Geno Smith's Arm
-
Posts
1,965 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Geno Smith's Arm
-
-
It certainly does not hurt that they got McKelvin with their #1.
However, a #1 is well-spent on McKelvin if you use a D scheme which maximizes his abilities (can cover all over the field and run with WRs going deep among other things that made him the first CB taken and almost an elite talent (which I define as being a good enough player to command a top10 choice).
However, in our case, we run a Cover 2 as a base scheme and Fewell estimates we run a traditional Cover 2 only 25% of plays. In this scheme rather than covering a WR all over the field the CB turns them over to the safeties after the short zone. We also run a version of the Cover 2 generally known as the Tampa 2 in which the MLB covers the deep middle and the safeties need only worry about a 1/3 of the deep field. When one also eliminates plays in the redzone where there is not enough field to even go deep and we run a different scheme or short yardage where the opponent is almost certainly not going deep, there simply are only a few plays each game where we are running a scheme which plays to McKelvin's strengths (or more important for our purposes where a CB of far less than elite talent like a Greer or McGee can be expected to play CB adequately in our D.
In general if we want to make the highest best use of McKelvin we will need to change how we employ our base scheme to allow him to cover WRs all over the field. This is well and good for McKelvin, but it does raise a question of whether our other defenders who were acquired for and practice the Cover 2 will do well in a D which gets altered to take advantage of what McKelvin can do.
Its not at all that we can get by with bad CBs because we run a Cover 2. However, what is the case is that players who were never good enough to start at CB under the old system like Greer, or CBs who clearly were far less talented than Clements can actually play adequately in a Cover 2.
McKelvin was not a bad athlete to acquire. However, it was likely a waste of resources as it definitely would take a #11 pick to acquire McKelvin but actually a lower pick and less accomplished player at the Greer level can do an adequate job with this D.
I wish we had been able to pull off a trade which allowed us to move down in the round (or even out of the 1st round) and let us acquire some more 2nd and 3rd rounders in compensation. Its all woulda/coulda/shoulda but it is easy for me to see if we could have made such a deal we could have acquired another WR to compete with Hardy (a Jackson or Tweed for example) and also have gotten a Conner or other players to make us a better team.
We did not and this is reality and we will have to do well with the value pick in the first, hope that the behavior issues in Hardy's college life were due to immaturity, and that a CB like Corner turns out to be an ST stud because it seems quite unlikely that we are gonna get away with a 5' 9'' CB against folks like Moss/Welker.
Is this an indictment of the professional with the Bills. No because it would not be a very good one. Who knows what trades they were offered. As far as football knowledge they have forgotten more than us fans will ever learn about the game.
However, us fans are entitled to our opinions (no matter how fact-free they are) and actually NFL professional make dumb choices like picking Mike Williams or trading their entire draft for Wicky Williams. The Bills braintrust is far from immune to criticism of this draft and in fact this business should welcome it.
It sells far more tickets than people not caring enough to be disturbed by the draft.
Over-intellectualized bullsh*t.
All theory.
If he is an exceptional player, he will find a way to impact games, even if if is by dissuading teams from passing in his direction.
Perhaps they could have chosen a player of a different position, perhaps he isn't the player they think he is, but an exceptional player will find a way to impact games regardless of the scheme. If he controls an area of the field, he is having an impact.
Plus he is a dynamite returner.
-
I wouldn't say you should "expect" a first year impact player in round 3, but that being said, there are certainly ones out there. Seems like we went for depth when we could have addressed potential starter needs...
Do you think they felt "well, this guy could start at TE and transform our offense, but we need some special teamers"? They took the guys the thought would be good players. Most later rd guys don't end up starting, or even stay in the league. they are looking for guys that are good enough to be pros.
-
Trent Edwards?
yea, why not list EVERY player that has been a late round rookie starter? Plus I wouldn't call him a great rookie success, he is more like a nice developing player
I said it HAPPENS, but RARELY!
And he was a VALUE pick!, Exactly what everyone is complaining about. They wanted to get a rookie starting TE and center in the 4th round, that change the offense into a juggernaut.
-
Well seeing as how the Chiefs were all about saying they expected 6 starters; I'd say a team gets out of a draft what they want (for the most part).
