Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 Looks to me like other than a horrible game against Cleveland, he was improving. That can happen when you have a young player who is thrust into the lineup. To think that last year's effort seals him into the worst tackle ever category is a bit short sighted. You mean because the negative scores were slightly lower? Seriously, if he was improving so much, how come his last game was a MINUS 2.3? Prorate that across 16 games and you get MINUS 36.8, which would have made him the second-worst-tackle, 76th out of 77. Look again at the stats at the bottom, the last three games he had significant negative scores as a pass blocker, which is his major weakness (outside of penalties), and that is kind of a major handicap for a left tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 Looks to me like other than a horrible game against Cleveland, he was improving. That can happen when you have a young player who is thrust into the lineup. To think that last year's effort seals him into the worst tackle ever category is a bit short sighted. You mean because the negative scores were slightly lower? Seriously, if he was improving so much, how come his last game was a MINUS 2.3? Prorate that across 16 games and you get MINUS 36.8, which would have made him the second-worst-tackle, 76th out of 77. Look again at the stats at the bottom, the last three games he had significant negative scores as a pass blocker, which is his major weakness (outside of penalties), and that is kind of a major handicap for a left tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 Looks to me like other than a horrible game against Cleveland, he was improving. That can happen when you have a young player who is thrust into the lineup. To think that last year's effort seals him into the worst tackle ever category is a bit short sighted. You mean because the negative scores were slightly lower? Seriously, if he was improving so much, how come his last game was a MINUS 2.3? Prorate that across 16 games and you get MINUS 36.8, which would have made him the second-worst-tackle, 76th out of 77. Look again at the stats at the bottom, the last three games he had significant negative scores as a pass blocker, which is his major weakness (outside of penalties), and that is kind of a major handicap for a left tackle. And I didn't say anything about the worst tackle ever. Just the absolute worst tackle last year. And expecting the worst tackle last year to become a good tackle this year, well, it's not going to happen. Perhaps two or three years down the road? Maybe. But again, it's very unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 True but if you look at all the positions you'll find we sucked across the board- Bell ranked 74 , so did Levitre, Wood wasn't much better at 65- Hangartner is at the bottom of his position too. So you should agree with me that we need to draft at least 3 OL with ourfirst 5 picks I agree with some of that. But we have a number of positions we're awful at, not just OL. We're horrible at QB, NT and LB, so no, I don't agree we should draft at least 3 OLs. Also, Levitre and Wood were rookies. They are likely to make major jumps this year. If they don't, it would be time to start thinking. I do agree about Hangartner, he's questionable. But basically, we need two tackles is what we need, and we got one in FA, though I'm far from sure he's the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 the jury is still out on Bell. I think he can be good. The coaching staff saw something in Peters, and they were pretty right on him. bell also played MUCH better after the no huddle was scrapped. it just wasn't enough time bc he was hurt soon after. But most of his penalties were racked up during the no huddle 4 week era. "The coaching staff saw something in Peters, and they were pretty right on him," you say? Are you serious? The coaching staff also saw something in Langston Walker, Melvin Fowler, Derrick Dockery, Terrence Pennington, Duke Preston, Mike Gandy, Tutan Reyes, Aaron Merz ... need I go on? The thing that they noticed about Jason Peters was that when they put him on the OL he destroyed everyone opposite him. The thing they noticed about Bell was that he had potential as a development guy. Major major difference there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartacus Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 The right question to ask is "Are we sure Bell can be a good OLT?" and how long before he's "GOOD". We need "GOOD" now. He's not that big for a LT and he's not that durable. He didn't win the job, he got thrown in there because Walker sucked and the Bills weren't about to pay him bonus money, let alone his salary. He's had his audition. Now he can audtion for a spot on the team. Let's not cut these marginal holdovers, from probably the worst Bills offense ever, any slack... we need football players. ah, grasshopper you are incorrect The Bills did pay Walker his bonus in March then cut him a week before the season. with no other legitimate LT on the roster brilliant!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartacus Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 YES. I am sure that he can't become a good, much less average, LT in the 2010 and possibly the 2011 seasons. That being said there is no guarantee that this guy will even still be in the NFL in 2011 or 2012. We were so incredibly spoiled by Jason Peters rise from TE to probowl LT that we think we can take any guy and do the same. Peter's was an incredible rarity. We can't keep trying to polish turds into diamonds. It works once in a blue moon. The clown show at OBD has been picking up trash and trying to pass it off as an NFL caliber OL since Polian left. It would seem the entire philosophy is the designed as an affront to Polian - who was fired over his disagreement with Linda Bogdan that we should be drafting OL with our premium picks. Seems Ralph holds a grudge and demands we do the opposite with building an OL from what Polian would do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabres...yawn Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 Wasn't he essentially hurt most of the year? Didn't he look pretty solid in his limited action while he was healthy? I'm interested in hearing what I missed watching the games - I don't remember ever being very upset with what I saw from him, but maybe I've forgotten. It just seems like so much of the screaming about the state of our offensive line was ignoring the fact that 3/5 starters were out much of the year. Please - tell me which games I should look back at - I have them recorded - to find where Bell sucks - particularly for a guy coming in with so little experience and room to continue developing physically. Considering he had never played in the league before I actually thought he played pretty well. He was put in a very difficult position and held up well for the most part. I would MUCH rather see him playing than Kirk Chambers who is absolutely horrific. There is a place for an improving D. Bell on the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartacus Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 I agree with some of that. But we have a number of positions we're awful at, not just OL. We're horrible at QB, NT and LB, so no, I don't agree we should draft at least 3 OLs. Also, Levitre and Wood were rookies. They are likely to make major jumps this year. If they don't, it would be time to start thinking. I do agree about Hangartner, he's questionable. But basically, we need two tackles is what we need, and we got one in FA, though I'm far from sure he's the answer. we paid him alot so he must be good so good, my guess he will be the LT come opening day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 we paid him alot so he must be good so good, my guess he will be the LT come opening day Oh, please let it not be so. Three mill a year isn't huge by any means, and if he's intended to be our long-term LT, that would be clear proof of front office incompetence. I can't imagine it, he's been an RT his whole career, when he wasn't playing guard. I'd expect him to fight for the starting RT spot, and be a depth guy who can play tackle or guard if he doesn't win the competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoName Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 From what I've seen from Bell, he is a solid starter with injury problems....make no mistake about it, Bell was a rookie last year....he essentially had the same amount of playing time as Weed and Levitre going into the season opener....and he was thrown into the position....I still think you have to draft an LT somewhere within the 1st 3 rounds......and not for nothing..but I think Chambers is the worse offensive lineman in Bills History....I have no idea how this guy holds down a roster spot....and there is no freakin way you can tell me Chambers was better than Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartacus Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 Oh, please let it not be so. Three mill a year isn't huge by any means, and if he's intended to be our long-term LT, that would be clear proof of front office incompetence. I can't imagine it, he's been an RT his whole career, when he wasn't playing guard. I'd expect him to fight for the starting RT spot, and be a depth guy who can play tackle or guard if he doesn't win the competition. how is this different from last year's "solution" move a fat slow guy from RT to play LT with only enough reps there to prove that he couldn't handle it and then go with the already injured 7th round draft pick who does not belong on the roster when that failed, plug in the guy who was so bad the Bills even cut him. can't see it being so far fetched - they paid way too much for only a RT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4BillsintheBurgh Posted March 22, 2010 Share Posted March 22, 2010 You mean because the negative scores were slightly lower? Seriously, if he was improving so much, how come his last game was a MINUS 2.3? Prorate that across 16 games and you get MINUS 36.8, which would have made him the second-worst-tackle, 76th out of 77. Look again at the stats at the bottom, the last three games he had significant negative scores as a pass blocker, which is his major weakness (outside of penalties), and that is kind of a major handicap for a left tackle. And I didn't say anything about the worst tackle ever. Just the absolute worst tackle last year. And expecting the worst tackle last year to become a good tackle this year, well, it's not going to happen. Perhaps two or three years down the road? Maybe. But again, it's very unlikely. I guess I'm not ready to tie a players improvement to stats, especially from a year ago. He may never be a great tackle, but to be as sure as you are about him not being good is silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts