BuffaloBill Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 Wouldn't that suck if this "developmental project" started, and played well, faster than the last LT developemental project the Bills had? Would be a very good thing.
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 Would be a very good thing. Thurm knew what I was saying.
Chandler#81 Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 I think Walker would love to return to RT. Especially for the huge paypay he'd receive when the Bills draft Tebow...
BuffaloBill Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 I think Walker would love to return to RT. Especially for the huge paypay he'd receive when the Bills draft Tebow... Tebow does not have the stuff of an NFL QB. His game does not teranslate to the pro level. Besides not sure how a draft pick influences your RT's contract.
Chandler#81 Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 Tebow does not have the stuff of an NFL QB. His game does not teranslate to the pro level. Besides not sure how a draft pick influences your RT's contract. The bolded part, frankly, remains to be seen. He's a very accurate passer, extremely intelligent and courageous. How that doesn't translate to playing QB well, I don't understand. As for a big payday for Walker, Tebow's a southpaw...
Erik Flowers Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 The bolded part, frankly, remains to be seen. He's a very accurate passer, extremely intelligent and courageous. How that doesn't translate to playing QB well, I don't understand. As for a big payday for Walker, Tebow's a southpaw... Ummmm, not so much.
Chandler#81 Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 Ummmm, not so much. Ummmm, much. http://espndb.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=183484
Erik Flowers Posted September 1, 2009 Posted September 1, 2009 Ummmm, much. http://espndb.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=183484 I don't know that I would call a 64% completion percentage "very accurate", especially on a team that seriously outclasses its opponents from a talent standpoint on a week to week basis. He doesn't throw too many picks, though, I will give him that.
sharper802 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 The idea the Bills still don't have the LT position figured out was ridiculed by ESPN today. The Bills have a 90 year old HOF owner who is "apalled" by people in wheel chairs and a GM who is better suited for an episode of "Mad Men". I think the Raiders have competition for lauging stock of the league status.
sharper802 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 Would be a very good thing. Except when the Bills refuse to pay him and he is traded away.....
thebandit27 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 I don't know that I would call a 64% completion percentage "very accurate", especially on a team that seriously outclasses its opponents from a talent standpoint on a week to week basis. He doesn't throw too many picks, though, I will give him that. It's at least on par with Sam Bradford's 67.9% against the defensively-bankrupt Big 12
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 The idea the Bills still don't have the LT position figured out was ridiculed by ESPN today. The Bills have a 90 year old HOF owner who is "apalled" by people in wheel chairs and a GM who is better suited for an episode of "Mad Men". I think the Raiders have competition for lauging stock of the league status. Yep, the Lions.
Thurman#1 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 Wouldn't that suck if this "developmental project" started, and played well, faster than the last LT developemental project the Bills had? It's already too late for that, dude. By the end of his first year as a pro, Jason Peters had not even taken one practice rep as an o-lineman. And yet he had much more impact as a rookie than Bell has had. How many TDs did Bell have in his rookie year? Blocked punts? Peters had one of each in his first year. Jason Peters had already proved in his first year that he was an awesome physical specimen, arguably the most feared STs player in the league who was not a return man. He was absolutely destroying wedges on the return teams. And he had another TD in his second year. As a tight end. Jason Peters was a starting NFL lineman five months after he took his first practice reps as a lineman in OTAs and two and a half months after he started his first training camp at OL. And again, that was the season where he also caught a TD pass as a TE. Too late for Bell to catch up with that. Near the start of his second season at RT (also only his second season as an offensive lineman), Bill Belichick said Peters was the best player on the Bills offense. At that point, Peters had played less than one full season's worth of games at RT. Halfway through that same season, he was switched to LT and by the end of the season, he was All-Pro, and Dr. Z said he was the third-best tackle in football. All that after having switched from TE to RT and then to LT in the space of 16 months. Don't try to compare Bell's development to the development of Peters, it sets him up as a failure. Let's just hope that he turns into a better than average LT. That would be terrific news for the Bills. And the jury is still out.
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 It's already too late for that, dude. By the end of his first year as a pro, Jason Peters had not even taken one practice rep as an o-lineman. And yet he had much more impact as a rookie than Bell has had. How many TDs did Bell have in his rookie year? Blocked punts? Peters had one of each in his first year. Jason Peters had already proved in his first year that he was an awesome physical specimen, arguably the most feared STs player in the league who was not a return man. He was absolutely destroying wedges on the return teams. And he had another TD in his second year. As a tight end. Jason Peters was a starting NFL lineman five months after he took his first practice reps as a lineman in OTAs and two and a half months after he started his first training camp at OL. And again, that was the season where he also caught a TD pass as a TE. Too late for Bell to catch up with that. Near the start of his second season at RT (also only his second season as an offensive lineman), Bill Belichick said Peters was the best player on the Bills offense. At that point, Peters had played less than one full season's worth of games at RT. Halfway through that same season, he was switched to LT and by the end of the season, he was All-Pro, and Dr. Z said he was the third-best tackle in football. All that after having switched from TE to RT and then to LT in the space of 16 months. Don't try to compare Bell's development to the development of Peters, it sets him up as a failure. Let's just hope that he turns into a better than average LT. That would be terrific news for the Bills. And the jury is still out. The I meant "production" from an O-line standpoint. It's great that he performed well on ST's for the Bills in 2004, although the ST's didn't seem to miss a beat once he stopped playing them. It's unfortunate that Bell's back injury set him, well, back, but he figures to see the field sooner rather than later. And yes I'm well-aware of Peters' abilities during 2006 and 2007. As I've said repeatedly, had he showed up during the off-/pre-season and performed at that level in 2008, he'd still be in Buffalo. Bell doesn't need to have Peters' freakish athletic ability to succeed. And the history of the NFL is littered with athletic freaks who didn't amount to a hill of beans.
atlbillsfan1975 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 If Bell can play LT, and that is a big if. I am not saying he can't, but have not seen enough out of him yet. But then your starting line is LT -BELL LG-WOOD C-Hangartner RG-Butler RT- Walker Levitre is first off the bench for anyone getting hurt interior wise. With Wood sliding into the center if Hangartner gets hurt. Longterm your line is(when i say longterm i mean for 2010 and 2011). LT-Bell LG- Levitre C-Woods RG-Butler RT-Walker This would help you have a good young left side of the oline for years. If Butler can stay healthy he is solid and so is Walker.
Thoner7 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 Our season is over. 2009 was down the sh*tter the moment they didnt fire Dick. I would love to see Bell start all 16 games at LT just to see how he does. Then, when we are drafting top 5, we will have a pretty good idea if we need a LT or not.
vincec Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 If Bell can play LT, and that is a big if. I am not saying he can't, but have not seen enough out of him yet. But then your starting line is LT -BELL LG-WOOD C-Hangartner RG-Butler RT- Walker Levitre is first off the bench for anyone getting hurt interior wise. With Wood sliding into the center if Hangartner gets hurt. Longterm your line is(when i say longterm i mean for 2010 and 2011). LT-Bell LG- Levitre C-Woods RG-Butler RT-Walker This would help you have a good young left side of the oline for years. If Butler can stay healthy he is solid and so is Walker. There are just way to many variables at this point to definitively evaluate who the best linemen are and what position they should be playing. - Can Butler stay healthy? Can he play RT? For that matter, can he develop into a dominating RG? He was just average at RG last season. - Can Bell play LT? - Can Walker play LT? People have written him off, but the season hasn't even started yet. I think that he needs to be given a few games at LT to see how he does. Can Walker be a dominating RT? He was just sightly above average last season, IMO. - Will Woods become a good interior lineman? Can he play center in this league? - Will Levitre become a good interior lineman? - Is Hangartner a good center? People seem to want to move him immediately to the bench, but he hasn't even played a regular season game for the team yet. Why not see how he does first? Until some of these questions get answered, it's going to be a rotating mess on the line. I think that it'll be at least through this season before some of these things are worked out.
