AKC

In reviewing the first half that's the single thing that kept coming to me- how much stronger he is than Trey Teague. He gets up out of his stance pretty quickly and only had two really awkward footwork issues, one of them mentioned by you. I have to say that on my first viewing of the game in real time I also thought Villarial looked flat, and the early runs over his back that went nowhere pay credence to this. I 'm feeling a little different through after watching the tape and noting his perfectly adequate play in pass pro- it gives me more confidence that he'll be back as an asset to the offense as we move towards the regular season. We were playing against one of the elite DLines in the league- with KJenkins back maybe THE elite DLine. Villarial fought well with his arms and kept his assignment out of the backfield on passing downs. I'll look for his legs to catch up with the rest of his game and for him to once again be a solid run blocker for us in 2006.

The inside receiver on Pepper's side takes an outlet route sitting in the flat with a DB off his shoulder; the downfield route taken by the outside wideout is also covered. The sweet spot should be on the opposite side where they've got a DE dropping to cover the short zone and we've got two receivers above him.

Peter's took most of the media blame for it but watching the Holcomb sack, it’s hard for me to pin the fault on Peters. It’s a zone blitz that’s coming at a balanced 4 WR set, leaving us 6 blockers. Our FB is on the right side of the play but when a Panther LB and DB break inside to overload our line Shelton jumps the inside while Peters does what he’s surely supposed to do in getting a shoulder in the DE and passing him up- over the top- where the FB should be to take the second shot at him. Villarial gets in front of the blitzing LB while Shelton chooses a guy 45 pounds lighter and stops the DB. The reality is that if Shelton does what the play is almost surely designed to do by getting in front of Peppers who’s already been chipped effectively, Peter's ends up properly keeping the second blitzer out of the backfield and Holcomb is given the time necessary to exploit the passing zone behind the Carolina DE who’s dropped on the right of their line. It looks like we have exactly the right set and spacing to protect against this blitz, yet Shelton's error blows the whole thing up and allows the media to leave the impression Peters did something wrong. Sign me up. I had exactly the same reaction to his pathetic feign at helping Losman out after the good hustle JP'd shown to get some room to throw, and staying on the lateral route to avoid contact instead of coming up to earn the football proves this guy is the same punk who has always been barely tough enough to play flag football.

I guess I could have linked that Ezekial article in my post ;-) The single biggest criticism I'd level at TDonahoe was our lack (or in many cases absence) of depth at far too many positions, which has led us to this point in time where the "new" regime finds itself with little credible talent at the second level of our depth chart.

I'm a fan of our current MLB and as hard as he works in coverage (granted without the best skills to play behind himself) I think he might be a major asset in the D scheme change. Working quick and hard gives the highest payout in a cover 2- to me that's pretty much London's Nom de Plume.

Just grabbing a tape at random watch the second defensive play of our 2005 season. This play exemplifies Posey's problems playing at this level- It's a second and 8 run to the Strong Side and the Texan's #4 TE- a scrub named Matt Murphy who isn't on a roster this season although he's been in the league the past 4 years- moves deliberately up into Posey's line and actually knocks Posey off his vertical balance, removing Posey from the play completely. This is the guy's career- if he's untouched he can make plays; if he's challenged he's gone. You might live with that in your weakside backer but you just can't accept it from your SS or MLB in a 4-3.

It's absolutely laughable that he would be seriously considered for playing as a stand-up lineman when his greatest weakness if his absolute concession to anyone who made solid contact on him. Get him CLOSER to the action and he'll somehow become more productive? No- This guys success in the 3-4 was based solely on the space given the outside linebackers in the scheme and the good work of other guys on his side of the ball. Traffic is this guy's absolute Achilles heel and the thought of puttiing him in the middle of the road should be funny- but somehow I'm not laughing. I'm guessing some minimum salary guy like Jason Hall puts up a much better show as an edge guy and makes the Posey salary expendable.

Plus the front office didn't hide the demotion in Spring- Posey

Let's watch that Jack ;-)

I'd frame it out this way- Aaron Schobel tied Jason Taylor for 5th in the league in sacks last season. Willis McGahee has yet to even match Travis Henry's 2003 season in rushing yards. Aaron, playing in a well-rewarded position for racking up sacks, is easily considered a top 10 player at his position and it's not unlikely that a lot of GM's would rank him among the elite 5, where he finished last season. It's hard for me to imagine ranking Willis among the 10 best running backs in the game, and even then the money for a #10 RB is less to a pretty large degree in FAgency versus a top 10 sack artist.

I'd venture to guess that on the open market most league GM's would pay FAR more money for Schobel than Willis McGahee.

If you believe that absolute nonsense there's no reason for you and I to discuss the game of football. I've done us both a favor and added you to my "Ignore" list.

I knew he was a Cherry Picker ;-) Always one of my favorite QBs to watch, but I like to watch Jake Plummer play too! He's making a mistake playing this year IMO. I understand his drive and desire to win, but he' sliding now into the second year of "waiting too long" to hang it up.

