2020 Our Year For Sure

This article includes a pretty interesting video package, and if you go to a11offense.com and click 'A-11 VIDEO CLIPS' you'll find a whole bunch of them.

If Sweed is behind both Mendenhall and Willie Parker, Hardy is surely behind Lynch.

Piedmont High School in California has developed a new spread formation to try to neutralize a disadvantage in personnel. The base set consists of a center flanked by two tight ends surrounding the ball, two quarterbacks in the shotgun, and 6 recievers (3 wide right and 3 wide left). The school got a 7-4 record using the set about 60% of the time, and head coach and co-creator Kurt Bryan says he plans to use it 85-90% of the time this coming season. Apparently, at least one of the quarterbacks must be at least 7 yards behind the LOS for the set to be considered a "punt formation." They've given all 11 offensive players eligible reciever jersey numbers, and mix and match which 6 players are eligible recievers on a given play (as 6 eligibles is the maximum). Not sure how a center can be considered an eligible reciever. Players who are ineligible on a given play "can take a reverse pitch or a negative screen or a hitch behind the line of scrimmage." Here is an interesting article on Rivals.com, complete with a video package showing off some of the interesting things they've done with the formation. Bryan claims that 35-40 coaches from division I-A schools, from every conference, have contacted him (under the condition of anonymity). Steve Humphries, Piedmont's director of football operations and the other co-creator of the A-11, says that last season he saw San Jose State run multiple A-11 plays against Stanford, Florida run one against LSU, and Rutgers and the San Francisco 49ers run punt plays with "aspects of Piedmont's offense." They've got a pretty informative site up at a11offense.com. I'm thinking in the next year or two, we'll see some colleges use the set every now and then. Anyone else know more about this?

What else is there to comment on? In attending the Bills camp, the guy made three observations: 1) the defense and special teams are good, but not good enough without Jason Peters, 2) that Peters may or may not be a serious holdout, and 3) the Bills should pay Jason Peters. If Peters walks into camp tomorrow, 90% of the article is a waste of time and money. Hence me rolling my eyes.

Judging by the article, I would've thought he had three.

See sig.

You've set the record straight, of course. The thing about Lynch was that to my memory all the TSW pre-draft buzz surrounding him was virtually the opposite of what he actually is. Not being a huge college football fan, I had to rely on other fans' opinions...and that left me the impression of a Marshall Faulk or a Brian Westbrook type: seemingly a natural when lining up as a wide reciever, possessing lightning speed and quickness, with MOVES in the open field. What we got was more Brandon Jacobs than Marshall Faulk. Without that homerun ability some of us thought we were drafting, I don't know if he'll ever be an elite back. Not that I'm complaining. Lynch ought to be a darn good back in this league for some time, and we should all be happy to have him.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm glad he did. Lets hope Ko and Marshawn can follow suit.

Thats good to hear from someone who clearly isn't afraid to call these young starters of ours out when they're not up to snuff. Makes your thumbs up more meaningful.

Right now is the time when our rookie offensive coordinator is installing a new offense, presumably with altered terminology and a different playbook. This is when Peters' teammates are learning that system, together. He should be there. He should be there working out the rust from his injury, he should be there further familiarizing himself with Derrick Dockery, he should be getting ready for the season. A team with serious expectations is implementing a new offense...and Peters has decided to be absent. You can't tell me he is committed to winning. He has consciously and deliberately accepted a potential hit to his performance this season for a mere hope at getting more money. He's sacrificed at least some small part of the team's potential to win, for his own selfish financial reasons. In his mind, money is clearly first, and winning a distant second. He will never get back the time at camp he missed. This team will never have the same exact chance at success as they would have if Peters had reported on time. In my humble opinion, no player who holds money and winning as equal priorities would begin negotiations by making that sacrifice. I understand he's young, a top player at his position, and its the perfect time in his career to cash in. But sacrificing some small part of the team's potential for the upcoming season isn't the way to go about it. He could have shown up to camp on time, and thus begun the learning curve of the new offense, the process of shaking off the rust after offseason surgery, and continued the ongoing process of building chemistry with his linemates...all right on time. And while at camp, he could have negotiated a new contract behind closed doors. In this league, you earn money by working and constantly showing your worth, not by pouting in the corner while you're supposed to be getting ready for the season. He has his work cut out for him to show he's a player that is committed to winning, and therefore worthy of a big contract in this league. Its going to take some time, and the clock is ticking. And he's still sitting on his couch.

Wholeheartedly agree. If Peters was committed to winning, he'd be afraid of the damage missing practice time would do to his performance. But in his world, money clearly comes before winning. If I'm GM, he doesn't get an extra dime until he gets into camp, plays hard the whole season, practices harder, attends all voluntary and mandatory activities next offseason, and then reports to camp on time. Thats the only way he can show he's a player who is committed to winning, and therefore worth spending money on. If he's not willing to do that, he can rot for the next three years. This team will go on.

Peters has shown that winning isn't important to him. If he cared about winning, he'd be thinking, "Yes I need a new contract, and I'll tell them that privately. But I can't holdout, because I need to learn the new offense and I need to practice with my teammates to play at my best and give this team the best chance to win." Jason Peters has made it perfectly clear that money comes first, and winning comes second. Therefore, if I'm sitting in the GM's chair, I'm moving on without him and trying to forget he so much as exists. Regardless of whether or not he reports, he's not getting a new contract this offseason...he's already shown me his true colors by not getting to camp on time, and I don't want to invest millions in a player who isn't dedicated to winning. If he wants to pout in the corner, he can sit on his couch for the next 3 years, miss out on the prime of his career along with millions of dollars. Thats his choice. But he isn't bigger than this team. We can move Walker, himself an outstanding run blocker, to the blind side, and give him help with the quicker pass rushers. This time will survive without Jason Peters. If Peters comes into camp sometime in the next week, he can still start for me. If he plays hard, practices harder, and then attends all mandatory AND voluntary activities next year, and THEN reports to camp on time and says the right things to the media through it all...then maybe we can talk about money. But Jason Peters has a long way to go to show us he cares about winning, and that he's a player worth spending money on.

Yeah. That makes sense.

This is really nothing new. The first time I remember seeing it is Bonds, during the home run chase.

Uh...why? Has no team EVER won without a top corner? Who won the Super Bowl last year? Thats right. And who won it the year before, again?

That is interesting. How do we know that?

My DVR is being installed tomorrow. I am so ready.

Aaron Schobel.

link With the Peters situation lurking, it would be nice to get some good news on the Evans front. A few quotes from Evans: -"They've progressed through summer. Now that we're in camp, it'll heat up a little more. And hopefully, it'll heat up to a position where it can be worked out." -[the talks are] "more serious than they were before." -"We're moving in the right direction, which is positive. Both sides are talking. Both sides are positive. That's really good. I am hopeful." Git'er done, uh...Russ and Ralph and John and Tom and Jim and Dick. EDIT: And here's a blog post and a quick article from Chris Brown on the subject. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.

I hardly think this is a competition. If Favre is a Packer (which he won't be), its as the backup.

My thought as well. They very well could have been targeting Hardy all along.

In terms of personnel? Yeah, pretty much. What positions on this team are holding the Bills back in YOUR opinion? Our roster looks pretty solid across the board from where I'm sitting.

I don't care if he'd have it or not. I'm willing to concede to 1bills, obi and the like that Schonert will be the last offensive coordinator Jauron personally hires for this team, one way or the other. If Schonert fails, and Jauron can't accept that he doesn't know the first thing about hiring an offensive coordinator, I won't defend him. He can show himself out. Who cares if Wade had any leverage? Phillips with his guys coaching the offense equals mediocrity. Phillips with power over the offense taken out of his hands equates to success, with the right personnel in place. If Schonert fails, its time to take away some of the leverage Jauron has, and put him in the position Phillips was in: run with our guy coaching the offense, or walk. I give Jauron until he has an offensive coordinator we have some reason to believe knows what they're doing, and the team still can't make the playoffs. Until then, I'm not giving up on a guy who has the defense moving in the right direction, and the whole team playing hard, yet smart. I won't allow his defficiency in one area of the game to sour me on him, when it can be easily remedied by allowing someone else (say, Marv Levy?) to appoint the overseer of that unit. EDIT: You guys can go on and on about Jauron's track record. The facts are he fielded good defensive units in Chicago when he had competent personnel, and there's reason to be optimistic about the defense here. And he has NEVER had the oppurtunity to work with a competent offensive coach. His teams play with passion, his players love to play for him, and penalties are kept low. I believe the offensive coach is whats missing, and what was missing in Chicago before Angelo lost half his defense.

I see similarities between Jauron and Tony Dungy. Other than running the same defensive system, they're both laid-back guys who like to promote a family environment, rather then cracking the whip on their players' backs. Players love playing for both of them. If not knowing enough about offense didn't hold Dungy back, and he was able to rise above mediocrity when paired with a savvy offensive coach, I don't see why Jauron wouldn't be able to do the same. Do you? Your entire post could be addressed to a Bills fan who was loyal to Wade Phillips after Homerun Throwup. Yet we've seen Phillips go on and have success when the delegation of the offensive coordinator was taken out of his hands. If Schonert fails, its time to consider the possibility that Jauron is another one of these guys.