Scouts Inc. Fantasy O-Line rankings

[Sisyphean Bills]

That might make sense. I don't see that changing what's been right is a good thing however. Evans needs to be the X guy. Some were hard on Evans last year, but it's not like we went to him nearly as often as we did the year prior.

 

I don't know what Hardy played in college, but as we all know what happened in college can usually be thrown out the window upon moving to the NFL. Hardy doesn't have the prototypical traits of a #1 WR in the NFL at this point. He may have caught some deep balls last year, but I've already shown that he didn't play any great passing defenses. But another fact is that just about all of his TD catches were in the 7-10 yard range which to me suggests that first of all like everyone says he will be a great Red Zone target, but that he also will have the greatest use within 5-15 yards of the line. He's probably not going t be a good slot, but who cares. Both Reed and Parrish are very good slots so we don't need him for that.

 

With all of this talk about Hardy, the team really needs to make far greater use of Evans. We should be viewing Hardy as nothing more than making sure that happens. Anything more right now for this season is too optimistic. If Evans leaves, which seems all but certain now, then we can begin talking about what Hardy or Johnson can do next year in the #1 or X if there's even any basis for that kind of discussion.

 

If Hardy's presence doesn't help Evans get back to the kind of numbers he posted in '06 w/ Losman throwing to him and Anthony Thomas at RB and a weaker OL, then Hardy sure isn't going to make up the yardage and scoring deficit on offense.

I think it is unlikely that the Bills switch it up much as well.

 

But, this is what I was thinking. Evans is the smaller guy and he (supposedly) knows this offense. It might be easier for him to flop to the Z. Also, that lets him become the motion guy. With his speed and quickness, that might help him get freed up and allow the offense to dictate coverages to some degree. Bottom line: it's not like what they did last year worked or was well suited to Evans.

[VOR]

I think it is unlikely that the Bills switch it up much as well.

 

But, this is what I was thinking. Evans is the smaller guy and he (supposedly) knows this offense. It might be easier for him to flop to the Z. Also, that lets him become the motion guy. With his speed and quickness, that might help him get freed up and allow the offense to dictate coverages to some degree. Bottom line: it's not like what they did last year worked or was well suited to Evans.

What about 2006? That seemed to work for Evans. And last year featured the same OC and personnel except for some upgrades on the O-line.

[keepthefaith]

What about 2006? That seemed to work.

 

Yes, but the cast of characters was slightly different. The Bill are not committed to a dramatic and explosive show. Their newest act is one better suited to the kinder and gentler crowd.

[Sisyphean Bills]

What about 2006? That seemed to work for Evans. And last year featured the same OC and personnel except for some upgrades on the O-line.

You mean when JP Losman was the starting QB?

[VOR]

You mean when JP Losman was the starting QB?

The offense was sputtering under JP for the first 2 games, when by all accounts it should have picked-up where it left off in 2006. After Edwards, a rookie, came in, I can understand why the greater importance was to protect him and take fewer chances.

 

But what I was getting at is that the Bills didn't have a #2 WR last year, and I knew that would be a problem prior to the start of the season. In 2006, Price was the #2, and while he wasn't any great shakes, he was still the best the Bills had. But that was his last gasp as his performances before he got injured in the 4th game show. As I've said, if nothing else, I expect Hardy to take attention away from Evans like Price did in 2006.

 

But as to Fairchild, why did he suddenly take away audibles from JP in 2007? Why did he have the team practice plays, only to not use them during games? I can't figure those out, and I don't know if Jauron could have been wise to them before it was too late.

[krazykat]

You have no idea what you are talking about. You have convinced me that you know nothing about football, other than the fact that you like JP Losman in some way.

 

1999 you bring up? Rushing stats? Doug Flutie ran for 476 yards in 1999, most of them on broken plays. Flutie thrived on broken plays. Take away his yardage and how do your nonsensical rankings look? Any different?

Wrt passing, Flutie was most effective at taking the snap and rolling out. Rarely did he have a pocket to stand in and when he did, it must have been pretty hard to see over it. Many of his passes were blocked at scrimage.

The above is not meant to blast Flutie, who was perfect for this team. He masked the gaping wound of a pathetic OL, and was good at getting out of trouble. Again, that was his game.

 

To give Ostroski credit for these meaningless stats and label him as an above average OC proves that you really don't know anything about football. You are good at complaining and taking sides. You are a JP Fanboy because you like his stats (or perhaps in this one instance there are other reasons). You dislike Jauron because you don't like his stats. You blast Edwards because of his rookie stats. Now, Jerry O is above average because of yardage compiled by Flutie. Oh, and the Bills stout defense stopping their opponents and giving Flutie the ball again and again means nothing in you clouded statistical world either, right? Gotcha!

 

You should give up football and go to other types of events. Are there calculator conventions?

See, here's where things break down for you Bill, and in spades.

 

The original discussion was about Ostroski, no?

 

I never said anything about where the yards were coming from particularly. BUT, does it even matter?

 

My point, was that with a crap line outside of Brown, Fina, and Ostroski, which no doubt you would not argue that today's is better as would most outside of the Cs, even if you discount Flutie's rushing yards, the team still would have ranked 20th in yardage.

 

Now perhaps my knowledge of math is somehow a little twisted, but isn't even 20 a higher ranking than 30?

 

I don't know, perhaps you in your superior knowledge can inform all the people here how last year's offense with Fowler at C, and clearly Peters as being better than any linemen we had in '99, and Dockery close to that, how our performance last year in any way, shape or form, particularly given that it had about 400 less yards AFTER Flutie's rushing yards are discounted, was better than that of '99 although it ranked 30th and put up fewer yards than either the '99 or '00 Os did.

 

But then you convenienlty don't even address the '00 offense where Ostroski was a year older and Flutie barely played and had an insignificant amount of rushing yards. Yet, we impproved offensively to 9th in yardage.

 

So perhaps you could then either apply the same logic to that season or come up with a different argument.

 

And you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. The numbers don't lie Bill. Perhaps doing your homework would help, huh.

 

To give Ostroski credit for these meaningless stats and label him as an above average OC proves that you really don't know anything about football. You are good at complaining and taking sides. You are a JP Fanboy because you like his stats (or perhaps in this one instance there are other reasons). You dislike Jauron because you don't like his stats. You blast Edwards because of his rookie stats. Now, Jerry O is above average because of yardage compiled by Flutie. Oh, and the Bills stout defense stopping their opponents and giving Flutie the ball again and again means nothing in you clouded statistical world either, right? Gotcha!

 

This is where your argument begins to break down and fall into a tantrum category.

 

I'm not giving Ostroski credit, necessarily, for "those meaningless stats," which frankly aren't so meaningless except to you because you're getting your a$$ kicked in this debate. So what, they're meaningless because you say so. LOL

 

What I'm doing is attempting to find out why the team then outperformed the team now given the contrast between Ostroski and Fowler.

 

Nevertheless, there has to be a reason why the offense performed better, under Flutie one year, and then even better under Johnson the next. Right? Or is this simply because Jupiter had a slight glitch in it's orbit that year now. I mean really, talk about picking and choosing your arguments in a vacuum otherwise simply to illustrate your point, and then to turn on me in this way.

 

So which component of the offense, which ranked about average that year with or without Flutie's rushing total, and 9th overall, 15th without Flutie's 161 yards rushing, do you say was the reason why we weren't ranked 30th like we were last year and also couldn't get any 3rd down conversions or 1st downs in general?

 

I'll give you a multiple choice:

 

A. Rob Johnson

B. The RBBC of Antowain Smith, Sammy Morris, and Shaun Bryson

C. Marcus Spriggs, Jamie Nails, Robert Hicks, and John Fina

D. Joe Pendry

 

And look, I'm not saying that Ostroski had a great year, not at all. In fact I do remember him struggling in his last season. But the team performed better offensively, both under Flutie and Johnson. But Fowler sucks. I just find it hilarious that anyone would think that an OL that "led" us to the NFL's worst offensive production was actually good or that the worst lineman on it, or maybe second to worst, was actually a decent player.

 

As to Ostroski, I know he didn't play well in '00, but in '99 he got a very big contract up to that point. I remember that I thought it was too big, but still, obviously the team thought that he played well enough at G in '98 to justify it, and while he did begin to turn down, I doubt it was by as much as you say all at once. Meanwhile, the team that year besides Brown and Fina had nothing but one year signees pretty much to man the line otherwise.

 

As to my "being a JP fan boy," hardly. I don't think he's any good either. But the fact remains, that the team scored more points with him in there on average last year and he didn't even play with the same team the year prior and a much worse one. So since when here does something other than the points scored in games mean more? I'm no JP fan, believe me.

 

As to "disliking Jauron," I think he's an awful coach. You will maybe lecture me/us on why he is a good coach but it will include all soft type of stuff because his record as a coach suggests that he sucks and in no small way.

 

And of course I "blast Edwards because of his rookie stats!" WTF am I supposed to use, his stats from high school? I also use the stats of the team, which paint in no unclear manner, that the Bills, under Edwards, were horrible at scoring and the worst in the league. That's worse than teams like the Raiders with no RB and Jamarcus Russell, worse than Brodie Coyle and Damon Huard in KC with no RB, worse than Cleo Lemon in Miami, and any team that you care to mention. On a per game basis we scored fewer points as a team than any of the other 31 teams with Edwards in there. We were also the worst at 3rd down conversions under him by a LONG shot over the 31st ranked team too and in ball movement in general. So what particularly is it that intrigues people about Edwards amidst all of these DFL statistical indicators? It can only be "the way in which he does things," ala "poise."

 

But hey, if a player looks good but produces little, and you're satisfied with that, why are you upset when I challenge that?

 

Now, you'll lecture us on how good Lynch is, so then Einstein, how come we were the worst team in the league last year in offensive scoring then and worse under Edwards than under Losman on average? This should be interesting.

[krazykat]

If you paid attention, some of us have been saying that Hardy's presence, if nothing else, will draw attention away from Evans. You simply cannot ignore a guy who is 6'5" 220#, runs a 4.45, is agile, and has a 37" vertical jump, or even put a LB'er on him.

I have been paying attention. You haven't.

 

First of all you say will. It might. If Hardy sucks it won't do anything now will it.

 

Second of all, to what extent? What will be the overall TD production increase for our offense, which hasn't changed otherwise VOR? Go ahead, wager a guess all the way around.

[krazykat]

You are good at complaining and taking sides.

And since you got the nod from VOR on this, what particularly am I good about taking sides on?

 

Please don't say the QB issue.

 

As to complaining, yes, as a fan when my team sucks, I complain unlike you who make excuses for the people that suck.

 

So who's the bigger fan, the one of us that is dissatisfied and insists on corrective action, real corrective action not just "because they say so" corrective action, or you who only makes excuses and defends the pieces of this organization that have absolutely no proven track record of success before or during when they are here?

[krazykat]

I think it is unlikely that the Bills switch it up much as well.

 

But, this is what I was thinking. Evans is the smaller guy and he (supposedly) knows this offense. It might be easier for him to flop to the Z. Also, that lets him become the motion guy. With his speed and quickness, that might help him get freed up and allow the offense to dictate coverages to some degree. Bottom line: it's not like what they did last year worked or was well suited to Evans.

I dunno, I'm thinking that that role sets both Evans and therefore the team back, not ahead.

 

We'll see what happens.

 

It's all gonna come down to what Hardy and maybe Johnson are capable of. If one shows that they are a Derrick Bowes type in their rookie season, then the options open up for us. But if Johnson plays like a 7th round pick and Hardy struggles and needs to be coddled, then it really won't matter because little else will have changed, eh.

[krazykat]

What about 2006? That seemed to work for Evans. And last year featured the same OC and personnel except for some upgrades on the O-line.

Oh, you're quick. And what was the primary difference from '06 to '07?

 

I'll help you out. Evans had one TD pass over 30 yards for a TD last year from Edwards. In '06 he had many. Five or six. Edwards didn't have another one 10 yards or more otherwise. Hell, 7 of JP's 8 TD passes to Evans were 21 or longer. At least it was fun to watch rather than the slow bleed offense rotting throughout the game.

[Adam]

I have been paying attention. You haven't.

 

First of all you say will. It might. If Hardy sucks it won't do anything now will it.

 

Second of all, to what extent? What will be the overall TD production increase for our offense, which hasn't changed otherwise VOR? Go ahead, wager a guess all the way around.

I agree with your point that if he is THAT bad, they can put a DT on him and he still won't do anything. Even as a rookie, I don't see him as being that bad though. I don't think moving the WR's around will hurt us all that much- Evans may be short, but he is pretty talented and can handle wherever we put him.

 

Our offense probably won't be much better than last year, but if they make a few steps in the right direction, that is acceptable.

[Sisyphean Bills]

The offense was sputtering under JP for the first 2 games, when by all accounts it should have picked-up where it left off in 2006. After Edwards, a rookie, came in, I can understand why the greater importance was to protect him and take fewer chances.

 

But what I was getting at is that the Bills didn't have a #2 WR last year, and I knew that would be a problem prior to the start of the season. In 2006, Price was the #2, and while he wasn't any great shakes, he was still the best the Bills had. But that was his last gasp as his performances before he got injured in the 4th game show. As I've said, if nothing else, I expect Hardy to take attention away from Evans like Price did in 2006.

 

But as to Fairchild, why did he suddenly take away audibles from JP in 2007?

The way I understand it, Losman didn't have audibles in 06. The Mike Martz offense, the one Fairchild installed, doesn't have audibles. That means the Rams won a Super Bowl without any audibles.

Why did he have the team practice plays, only to not use them during games? I can't figure those out, and I don't know if Jauron could have been wise to them before it was too late.

So you are contending that Jauron doesn't know what is going on in his practices? That instills confidence.

[obie_wan]

If you paid attention, some of us have been saying that Hardy's presence, if nothing else, will draw attention away from Evans. You simply cannot ignore a guy who is 6'5" 220#, runs a 4.45, is agile, and has a 37" vertical jump, or even put a LB'er on him.

 

you can - until he proves he can beat you by making plays.

 

His mere presence will not change anything on the field in regard to Evans.

 

 

Same way teams will continue to stack the box until Edwards actually hit big plays to force them off the line.

[VOR]

Oh, you're quick. And what was the primary difference from '06 to '07?

 

I'll help you out. Evans had one TD pass over 30 yards for a TD last year from Edwards. In '06 he had many. Five or six. Edwards didn't have another one 10 yards or more otherwise. Hell, 7 of JP's 8 TD passes to Evans were 21 or longer. At least it was fun to watch rather than the slow bleed offense rotting throughout the game.

The biggest problem was the lack of a #2 WR. Without one and the defenses being able to key more onto Evans, the long passes, which are low percentage to begin with, become even lower. And after Edwards was the starter, again as I said, they tried to limit his exposure.

 

As for whether Hardy WILL take attention away from Evans, I believe he will. I think you over-estimate just how much opposing DB's will be able to sit on him at the LOS.

[krazykat]

I agree with your point that if he is THAT bad, they can put a DT on him and he still won't do anything. Even as a rookie, I don't see him as being that bad though. I don't think moving the WR's around will hurt us all that much- Evans may be short, but he is pretty talented and can handle wherever we put him.

 

Our offense probably won't be much better than last year, but if they make a few steps in the right direction, that is acceptable.

Well, it's not as if you take an offense as horrific as our was last season under Edwards, add a handful of TDs to it and it becomes average. I think as some have said if Hardy himself scores 5 TDs it will be considered good, which is reasonable in a great season.

 

So the entire difference otherwise then seems to stem from Evans' increase in production as a result and ignoring anything regarding Edwards or the OL in even being able to do that.

 

So what will Evans' production jump to from 5? 8, 10, 12? Only 8 WRs in the league last year had more than 10 TD receptions and all were on far more prolific passing teams than the Bills were or will be this year. So let's say it jumps to 10 which is extremely reasonable. So the team logs 10 more TDs which still places it at only around 20th or so, still far from anything average. And again, that's if Edwards has no issues and improves and Hardy does step up. Meanwhile, we lost Gaines who was our best TE and 3rd leading TD receiver last year.

 

As to steps in the right direction, this is the third season of a new head coach. We need more than steps in the right direction, we need winning and a winning season and a demonstrated ability to play solid fundamental football which we were very far from last year. Anything less is unacceptible. This isn't try it for a decade to see if you can get it right once. If Jauron can't go at least 9-7 while proving that this team can beat more than teams like last years Jets, Fins, Ravens, and Bengals then it's time to move on.

[krazykat]

The biggest problem was the lack of a #2 WR. Without one and the defenses being able to key more onto Evans, the long passes, which are low percentage to begin with, become even lower. And after Edwards was the starter, again as I said, they tried to limit his exposure.

 

As for whether Hardy WILL take attention away from Evans, I believe he will. I think you over-estimate just how much opposing DB's will be able to sit on him at the LOS.

You enjoy digging holes, don't ya.

 

I think you overestimate many things about this team.

 

It's not Evans' getting open downfield that I don't think will occur, he was open last year at times when Edwards simply didn't see him or was able to deliver. Doesn't have to be 50 times to prove problematic, it only takes a half dozen to suggest issues there and there were at least that. Throw in some to other receivers too and it merely compounds the problem.

 

I have no faith in Edwards or the OL. Why should I, if either had done their job to even slightly below average standards last season we wouldn't have had the worst offense in the league under Edwards and one of the worst if not the worst one in Bills franchise history as well.

 

Hardy will command a one-on-one just like whomever else lined up at WR in whatever spot he assumes did last season until he can prove something in this league. You already talk about him as if it's a given that he's a shoe-in for success. The odds are strongly against it, for any WR, not just Hardy. But that doesn't seem to factor into your assessment.

 

In other words, the chances are greater that he amounts to nothing than they are that he even puts up a 500/5 season.

 

So until he does, which is all that several of us are saying, it hasn't happened and the offense isn't any different otherwise. So the offense will essentially only take a leap if Hardy explodes, the chances of which are remote.

[VOR]

The way I understand it, Losman didn't have audibles in 06. The Mike Martz offense, the one Fairchild installed, doesn't have audibles. That means the Rams won a Super Bowl without any audibles.

If that's true, then I'm surprised the offense wasn't almost as bad in 2006 as last year. And it's no wonder the Bills have struggled under Fairchild. You must be able to audible out of a bad play.

 

So you are contending that Jauron doesn't know what is going on in his practices? That instills confidence.

He's a defensive guy. I was fine with him leaving the offense to his OC, provided the OC knows what he is doing. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Fairchild blamed a lot of his problems on a rookie QB.

[krazykat]

The biggest problem was the lack of a #2 WR. Without one and the defenses being able to key more onto Evans, the long passes, which are low percentage to begin with, become even lower. And after Edwards was the starter, again as I said, they tried to limit his exposure.

 

As for whether Hardy WILL take attention away from Evans, I believe he will. I think you over-estimate just how much opposing DB's will be able to sit on him at the LOS.

And no, the biggest problem for our offense last year was a line that couldn't block and a QB that couldn't move the ball. It's ridiculous to blame that lack of superior receivers after a quite proven Evans when numerous other teams saw passing production greater than ours with even less.

 

The problem is Edwards and the OL. Whether both or either improve remains to be seen. I see no reason why the line would improve significantly however. Edwards in his second season will certianly have an edge, but so too will our opponents know what to expect, so that may very well be awash.

[krazykat]

If that's true, then I'm surprised the offense wasn't almost as bad in 2006 as last year. And it's no wonder the Bills have struggled under Fairchild. You must be able to audible out of a bad play.

 

 

He's a defensive guy. I was fine with him leaving the offense to his OC, provided the OC knows what he is doing. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Fairchild blamed a lot of his problems on a rookie QB.

Are you suggesting that Schonert won't have problems?

[Bill from NYC]

I never said anything about where the yards were coming from particularly. BUT, does it even matter?

 

My friend, if you cannot answer this question on your own, a meaningful discussion with you is just not possible.

Still, thanks for posting, even though your posts are hollow; void of any real knowledge of football. I for one like to read views that dissent from those of the masses.