lets_go_bills Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 Sorry, but the QBs are what win you the championships now. This is line of thought is old hat, that defense wins championships. QBs are setup to succeed in the NFL. I'm all for Good defense and the Bills fixing theirs, via draft and Free Agency. Alot of this could have been fixed have the Bills went after Julius Peppers and Carlos Dansby last offseason, but the powers that be thought they were so smart and knew what they had. Nix and Gailey obviously failed in the 2010 offeason. It's now the 2011 offseason and now they must come out swinging to turn this thing around. I'm all for the Defense, but if Andrew Luck comes out and is sitting at #3, you take him no questions asked. QBs score the points and win the championships now! Please read my post carefully. I'll reiterate. Luck is the ONLY Franchise QB in this draft. And he may not even declare. If he does, he's not falling to us at #3. Won't happen. Trading up is too costly and also won't happen. That means Mallett, Locker and Newton remain. I am not sold on any of them and they are not worthy of the #3 pick. Fitz has been decent enought to the point where we can put off drafting a QB for another year and not have to reach or gamble on one this year. But don't get me wrong here. We still need a Franchise QB and getting one is the only way we can move forward and win a championship. QB is the most important position in football and it is a QB driven league. No doubt. But anyone who watched the Bills play this year knows that the worst part of our entire team was the defensive front-seven. They got gashed on the ground all God damn year. They barely ppressured QBs and generated poor sack numbers. This has to be fixed and this is the year to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) Who was surprised by Fitzpatrick's well below-average play? I mean, I wasn't surprised to see him have an 80 quarterback rating, with a nearly 1:1 TD to INT ratio, and sub-58% completion percentage... Another sarcastic and uninformed Bills fans. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not naive enough to think that after five NFL seasons Ryan Fitzpatrick is suddenly going to become a franchise QB. Far from it. He's not the guy and never will be. He's a really good back up. But he's been serviceable under Gailey's tutelage. He's made the team fun to watch and we were better off with him in the lineup. He makes some errant throws and frustrating picks, but he also makes some pretty great plays. 1:1 TD to INT ratio? Check your facts. In 13 games: 23 TDs, 15 INTs and 3000 yards. Good for an 81 QB rating. I found that surprising. Don't you? Edited January 4, 2011 by lets_go_bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HARCO186 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Haynesworth doesn't want to play in a 3-4 for a team that is paying him primo bucks, and a highly regarded coach in this league with a reputation as a winner (not that I think much of Shanny). Why would he ever want to play for the Bills in a 3-4? To say nothing of Ralph taking on that contract. I don't think RW's as cheap as he is unwise in who he throws his money at, but AH's contract is way beyond this (and most any) team's budget. As for Bowers, I don't know him from Fairley from Dareus - at least not well enough to make judgments - but I'll cross my fingers that the talent evaluators will find the right guy for this team. The Bills most certainly need help across the front 7. Imagine if Buffalo gave up the draft pick for Haynesworth, and brought him in next to Williams and Stroud and Kelsey, and we stayed with a 4-3 system? Gailey said he is unclear if we are a 3-4 or a 4-3. In fact he said like many teams we are a multiple set, and getting Albert is no joke. Regardless of what he did in Washington, he is a wrecking crew up front in a 4-3. I could see Buffalo giving up a the 1st round on him. The issue is he won't come to Buffalo and play. It would bring an instant respect for Buffalo's front defensive line if he were to come though. Wishful thinking or dreaming though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevWarRifleman Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Fitzpatrick's surprising play has benefitted us to the point where we can put off drafting a QB. Luck may not declare and if he does, will not be there when we draft and trading up is not an option. There's no sense reaching for a QB, especially when we've got other holes to fill. A lot depends on how free agency shakes out for us. I don't anticipate any big-name signings. I hope we re-sign Posluszny, he's solid. I would like to retain Whitner as well but he's not worth the money he's seeking. The Bills ranked 25th in total offense and 24th in total defense, so help is needed everywhere. Most telling however, is that we ranked dead last in rush defense. This has to stop. I think we should go heavy on the defense. I like DE Da'Quan Bowers and OLB Von Miller. We need to bolster the front seven, big time. Either of these two guys could help us out tremendously and immediately. These guys are NFL-ready. I really like Miller as that 3-4 edge rusher we've been sorely lacking. The Butkus winner had 10 sacks this year and 17 last year. That's consistent, big time production. And at 6'3 and 243lbs with 4.6 speed, he's a gamer. Bowers was the top recrit coming out of high school and is a big boy who has been simply unblockable this year. He could easily line up at end and be our new Bruce Smith. The front seven should be this team's priority. Everything else will fall into place after that. We need pass rushers and run stuffers. If we can do that, we'll see more turnovers, more sacks and more 3-and-outs for opposing teams. The defense gets off the field and the offense gets on it and puts up points. That's how you win football games, IMO. Thoughts? LGBills, good post. I agree w/ your it totally. You gave real good arguements. Yes, defense first. Besides, one of the best ways to help an offense is to have a defense that can put the offense in good field postion, by forcing turnovers, sacks, 3-and-outs, what have you. Sure, our offense has some holes, but not as desperate as our D. Once agian LGB, good arguements. Just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 that worked in the 70s and 80s, but it isn't so true anymore. The NFL is a QB driven league. If you look at the vast majority of teams that have won the super bowl recently, they almost all had a very good QB. Pittsburgh, New Orleans, New England, Indianapolis, NY Giants, etc... In fact, of the last 18 super bowl winners, only 3 of them had QBs that you could say were average to below average(Tampa Bay, Baltimore, Washington) Bottom Line: if you want to win a lot of games in the NFL, get a very good QB... Ok... so are you saying that these teams DIDN'T also have very good defenses as well?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 LGBills, good post. I agree w/ your it totally. You gave real good arguements. Yes, defense first. Besides, one of the best ways to help an offense is to have a defense that can put the offense in good field postion, by forcing turnovers, sacks, 3-and-outs, what have you. Sure, our offense has some holes, but not as desperate as our D. Once agian LGB, good arguements. Just my opinion. Thank you sir. I can't recall the last time we beat the Pats. Tom Brady is unbelievably good. He's the only thing that keeps them going. We need to draft defenders who can pressure him and stop him. All AFC South teams drafted pass rushers because of having to face Manning twice a year. We need to do the same to Brady. Then and only then will we beat the Pats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hplarrm Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 that worked in the 70s and 80s, but it isn't so true anymore. The NFL is a QB driven league. If you look at the vast majority of teams that have won the super bowl recently, they almost all had a very good QB. Pittsburgh, New Orleans, New England, Indianapolis, NY Giants, etc... In fact, of the last 18 super bowl winners, only 3 of them had QBs that you could say were average to below average(Tampa Bay, Baltimore, Washington) Bottom Line: if you want to win a lot of games in the NFL, get a very good QB... I agree with you that this is a franchise QB driven league. However, this is a different issue than whether you acquire this franchise QB. Take a look at your own list. Pittsburgh- Yep, they drafted RoboQB in the first. but no one mistakes Buffalo for being anywhere near where Pitts was in terms of quality players like Polamalu, Ward, Bettis, etc. Do you really think that Luck no matter how god he is will mean the same thing for the Bills that a franchise QB like RoboQB meant for Pitts if you want to claim this as a determinative example for us. New Orleans- actually got their franchise QB through FA so this is a reason not to draft a Luck New England- again got their franchise QB through a 6th round pick and again is a reason not to go QB in the 1st. Indianapolis- yes, here is a QB taken in the 1st, but the key points of this pick are: 1. Indy clearly had done more to build an OL for Peyton than the Bills have for whatever sacrificial lamb rookie they will throw to the wolves if thry draft an immediate starter at QB. 2. Even if one chooses to assume the QB chosen is another Manning in skill level, specifically the new guy must have a rocket release cause even Manning got sacked a lothis rookie year. 3. Manning ended up on the 7 year plan before he finally delivered the SB win and needed James as a #5 to move Indy off the same 13 loss record I am not sure the Bills can survive the learning curve to eventual production a rookie QB brings to a bad team even if Luck or whomever turns out to be the next Peyton. NY Giants- Not only was Eli acquired by trading for his specific talents but those talents were the needed augment to put NYG over the top not completely revive the team as our QB will have to do. The examples which you site point more towards why the Bills should not draft Luck rather than advocate trying to find a franchise bolt of lightening in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 True dat. And if your in a division with Brady, your defense better be able to generate some heat with the rush and if your in a division with the Jets, you better be able to the stop the run if you hope to sniff the playoffs. Solid reasoning! How about this too, "In a division with the Jets and Patriots, you need to be able to run and pass, and score touchdowns! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) Fitzpatrick's surprising play has benefitted us to the point where we can put off drafting a QB. Luck may not declare and if he does, will not be there when we draft and trading up is not an option. There's no sense reaching for a QB, especially when we've got other holes to fill. A lot depends on how free agency shakes out for us. I don't anticipate any big-name signings. I hope we re-sign Posluszny, he's solid. I would like to retain Whitner as well but he's not worth the money he's seeking. The Bills ranked 25th in total offense and 24th in total defense, so help is needed everywhere. Most telling however, is that we ranked dead last in rush defense. This has to stop. I think we should go heavy on the defense. I like DE Da'Quan Bowers and OLB Von Miller. We need to bolster the front seven, big time. Either of these two guys could help us out tremendously and immediately. These guys are NFL-ready. I really like Miller as that 3-4 edge rusher we've been sorely lacking. The Butkus winner had 10 sacks this year and 17 last year. That's consistent, big time production. And at 6'3 and 243lbs with 4.6 speed, he's a gamer. Bowers was the top recrit coming out of high school and is a big boy who has been simply unblockable this year. He could easily line up at end and be our new Bruce Smith. The front seven should be this team's priority. Everything else will fall into place after that. We need pass rushers and run stuffers. If we can do that, we'll see more turnovers, more sacks and more 3-and-outs for opposing teams. The defense gets off the field and the offense gets on it and puts up points. That's how you win football games, IMO. Thoughts? I dont have a problem going D at #3, I mean we clearly need help. But I wouldnt go as far as to say "Defense wins championships" anymore though. Sure, ELITE defenses can carry a team to a title (see Ravens), but if you look at the teams in the playoffs, and more importantly the teams who are seriously contending this year and you will see one common denomenator...Good to great QB's. Its still a little early to see how the QB's are all going to grade out and start getting a grasp on where some of them are likely to get drafted. With this deep of a QB class, I think its quite possible we could see a player slip to us at the top of the 2nd at QB. If in round 1 or 2 there is a QB our FO believes to be a franchise guy that run this offense for the next decade, then you have to pull the trigger IMO rather than go D in both round 1 and 2. Edited January 5, 2011 by Alphadawg7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Imagine if Buffalo gave up the draft pick for Haynesworth, and brought him in next to Williams and Stroud and Kelsey, and we stayed with a 4-3 system? Gailey said he is unclear if we are a 3-4 or a 4-3. In fact he said like many teams we are a multiple set, and getting Albert is no joke. Regardless of what he did in Washington, he is a wrecking crew up front in a 4-3. I could see Buffalo giving up a the 1st round on him. The issue is he won't come to Buffalo and play. It would bring an instant respect for Buffalo's front defensive line if he were to come though. Wishful thinking or dreaming though. Sound more like a nightmare. Haynesworth, seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevWarRifleman Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Thank you sir. I can't recall the last time we beat the Pats. Tom Brady is unbelievably good. He's the only thing that keeps them going. We need to draft defenders who can pressure him and stop him. All AFC South teams drafted pass rushers because of having to face Manning twice a year. We need to do the same to Brady. Then and only then will we beat the Pats. Once again, I agree. The McD post (the one right after my first post) still holds to "it's a quarterback driven league." Well yeh, to a point. But if you have a defense that can put heat on the Q-back, that can nuter even the best qb's, you can drastically diminish his effectiveness. Witness the Giant defense the last time the Pats were in the Super Bowl. They came after Brady like he was a piece of raw meat. And it worked! Over the decades, I've seen the best quarterbacks in NFL history, Manning, Montana, Marino, our own Jim Kelly, Brady and many more throw INT's, hurried errant throws, balls over into the sideline, tipped balls and fumbles because they were about to/and/ or did get pasted by defensemen pouring in on them. And its not just about getting sacks either. They're nice, but if you can get into his face, lay some hits on him right after he get rid of the ball, that wears on him physically and psychologically. Case in point. I saw a game in the 90's, a big game on the line between the Bills at Miami. Marino was having his way w/ us in the passing game until sometime in the 2nd quarter. He dropped back to pass and Bruce got him from his blind side and really laid the wood to him. Clean hit, drove him to the ground. For the rest of the game Marino was never the same throwing the ball. Passes were hurried, thrown too high or too low, even to guys who were open. This was Dan Marino, not a Rob Johnson, or Heath Schuler or Cleo Lemon, but one of the best of the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 It's simple. Stop playing the 3-4. We would then have talented lineman across the board starting in positions where they can destroy people and we would have some real bulk for depth. We really have 0 proven good LBers any how regardless of how you think certain people can play in certain schemes so this would also eliminate one position of need there. Makes too much sense for a def coordinator that has limited data base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firemedic Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Man, remember the days of Pat williams, Ted Washington and other monsters? (Number one defense). Teams would NOT run through us, it was fun watching them try to run AROUND us........... Yep, I agree, let's get a defense this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Once again, I agree. The McD post (the one right after my first post) still holds to "it's a quarterback driven league." Well yeh, to a point. But if you have a defense that can put heat on the Q-back, that can nuter even the best qb's, you can drastically diminish his effectiveness. Witness the Giant defense the last time the Pats were in the Super Bowl. They came after Brady like he was a piece of raw meat. And it worked! Over the decades, I've seen the best quarterbacks in NFL history, Manning, Montana, Marino, our own Jim Kelly, Brady and many more throw INT's, hurried errant throws, balls over into the sideline, tipped balls and fumbles because they were about to/and/ or did get pasted by defensemen pouring in on them. And its not just about getting sacks either. They're nice, but if you can get into his face, lay some hits on him right after he get rid of the ball, that wears on him physically and psychologically. Case in point. I saw a game in the 90's, a big game on the line between the Bills at Miami. Marino was having his way w/ us in the passing game until sometime in the 2nd quarter. He dropped back to pass and Bruce got him from his blind side and really laid the wood to him. Clean hit, drove him to the ground. For the rest of the game Marino was never the same throwing the ball. Passes were hurried, thrown too high or too low, even to guys who were open. This was Dan Marino, not a Rob Johnson, or Heath Schuler or Cleo Lemon, but one of the best of the best. What?? I hope you see that I'm saying defenses were a large, LARGE part of those teams being successful. I don't believe for a minute that any of those teams win anything without their defenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 It's simple. Stop playing the 3-4. We would then have talented lineman across the board starting in positions where they can destroy people and we would have some real bulk for depth. We really have 0 proven good LBers any how regardless of how you think certain people can play in certain schemes so this would also eliminate one position of need there. You scrap the 3-4 then you scrap two of last year's top three picks in Troupe and Carrington. As while both could play in the 4-3 they're much better suited playing the 3-4. Toss in we just re-signed Merriman , it's a clear sign this team is looking to play the 3-4 in 2011. Now if we pursue a better DC that be something to consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Blizzard Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 New England didn't go 14-2 with great defense. It's an offensive league now. Even a defensive mastermind like Belichick has adjusted to that reality A team still has to be able to stop the run. Buffalo couldn't stop anybody this year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevWarRifleman Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 What?? I hope you see that I'm saying defenses were a large, LARGE part of those teams being successful. I don't believe for a minute that any of those teams win anything without their defenses. Sorry McD. My bad. I really didn't interpret that in your comment. But thanks for clarifying it for me, and not doing it in a sarcastic, demeaning/anger-laden way like I've seen so many other people responding to other's comments. RWR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Sorry McD. My bad. I really didn't interpret that in your comment. But thanks for clarifying it for me, and not doing it in a sarcastic, demeaning/anger-laden way like I've seen so many other people responding to other's comments. RWR No reason to apologize There are a lot of passionate people around here with very strong opinions... nothing more, nothing less Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts