Dan Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 True. You can lose with bad players without paying Derrick Dockery 7 million per to lose with bad players, but they really needed a guard after only getting them in late rounds and the scrap heaps of other teams. They are very expensive now, and drafting Wood and Levitre truly was an extremely smart move. This is why I think that Jauon wasn't responsible for it. I agree. Even with all the wasted late round picks (just my opinion, of course), I loved our draft. We selected what should be 3 solid starting linemen (Maybin, Wood, Levitre) within a couple of years. Is it a coincidence that Nix was hired just a few months prior to the draft? Maybe. But, if I were to guess, I'd say Russ sees some of these long standing problems and is slowly but surely taking steps to correct them. Hiring Nix and getting some early linemen is my only source though. I know some here very much dislike Russ and his lack of experience. But, most would have to admit, he's certainly made some decent moves in the last 2 years. Will they pan out? Who knows.
PromoTheRobot Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 You can argue about talent but we have missed the playoffs by narrow margins the last 10 years. In fact pick any two close losses, make them wins, and we are a playoff team. That would suggest our talent is good enough to make the playoffs. Where we lack is coaching, speciffically game management. PTR
Orton's Arm Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 I must say, by and large, a great thread (although a little pissy here in the end). I hadn't read this thinking it would be full of moaning about Felser but glad I finally got bored enough to read it. Now, if I may add a few thoughts... There are certainly many ways to build a contending team. The conclusion that the Bills are doing it wrong is an obvious one, due to their lack of success over the past decade. However, I'd offer the Bills' biggest problem isn't in the drafting or re-signing of DBs/linemen. It's in Head Coaching and QBs. Very few, very few teams go far without a good HC and good QB. And the Bills have failed miserably in these departments. If you watch some of the old highlights surfacing around here of the Kelly teams, ya know the ones with great O-lines. What's the one thing you should notice? Kelly got rid of the ball quick! Rarely do you see him drop back, pat the ball, and look around. If we had a QB that could read a defense that quickly, take 3 steps and fire the ball out without hesitation... the line suddenly looks very good. Do that and the team starts winning. And winning teams are teams that young players are more likely to re-sign with. So, in my opinion, get a good QB and we suddenly jump from the ranks of the mediocre. Of course, I'll say that goes hand in hand with coaching. Good coaches put their players in a position to do well and inspire them to be better than they are. When was the last time we had a coach at any of the 3 key positions (HC, OC, DC) that we could honestly say was good. I'll add that the one thing that has been consistent on this team through all of the recent mediocrity - the talent evaluators. Why do they still have jobs if they routinely fail to find quality players? Many like to say we haven't really addressed the lines. To that I say, look it up, each year we bring in new guys. The problem is... each year these guys are average at best. So, why can't our scouts and personnel department find above average linemen? And more importantly, why do they still have jobs if none of their signings pan out? If there's any glimmer of hope for this team, it's that Trent has shown flashes of being a good QB and that Russ hired Buddy Nix. As I've stated before, I have little hope for this team this upcoming year. But maybe, just maybe, those are the first inklings of a franchise that's starting to turn itself around. I'm not at all convinced we have the coaching to get the job done, but I guess time will tell. Very solid post! I agree completely with your points about the importance of a good head coach and a good quarterback. I'd say that the three most important areas for a team to be solid are at quarterback, offensive line, and defensive line. Without a quarterback, you're not going to have much of a passing game; and your offense will be one-dimensional. Add to that the fact that a bad quarterback will turn the ball over a lot; whereas a good quarterback can be instrumental in snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. A good offensive line is critical. You have to have at least decent protection for your passing game to work. And it's very tough for a running game to produce much of anything, unless the run blocking is solid. If you have a good defensive line, you can get a good pass rush from your front four. Without it, you're more or less forced to blitz if you want any kind of pressure. On running downs, a good defensive line can either make the tackle itself, or at very least disrupt things while using up a lot of blockers. As you noted, the Bills haven't had a good quarterback since Kelly hung up his cleats. Hopefully Edwards will change this. The offensive line has had some successes here and there, but for the most part has been underwhelming ever since we lost the Kent Hull/Jim Ritcher group. The defensive line was good in the '90s with guys like Bruce Smith, Ted Washington, and Pat Williams; but it's gone downhill since then. Why have the Bills endured such long periods of weakness at such key positions, for such long periods of time? Probably the biggest single reason is this team's failure to build through the draft. Of the first round picks we had from 2001 - 2005, only one (Lee Evans) was used on a player who's still with the team. The Colts have four such players: Reggie Wayne, Dwight Freeney, Dallas Clark, and Marlin Jackson. The next obvious question is, why have the Bills failed so spectacularly where the Colts have succeeded? Look at their first round picks from that era: 2001: Nate Clements. Short-sightedness. 2002: Mike Williams. Bad talent evaulation. 2003a: Drew Bledsoe. Short-sightedness. 2003b: Willis McGahee. Short-sightedness. 2004a: Lee Evans. A good pick. 2004b. J.P. Losman. Bad talent evaluation. As is generally the case with Bills' CBs picked in the first round, Clements went first contract and out. (After allowing for the extra year we got due to the franchise tag.) Willis McGahee was a short-sighted pick, because running backs typically have short careers; and because the Bills had a lot of other holes that needed to be filled. By the time we filled them, it would likely be time for another running back! The problem with the Drew Bledsoe pick is that a 3-13 team (as we had been in 2001) should not trade away a first round pick for someone else's aging veteran. Several of the picks expended on "shortsightedness" players could have been used on present-day contributors, instead, had the Bills been run by a better GM. When TD was guilty of bad talent evaluation--as he had been in the case of Mike Williams and Losman--it was typically because he'd over-emphasized physical traits, while under-emphasizing everything else. Both players had extensive physical potential. But Williams lacked the passion and work ethic he needed; while Losman lacked the on-field awareness and intelligence you'd hope your quarterback would have. To what extent is Russ Brandon guilty of TD's sins? He's already used an early first round pick on a CB (McKelvin), while letting a perfectly good CB walk in the prime of his career (Jabari Greer). Hopefully, that short-sightedness represents an anomaly, not a pattern. I'm not aware of any cases in which he's allowed the physical gifts of an early draft pick to blind him to that pick's other flaws. There don't seem to be any Mike Williams or J.P. Losman stories under Brandon's tenure as GM analog--at least not thus far.
BillsVet Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 You can argue about talent but we have missed the playoffs by narrow margins the last 10 years. In fact pick any two close losses, make them wins, and we are a playoff team. That would suggest our talent is good enough to make the playoffs. Where we lack is coaching, speciffically game management. PTR This is revisionist history. Only in 04 did Buffalo narrowly miss the playoffs, and they controlled their own destiny. As in the final week of the season they had a chance to make the post-season. 2001 3-13 Not even close 2002 8-8 (division winner 9-7, wild-cards 9-7 and 10-6) Close 2003 6-10 (division winner 14-2, wild cards 12-4 and 10-6) Not close 2005 5-11 (division winner 10-6, wild cards 11-5 and 10-6) Not close 2006 7-9 (division winner 12-4, wild cards 10-6 and 9-7) Not close 2007 7-9 (division winner 16-0, wild cards 11-5 and 10-6) Not close 2008 7-9 (Division winner 11-5, wild cards 12-4 and 11-5) Not close And if Buffalo is lacking in coaching, shouldn't it stand to reason that the coach be replaced for not even (by these standards admittedly) be replaced for failing to get close to a post-season berth? There I go being negative again. Personally, close losses are the same as blowouts: Big L's. And L's, no matter the score difference, hurt when it comes to the end of the season.
Rico Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 You can argue about talent but we have missed the playoffs by narrow margins the last 10 years. In fact pick any two close losses, make them wins, and we are a playoff team. That would suggest our talent is good enough to make the playoffs. Where we lack is coaching, speciffically game management. PTR
spartacus Posted June 14, 2009 Posted June 14, 2009 On one level, I completely agree with your post. However, it goes back to the "there's many ways to build a team" argument. If they're drafting linemen every year, then they'd be signing average CBs and getting urned for long touch downs, repeatedly. This is a fallacy The Bills should be using average CBs because that is what the scheme they use is designed for. They would not be giving up long TDs because of the cover-2 safeties playing 30 yards off the ball, to back up the CBs playing 10 yards off the ball. Since they are so committed to the soft cover-2, it is absolutely stupid and counter-productive to keep using premium picks on CBs with elite skills only to waste them in soft zone coverage. If they built the OL and front 7, they would be able to control the line of scrimmage
Recommended Posts