CookieG

What if: Stevie Wonder just called to say he's seen you? Joan Jett gave a damn about her bad reputation? Billy Idol's lover cried less, less, less? David Byrne sang about a boring, boring life?

I would, for several reasons. For as good as members of the line have been in run blocking, pass blocking is another matter. They ranked near the bottom of the NFL in adjusted sack rate, giving up 42 sacks, with one of the lowest number of attempts in the league. That's actually pretty bad. Some of that can be blamed on Tyrod holding on the ball too long, but much of it can be blamed on someone blowing through an OL, usually on the right side. In addition, there were a number of sacks avoided by Tyrod himself, being able to slip past a pass rusher who blew by someone. Miller struggled mightily in pass pro, and was really inconsistent. He's still got his college attitude of just planting his feet and slugging it out at the line, instead of giving ground when needed. I really like the guy, and am really pulling for him to improve, but his pass pro is well below NFL standards. At RT, Henderson showed what he was known for. Good athlete for his size, very good blocker at times, but wildly inconsistent. I can understand why Whaley took a chance on Kujo despite his red flags, but the red flags showed to be true. Actually, I love him as a run blocker, and like when Roman throws him in as a 3rd tackle on run plays. But in pass pro....damned. The thing is..when you have an inconsistent pass blocker at guard, and add in an inconsistent pass blocker at tackle, you're in trouble, like they were much of the time last year. You can only cover so many holes in pass protection. Even with a ground and pound team, they are still passing as much as they are running. And like penalties, a sack is a killer for a ground and pound team. I'd look at this as an excellent opportunity to help solidify the O line for a reasonable cost. You can get several years out of a guy on a rookie contract, a far less cost than what you'd pay a comparable FA.

People like to use the term "doubling down" as it comes to him in the offseason. I think he's going for a 5 Card Charlie.

A poster made a comment about his coaching record in college. It was corrected. Does any of it really matter any more? Damn, after watching the defense take a nosedive in 2015, he hired a guy as de facto assistant DC, who was just fired because he was running one of the worst defenses in NFL history. There isn't more to day after that.

the 36-11 record was as a player. As a coach, he was 12-22 and 1-9 against Top 25 teams. http://soonerstats.com/football/coaches/ou/details.cfm?OUCoachID=21 Bob Stoops took over and won a NC in his 2nd. season. Blake is considered, by far, the worst coach in Oklahoma history. Or at least since the invention of the automobile.

A very nice write up. To add....sometimes, you never know. Watching our 2 sons grow up, our youngest was by far the more physical, more aggressive of the 2, the one who loved physical contact. I would jokingly refer to him as my Linebacker in Training. The oldest was shy, sensitive, and got bullied a bit in grade school. The youngest, when in kindergarten, was singled out by a 2nd grade playground bully. Without getting into it...let's just say the bully made a mistake. By the time 4th grade rolled around, my oldest wanted to try football, so we enrolled him in a flag football league. I ended up coaching him for 2 years. Every other kid on his first team had experience, and he was probably the worst player on the team (no..I didn't start him at QB, but like everyone else..I made an effort to ensure everyone played). My youngest...he was in 2nd grade at the time and would come to the practices. Sometimes, I'd throw him in to a scrimmage, move him to a spot on defense and say, "run after the guy with the ball". I'll be damned if the kid wasn't running down 5th graders. Sometimes, he'd tackle them. But the thing was...my youngest had 0 interest in the game, or sports in general. It always surprised me, considering how physically active he was. I asked him a few times, but he was never interested. By 6th grade, the oldest wanted to try full contact football. The first contact practice was..about what you'd expect from a kid who's never played. But the first weekend I took him in the yard, in pads and showed him some blocking/tackling techniques. He picked it up pretty quick. Through junior high, he ended up starting both ways on his team, OL and DE and didn't do too bad. By the end, teachers/coaches at his junior high were asking my youngest to try out. He wouldn't. HIgh school...eh...I didn't realize how bad their high school program was. But they got a new coach who was building the program...and has made a little headway. My oldest really got into it. He hit the weights, he worked out at 6 am, for his 1st 2 years, he was going against guys on another team that outweighed him by 50-70 lbs. By his senior year, he ended up at about 6'0" 240 and was one of the 4 captains. As an OG, he was still outweighed on a regular basis, but not as bad. He ended up a pretty good player on a team that didn't win too much. But..he enjoyed it. If nothing else..he wasn't bullied any more. My youngest...the first day of high school, the head football coach cornered him and begged him to go out..he wouldn't. Both are honor roll students. Both have stayed out of trouble. Both have totally different likes and dislikes. Both have chosen their friends wisely and have avoided peer pressure. In many ways, I consider my wife and I have been extremely lucky. A little bad peer pressure can ruin a lifetime of good parenting. Luckily, we didn't face that. PS. The oldest understood from the beginning that he was on a one and done rule as far as concussions went. The game was over for him if he ever got one. It isn't worth it. A coach from another team talked to me about him playing college ball and said that teams can put him on a 5000 to 6000 calorie diet to bulk him up to 300 or so. With his body frame..that's not worth it either.

I looked at Smerlas being "underrated" the same way you look at Big Ted. Maybe in a current perspective, he's underrated, but he wasn't when he played. Smerlas was a multiple Pro Bowler and was considered one of the best NT's in the league, at a time when most teams had switched to a 3-4 D. He had lots of competition among NT's in the league at the time, but was a consensus top 3 NT in the league. 2 underrated players in the Knox Era... Shane Nelson - the 3rd and forgotten member of the Bermuda Triangle. He actually started as an OLB, and was the best front 7 player on a bad team. When he moved inside behind Smerlas, the D took off. But he never seemed to get the recognition of Haslett or Smerlas. He was to the Bermuda Triangle what Wedge was to Luke Skywalker and Lando. Joe Devlin - probably the best Bill to never make the PB (I don't think he did). But Mark Gastineau, who went against him twice a year, voted for him every year. He defined an offensive lineman, strong, tough, unassuming.

This is a bit of cherry picking (well, more than a bit). I mean, in 2 of your 7 examples...you're complaining about the D giving up a field goal. Against SD, Rivers dominated ..for a half. After giving up a TD to start the 2nd half, the Bills D caused 5 consecutive 3 and outs. It would have been a tough comeback, but it was still winnable. The offense responded with a single TD. "dominating" by allowing 2 TD's is a reach, especially if you want to use the "when it mattered" argument. If the 2nd half is "when it matters" argument...5 consecutive 3 and outs. The D held Houston to a single TD and caused 3 turnovers. But you want to focus on a single drive that ended up in a FG as "coming up small". Yes, they denied the offense the opportunity for another 3 and out or a pick 6. Minnesota...another game in which the D gave up a single touchdown the entire game and caused 2 turnovers. "When it mattered", they gave up 3 points the entire 2nd half. Miami...they gave up 2 TD's..one of the FG's they gave up was on a drive started at Buff's 12 yard line. Did it matter? The offense failed to score a single TD. Kansas City....one of the 2 TD drives started around the Bills' 20 or so, thanks to Leodis. They caused the Chiefs to punt 8 times and caused a fumble. The Bills scored a single TD in the entire game and a whopping 3 points in the entire 2nd half. NE certainly dominated them in game 1. Wouldn't be the first time its happened. As far as "couldn't stop the Raiders" it certainly wasnt their best game. On the other hand, they had 5 3 and outs in the first half. Too bad the Buffalo offense matched the Raiders 3 and outs for the first half. I don't know...this isn't the 1970's any more, where teams regularly win games 10-3. Other teams do score touchdowns...and usually do it on a regular basis. More games are won on a 30-27 basis than they are 10-3. And when you have an offense that's continually giving the ball back to an opposing offense via 3 and out, you're putting wayyyyyy too much pressure on your D.

yep. Which brings up the first point in the thread, about Dareus. He made the comment in TC about preferring to just get after the QB instead of making a bunch of reads and/or other responsibilities. The guy has the ability to beat a guard off the ball, take him off balance, getting enough leverage to let his pure power to take over. But to me at least, he looks like he's continuously in 2 gap protection, is usually head up on an OL and isn't given the chance to use his speed/power combination. In other words, he's been neutered and relegated to a space eater. And that's just a bad idea.

Kind of what I figured. I don't know how long you've been around, but a long time ago, when I first started on these sites..wayy back in Gregg Williams era, his name was Daquixlet. If anyone remembers the guy...I'm sorry.

BTW, JK's a good guy. Smart, even tempered, avoids pissing contests. BBTTWW JK, I'd imagine your farewell speech was deleted over there.

Doubt he owns it...unless he inherited it or something. He has a vivid imagination, I'll put it that way. And no thanks, I had enough of that db to last a lifetime.

Lol..you think? When I went over to another site, he was offering his "services" there. I talked to a few of the Admins that I knew and said not to let him anywhere near their control panel. I think Andy banned him.

Hey JK good to see you again! Is Quix/Lit/Scopes still pretending to be a lawyer? Or has he taken over the Lois Einhorn persona? I agree about the place going down and I miss it a lot of us put enough time and effort over there....but most have moved on. I really miss Tony and Merk, if you see them, tell them Gil said hi. I post on another site more often, but browse this place when I have time. Don't look back, you won;'t miss it as much as you think.

I got to see him years ago in a medium sized venue, (about 2500 people), with good seats. It was different from your normal concert, no distractions, it was just about the music. And with him...that's all you needed. It was like he was playing in your living room. I remember when I was in college in the 80;s. A friend of mine was a transfer from Rollins College in FLA, and the one day he was wearing a BB King concert T-shirt. I kind of laughed and said, "BB King, really?" He just smiled and said "yeah, I thought the same thing before the concert, then i listened to him play". He made me a fan that day.

I watched him in the Shrine Game in January. They kept coming back and showing him on the replays, far more than you ever see for an OL. And with good reason, he was knocking people off their spots on a regular basis. Mayock fell in love with him during the game, I think.

Evan Mathis ‏@EvanMathis69 3h3 hours ago Boring day on Twitter. ouch.

In a way, I agree. For instance, whatever effort Marrone put into his offense, from the high flying no huddle that was supposed to force the issue, or the pound on the ground offense he ended up with, the result wasn't good enough. Because whatever he was trying to accomplish, he ended up with a boring, predictable, ineffective, low scoring offense that was neither high flying nor pounding on the ground. So when he went in to ask for an extension, the writing was on the wall, so to speak. Burned by his own quote.

Richardson was a 5th round draft choice. I don't know if it should be considered whiffing, any more than it would be whiffing on Jonathan Meeks or Nic Harris. When its that low in the draft and the guy works out, I consider it a steal, (e.g. Kyle Williams). If it is a whiff, it isn't that bad. Cujo is another matter. You might want to expect a more NFL ready prospect, or one with fewer question marks than Cujo. I can understand that..it might not be the best to use a 2nd round pick on a project. On the other hand, most of the more sure thing OT's were taken in the 1st round and some aren't showing the NFL readiness expected. They went with potential on him, hoping for another DJ Fluker, or maybe an Andre Smith.

Neither Richardson nor Cujo were ready to play this year, and much will depend on them as to whether they ever will be. Richardson let himself go his senior year and got too heavy, Cujo was still recovering from his knee injury..and was also out of shape. Both really need to spend the offseason on conditioning and agility, especially short area foot quickness. The present state of their bodies make them pretty useless in pass pro. And if you're useless in pass pro in the NFL...you're pretty much useless. In run blocking...Richardson was the only guard on the squad who could move a DT from his spot. But his pass blocking..as it was..was so bad that he couldn't be on the field. But...I still think its possible. Call me crazy..but I think people who are overweight can improve their agility while getting in shape. Proper drills, proper program, proper diet could do wonders with both. And it must be remembered, that this isn't the same as "coaching up" some UDFA. Both have plenty of raw talent. Both were outstanding college linemen. Richardson was an Outland trophy candidate and All American. Cujo was an All American. Both excelled in run blocking. I watched Richardson a great deal at Baylor, and he didn't get moved in pass pro. He gets bowled over now, not because he's weak, its because he's late getting to where he needs to be, gets off balance, and loses leverage. I wouldn't write off either just yet. At the same time, I wouldn't go into camp without a plan B and a plan C.

1.91 for his 10 3.19 for his 20 By comparison, guys like Robinson, Lewan and Matthews had 10 yard splits around 1.7 and 20 yard splits in the low 2.8's. Henderson actually had similar numbers to them. At the combine, it was almost an eye opener to see how lumbering and lethargic he looked. That's why all of the questions about his knee came up. The Bills took a chance. He had/has trouble with speed rushers, but other than that..played like the All American he became. He could be dominant, especially in the run game. But he most definitely came with some red flags. He wasn't a "solid but unspectacular" type of prospect. More of a "he can be dominant if..." type of guy. Whether he'll ever be able to compensate for his lack of athleticism, or whether it improves, is anyone's guess.

You talk about getting rid of a coach because he's from a "bygone era" but keeping the head coach because he's "old school"? Speaking of bygone eras, you had a HC and his junior OC coming into Buffalo and bragging about how they would be using a 20+ year old playboook... uh huh. And worse, it was clear that they had little idea of the reason behind the K-gun and how to run it. Its Spiller's fault because he doesn't smash through the middle of the line and pick up 2 yards; Its the OL's fault when the D has 4 defenders stacked over the guards, and the 3 OL can't block 4 defenders (it took Hackett several games to realize that was happening); Its the OL coaches fault when the OC decides to attack behind the weakest area of the OL; Its everyone's fault except the people who design the O. But ok. If you think getting rid of the OL coach is somehow going to transform the offense, good luck with that. There will be someone else to blame next year.

I'm not sure that using essentially the same running play 20 of 23 times in a game can be classified as a "scheme". I mean, even Don Shula ran Jim Kiick and Mercury Morris outside. Watching Hackett call a running game reminds me of an old Happy Days episode I saw as a kid. Ritchie and Potzi's band played a frat party but could only play one song. Potzi couldn't figure out why everyone was leaving. Hackett = Potzi. Don't feel bad, give it a few years. The next offensive genius to come in, probably a quality control assistant at Sweet Home High School, will move Watkins to tight end, just as he's coming in to his own as a WR. And the comments will go like this: -You know, he's really not a very good blocker; -He really can't get off the line with a LB in his face; -I know he's not big by typical TE standards, but still, you should be able to block a LB or DE if you're a TE; -we're really getting killed on the edge by DE's and LB's...we really need someone who can block; -In this scheme, we really need a TE who can block, and we're not getting it from him, he just doesn't fit what we're trying to do; -I wonder if we can get a 5th rounder for him, I mean, he's proving pretty worthless as a TE...can't block and can't get off the line, I don't know who'd want him.

Why? Because that's what its been after the Chicago game...3.6 ypc and about 35 yards per game. By the same token, I don't know why you keep excluding the NE game. More importantly, if you think 3.6 ypc is good, fine or whatever, I don't know what to say.. Even more importantly, if you think the best the Bills RB's good for is to run into the middle of a pile on every play....well damn. This running game would be sooo much better with even a touch of imagination.

OK...I'm looking... and his ypc in the last 5 games total is 3.6. .