Conch Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 If Hangarten keeps getting blown up like what Raji did to him, he's the guy grabbing some bench. butler got rocked by raji too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 So basically what I said... my bad ... but yes what you said .... Cornell minds think alike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NishP Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 I'm all for Bell at LT and Langston back to the right side. Then the question is do we replace one of the rookie guards with Butler? well if thats the case we can always put wood back at center..... BELL LEVITRE WOOD BUTLER WALKER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 If Hangarten keeps getting blown up like what Raji did to him, he's the guy grabbing some bench. Could be, I've never really understood picking up Hangarten, I thought the main reason for the change was to get guys who could handle the huge NTs and DTs that gave this team such problems last year- I thought Jason Brown, and Chris Kemoeatu fit the Bill much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Depends how you look at it, doesn't it? If they start Bell because they're impressed with his progress, then that's a plus. On the other hand, if they're saying Walker can't cut it and this is a desperation move to find anyone who can man that spot, then yeah, it doesn't reflect well on them. I don't think anyone, from the FO to Walker himself, ever saw him starting at LT as anything but a stopgap. Bingo. I don't know whether Bell is ready, but I do know that I've seen some ugly plays from Walker so far this preseason. Also, since it doesn't appear anyone has provided the link yet ... Bell evolving into Bills' left tackle of choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Yes, Butler replaces Levitre, and ultimately (but probably not soon) Levitre replaces Handy and we line up: Bell, Levitre, Wood, Butler, Walker, in a perfect world. If Levitre is going to be back in the starting line up, I don't understand why remove him from the lineup in the first place...Why not just go ahead and move Hangatner to LG and move Butler back to RG...That way at least when Levitre gets his starting jig, then Hangatner goes to the bench... However all these don't make sense...One must give Hangatner the chance to start as the Center before pulling the plug. They have spent the entire off season with this line up and it would be foolhardy to play with this..... If bell is better than Walker, then Walker just goes to the Bench.......Period....Don't mess up with the continuity on the line again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 well if thats the case we can always put wood back at center..... BELL LEVITRE WOOD BUTLER WALKER I doubt they go with with this combination now ... however it sounds promising. Likely to be the siituation once Wood gets some experience under his big belt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewHampshireBillsFan Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 It's been my opinion that Bell has the most upside at LT - Bell is very good against speed and quickness and has some trouble against power- which is why I think he fits better at LT than RT- right now I think the best lineup would be Bell, Butler, Hangartner, Wood, Walker Agree. First of all if Bell comes in Walker goes back to RT where he has played well in the past. No way Butler beats out Walker at RT. Butler coming back to guard makes the most sense. The only problem is that Butler played RG and now Wood is entrenched there already. So if Butler could play LG that would work out best and Levitre sits for awhile. And no way does Hangartner go to the bench. They really like his high IQ and they need someone experienced and sharp at C, especially with all the the new faces in the OL and trying to run the no huddle to boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 my bad ... but yes what you said .... Cornell minds think alike Talk to Sagey, he's the Big Red Bear (I think). I'm a BUCKnell Bison, although my gf does go to Ithaca for graduate school! Never fear, there's plenty of echoes here: well if thats the case we can always put wood back at center..... BELL LEVITRE WOOD BUTLER WALKER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Depends how you look at it, doesn't it? If they start Bell because they're impressed with his progress, then that's a plus. On the other hand, if they're saying Walker can't cut it and this is a desperation move to find anyone who can man that spot, then yeah, it doesn't reflect well on them. I don't think anyone, from the FO to Walker himself, ever saw him starting at LT as anything but a stopgap. That's a lot of transition in four months. Potentially, Walker goes from RT to LT and back to RT. Butler from RG to RT and back. Bell becomes a starter and Wood from RG to LG. Sure this is speculation, but an OL cannot be forged by repeatedly shifting players to new positions. Granted these guys are bright, but asking them to move so often is not conducive to success. This line is still in transition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 That's a lot of transition in four months. Potentially, Walker goes from RT to LT and back to RT. Butler from RG to RT and back. Bell becomes a starter and Wood from RG to LG. Sure this is speculation, but an OL cannot be forged by repeatedly shifting players to new positions. Granted these guys are bright, but asking them to move so often is not conducive to success. This line is still in transition. At the same time, Walker is out of place on the left side. Coaches are paid to make tough decisions and to put the best players on the field. Sounds like if Bell did not tweak his back he would be playing LT against the Stillers. Makes you wonder what they would have if they had started out the offseason Bell, Wood, Hangartner, Butler, Walker. Spilled milk but under that scenario only half your line is in flux and your C-RT are very experienced. Wood will learn to hold his own as so far he appears to be a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 LT BellLG Wood C Hangartner RG Butler RT Walker Levitre first man off the bench at Guard. Chambers first man off at Tackle I think this is definitely the best line we could put out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 If Levitre is going to be back in the starting line up, I don't understand why remove him from the lineup in the first place...Why not just go ahead and move Hangatner to LG and move Butler back to RG...That way at least when Levitre gets his starting jig, then Hangatner goes to the bench... However all these don't make sense...One must give Hangatner the chance to start as the Center before pulling the plug. They have spent the entire off season with this line up and it would be foolhardy to play with this..... If bell is better than Walker, then Walker just goes to the Bench.......Period....Don't mess up with the continuity on the line again... Agree. First of all if Bell comes in Walker goes back to RT where he has played well in the past. No way Butler beats out Walker at RT. Butler coming back to guard makes the most sense. The only problem is that Butler played RG and now Wood is entrenched there already. So if Butler could play LG that would work out best and Levitre sits for awhile. And no way does Hangartner go to the bench. They really like his high IQ and they need someone experienced and sharp at C, especially with all the the new faces in the OL and trying to run the no huddle to boot. #1: Bell, Handy, Wood, Butler, Walker = best option, assuming Handy can play LG. It would be nice to get some insight as to what differentiates the LG skill set from the RG. It's the best option because it makes the transition to #3 the most seamless, and it still allows Handy to contribute his mental prowess. #2: Bell, Butler, Handy, Wood, Walker as mentioned above, not knowing the intricate differences between LG and RG, I can't say for certain whether Butler can play LG. It also sets up the line for another shakeup, assuming Levitre gets up to speed. #3 Bell, Levitre, Wood, Butler, Walker assuming Bell is the best option at LT, and that this rumor wasn't floated because of the Walker/Butler tackle conundrum, then I think this would be the starting lineup opening day 2010. Assuming Levitre being the highest rated G on draft day has some validity for his future potential in the NFL, and if Wood keeps progressing the way we all hope he will, then this will be a great lineup once it gets its act together, something I don't think will happen before the bye week in 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 (FWIW, Cat, I added the topic to your subtitle ...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 (FWIW, Cat, I added the topic to your subtitle ...) You mean to tell me people don't like ambiguity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 You mean to tell me people don't like ambiguity? If Tim's got this right (and I have no reason to disbelieve him), this will be pretty big news. One duplicate thread was already started because the poster didn't see it in any of the titles, and I'd like to keep that from becoming a trend. Appreciate your understanding ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartacus Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Couldn't help but notice Bell played LT in GB for a series or two. Thing is, if he becomes the starter and displaces other players, how much does that speak of the front office for saying LW would be the starting LT? Makes me wonder who's judging the roster from the front office, especially considering they figured LW would be the starter and now that could be changing. well the big change in thinking would be if the front office decided they needed an additional salary dump - since season ticket sales have maxed out, no revenue would be lost from dis-illusioned fans if a few high salary guys were dumped. Walker, Schobel and Kelsey could all be out the door to save Ralph some serious coin in 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortured Soul Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Bingo. I don't know whether Bell is ready, but I do know that I've seen some ugly plays from Walker so far this preseason. Also, since it doesn't appear anyone has provided the link yet ... Bell evolving into Bills' left tackle of choice Wouldn't you love to know who those "some coaches" are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Sources close to the team tell me there's a growing belief among some coaches on Dick Jauron's staff that Demetrius Bell should be the left tackle when the regular season opens Sept. 14 against the New England Patriots.... That part of Buffalo's staff favors Bell speaks as much about the club's dissatisfaction over Walker's inadequacies as it does Bell's development. Tim, if you're reading, I'm curious about these. First, did you get a sense that there's differing opinions, especially with Jauron? Do you get the feeling that it will be a battle if Turk wants Bell to start at LT for week 1? Also, is the second part speculation on your part, or was that the info you were given? I'm curious if the coaches actually think Bell is just less of a liability instead of surpassing their expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 If Tim's got this right (and I have no reason to disbelieve him), this will be pretty big news. One duplicate thread was already started because the poster didn't see it in any of the titles, and I'd like to keep that from becoming a trend. Appreciate your understanding ... You're right, it is big news, especially for the insatiable among us. Also, not being more specific in the title was my bad and you were right to fix it. Carry on, carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts