sllib olaffub Posted May 13, 2010 Share Posted May 13, 2010 Gailey has a specific scheme he's running - and on both sides of the ball, at each position, they are looking to have players fill a specific role - so, they see guys that don't fit what they're doing or who just suck and cut them, and they see positions that need more talent and they bring in more players at those positions. With WR it shows they want to create a set that looks like San Diego - tall and fast. With linebackers it was bigger, with running backs it's been, I think, just have at least four capable backs because we're going to run a lot. The only positions I'm surprised we haven't seen more change at is QB and TE. Maybe Gailey doesn't use TE's alot. I wouldn't be surprised if we brought it another QB by camp - like Thigpen or Garcia. In two years we'll look at this team and it will have almost no-one on it from last year. Our team will be as similar to last years team as a whole other team would be now. That is exciting, to me, to see the beginnings of that transformation now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 13, 2010 Share Posted May 13, 2010 Gailey has a specific scheme he's running - . Sorry - I couldn't resist that softball over the plate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 13, 2010 Share Posted May 13, 2010 Sorry - I couldn't resist that softball over the plate! You mean "Whatever Works" isn't a specific scheme? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 13, 2010 Share Posted May 13, 2010 I'd like to know why we would cut a no name and sign a no name With the repudiation of the CBA, these are unsettled times. Noted bargain hunter - CIN owner Brown - has been in a vet signing frenzy. I'm sure few will survive the cuts - but for pennies in NFL terms, he might get a decent performer. BUF should be shuttling them in for a look-see... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoto Posted May 13, 2010 Share Posted May 13, 2010 Because the no names we had showed they didn't even belong on the field with the other no names we had during minicamps. Amen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Update: The Walter Mendenhall Bus Tour stopped off in Cincinnati yesterday. http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/Beng...a7-899ef4f7f40d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoretalk Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 As a Bills' scout commented this week ... they hope that one or maybe two of the undrafted players might have what it takes to make the roster. They need cannon fodder so they bring in the truck drivers and wanna be's. Favorite might have a chance with another team but Harvey has clearly pushed him out in the pursuit of the back-up for the back-up at NT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKillerRobots Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Do you think our recent cutting of players is based on how well they mentally prepared themselves? Do you think Gailey thought those players couldn't handle the playbook? What is your take on the switch up? I'd like to know why we would cut a no name and sign a no name I'll bet it has to do with positional numbers going into camp, the impending draft pick signings, and poor schematic fits where the team wants to give the player the best chance possible to catch on with another team. My guess is the last reason is the most prevalent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts