vincec

Walker is obviously not going to make it at LT long term, partly because of his attitude, but I didn't see him dominate at RT last year the way some people are saying. He was a strong pass blocker, but the Bills had almost no confidence in the right side of their line in the running game. Everything went behind Peters and Dockery... even though they weren't really producing. I spent a lot of last year wondering about this and then I read an interview with a Bills coach (I believe Kugler) saying that Walker has a lot of work to do on his run blocking. I have a feeling that Walker is not moving back to RT under any circumstances. If the Bills were really happy with him at RT then they would've left him there and used a different approach at LT. I think that it's LT or bust for him with the Bills.

The Bills can just make a list of their top 5, and then turn it upside down for the draft.

Well, these are compelling, well reasoned and intelligent opinions. Hey, I got one too... "Up your nose with a rubber hose." That should make sense to someone at your level.

How do you know? Neither one of them has played a down in the NFL or even preseason.

The weather's nice. You just need to stop reading this board.

I would feel much better about Walker at LT if he had a better attitude about it. Up until now, it has sounded like he is doing it because he has to and has not really embraced the challenge. That is a recipe for failure.

I hope that this is true. Josh Reed is a tough guy and a good blocker, but he is not a tight end. Running out of 3 WR was the key for the K-Gun bills. The Bills were so good at this that many teams played their conventional personnel against it and not nickel. I think that any team playing in Buffalo MUST be able to run the football to win, so if the Bills play a lot of 3 WR then they will have to learn to run out of it.

My guess is that defenses will vary their approaches according to their personnel and philosophy, but I'm fairly confident that we'll see a lot of: 1) Two deep safeties and 7 men in the box, daring the Bills inexperienced and newly assembled offensive line to consistently open holes in the running game. Defense will try to get decent pressure with a 4 man rush. Yes, the Bills can throw to Jackson or Nelson but these guys are not Marshall Faulk and Tony Gonzales. It'll be slow going against these types of defenses and consistency will be the key. 2) 8 man fronts with 5 and 6 man pass rushes. Secondary will disguise their coverages as best as possible to confuse Edwards. Bills will need good, quick reads by the QB and solid blitz pickup against this. The Bills will need to hit a few big plays against this approach to chase teams out of it.

Exactly. Anyone can claim to be an expert now regardless of their qualifications.

I think that the thinking was that we could improve the OL faster through FA instead of waiting for draft picks to develop.

No. 1) A "successful" season by Rhodes in which he actually has a meaningful number of carries would be a miracle. Plus, the guy's 30 which is starting to get up there for a RB. 2) No one is going to give Buffalo anything good for Lynch. Good running backs are the easiest things to find in the draft. The two 3rd round picks and one 7th that the Bills got for McGahee was a steal. I doubt we'd get that for Llynch. I would assume one 3rd round pick at best. 3) Lynch is the best of all three of the running backs you mentioned.

All I am saying is that it's not all about the OL. Buffalo has enough talent on offense to perform well with just average play from the OL. They don't have to dominate. BTW- Arizona was 8-8 the year before last, with essentially the same personnel and coaching staff that they had last year. I wonder how "laughable" comparison would've been in 2007. Let's give Schonert a chance with a little talent to work with.

I think that too much is being made of the OL situation. This offense will play as well as Trent Edwards does. With TO, Evans, Reed, Parish, etc. the Bills are going to look at passing to open things up in the running game. Good quick reads by the QB and short drops will be the goal. If we can back the defenses off of the line and keep them off balance, the Bills will be fine. Look at what Kurt Warner did with Arizona last year. They didn't have a strong OL.

No, he did that because the players starting ahead of him, like Mike Gandy and Mike Williams, were playing very poorly.

To this point in his career, Peters is one of the most overrated players in the league. He has had one good season. He is basically living off of his potential as a young athletic player who has a high up-side. Everyone is imagining how great he will become when he re-commits himself and has a few more years of experience. He is not great yet. He may become a consistent pro-bowler, but there have been a lot of young players on the brink of greatness before they got derailed. In fact, it's more the norm than them making it. Either way, Peters basically forced the Bills to trade him. At least Graham got that part right. The Bills got good value for him, so it is what it is. Maybe both teams will benefit or maybe neither, we'll see how the next two of three seasons pan out.

Yes. It's Scott + Simpson that are going to be relegated to utility roles or released, not Donte. There are many worthless "journalists" out there.

So, if Vinatieri is over-rated, who is a "great" kicker? Morton Anderson, who had a strong leg, makes every kick during the season and then misses the one that would put his team in the super bowl? Great players are defined by making the money plays. Vinatieri has made them.

I don't think that Bernie Kosar, Dave Kreig or Drew Bledsoe are in Warren Moon's class... and Moon isn't even a top 10 all time QB IMO.

I like JP. He's got a solid professional attitude. He wants to complete and play, and believes in his abilities. He doesn't want to be the backup, but he didn't cause a major stink when he was relegated. He worked hard and bided his time, but he didn't accept it. I think that's a good professional attitude. He may end up as a career backup, but he's too young and has too much physical ability to accept that yet. I'd make a play for him if I had a spot. Sign him for the minimum and see what he can do in a different situation. What do you have to lose?

This sums up my opinion also. The Bengals O was not the same as the no-huddle. They didn't even call it that. And, as was mentioned in an earlier post, there is no "next level" to the no huddle. The overuse of that term is ridiculous.

I doubt that you can even see the neighbors unless you have a telescope, so who cares about them?

Thurman Thomas. It's easy to forget how good he was...

Well, now that it's only him, his wife and one kid they are looking to downsize... maybe down to 6 or 7 bedrooms.

The players can't be blamed for everything. Coaching does play a part in this game. Unless you think that it's just bad luck that DJ has had one winning season in his entire career and good luck that someone like Don Shula had only 1 losing season in 32 years of coaching. It's just the players that they happened to get. The coaches really didn't play a part in any of it.

Turnovers are not all luck. Defenses that can pressure the QB create sacks (with QB fumbles) and interceptions due to disrupted timing and poor throws. Defenses that get can stop the run create obvious passing downs which lead to better opportunities to create turnovers in the passing game. Defenses that get penetration into the backfield create broken plays and cause fumbles. On offense, teams that run the ball effectively turn the ball over less because they stay out of long yardage situations and force opposing defenses to reduce the frequency of blitzes and nickel/dime coverages. This leads to fewer ints. Also, some backs are simply more turnover prone than others because of their running style (upright) or the way the hold the ball (Tikki Barber before changes). It's a team game too. Teams with strong offenses get big leads and force other teams into riskier play calls to catch up. Strong defenses keep the games close so offenses can play more conservatively. So the Bills poor turnover performance is a reflection on the teams performance and coaching, not simply luck as is being implied.