Thurman#1 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 The I meant "production" from an O-line standpoint. It's great that he performed well on ST's for the Bills in 2004, although the ST's didn't seem to miss a beat once he stopped playing them. It's unfortunate that Bell's back injury set him, well, back, but he figures to see the field sooner rather than later. And yes I'm well-aware of Peters' abilities during 2006 and 2007. As I've said repeatedly, had he showed up during the off-/pre-season and performed at that level in 2008, he'd still be in Buffalo. Bell doesn't need to have Peters' freakish athletic ability to succeed. And the history of the NFL is littered with athletic freaks who didn't amount to a hill of beans. OK, a quick change, hunh? You know, if you meant production from an O-line standpoint, why didn't you say it? Because in fact, you didn't mean it, you just meant production, but then you just realized that I had a point and so you wanted to skip right past it without acknowledging it. But OK, let's ignore the very real achievements Peters had on STs. Well, from an O-line standpoint again, Bell has already been beaten by Peters. Peters never played o-line in college. Less than five months after Peters took his first o-line practice rep of his entire life, he was an NFL starter. Again, there is no way for Bell to match that. And yeah, you indeed did say he'd still be in Buffalo. And when you said it you had no more proof than you do now, none whatsoever. It is certainly possible, but it flies in the face of logic when you only look at what the Bills did in negotiating his contract. You say "And the history of the NFL is littered with athletic freaks who didn't amount to a hill of beans." Littered? You don't seem to understand the nature of a freak. There aren't that many of them in the first place. That's why they're called freaks. Tell me, how many two-time Pro-Bowlers are there who don't amount to a hill of beans? Peters has already had a career better than 95% of NFL players. You know what the NFL is REALLY littered with? Guys who are NOT athletic freaks who didn't amount to a hill of beans. Tens of thousands of them. Let's hope Bell isn't one of them.
Thurman#1 Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 If Bell can play LT, and that is a big if. I am not saying he can't, but have not seen enough out of him yet. But then your starting line is LT -BELL LG-WOOD C-Hangartner RG-Butler RT- Walker Levitre is first off the bench for anyone getting hurt interior wise. With Wood sliding into the center if Hangartner gets hurt. Longterm your line is(when i say longterm i mean for 2010 and 2011). LT-Bell LG- Levitre C-Woods RG-Butler RT-Walker This would help you have a good young left side of the oline for years. If Butler can stay healthy he is solid and so is Walker. Again, switching Wood to LG is tantamount to sabotage. It will not happen, it's too obviously a way to ruin him. Who knows whether Walker will end up at LT, RT or the bench? And if Walker goes to RT, who knows whether Butler will be at LG or the bench? But I can pretty much guarantee that they won't move a rookie like Wood to a new position next to a guy he's never worked with before a week before the season starts. That's more than enough reason right there, but it would also mean both the LT and the LG would have not a single play of NFL experience. There's no way it happens that way.
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 2, 2009 Posted September 2, 2009 If Bell can play LT, and that is a big if. I am not saying he can't, but have not seen enough out of him yet. But then your starting line is LT -BELL LG-WOOD C-Hangartner RG-Butler RT- Walker Levitre is first off the bench for anyone getting hurt interior wise. With Wood sliding into the center if Hangartner gets hurt. Longterm your line is(when i say longterm i mean for 2010 and 2011). LT-Bell LG- Levitre C-Woods RG-Butler RT-Walker This would help you have a good young left side of the oline for years. If Butler can stay healthy he is solid and so is Walker. I agree with the longterm O-line, although I think Hangartner figures in there somewhere (RG?). But the short-term should be Butler at LG and Wood remaining at RG. Wood is a rookie and making him make a position switch will be a lot harder for him than Butler. And by putting Butler next to Bell, you don't have 2 inexperienced guys starting next to each other (anywhere on the O-line).
Recommended Posts