Realist Posted September 8, 2009 Posted September 8, 2009 Trent wont even make it to the bye week! I don't understand everyone saying this now. Was Walker that good that he was going to stop Edwards from getting crushed? NO. Walker absolutely sucked in the preseason, Bell outplayed him by a long shot and now all of a sudden TE is going to get killed? If anything this may save Edwards.
Alaska Darin Posted September 8, 2009 Posted September 8, 2009 Wow. Typical. It's funny how you look at my consistency as a negative but are "opptomistic" about the upcoming season despite 10 years of mediocrity and a team that has fired its OC and starting LT less than 10 days before a game against a team they've been ONCE in the last SIXTEEN tries. Anyway, take my advice, and by the way I have been here since the beginning.
Fewell733 Posted September 8, 2009 Posted September 8, 2009 surprising move because of its timing, but a little less so since we just switched coordinators. Walker did not look like a good left tackle but he was still our best right tackle, just not 5 mill a year good and not clear enough of an upgrade reshuffle the line. I wonder if Langston really had the legs to run all the plays we want to be able to run. we'll see how it plays out, but it wasn't looking like Langston was going to last regardless. Hope Bell's a quick study and we give him a lot of help the first few weeks.
MRW Posted September 8, 2009 Posted September 8, 2009 I wonder how many of the people saying "no big deal, Walker sucked anyway" are the same ones who were saying "trading Peters is no big deal, Walker filled in just fine for him at the beginning of last season". But hey, the Bills didn't have to pay $10 million a year for an actual NFL-caliber left tackle and that's what's really important, so I guess the details don't matter.
Lori Posted September 8, 2009 Posted September 8, 2009 I suspect that the timing of this has EVERYTHING to do with the change in coordinators. From all indications Jauron wants the no huddle run faster and the offense simpler. Here's my guess: Turk: More complex offense + Walker advocate = slower pace to offense AVP: Simpler offense + Bell advocate = faster pace to offense Except for one thing: http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/...ackle-of-choice 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. Offensive coordinator Turk Schonert is said to favor Bell because he has outperformed Walker and would give Buffalo the best chance to win.
twist_to_open Posted September 8, 2009 Posted September 8, 2009 I don't understand everyone saying this now. Was Walker that good that he was going to stop Edwards from getting crushed? NO. Walker absolutely sucked in the preseason, Bell outplayed him by a long shot and now all of a sudden TE is going to get killed? If anything this may save Edwards. Its the timing that gets me. Chemistry counts.
Kelly the Dog Posted September 8, 2009 Posted September 8, 2009 I suspect that the timing of this has EVERYTHING to do with the change in coordinators. From all indications Jauron wants the no huddle run faster and the offense simpler. Here's my guess: Turk: More complex offense + Walker advocate = slower pace to offense AVP: Simpler offense + Bell advocate = faster pace to offense That really could have been a factor. I remember that was my first thought when I heard about us running the no huddle exclusively. That not only was Walker going to suck at LT but he would be exhausted running up to the line, and that maybe Chambers or someone would have to spell him a series or two a game.
nucci Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 I don't understand everyone saying this now. Was Walker that good that he was going to stop Edwards from getting crushed? NO. Walker absolutely sucked in the preseason, Bell outplayed him by a long shot and now all of a sudden TE is going to get killed? If anything this may save Edwards. It's funny because everyone was saying Edwards was going to get killed with Walker playing LT.
Maddog69 Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 Ralph is a joke. All of the moves the Bills make are about selling jerseys (T.O) or saving money (keep Jauron, cutting Rhodes/Walker). Those player cuts were all about saving money. There is noone on the O line as good as Walker. He was not suited for LT, but he is by far the best RT on the roster. Rhodes is way better than Omon. Cutting those guys saves Ralph money. He does not care about fielding a competitive team. He needs to go. The Bills are now the laughing stock of the NFL. Al Davis is laughing at Ralph. Atleast Al tries to win. Ralph treats the Bills like a 401k. He just wants to maximize the value for his family upon his death. He is not even pretending to care about football anymore, regardless of the crap he said in his HOF speech about loving the competitiveness. Maybe he did when he was younger. Clearly not any more. I am a season ticket holder and will continue to be becasue I love this team and long for a time when we have a real owner to bring this team some real glory.
sharper802 Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 It was a disastrous decision right from the start. The guy isn't equipped to play LT and doesn't want to play LT. I thought it was a disaster as soon as it was announced. So did Walker after they told him the day after the draft where we passed on mulitple LT prospects....
