went out there and said, 'Hey, if a wide receiver comes by, tattoo 'em and everybody run to the ball.' That's basically what we did." "This is an attitude game," Corey said. "Sometimes you start playing a game and you're afraid to make things happen or afraid to make a mistake. We didn't do anything the first half. We were playing with our dime defense. I thought the scheme of the dime defense was good, but we didn't make anything happen." ... but at some point, your corners need to be counted among the best players. Those extra DBs were career backup Cliff Hicks and rookie 7th-round pick Kurt Schulz; they were replaced by veteran LBs Carlton Bailey and Marvcus Patton. The transactions after that season were telling; Mickey Washington was signed as a free agent to replace Hicks, and even though the Bills still had J.D. Williams (#1) and Nate Odomes (#2) on the roster, they spent their next #1 pick on Thomas Smith.
eball Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 It isn't all about the OL. Jauron/Levy wasted far too many resources on the secondary on a team with a questionable foundation, let alone that sometimes plays in the elements, where passing often matters less. Forget the multiple free agent dbs, how about a #8, #11, an early 3rd, and 2 4ths in 3 drafts? Not excessive? OK, let me know when enough is enough. Well, since you asked -- the answer is a resounding "no!" Of those five draft picks, three are expected to be opening day starters this year (Whitner, McKelvin, Simpson) and a fourth (Corner) will probably grab the nickel. Only Youboty appears to be a bust, and in the 3rd round that's not completely out of the ordinary. I think an 80% success rate is pretty good, but that's just me. As for the questionable foundation -- when Levy and Jauron arrived the Bills immediately went to work on that. Five new OL starters (that would be the ENTIRE line, Bill). New QB, new RB, new MLB and WLB, five new DTs, and of course, the entire new secondary you loathe. Let ME know when enough is enough.
Captain Hindsight Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 We already had three starting corners. I'll still be disappointed with the result of the first round if McKelvin is just a solid starter. He needs to be something special to make me look back on this kindly. Id rather have a solid starter than a bust Call me old fashioned
HarkinBanks Posted May 12, 2008 Posted May 12, 2008 Absolutely true: ... but at some point, your corners need to be counted among the best players. Those extra DBs were career backup Cliff Hicks and rookie 7th-round pick Kurt Schulz; they were replaced by veteran LBs Carlton Bailey and Marvcus Patton. The transactions after that season were telling; Mickey Washington was signed as a free agent to replace Hicks, and even though the Bills still had J.D. Williams (#1) and Nate Odomes (#2) on the roster, they spent their next #1 pick on Thomas Smith. Thanks a lot for the info...and completely agree with you.
todd Posted May 12, 2008 Author Posted May 12, 2008 Does spending that money mean success? Ask the Redskins. Yes, lets compare the Bills FA strategy to that of the Redskins. That would be a quite valid comparison.
Recommended Posts