[please fix subject]TJ Graham

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I like some of the points you make, Uncle but this is my specific concern regarding our receiving corps:

 

Not enough difference makers.

 

Semantically you can call them playmakers or whatever but I don't think the Bills have enough of them. I count three.

 

Steve Johnson, Fred Jackson, CJ Spiller.

 

I think for an offense to have an opportunity to be elite, you need at least 4 guys to threaten the defense with.

 

Chandler and David Nelson are nice players but I don't think they're quite in that category which I'm talking about.

 

And we only have one wideout who really needs to be game planned for.

[uncle flap]

I like some of the points you make, Uncle but this is my specific concern regarding our receiving corps:

 

Not enough difference makers.

 

Semantically you can call them playmakers or whatever but I don't think the Bills have enough of them. I count three.

 

Steve Johnson, Fred Jackson, CJ Spiller.

 

I think for an offense to have an opportunity to be elite, you need at least 4 guys to threaten the defense with.

 

Chandler and David Nelson are nice players but I don't think they're quite in that category which I'm talking about.

 

And we only have one wideout who really needs to be game planned for.

 

I agree there is a lack of explosive playmakers.

 

To bring the thread back to TJ, I think he can become a receiver that will have DCs adjusting their game plan.

 

If Graham and Easley can take that next step in becoming better route runners, I think both can cause problems for opposing defenses.

 

Graham already has the potential to either grab one over the top, or beat his man on a quick out/hitch/bubble screen and be off to the races. If he can become even slightly more well rounded, I think he'll have a solid career. So far, it seems for every catch he's snagged over the middle, he's been out of position on another.

 

Easley's size and speed are unteachable, so if he too can become more consistent with the playbook and route running, he can certainly do some damage as well. He's got pretty good hands, and I'd like to seem him run with the 1s some more. If a guy like Hagan really is that much better with the playbook and running routes, so be it, but I'm not ready to give up on Easley yet.

 

Graham seems further along than Easley, but I still think it's too soon to cut ties with Easley since that prototypical size/speed combination doesn't come around that often.

 

The other guys we've mentioned I think are pretty much in the "What you see is what you get" category. Nelson and Chandler are average to solid starters, and I don't see Jones and the rest of receivers making any huge strides in getting much better, but time will tell.

[eball]

I like some of the points you make, Uncle but this is my specific concern regarding our receiving corps:

 

Not enough difference makers.

 

Semantically you can call them playmakers or whatever but I don't think the Bills have enough of them. I count three.

 

Steve Johnson, Fred Jackson, CJ Spiller.

 

I think for an offense to have an opportunity to be elite, you need at least 4 guys to threaten the defense with.

 

Chandler and David Nelson are nice players but I don't think they're quite in that category which I'm talking about.

 

And we only have one wideout who really needs to be game planned for.

 

Chandler's your 4th. From what I saw last year and in clips from camp, the guy doesn't seem to be "coverable." Fitz loves him (in a football sort of way).

 

Mark my words, Scott Chandler is going to have a monster year.

[Maury Ballstein]

If I'm the GM, barring any serious injuries, acquisitions, or off-the-field stuff, I've got:

 

Stevie

Nelson

Graham

Easley

Jones

 

and that's it for WR. I hate to see Roosevelt go, and even though Hagan has had a pretty good camp, neither have been consistently good enough to push any of the above guys out, IMO. Jones is the bubble guy for me. The best things he's got going for him is his knowledge of the offense and his dedication as a downfield blocker. I believe Easley has much more raw talent than Jones (key word: raw), and with a little more experience, he can make a name for himself as a solid option in an offense that spreads the ball around.

 

5 pure WRs would seem low for many/most teams, but consider the other viable receiving threats: FJ, CJ, Chandler, Brad Smith and Dorin Dickerson (assuming DD sticks). Each of those guys can and have lined up outside and/or in the slot.

 

So, in this scenario, the Bills have 10 guys than can serve the purpose of a WR, even if that isn't their primary role, or how they line up on the field. Last year, IIRC, the Bills motioned a player out of the backfield to a receiver spot on the line more often than any other team.

 

The question in my mind is, would you rather have a 6th or 7th pure WR, or an additional player at another position?

 

I can see the Bills keeping 6, even if I wouldn't. If they do, I think Hagan gets the nod. Of course, there's still time for players to make more of a case for themselves.

 

Remember, if there is some unlikely rash of injuries to the WRs, the roster can be adjusted during the season. It's likely a few of the fringe guys will be available or on the practice squad if it comes down to it.

 

That said, I think I'm going to have to sit down and try my hand at a full 53 man roster and see if I don't change my own mind.

 

 

Seems like this would be the most logical scenario to me also......Brad smith can fill in if need be......Feel bad to not give Hagan a shot but he has been all around the league....gotta be a reason for that.....roll with the young guys and let's see what happens

[Hplarrm]

Fitz can let it rip with a lil time and good weather IMO....I remember Fitz throwing a deep ball to Spiller that wasn't caught...I won't say he's super accurate but with time in the pocket he can let it rip to a degree.

 

 

 

The thing which many posters seen to ignore is that these types of misses can be very important good things for the production of the Bills O! When Spiller makes an attempt to release and go deep, even if Fitzy misses him the opposing DC and DBs remember that they got beat deep and then adjust their coverage by lining up a step deeper or by biting on a fake that Spiller might go deep on a play because he is lined up like a starter or set out a step or two wide.

 

All it then takes is for the defender to take a step back or even be perceived as leaning backrather than pinching in at the snap and as long as Fitzy and Spiller make the sane read or the Fitzy audibles from a pass to a run then Spiller can carry the ball into a hole that might not have been there before if the DC/DBs first thought is to expect a run.

 

I for one do not mind misses much at all early on as long as the receiver simply beats the DB as this is gonna be helpful for run productivity throughout the game.

[SDS]

[This is an automated response]

 

As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive subject lines. The topic starter can edit the subject line to make it more appropriate.

 

Thank you.