I absolutely do- but my position is based upon my own opinion that the QB on most teams isn't the most important player. Just as it would be tough for me to consider a knuckleballer one of the "great pitchers" in baseball, I think even successful system QBs can't realistically crest the "great" tag. On the other hand I'll give you John Elway as a great QB because he actually WAS a QB- all the throws, a full career and success even with lesser talent on some of his teams. You've got my vote on that one.

Without defending them in any way I'd easily rank at least 5 of our players ahead of McGahee as the "best player" on the Bills. Clements Spikes Fletcher McGee Schobel

Any fan of the game has to recognize and admire Favre's grit and leadership skills- but at the same time it's hard to imagine any QB who's considered superior at his position who threw more god-awfully advised balls into trouble areas. It happened that Favre fell to the better side of the roullette roll in some of those seasons, but having seen enough QB's I considered "great" and recognizing that the normal outcome of the type of QB'ing Favre has done on most Sundays results in a bad outcome for the majority, I simply can't quite get to the "great" moniker with him. But hey, I could be wrong. And that's the out for any subjective based argument. There's no such way to get out of the fact that if you want to improve your chances of winning the Super Bowl these days you'd go far in your quest signing with an East Coast team- unlike the odds on some guage of the play of a team's QB this would actually give you a far greater shot at the Lombardi.

My original premise earlier in the string might be worth, as you suggest, going back to read- I believe that fans and the media feed the false premise that the QB is of some much greater importance than other players on the team, and history simply proves this to be wrong IMO. For instance, on the Ravens winning team I'd say their QB was probably not more than maybe the 17th or 18th most skilled player at his position among their starters, and easily no higher on the scale of importance to their win. The bottom line is that teams need someone to lead the sales of their jerseys, the media needs someone to glorify or vilify on film every week and the fans need to believe they understand the game by overscrutinizing the people they watch who handle the ball. I just disagree with the sum of those things being the critical elements to winning the game of football as it's played in the NFL.

Posey is a "fierce competitor" and Willis McGahee is our "best player". I must be missing some game film here, can anyone help?

I don't know whether that's an attemtped dodge of the original supposition or simply a continued semantic dalliance ignoring clear evidence. But instead of debating that, let me introduce some objectivity into the original debate that contradicts the original poster's conclusions. A) Among the past 6 Super Bowl Winning Quarterbacks, 3 have been journeymen Quarterbacks. Statistically speaking, over that span the whole of the 32 NFL teams have been just as likely win the Super Bowl with a journeyman Quarterback as they have been to win with a Quarterback assumed to be of any greater talent level. B) Of the past 16 Super Bowls, half were won by teams playing in the Eastern Conference. C) Of the past 6 Super Bowls, every single game was won by a team playing in a city located East of the Mississippi. Just applying these objective facts to reach a conclusion on the likelihood of winning Super Bowls, it's perfectly objective to say that a team with a journeyman quarterback playing on an East Coast team today is infinitely more likely to win a Super Bowl than a great Quarterback playing for a West Coast team. Also, we know for a fact that in recent times a journeyman QB is as likely to be among the Super Bowl winners as all the other Quarterbacks of any greater talent level in the game of football. So using objective evidence instead of a subjective measure like "great QBs" we can prove that the original premise and conclusion are subject to irrefutable contradiction.

It might be possible to turn that argument completely around. It seems that the term "great QB" is most often bestowed upon those who end up on the winning sidelines Super Bowl Sunday, which simply follows the fan hysteria of attributing an inordinate amount of any team's success or failure to that single position. Along those lines you've identified Kurt Warner and Brett Favre under your measures as "Great QBs". It might be more prudent to say that another season at Arizona and Green Bay respectively could go far in dulling both their shines to the point that in retirement they may not be looked upon so glowingly. I could also list MVP QBs who are hardly "great", but simply beneficiaries of systems that fit their skillsets ideally. You might start with Rick Gannon as a for instance, and there are solid arguments along the same lines about a few of those among the Super Bowl winners you list too.

Chances are if Triplett/McCargo/Anderson have a big season the majority of the credit will end up in a defensive back's future paycheck. Since that's the reality of this league, I'd be just as happy seeing it go to a hard-sticking Safety who's spreading some fear rather than anyone else in the backfield.

Just speaking for some of the Cal locations, in SFO you can't beat the North Star: Moose McGillicuddys in Old Town Pasadena is home of the Los Angeles Bill's Backers; and this season in Santa Monica you can join Kelly the Dog and myself with "guest appearances" each Sunday from other TBD alumni plus a wide array of Bill's fans at Busby's located at Berkely and Santa Monica Blvd. in Santa Monica.

If you're a buyer of atheltic stereotypes it's important to recognize that JP is half American Indian, and that his dad was a professional-quality athlete who had conformance issues that led him to skip a pro baseball career after he was drafted. It might not be unfair to view the difference between Jaworski and Losman similar to the difference between Stan Makowski and Jim Thorpe.

Who's sportin' the jack for all those candles? Have an Irish Car bomb today with the promise of future reimbursement ;-)

The talk of creampuff Posey moving up to play on the line doesn't bode well for his future with the Bills in my mind.