And yes, they may have tried to trade up and/or down and couldn't. However, I would think that if they wanted to move up a few spots sinto the high second or mid second, they could have. Plenty of teams moved around with fairly reasonable offers - why couldn't the Bills if they wanted to? My guess is they didn't because they didn't want to.
Really, do you think they don't know Fowler blows?
do you think they don't know they could vastly improve at TE?
That's exactly what I'm suggesting. Just because you or I think they blow, that doesn't mean that Jauron does.
I would rather that they waited until next year to fill a position with a top pick or in free agency than waste picks on marginal players that aren't any better than the guys they already have.
I agree.
I was going to type " how many starters with the picks the Bills had" or "with a pick each round" but I thought that was implicit. The Chiefs traded away a pro bowler for more picks, that's obviously a special case. And it remains to be seen if they get 6 starters, and if the starters are any good, and if the Chiefs will still blow (likely). Is there anyone more full of Sh*t in the NFL than Herm Edwards?
I think that Everyone knows that Fowler blows (poetry). The tight ends? I think that they know they could do a lot better, but that there aren't that many hot shot TE's to choose from each draft.
WR or TE in the second round? My preference for this draft, and this team, WR.
I'm not convinced that Antonio Gates or Dallas Clark would have been any good in last years offense. I think the OC and the QB's were way more to blame than the TE's.
-
No. But that's my point. If the Bills' brass really thought we needed one, they could have traded up and gotten one. In the past 2 drafts they've traded back up to get players. This year they seemed content to get those situational/depth kind of guys. That's my point. Many think we needed a stud TE or a new C, apparently, Brandon doesn't.
Not necessarily. I think we need to improve those positions too, and it is reasonable to argue about the top picks, but they had needs at WR and CB, and there didn't seem to be a TE worth the 11th pick (how do you know that they didn't try to make trades?).
Blah blah blah blah blah........
How many rookie starters do you think a team is going to get out a draft?
Really, do you think they don't know Fowler blows?
do you think they don't know they could vastly improve at TE?
There aren't even many pro TE prospects that come out of college each year. It's not like RB or WR. Which TE did you want at 11?
I would rather that they waited until next year to fill a position with a top pick or in free agency than waste picks on marginal players that aren't any better than the guys they already have.
-
It seems that people are expecting to fill THIS seasons' needs with 5 Rd picks. How many teams that make the playoffs will have a ROOKIE, starting center(or TE) from the 3rd, 4th,5th,6th or 7th rounds?
Yeah it happens, but the second day picks usually take some time to develop.
The Bills sucked, and one draft cannot fill all the holes. They have 2 nice prospects that might upgrade 2 positions of need. That's good.
People can bicker about what position to spend the top picks on, but the other guys likely won't start as rookies, so the Bills chose the best players on their board, or guys that were recommended, or a guy on the staff used to coach etc. When you are trying to get lucky, you have to take the BPA.
They are just trying to find guys that MIGHT be good enough to actually play in the pros, let alone become starters.
-
Going in most posters here thought we had a few glaring holes to fill - WR, TE, CB, OG, DT. Well, upon reflection (while washing my truck for the last bit), I can only come to one logical conclusion. The FO came into the draft thinking we only needed to find about 2 starters - WR and CB.
It's fairly obvious that they started selecting BPA to fit certain need areas in the 3rd round. If they really wanted a starting TE out of this draft, there were just too many options to select a better prospect than Fine. If they really wanted depth on the Oline, they could have easily selected a few guys for that. And so forth.
IMO, they got the 2 guys they wanted - a starting CB and a starting WR. Then they just started filling the roster with depth type players that could be good on Special Teams and possibly surprise us all and step into as starters roll in a few years.
So, I ask, is it possible that the team is closer to competing for a playoff spot than many posters think? Personally, I thought we were still 1 year away from a draft like this. Apparently, the FO disagrees. I guess we'll see in November.
Really, after the first 2 rounds, can you really expect a first year impact player? The Bills sucked last year, you can't fill so many holes with one draft. People can bicker about what position should be filled with the first picks, but did you really think we were gonna find a tight end in the 3rd or 4th that was gonna "open up the offense" or be a real impact player?
It happens, but the odds aren't very good.
They got good prospects for starters in two positions of need (CB, WR), the rest of the guys are projects, the same for every team.
-
He knows you win on the line of scrimmage.
He invested mega-bucks in his QB and does not want him crippled by using scumbags on the OL.
Contrast this with the Bills approach where they consistently ignore the OL on draft day.
If the Bills drafted 3 centers, you would hate it.
-
The Rams are on the clock and should sign whoever they can.
The league has no reason to delay the signing other than to placate the network televising the draft.
There could also be problems with the players union if teams beyond the top pick started doing this.
-
I like the direction the Bills are headed with personnel. Don't like what the coach is doing with the players. To win in the NFL you need a winning level of talent and a winning approach to the game. I don't see the winning approach. I do see the same DJ that I watched here in Chicago for several years. That's really disappointing to me. When he was hired by the Bills, several friends here in Chicago chuckled and said to me "good luck". I defended the hire then saying that Jauron will have learned a lot the first time around and will be better for that experience. So far I don't see that. What I see is the same overly cautious, manage the game to keep it close and hope to win it in the last 4 minutes crap that he deployed in Chicago. His public presentations from week to week about the last game or the next game are mirror images of what he said here in Chicago. It's a friggin miracle that the bears won 12 or 13 games that one year when he was coach. They had an amazing stretch of lucky plays at the end of games and played in a very weak division. My Bills crystal ball shows a rise in the talent level in Buffalo with a playoff birth and early exit in '09 and that being the peak of the DJ era. Being wrong about this would be great.
I feel exactly the same way. It's really hard to get excited about the team when you can see that the coach plays "not to lose". It leads to decent records , but never the big prize.
It's also boring to watch.
-
Thanks.
You are right that picking a CB at #11 would not be the worse thing. However, it would not be a pick that does the most for improving our past protection and production. Ironically, perhaps the best thing we could do to improve the performance of our pass D in real measurable terms may actually be to draft offensive players who help us avoid so many 3 and outs and simply reduce th # of first downs our D gives up by keeping the opposing offense off the field.
Despite my repetitive posting, some folks still choose to interpret what I am saying as some blanket statement that our CBs do not cover the pass. THE CB's DO PASS COVERAGE FOR US, HOWEVER, DEEP PASS COVERAGE IS NOT THERE FIRST RESPONSIBILITY IN THE COVER 2 AS WE EMPLOY IT.
Our CBs perform:
1. Short zone pass coverage as they actually turn the WR over to the safeties on the wing or to the MLB over the middle once they get to 12-15 yards down the field. If someone is interested in improving our pass protection against WRs all over the field or on deep throws, they should be far more interested in improving:
A. our pass rush so there is no time to run the deep route
B. our safety play because they will primarily do the mid to deep WR coverage
C. our offense so we have fewer three and outs.
All three of these aspects of the game are much more vital to good pass protection for the Bills than getting a better CB.
2. Containment and tackling of outside rush threats. Our CB needs to make good reads so he is not dropping back on outside runs to his side or pinching in when the QB is looking into the shortzone for the WR.
3. The CB blitz- as our CBs generally do not have deep duty, the formation allows them to do more CB blitzes.
4. From time to time, we will run a more traditional coverage and the CB will in fact need to run with the WR on a fly pattern. However, I think this formation and utilization is by far the exception rather than the rule and though our CBs may not be good enough to consistently cover a WR running fly patterns all day, it is a different thing when a CB only has to show this ability from time to time.
Even if we do not feel good about Greer, McGee, or Youbouty on the fly pattern generally, we do have the ability if the coverage demands that the CB cover the deep pass we can line the CB up a few steps back off the line so he need not run continually or keep up with the WR. Further, when the coverage calls for the CB to go deep it is possible for us to supplement this package with the safety still backing the CB up deep,
Yes, the CB will need to sometime do deep coverage in our D but this still is the exception rather than the rule.
I generally agree with what you laid out here, but perhaps point four is key. Perhaps, if the Bills had a "shutdown corner" they could mix up coverages more, and be more adaptable to an opposing offenses' adjustments. Like say an OC, or QB is adept at picking apart the Cover 2, or their playmakers' skills matchup to the Cover 2 (good route- runners), the versatility could be very beneficial.
-
He's got a SuperBowl ring doesn't he.
yeah 2.
It's meant as a compliment. A very big compliment.
-
JP will be the Jim Plunkett of this era.
-
There isn't an area on this team, from defensive backfield to D-line, from wide-out to O-line, that doesn't need big improvement. I will be happy if they get a guy who excels, and makes a difference.
Take the best guy.
I can't believe people have a philosophy like "we need WR most, and DB 2nd priority, then TE, so first pick should be WR and 2nd pick DB, etc". That's really simplistic (code word for stupid).
This team sucked, and has big weaknesses EVERYWHERE. RB and QB are in the development stages, but everywhere else there are problems.
-
I love the attitude Shockey brings to the field and yes id love to have him on this team......
He is a dlck.
He is from "The U" (no, I don't need a list of the "good" guys from Miami).
The Giants didn't even want him around because he was causing problems, and that was obviously the right choice.
There are also injury questions, and a drop off in play.
I would rather the Bills gave the playing time to a develop a draftee.
-
Jerry Ball, Chris Speilman, Mike Johnson, Herman Moore, etc..........they all were terrible, weren't they.
They were in a conference with Washington, NY, Philly, Dallas and San Francisco. Minnesota and Chicago were pretty good too
I don't remember Mike Johnson. Herman Moore was real good, but I'm don't think they were together many seasons and the QB situation was bad, real bad.
-
With all the creeps that have played in the NFL and pro sports in general, it seems ridiculous to say a bad thing about Barry Sanders. If it was really "all about him", he would have tried to force a trade to a winning franchise. The reason it was all about him is because the Detroit front office could never find any other weapons (QB especially) to move the ball forward.
-
Why does anyone really care if he is in or not?
Do you consider it some kind of "feather in the cap" for the City of Buffalo or something.
I only enjoy seeing the players get in.
-
Sweed looks like he may adapt quickest to the NFL of the 4 guys mentioned, but he probably will always be a #2 kind of guy. I see Sweed, I think Quinn Early...I see Kelly, I think TO. I see Thomas......I don't know what to feel. Will he fit into a pseudo hurry up or west coast offense? I know Evans and Reed should work well in it, and there is a shot to bring in Carlson who would adapt easily......Thomas seems to have a little more "project" to him.
I agree. I don't remember that much about Q Early (was he tall?), except that he was above average.
I think Thomas will be great but like you mention could be a project.
I think Sweed is "specialized", but that skill would really help the current team. If we got him in the 2nd, or traded up, I would be pretty happy. Not sure he is worth a #11, but he has the kind of skill that could be immediately effective. Namely, going up for the ball.
-
Welcome to the board! Great first post. Look at more footage of Hardy! He is everything physically, he has charactor concerns. As far as specialized goes it doesn't get any more special than him...
Yeah he looked real good too, but Sweed definitely looked the best at going up for the ball.
I'm not a big one for the "character" thing, and I don't know the whole story, but beating up on the mother of your child is pretty bad.
-
When I watch the Youtube footage of the top receivers I see them like this:
Limas Sweed - Great hands, and body control. Perfect endzone target, and chain mover. Looks kinda slow, but fights for the ball and goes up to get it at the highest point. Doesn't do much after the catch.
Devin Thomas - He looks like Andre Reed out there. Great after the catch, and makes things happen. I think he will be a star.
Malcolm Kelly - Made lots of plays, and some great catches and nice runs after the catch, but he lets the ball hit his body too much (almost every catch).
That's a very bad habit.
Hardy and the other guys don't seem as "specialized" as far as great runs or going after the ball, etc.
I can easily see Thomas becoming the best receiver of the bunch, but I think that Sweed is the guy whose skills match what the Bills need most. I have also heard great things about his work ethic and general personality (I ain't gonna use the "C" word).
This defense is going to be very good
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
What !?!?
Denney and kelsay ain't studs. Mcgee is alright.
They will be better, but c'mon.