rstencel

Welcome to boards. There are hundreds of opinions, so have to read them all as different ones, not like there is a consensus. Usually notice that most people have been pretty consistent in their complaint and/or praises, but there are the wishy washy types too, just like most boards out there. Read at your own risk

Understood, have another reply where talk about my feelings on that. They are younger than were, so while I am not completely sold on there being allot more talent, there is hope that several of the good players can grow into great ones. If that happens, then there are enough solid players that with another solid draft in a few key positions, this could be a very good team in a year or two. There is always a chance that Maybin could be real deal, and if he is, then changes my perspective on defense quite a bit.

Agree, if you have a Brady, or QB who is able to make the slide moves that buy that extra second to allow the play to develop. TE doesn't seem to have the uncanny ability to extend time in the pocket, that the upper tier QB's seem to have. Plus Brady's line usually is pretty darn good at protecting him, and he has more than Lee Evans to throw to. Hopefully having TO will allow them to get teams out of being able to keep 8 in a box.

I think we have allot of solid players on this team. I don't think we have enough difference makers though. The players on defense that should be difference makers like Witner, Posluszny, McGee, Stroud, and Schobel are all solid players, but don't make many big plays or turn tides of games. I don't like the overall talent of our defensive line or Linebackers, but secondary has some talent and depth, but no one who would consider a pro-bowler. Offense isn't as solid as the defense, but think they have a few players that can be game changers, like Evans, TO and to some degree Lynch. Until they find a way to be more consistent, and find a way for the line give the QB more time for plays to develop, not sure how good the offense is going to be, if good at all. Better QB play wouldn't hurt either. Almost seems like a waste to have such talented skill players on a team that cant seem to find a way to play constantly on offense, or even show up every week. Overall, I think we have less talent of defense as far as the upper tier play-makers, but more depth of quality players. And on offense think the opposite.

Part of it is DC's realized what his strengths are, and realize can put 8 in box, and still defend the short/intermediate routes, since he doesn't look deep. I think another part is related to his injuries from getting hit. Once he gets dinged up, he looses his nerve to wait the plays out, and doesn't want to wait for the plays to develop and just checks down to get it out fast.

The key wasn't simplicity as much as it was how well they were able to execute the limited set of plays that were used, and that they were so well designed that they could all be run from any of their sets, and defenses couldn't key on what they were going to do off of a set or formation. Until the snap defenses didn't know what the play was. Eventually the patterns of Jim Kelly's play calling became one of the big weaknesses of the offense, since he had some predictable tendencies, but the formations or the pre-snap looks were pretty much the same no matter what play was called. The other thing they had was allot of talent, and cohesiveness. The thing they relied on was individual players winning their one on one match ups more often than not. This team does have the talent in the skill positions to do that, but the line does not in my opinion. Until they gel and learn each others strengths and tendencies, things like blitz/stunt pickup, and line shifts will struggle more in no huddle than if huddled. Reason I say that, is when huddling they have a chance to talk and discuss issues between plays, that they do not get in no huddle. Same goes with receivers and QB. How many times has a big play happened, when a WR comes back in the huddle and says, hes biting on this, before the defensive coach has a chance to correct the problem on sidelines. It takes a veteran team that has worked together for several years to execute the no huddle offense efficiently and consistently in my opinion, and I don't think this team will be successful consistently if they try to run the offense more than a few series a game.

No point discussing him for Bills, as he would want more control than Ralph would give anyone. He would most likely want to be coach and GM, or at least have last say in personnel and player decisions, and Ralph wants the last say. Don't think he would get the control he wants on this team. But if must discuss, I like him as a coach for a team in the position the Bills are currently in. I would like to see someone like him come in for 4-5 years and build a solid foundation and give the team a direction. Until that happens the Bills are not going to attract decent free agents without overpaying, like have to do now.

Why not, can just cut him and use the first later if dont like him that much. His salary isnt guarenteed. Although if we did get him, think he would be the best receiver on the team, so cutting him would be tough.

Don't really think that Cards were actively trying to trade Boldin. Not positive, but I thought I saw some reports of them being offered a 2nds for him a few times, but them not really making much of an attempt to negotiate anything once offers were made. Marshall is a bit on immature side, but if he gets a trade to a stable team, think he would fall in line and become a good pickup. Think allot of the issues are partly due to the environment on the team over last couple of years, and the new managements issues with dealing with people. Hoping he goes to the NFC myself. He doesn't have the greatest hands, but boy can he get open.

He looks like has some talent, but think your right in that it doesnt appear he is ready to go against the bigs at this level yet. A year of work with the strength and conditioning coach would do him wonders. The time to work on his technique wouldnt hurt either.

If they were going to make all those moves think they would have at least been looking at it in practice by now. Like the idea of the moves, but as long as doing that, would like to see wood and hang swap positions too. I know they don't want a Rookie at center as that position is doing all the line calls on the fly in a no huddle, but I think Hang is a better guard than tackle, and that Wood was the best center in the draft. Maybe they wait till next year, so they can shuffle the line again.

I don't know anything for sure about the contracts or money he was offered, but from what I have heard from rumors from a couple of scouts I know, is that the Bills were willing to go higher than the contract he signed for in Philly earlier in the negotiations, but he wanted more than that. He wanted to be the top paid tackle in the NFL at that point. I only have heard that in hearsay, but based on the ploys of other clients of his agent, it would not surprise me in the least if was true.

The thing your forgetting is that Jason Peters didn't really seem to want to play here. Yes he wanted a raise, but most professionals that want a raise, at least keep in shape, and put forth a good effort when they do show up, to prove they deserve it. And if you pay a guy enough money to be the top paid tackle (or close to it) in the NFL, you expect more than just talent, but full effort on every play. If they would have paid him what he was asking, do you think he would have suddenly decided to get in shape, and give full effort. That's allot of money to gamble on a player who didn't even get drafted because of a stigma of not putting effort out consistently, who showed he is still capable of falling back on those bad habits. While I think he is very talented, and very well could be one of the all time greats at the position if he stays in shape, and plays hard every down, I do not believe he would have done that no matter how much money he was shown in Buffalo. Sending him packing was the only move that made sense to me, as putting out that much money in a long term contract on a player who doesn't always play is too big of a gamble for a small market team. And the message doing that would send to rest of players on team doesn't help either. Basically, while I hate to see them loose another talented player, in this case I think it was for the best.

Looks like I was first to vote 3rd quarter. My thinking is that by then the line play will be improved since will have had some time to gel, and possibly time for Bell to take over as LT. I am also hoping by then Shawn Nelson may be getting on the field allot as receiving option, and the Steve Johnson will have moved up the charts at WR and come on. I know there are allot of things I am hoping for, but I do fell like the best chance for TE to pass for 300 is if more big receivers are on the field, as he does tend to prefer the shorter passes.

Yes, he served his time, awful nice of him to volunteer for that. There are worse people out there, yes. I hope he doesn't revert back to criminal activities, and hope he is able to get to live a descent live if he does stay clean. But that doesn't change the fact that I will not watch an Eagles game again, or support any of their corporate sponsors with my money.

But he is such a nice guy who is just misunderstood.

He also bankrolled a criminal organization, bet on illegal activities, and put money in allot of criminals pockets to help them continue their criminal activities. Just because the main function was dogs, doesn't mean it didn't affect or support criminals doing other activities. It's kind of like saying money laundering doesn't hurt anybody.

Well was just reading the thread and realized how ironic it is that I'm the one complianing about being sick of hearing about Vick on TV all the time, and I'm the one who brought him up in the thread. My Bad.

Well not like he isn't trying to do same day job as before he went in. He just lied and covered up the criminal portion of his life. I will be very happy if he doesn't resume bankrolling criminal activities, but doesn't mean want to have sports show hosts shove his every move down my throat and hear about how great a guy he is, and how great he always has been. News flash, I watch sports center to see news on what happened in sports, not how many times he popped his head out the window while he was on house arrest, or how his bankruptcy case is going. I probably wouldn't have cared what he did when got out of slammer before he became the guy that everyone loves and is so misunderstood. Now I am so sick of hearing about how unfair it is for him, and hope he fails miserably so don't have to see them talk about him like a fallen god anymore.

Considering Collins only started one game that year, and had a total of 29 pass attempts on the season, Not sure if he really counts. He really didn't get an opportunity to show what he could do till his 3rd year, as made one start each in first 2 years with few appearances in mop up duties as well. Think Kelly was last person before TE to start as a rookie in more than one game, and was only one to win starting job out of training camp as a rookie after Fergy, although can argue he wasnt really a rookie, since he started in USFL already.

Funny part is I forgot he played for Eagles. The whole Vick thing with them made me forget they had Peters too. When I turned on Game and realized it was Eagles playing, I turned it off, as I do anytime sports shows start promoting Vick. The sports writers and announcer's seem to talk about him like some sort of hero who is getting a bum rap lately, to point I cant even watch NFL network or Sportscenter anymore.

Curious why your on boards that is discussing team before season, if you dont want to discuss pros/cons and opinions on anything before season?

I have high hopes for line, but think it will take first half of season for line to gel. Beleive by end of year this line will be pretty good, but think will take till atleast the bye week for them to be able to pick up blitzes consistantly, and a few more games to play to thier potential. Basically worse first 5-8 games, but better after that IMO.

Spell Check Your Text or Website Right Now! Free Online Spell Checker. Fast and Accurate Results. No Software Required. OrSpell Check Your Text Language: English (change) Wasn't saying killed Bills defense, was saying in past was tougher for defenses that were going against no huddle, since they didn't have microphones in helmet back then, but i do believe it puts more pressure on your defense. I do believe it is harder for teams defense that plays the no huddle because they tend to spend less time on the field since run plays faster, and give less time for them to rest between drives. Also find that teams that run the no huddle tend to be feast or famine allot. Meaning that some games will have allot of long drives and other games have a ton of 3 and outs, and only have 20-25 minutes time of possession. I know time of possession can be overrated, but don't fell quick 2 and outs are rated high enough. Defense that get off the field and have to come right back in short amount of time tend to give more big plays, and can be demoralized if happens several times in a row. If look at teams in both college and pros that run no huddle, there is a common thread that most of the time they tend to have ball 5 less minutes that their opponents, unless they blow them out. Of course the data may be skewed by numbers for hurry up offenses. Basically I think the offense is good in shorts spurts, or as a change of pace, but am not a fan of it as a full time offense. It can work, and has for teams, but I don't think it works against well coached teams, unless the team running it is very efficient and executes the offense extremely well, and don't see feel this team will be efficient enough or executing to that level required to beat good teams. Especially teams with a good pass rush. And as far as that Bills defense not having a problem with it. That was a very very talented defense. They had all pro talent on most of d-line, and line-backing core was very talented. If Bills would have run a more traditional offense, I believe that defense would have been number 1 ranked for multiple years, and had more than Bruce in the hall. I could be wrong on that, as that is more of an opinion. Basically I don't agree with the statement running no huddle doesn't affect the defense, but I do agree that a good defense wouldn't be very affected by it. I just don't believe we have the right type of defense to mesh with it. Our defense is undersized and depends on speed and penetration. If run an undersized defense, one thing have to worry about is them getting tired, and no-huddle can contribute to this. Sure Indy runs no-huddle frequently and runs same type of defense, but they get allot of first downs, as they have one heck of a QB, great o-line, and up to this year 2 probably hall of famers at WR. So dont feel like that team is a good bench mark as this team doesnt have good line yet, and QB isnt quite in same league. Sorry about long reply.

If people only followed winning teams, there would be only a few teams with fans. You can still love a team, without having to wear the rose colored shades.