ddaryl Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 pretty much a done deal IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 Very simple indeed. You used this concept to discount Luck's first preseason showing so I figured you would apply it to Brooks's also--to the point he would force McGee out, perhaps. It's not clear why his performance against a "vanilla offense" would help inspire you to start this thread, therefore. Hmmm....go back and read the start of the thread. That point has nothing to do with it. The fact is that for what they've been asked to do (which isn't a lot), that Brooks is still outperforming McGee. But what he's doing right now in just one preseason game and in no-contact scrimmages is not necessarily an indicator of what he'll do when the regular season starts. Optimistic? Sure, but not getting ahead of myself. At the end of the day, how many teams front offices are saying that any of their projected starters look awful? How many front offices are ready right now to concede that the rookies they drafted probably aren't good enough to start at some point? The answer to both of those questions is a resounding NONE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbosrrgood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) Pretty simple concept actually. Basically it's a limited playbook to allow players to get used to the schemes and formations. For example, defensively against the Redskins, the Bills didn't run a single blitz. Not one. They didn't call any of the more complex defensive packages that they'll be running in the regular season. The Redskins on offense didn't run any of what will be more complex route packages. No team shows their hand in the preseason of the things they're going to try to do in the regular season. Hopefully that helps elaborate on what I was trying to say before. I was actually surprised that the bills WERE blitzing. Moats Blitzed on several occasions, Batten blitzed at least once. It actually looked pretty clear to me that the Bills are willing to bring 5 occasionally on passing downs, even in the pre-season. Moats and Batten also happen to be perfect candidates for that, being converted DE's (rare for 4-3 LB's). Edited August 16, 2012 by Turbosrrgood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todzilla Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 What about McGee as a free safety? Other veteran CB's have made this transition near the end of careers. Chan has expressed a desire to add depth at safety...perhaps it's already here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbosrrgood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 What about McGee as a free safety? Other veteran CB's have made this transition near the end of careers. Chan has expressed a desire to add depth at safety...perhaps it's already here? That's actually not a bad idea, but I don't think it will happen. Bottom line is McGee isn't healthy, if he was he would make a great Nickle back. I doubt the Bills are going to cut a young healthy guy, to keep a battered unhealthy veteran, with a veteran salary. I'm a big McGee fan, but his football time might be over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 what's the history of a team starting 2 rookie CB's in a playoff game?,,, can't be a long list Great question. I tried to search for it, but came up empty of even a discussion. What about McGee as a free safety? Other veteran CB's have made this transition near the end of careers. Chan has expressed a desire to add depth at safety...perhaps it's already here? He's not big enough. I was actually surprised that the bills WERE blitzing. Moats Blitzed on several occasions, Batten blitzed at least once. It actually looked pretty clear to me that the Bills are willing to bring 5 occasionally on passing downs, even in the pre-season. Moats and Batten also happen to be perfect candidates for that, being converted DE's (rare for 4-3 LB's). I was talking about the first team defense. It was pretty bland stuff and didn't include a single blitz. Second and third team really doesn't matter much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stony Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 That's actually not a bad idea, but I don't think it will happen. Bottom line is McGee isn't healthy, if he was he would make a great Nickle back. I doubt the Bills are going to cut a young healthy guy, to keep a battered unhealthy veteran, with a veteran salary. I'm a big McGee fan, but his football time might be over. You hit the nail on the head. He's hurt. It's sad because he's be a consummate pro here in Buffalo, but his time might be over. By cutting him the team is freeing up money for the Byrd and Levitre signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Hmmm....go back and read the start of the thread. That point has nothing to do with it. The fact is that for what they've been asked to do (which isn't a lot), that Brooks is still outperforming McGee. But what he's doing right now in just one preseason game and in no-contact scrimmages is not necessarily an indicator of what he'll do when the regular season starts. Optimistic? Sure, but not getting ahead of myself. At the end of the day, how many teams front offices are saying that any of their projected starters look awful? How many front offices are ready right now to concede that the rookies they drafted probably aren't good enough to start at some point? The answer to both of those questions is a resounding NONE. No team is saying its draftees look awful. Can't argue with that non sequitur. ...anyway, back to the discussion: McGee, if healthy, is a great CB. Brooks may someday be one. After one preseason game where no one is asked to do a lot, I wouldn't make the jump you made at the top of this thread. It is at least as likely that after a few more games, that McGee will show us why he has been such a good CB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 No team is saying its draftees look awful. Can't argue with that non sequitur. ...anyway, back to the discussion: McGee, if healthy, is a great CB. Brooks may someday be one. After one preseason game where no one is asked to do a lot, I wouldn't make the jump you made at the top of this thread. It is at least as likely that after a few more games, that McGee will show us why he has been such a good CB. How is it likely? He's been on and off the IR for the last 4 years running. He's only been able to start 10 games out of the last 32 (2 years). He certainly hasn't been very good in practices and scrimmages that would lead us to believe that he's "likely" to show us how he used to be good 4 years ago. Same as before. I like the optimism, but it should be tempered with at least a pinch of reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbosrrgood Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 (edited) I was talking about the first team defense. It was pretty bland stuff and didn't include a single blitz. Second and third team really doesn't matter much. I'm not trying to harass you, just pointing out the truth. Moats is a first team player (Morrison was second team), and blitzed several times. He even had a borderline late hit on the QB in the endzone. And since you were specifically talking about the defense in regards to Brooks, how can the 2nd/3rd team not matter? That's where Brooks was playing. Edited August 16, 2012 by Turbosrrgood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffBill Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Based on everything I've read and heard from training camp and the first preseason game, Ron Brooks is really shining. It sounds to me like a great problem to have, but I have to wonder if McGee's days are numbered. With Gilmore and Williams clearly the starters, will Brooks make McGee the odd man out? Don't get me wrong as I like McGee. Just interested in what people think. I am almost getting the sense that McGee might start the season on the PUP, to avoid having to make a decision like that. By the time the 6 games are up and he is eligible to play, there is a good chance that there will be at least one injury (always is) and they won't have to dump someone they want to hang on to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 by the way....in my admiring Brooks performance I am not saying cut MgGee...... I just want to make sure the best players are on the field.......not so much the names on the back of the jersies. Personally....I think MgGee has value on this team as both a mentor and spot dutie as a corner +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stony Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I am almost getting the sense that McGee might start the season on the PUP, to avoid having to make a decision like that. By the time the 6 games are up and he is eligible to play, there is a good chance that there will be at least one injury (always is) and they won't have to dump someone they want to hang on to. McGee has practiced already which makes him ineligible for the PUP list. Unfortunately not an option at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 How is it likely? He's been on and off the IR for the last 4 years running. He's only been able to start 10 games out of the last 32 (2 years). He certainly hasn't been very good in practices and scrimmages that would lead us to believe that he's "likely" to show us how he used to be good 4 years ago. Same as before. I like the optimism, but it should be tempered with at least a pinch of reality. Will agree to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yard Monkey Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Pretty simple concept actually. Basically it's a limited playbook to allow players to get used to the schemes and formations. For example, defensively against the Redskins, the Bills didn't run a single blitz. Not one. They didn't call any of the more complex defensive packages that they'll be running in the regular season. The Redskins on offense didn't run any of what will be more complex route packages. No team shows their hand in the preseason of the things they're going to try to do in the regular season. Hopefully that helps elaborate on what I was trying to say before. The redskins did not play vanilla d and did apply a lot of pressure on defense though. They were bringing an extra man or 2 out of the 3-4 on most plays from all sides. I was a little surprised to see this in the first preseason game. The Bills were surprised, as well.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 The redskins did not play vanilla d and did apply a lot of pressure on defense though. They were bringing an extra man or 2 out of the 3-4 on most plays from all sides. I was a little surprised to see this in the first preseason game. The Bills were surprised, as well.... I kinda doubt that. You can bet Chan and Shanahan spoke to each other before the game. It's a common practice among coaches. Anyway, I thought the starting OLine acquitted themselves quite well considering those two young OTs were thrown to the wolves when we came out running the two-minute offense. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Best Player Available Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 what's the history of a team starting 2 rookie CB's in a playoff game?,,, can't be a long list What, the Bills have already been awarded a playoff spot? Awesome, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 The redskins did not play vanilla d and did apply a lot of pressure on defense though. They were bringing an extra man or 2 out of the 3-4 on most plays from all sides. I was a little surprised to see this in the first preseason game. The Bills were surprised, as well.... Most of the game was second and third string against second and third string. Neither team was playing with any sense of urgency and simply working on their playbooks. To simplify it for you, let's take our 4-year Superbowl team of the 90's. In any given preseason, they won either 0 or 1 game out of 4. All they did is work on certain aspects of offense and defense. It's not even close to the reality of what games are in season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 When healthy, McGee was good. I am not sure where the impression is coming from has been Florence is comparable to him when both players are at 100% McGee's problem has been the injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yard Monkey Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I kinda doubt that. You can bet Chan and Shanahan spoke to each other before the game. It's a common practice among coaches. Anyway, I thought the starting OLine acquitted themselves quite well considering those two young OTs were thrown to the wolves when we came out running the two-minute offense. GO BILLS!!! Agree that the oline handled it pretty well outside the penalties. Chan made a comment in an interview at the half or end of game in which he mentioned that he expected more nickel from the skins and was a little surprised. Also said that they had not installed pressure 3-4 reads yet, but that it was still a good learning experience for them to see it. Anyone else hear this? Most of the game was second and third string against second and third string. Neither team was playing with any sense of urgency and simply working on their playbooks. To simplify it for you, let's take our 4-year Superbowl team of the 90's. In any given preseason, they won either 0 or 1 game out of 4. All they did is work on certain aspects of offense and defense. It's not even close to the reality of what games are in season. What are you simplifying for me and why? I made a general statement that had nothing to do with a) 2nd or 3rd stringers or b) winning or losing the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts