NoSaint Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) Thank you. You draft for depth. There is just no possible way the team could have PLANNED in April (or earlier, for that matter) to lose 4 of their upper-tier players in the secondary. Complaining about that is feeble and useless. i wouldve liked 1 more vet and for brooks to be a bit more of depth/development but even if we had 1 more body, yesterday was a situation that wouldve had any team hurting in a bad way. you just cant plan to have 4 of your top 6 guys from any unit missing. its unreasonable to expect good play coming from a full unit of depth players. 1 filling in with competent support around him is a different story, but yesterday it was everywhere across the board in the secondary. theres no way you can build a roster to handle that successfully. Edited September 23, 2013 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) Call it a hunch, but I have a sneaking suspicion there wouldn't be quite as much weeping and gnashing of teeth over Geno vs. EJ if our secondary weren't a M.A.S.H. unit. We say that every year. If only we didn't have so many injuries. Other teams get injuries too. Guess what, they have talented depth and coaches to coach them. The difference between winning football clubs and losing football clubs. This injury excuse is getting old. Edited September 23, 2013 by Dorkington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 23, 2013 Author Share Posted September 23, 2013 i wouldve liked 1 more vet and for brooks to be a bit more of depth/development but even if we had 1 more body, yesterday was a situation that wouldve had any team hurting in a bad way. I agree. See McGee note earlier. But yes. We say that every year. If only we didn't have so many injuries. Other teams get injuries too. Guess what, they have talent at depth and coaches to coach them. The difference between winning football clubs and losing football clubs. This injury excuse is getting old. Sure. Everybody loses half of their secondary at once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 I agree. See McGee note earlier. But yes. yup - 100% the same page on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 There's no scheme for missing your top 3 corners and number one safety. The scheme is hope like hell your pass rushers get there faster than you could ever seriously count on. Sure there is. The Bills rush wasn't getting there anyway. They could have forgone the max pressure man coverage and played more of a zone and make Geno beat them in little chunks all the way down field instead of just tossing it up against man coverage and having our backup DBs fail to do their job. A more conservative game plan is in order when you're missing 3/4 of your defensive backfield. You can't go out and play like you still have Revis out there shutting down half the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 I agree. See McGee note earlier. But yes. Sure. Everybody loses half of their secondary at once. No, but a great many teams lose major talent at some position or another. Good teams overcome that obstacle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) No, but a great many teams lose major talent at some position or another. Good teams overcome that obstacle. lose talent and lose the entire roster of guys that you would have active most sundays in a unit (minus aaron williams who was forced to play a different position) are two different discussions Edited September 23, 2013 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterpan Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 I was jealous seeing Ellis Lankster running around out there for the Jets. Same here. We should blame our FO for letting Lankster go a few years ago and not finding a more competant replacement for Rogers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 We say that every year. If only we didn't have so many injuries. Other teams get injuries too. Guess what, they have talented depth and coaches to coach them. The difference between winning football clubs and losing football clubs. This injury excuse is getting old. Secondary depth was already an issue prior to injuries, no question, and that's a big part of the problem. But realistically, how many teams can field a competitive secondary missing their top 3 CBs and starting S? Shifting Aaron Williams from S back to CB further complicates things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) lose talent and lose the entire roster of guys that you would have active most sundays in a unit (minus aaron williams who was forced to play a different position) are two different discussions Secondary depth was already an issue prior to injuries, no question, and that's a big part of the problem. But realistically, how many teams can field a competitive secondary missing their top 3 CBs and starting S? Shifting Aaron Williams from S back to CB further complicates things. How many teams? A handful of good teams, the pretenders would be significantly hurt. I'm not saying *every* other NFL team could deal with it... just that good ones could. Just like the Pats are 3-0 playing a bunch of garbage at WR/TE. Edited September 23, 2013 by Dorkington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 23, 2013 Author Share Posted September 23, 2013 Secondary depth was already an issue prior to injuries, no question, and that's a big part of the problem. But realistically ... Whoah, whoah, whoah you just lost a good half of the board here. Take it easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) lose talent and lose the entire roster of guys that you would have active most sundays in a unit (minus aaron williams who was forced to play a different position) are two different discussions You make a fair point. It's not that I expect Duke Williams and Meeks to be able to step in and play right away. I'm going farther than that - and I'm certainly going out on a limb - based on what I saw of those two this preseason, I have serious doubts that either