RayFinkle Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 He's completely unproven...and I don't get a good feeling when I hear the Bills FO saying they are high on somebody because____(fill in the blank). We hear it every year on guys like Dockery, whittle, Robert Royal, Tim Anderson, etc....only to see them fall by the wayside. It's pretty risky taking an already thinned out O-line and not getting a tackle, in a draft that had a lot of them to offer. A guy the Bills draft in the 2nd round is going to come in and be a proven starting tackle?
John from Riverside Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 The point made about the 7 or 8 best tackle in the draft being unproven just like our guys drafted last year is a valid one
Thurman#1 Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 Bell wouldn't cause TE to get hurt. He just won't get great push in the running game (unless he's gotten a lot stronger, which is likely). The one thing Bell does well is pass block. Just because he's athletic doesn't mean he's good at pass blocking. I expect him to start off the year maybe at RT, and for Langston Walker to be at LT, and for that to be a disaster. Why not get those three LTs? I just don't think any of them projected as LTs. They were projects or RTs. Once we'd missed Smith, Monroe and Smith, OBD just didn't like any of them. Neither did I.
Thurman#1 Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 How is it a fact any of these guys will be better than Bell? Based on a week of senior bowl practices both Wood and Levitre are now guards. Bell has practiced with NFL players for a year. His knock outta college was size and experience. Now he has a year under his belt in this offense(also trainers and strength people). Plus the staff seems high on him. As a prospect who would you want- Bell or some 2nd rounder from UCONN? Um, neither, honestly.
Christopher Capolupo Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 OK...even if he's gone after round 2...still coulda used a tackle more than another DB. I think you draft players that you like and think make sense on your team. Not players that other people like and think are good fits for their team. If whatever player you wanted to draft turns out to be good on the team he was drafted by, does that mean he would have panned out on the Bills?
Thurman#1 Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 apparently you missed the fact that by drafting 2 guards we can now move 2 of our former "guards" to RT or LT. Chambers is solid at ether tackle, and Butler is big and strong enough to run behind at RT. I don't think it will come to that though. the line is most likely this: LT - Walker LG - Butler C - Hangartner RG - Wood RT - Chambers that is not a BAD o-line. So yes, we improved it without reaching for a tackle which is what you wanted. Wood is a very, very good player that a lot of teams wanted and better than the tackles you mentioned. I am thrilled about him. I also like Levitre because he has the size to be another good OG/OL and was ranked as the highest guard in the draft. Again, the top guard or the 6th best OT? take the best at his position in a case like this. It's exactly waht the bills HAVEN'T been doing. I hate that we took 2 more DBs late, but whatever - if there is one thing this team does well, its develop corners. Think about it, when was the lat time we missed on a CB? the Chris Watson trade with denver? A lot of DBs are necessary when playing the pats, and at least we have a good top 4 in McGee, Leodis, YoBootie and Florence. Corner and one of these shmucks will round that out well. You're right. It's not a bad line. It's just bad in the single most important place. It's like saying "Yeah, we are all set on offense, even though we have Joey Harrington at QB." Chambers is a step down from Walker. Walker is a major step down even from last year's Peters (he can't stop the speed rushers, and I'm sorry, but playing in pre-season really shouldn't convince you different, particularly when they helped him out a lot). Wood is a step down from Butler at RT (he's a rookie). Butler is a major step up at LG, he was our second-best player last year, and personally I don't see them transferring him anywhere. And anyone is a step up from our centers last year. But which position is the one which either stops or allows unabated blind side rushes? LT. It is by far the most important position on the line, and Walker isn't very good.
Thurman#1 Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 In regards the Bills not taking an OT, let us consider that the glaring hole - that being OT - certainly wouldn't have slipped by the F.O. It's not like come Monday they'll be, all of a sudden, saying, "Oh, crap, we forgot about Tackle!" Those potential replacements were passed on for a reason. They either think the guys they've got and assembled will do it, or, they are considering bringing someone in. Remember, they aren't looking to the future; they know they have to win now. I'd also like to point out that, although I consider the lines the very most important part of a team, there have been successful teams of late with lesser lines on paper than the one we can start with as is. Just because we didn't find an obvious replacement doesn't mean we are happy about it. We didn't find an obvious replacement for Ellison either. Do you think that means they're very happy with him.
Thurman#1 Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 I'm seeing that some of the Bills' rosters list Butler as an OT this year: 60 Butler, Brad T 6-7 315 09/18/1983 4 Virginia Does that tell you anything? He's got all the tools and that would put us in fat city for G and T. Sometimes these things are just mistakes, but let's assume it's not. Butler might make a good RT. He's tough as nails. But he just doesn't have the quick feet or the athleticism for LT. We seem to have plenty of guys who could play a decent RT, but no good LT.
Thurman#1 Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 Walker, Chambers, Bell, and now Butler are competing for two tackle spots. May the best two win. This team has assembled quality o-line competition across the board. Because it didn't go the way you and some others envisioned dosen't mean it can't replace Dockery and Peters (11.5 version). It has nothing to do with what anyone wanted. It has everything to do with our current players and their capabilities. For years, Tampa Bay has had four or five QBs. But you could just as easily say they have no QBs. What is the famous saying, "If you have two quarterbacks, you don't have any." Same with LT.
youbotymyboty Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 It has nothing to do with what anyone wanted. It has everything to do with our current players and their capabilities. For years, Tampa Bay has had four or five QBs. But you could just as easily say they have no QBs. What is the famous saying, "If you have two quarterbacks, you don't have any." Same with LT. I think the saying your lookin for is "schitt in one hand, wish in the other. See which one fills up first." 7-9 three years with Peters(yes he is elite). Its a gamble, only time will tell.
ChevyVanMiller Posted April 27, 2009 Posted April 27, 2009 Remember that when the Bills first switched Peters to guard the talk here was, "Now, we're going to play an undrafted TE at Tackle? We're doomed!" I think that if the Bills thought that they did not having good starting Tackles on the team already they never would have traded Peters. I don't know if things will pan out, but I like the confidence the team is showing to Butler and Bell.
Recommended Posts