Golden Wheels Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 C'mon. Haven't you guys seen the movie Major League? The owner puts together a purposely horrible team so they'll lose, attendance will drop, and she can move the team. I think Ralph is following the script.
DanInUticaTampa Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 and the bills have a cardboard cutout of ralph, and everytime they win, they get to take a piece of clothing off?
first_and_ten Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 and the bills have a cardboard cutout of ralph, and everytime they win, they get to take a piece of clothing off? One positive then is we won't have to see a naked Ralph
Bad Lieutenant Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 C'mon. Haven't you guys seen the movie Major League? The owner puts together a purposely horrible team so they'll lose, attendance will drop, and she can move the team. I think Ralph is following the script. If this was true Ralph would have kept Walker.
jtl3302 Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 So did Walker after they told him the day after the draft where we passed on mulitple LT prospects.... you can honestly say that the top LT's in last years drafts are more ready to play then Bell? and how many are multiples? because i can only think of MAYBE 3 that we could"ve had at 11.
spartacus Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 So you don't like him at LT move him back to RT!!!!!!! Bulter didn't look that good to me at RT. You cut Walker and Chambers, ugh, Bills FO sucks. As I have been saying for weeks, Walker is paid way too much to play anywhere but LT for this front office. The clown show is convinced they can field an OL of rookies and free agent cast offs. Since they set a record for season ticket sales, I guess they are right.
Trader Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 The whole thing is so bizzare it just might work!!!!
BB2004 Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 Wheeeeee, as the merry-go-round spins madly out of control. Well, at least this offseason hasn't been boring ... That is an excellent point Lori. This offseason has had more shockers than I can remember. Maybe not since 2002 when we got Drew Bledsoe or it could haven been 2003 with Laywer Milloy and Takeo Spikes.
lostinmiami Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 I want to follow the logic here, because I assume our coaches and front office are paid to think things out in a timely manner and improve our team. #1 we have a weak offensive line, but we trade away our pro-bowl LT, who admittedly is underperforming and unhappy - but we don't pay him to make him happy, since pro-bowl LT's just grow on trees and its not an important position, see, you can just #2 take our adequately performing RT, who now is the best player on the line, and have him play LT, right? Even though he knows and anyone who understand football knows it will be a disaster, because he has the body-type for a RT, not an LT. And he is even sceptical if he can play the position, but we're told it will be fine, and then #3 a week before the season starts you decide he can't play LT, in fact, although he was your "best" lineman he can't even play on the team at all, not even moved back to the RT spot, and you end up with #4 a cheap undrafted LT who, being the bass-tard son of Karl Malone, has some athletic ability but five years football experience. And the guy has a bad back and hasn't practiced in two weeks. But that's fine. Because he's on a solid line with #5 two rookie guards (one seems up to the task) an underperforming free-agent center, and a perpetually broken-down RT playing out of position. And for depth you got a guy who was waived and nobody else wanted, Johnathan Scott who now the more optimistic fools on this board are high on, simply because we haven't seen him play/suck yet, and one mediocre vet guard. But we didn't need to hang onto Walker - we could just let him go.
Fan in Chicago Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 If this was just a money move, in that LW was making too much money to play RT, couldn't his contract have been re-structured ? Or was the FO giving LW a chance to test the waters and sign him back if he didn't get any offers ? If this was not a money move, then perhaps there is a plan to bring in Runyan or trade for someone ? In either case, things will become clear in the next few days. I certainly hope the answer is not 'none of the above' as then we are woefully low on depth.
Recommended Posts