one of them will develop into quality starters (or backups) down the line. That's my uneducated, uniformed, pure speculated guess, but at least I'm being honest about it. Frankly I was surprised Meeks survived final cuts, he looked so out of place on the field to me (and had a very underwhelming and unproductive collegiate career). I was surprised he was even drafted. It's surely not fair to declare rookies to be busts after three games, especially for a non-scout like myself. Just calling it like I see it - they appear to have been wasted draft picks. Edited September 23, 2013 by Coach Tuesday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) How many teams? A handful of good teams, the pretenders would be significantly hurt. I'm not saying *every* other NFL team could deal with it... just that good ones could. Just like the Pats are 3-0 playing a bunch of garbage at WR/TE. right but that garbage is still led by a hall of famer at the most important position to drive the passing game. not really apples to apples. come back to me when they lose brady. You make a fair point. It's not that I expect Duke Williams and Meeks to be able to step in and play right away. I'm going farther than that - and I'm certainly going out on a limb - based on what I saw of those two this preseason, I have serious doubts that either one of them will develop into quality starters (or backups) down the line. That's my uneducated, uniformed, pure speculated guess, but at least I'm being honest about it. Frankly I was surprised Meeks survived final cuts, he looked so out of place on the field to me (and had a very underwhelming and unproductive collegiate career). I was surprised he was even drafted. i think thats a fair place for the discussion to fall, but its a tough discussion because they had so little talent around them yesterday. it was like our 4th quarter of the 4th preseason game secondary against their starters. your assessment may be completely right, but i often have trouble judging young guys when thrown into losing situations as opposed to blending into good units while they learn (can trust the guys around them, can make mistakes without them being as catastrophic etc....) Edited September 23, 2013 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 right but that garbage is still led by a hall of famer at the most important position to drive the passing game. not really apples to apples. come back to me when they lose brady. But we have hall of fame talent on the DL, and a crazy good DC... supposedly. Again, I'm not saying every team could deal with it, but rather just the good ones. Which we do not qualify as. It's not rocket science. We need to shore up depth in many areas on this team, because injuries are a fact of NFL life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 But we have hall of fame talent on the DL, and a crazy good DC... supposedly. Again, I'm not saying every team could deal with it, but rather just the good ones. Which we do not qualify as. It's not rocket science. We need to shore up depth in many areas on this team, because injuries are a fact of NFL life. and ill say again i think you are completely wrong using an offense piloted by a hall of fame qb and comparing it to us having a decent front 7. the way the units work just isnt comparable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meatloaf Sandwich Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 That is no excuse... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D521646 Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Sure there is. The Bills rush wasn't getting there anyway. They could have forgone the max pressure man coverage and played more of a zone and make Geno beat them in little chunks all the way down field instead of just tossing it up against man coverage and having our backup DBs fail to do their job. A more conservative game plan is in order when you're missing 3/4 of your defensive backfield. You can't go out and play like you still have Revis out there shutting down half the field. This is what frustrated me to. I was screaming at the TV.. Zone, damit, Zone, or Have Rogers play off all the time. No, no, he lined up in a pressure role across from Hill or Holmes almost exclusively. To me though, the problems came in Hackets shoulders, IMO. Correct me if wrong but I did not see a single screen, or designed roll out from our offense to stay off the blitzing Jets, not a single one. My God we didn't even try running away from the blitzing strong side, not once? I know Hackets comes with some pedigree but come on, my 12 year old Madden game playing son would have done those things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 How many teams? A handful of good teams, the pretenders would be significantly hurt. I'm not saying *every* other NFL team could deal with it... just that good ones could. Just like the Pats are 3-0 playing a bunch of garbage at WR/TE. My post was in reference to the stats posted by 26CornerBlitz: Justin Rogers targeted 9 times for 6 completions, 254 yards and 2 TDs. He's in that position due to injury. I'm not sure where the disconnect is--- because the Jets going after one inadequate replacement was responsible for 50% of their offensive output. It's hard to cover that up when you're down starters at all 5 DB positions (including nickel). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Secondary depth was already an issue prior to injuries, no question, and that's a big part of the problem. But realistically, how many teams can field a competitive secondary missing their top 3 CBs and starting S? Shifting Aaron Williams from S back to CB further complicates things. Yeah, well, this is a professional team, isn't it? They may have to move Williams back to CB simply because they don't have anyone better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 It is management's fault for not addressing a clear deficiency. There's no excuse to have zero depth at CB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts