shrader Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 Agree, but who cares about the casual fan? The team, the league, and the television networks.
SteamRoller67 Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 I love how a relatively boring draft had lead to the posibility of a more entertaining offense. I had no problems with the draft, but let's face it. Picking up a pair of guards early isn't going to do much for the casual fan. Casual fans are useless.....they probably skip some Bills games to golf or watch Nascar.
nucci Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 The team, the league, and the television networks. The context of your post was referring to the drafting of 2 guards not exciting the casual fan. That is what I replied to.
Cynical Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 I was more or less referring to Guard play. Wood, Hantgartner and Butler/Levitre is a more athletic, nastier interior line than Dockery, Fowler, Butler. No one knows how Peters will play from now on...he just got 60 million and might eat himself out of the probowl. He was dominant in 2007, stunk in 2008 and in 2009 ???. It's a crap shoot for 10 mill a season. We just drafted two rookies who have yet to play a single down in the NFL. And the Bills are expecting them to come in, adjust to the speed and complexity of the NFL, while playing in the no huddle. Talk about a crap shoot.
2003Contenders Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 It will be interesting to see what sort of "no huddle" the team uses and how often they use it. The "Sugar Huddle" that the Bengals used under Boomer and Wyche was very different from the hurry-up offense that Kelly ran. The Bengals version was designed to catch defenses napping and it gave their crafty QB an opportunity to audible at the line of scrimmage (Boomer didn't necessarily call his own plays). Based on Turk's history with the Bengals and Jauron's conservative approach (unlikely to allow the offense to essentially run the two minute drill all game long for fear of wearing out his defense), I would suspect that we will more likely see the Bengals old version.
shrader Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 The context of your post was referring to the drafting of 2 guards not exciting the casual fan. That is what I replied to. Yeah, but I'd say the casual fan is about 95% of the total fanbase leaguewide.
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 It will be interesting to see what sort of "no huddle" the team uses and how often they use it. The "Sugar Huddle" that the Bengals used under Boomer and Wyche was very different from the hurry-up offense that Kelly ran. The Bengals version was designed to catch defenses napping and it gave their crafty QB an opportunity to audible at the line of scrimmage (Boomer didn't necessarily call his own plays). Based on Turk's history with the Bengals and Jauron's conservative approach (unlikely to allow the offense to essentially run the two minute drill all game long for fear of wearing out his defense), I would suspect that we will more likely see the Bengals old version. Speaking of wearing out the defense, having a quick 3 and out sprint coupled with our small-but-fast Tampa-2 defense seems like a formula for ....
BobChalmers Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 ESPN's Tim Graham reported last week that the Bills may use a no-huddle offense this season. Not only was this also confirmed to me by a source close to the team, I was also told now that the team has a tight end they feel can be an important part of the passing game (rookie Shawn Nelson), they will look to use much more spread-formations in their base offensive sets, using three wide receivers, plus splitting Nelson out as a 4th receiver, and only using one running back in the backfield. The source said the Bills may do this even when they do not a run a no-huddle. The Bills had incorporated a fullback into their offensive gameplan more often the past two seasons. Running more 4 wide, 1 RB sets would obviously mean there wouldn't be a FB on the field as often. http://www.salsports.com/NFLMayUpdate.htm In terms of personnel on the field - how shocking is this, really? The only fullback on the roster right now, is Corey McIntyre, who was probably the worst player to take the field for the Bills' offense last season. Why would there be anything controversial or surprising about the idea of letting Josh Reed stay on the field more and McIntyre less? Other than that - all we're really saying here is they like Nelson at TE as having more upside as a receiver that Schouman, Fine, Royal, etc. Duh. As far as the no-huddle. The only reason that worked in the 90's was because our hall-of-fame-bound skill personnel were creating mismatches and playing w/o opportunities for substitutions wore the defenses out more than our offense. If the offense still goes 3-and-out too often, the only defense you wear out by running no-huddle is your own.
Jeffery Lester Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 You mean like "svelte" 366 lb. "new" LT Langston Walker? I just love how people tend to gloss over the fact Peters was pretty damn good in 2007. Instead, they like to focus in on 2008. Like that year is a foreshadow of he'll play from now on. Get over Jason Peters he was a malcontent diva who layed down and rolled over like a stuck whale last year. Why do so many people want Buffalo to reward him for that? Just give him what he wanted. Fu....k that. IMO Jason Peters was traded not so much for his play but due to his attitude.
Magox Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 Speaking of wearing out the defense, having a quick 3 and out sprint coupled with our small-but-fast Tampa-2 defense seems like a formula for .... you are a ray of sunshine...
crazyDingo Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 Seems like an awful lot of work for a 2 yard dump-off.
bourbonboy Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 I just love how people tend to gloss over the fact Peters was pretty damn good in 2007. Instead, they like to focus in on 2008. Like that year is a foreshadow of he'll play from now on. The point is not to debate Peters worth/skill (that's been done to death a million times now) - the point is to predict how this year's OL will be different from last years OL. Peters sucked last year, and this years OL should be much better than last years. Period.
SteamRoller67 Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 The point is not to debate Peters worth/skill (that's been done to death a million times now) - the point is to predict how this year's OL will be different from last years OL. Peters sucked last year, and this years OL should be much better than last years. Period. In 100% agreement.
Cynical Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 Get over Jason Peters he was a malcontent diva who layed down and rolled over like a stuck whale last year. Why do so many people want Buffalo to reward him for that? Just give him what he wanted. Fu....k that. IMO Jason Peters was traded not so much for his play but due to his attitude. Apparently you missed the part where Peters wanted to be "rewarded" the year before, after 2007. You know, the year where he was pretty damn good. The year he was elected as an ALL-PRO. The year the Bills organization essentially told him to off. And can we assume if you were in a similar position, your attitude would be "perky"?
nucci Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 Apparently you missed the part where Peters wanted to be "rewarded" the year before, after 2007. You know, the year where he was pretty damn good. The year he was elected as an ALL-PRO. The year the Bills organization essentially told him to off. And can we assume if you were in a similar position, your attitude would be "perky"? You mean 1 year after they "rewarded" him with a 5 year $18M contract?
SKOOBY Posted May 8, 2009 Author Posted May 8, 2009 You mean 1 year after they "rewarded" him with a 5 year $18M contract? He wanted bi-yearly awards, goner.
HelloNewman Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 ESPN's Tim Graham reported last week that the Bills may use a no-huddle offense this season. Not only was this also confirmed to me by a source close to the team, I was also told now that the team has a tight end they feel can be an important part of the passing game (rookie Shawn Nelson), they will look to use much more spread-formations in their base offensive sets, using three wide receivers, plus splitting Nelson out as a 4th receiver, and only using one running back in the backfield. The source said the Bills may do this even when they do not a run a no-huddle. The Bills had incorporated a fullback into their offensive gameplan more often the past two seasons. Running more 4 wide, 1 RB sets would obviously mean there wouldn't be a FB on the field as often. http://www.salsports.com/NFLMayUpdate.htm Wow how creative....using a re-hashed early 90's no huddle that all teams know how to gameplan for.....just FYI the Pats were doing mostly 5 wide during thier 16-0 regular season...hope our defense is in shape because you are looking at 45:00 of field time..
Cynical Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 The point is not to debate Peters worth/skill (that's been done to death a million times now) - the point is to predict how this year's OL will be different from last years OL. Peters sucked last year, and this years OL should be much better than last years. Period. I do not have a problem with that. My problem is with automatically assuming this OL will be better. In order to make that assumption, one has to believe Peters play will continue to deteriorate. And that a 366 lb slow footed RT is now going to be a fleet footed agile LT. And that 2 rookie OL are going to adjust to the speed and complexity of the NFL in one off season. And that back up C from another team will quickly get into sync with his new third year QB. And the RG is now the RT. In short, the entire OL has been rebuilt, from one end to the other. If this was college ball, I would not have a problem with that. But this is not college. And on opening day, that's not Syracuse University the Bills will be playing. It will be BB and the Patriots*. BB has a made a living and a reputation of exploiting other teams weaknesses. Until proven otherwise, a slow footed LT, and 2 rookies are weaknesses waiting to be exploited. BB could literally set the template on how to beat the Bills this season.
Cynical Posted May 8, 2009 Posted May 8, 2009 You mean 1 year after they "rewarded" him with a 5 year $18M contract? Yep. The year he was promoted from RT to LT. I guess we can assume you also would have no problem of not getting a raise after being promoted.
SKOOBY Posted May 8, 2009 Author Posted May 8, 2009 Yep. The year he was promoted from RT to LT. I guess we can assume you also would have no problem of not getting a raise after being promoted. Sure $1 an hour raise, not $100 a second.
Recommended Posts