Kelly the Dog Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Please don't answer if you're just going to say he gave up 11.25 sacks. We know that. We also know that he looked extremely average at C until McNally and MM got here. We know that MW looked very average and gave up a lot of sacks at RT before Mouse and MM got here. We know that McNally has got the most out of lesser players than Teague. I am not saying he will be good or great. I have no idea. And still think we're getting Shelton to play there. But what, specifically, makes you think he cannot be a very solid LT in this league? He is not small, he is not stupid, he is not slow, he is not a kitty, he is not bad technique wise. I am just not an OL expert and it seems to me if he can make vast improvements at C in one year, has played the position before, and does not possess limitations physically to play LT in this league, what exactly is preventing him from being a reliable LT? Furthermore, that 11.25 sacks in Denver was on a team that had problems all over the offense, not just the far left side of their line. They had three injured RBs I believe, and one WR (Smith caught like 113 passes and the most anyone else had was 15), no Shannon Sharpe or TE threat, and an erratic quarterback. ANd yet still finished 10th in the league in O and had an 8-8 record with a mediocre defense. This is really more of a question looking for a specific football answer. What exactly is it preventing TT from being good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 I think Teague as a LT would do quite well against speed rushers, with his footwork, lateral movement and positioning. The problem is that I think he would get abused by larger DE's and also have trouble on off-tackle plays to his side of the formation where he may have to go man on man with a larger player.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 1, 2005 Author Share Posted April 1, 2005 I think Teague as a LT would do quite well against speed rushers, with his footwork, lateral movement and positioning. The problem is that I think he would get abused by larger DE's and also have trouble on off-tackle plays to his side of the formation where he may have to go man on man with a larger player.... 293112[/snapback] I am not arguing that, for it may well be true, but doesn't he now block bigger and stronger players than he would at OT? Granted, it is not as if he regularly blows people off the line, although that is difficult for a center to do anyway. Furthermore, with the way Willis happens to run... gliding seemingly forever and then making a quick decision and making his move to the hole, it seems like a Teague-type blocker wouldn't need to blow people away as much as get position on them and tie them up and seal them off so they cannot get to McGahee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 I am not arguing that, for it may well be true, but doesn't he now block bigger and stronger players than he would at OT? Granted, it is not as if he regularly blows people off the line, although that is difficult for a center to do anyway. Furthermore, with the way Willis happens to run... gliding seemingly forever and then making a quick decision and making his move to the hole, it seems like a Teague-type blocker wouldn't need to blow people away as much as get position on them and tie them up and seal them off so they cannot get to McGahee. 293130[/snapback] I do think that as a tackle, one is put on an "island" quite often, whereas while playing center (in our scheme) virtually none of your blocks are one on one, they are more chip type blocks or blitz pickups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester43 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 i think he can't do it because he was lousy at it in denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Please don't answer if you're just going to say he gave up 11.25 sacks. We know that. We also know that he looked extremely average at C until McNally and MM got here. We know that MW looked very average and gave up a lot of sacks at RT before Mouse and MM got here. We know that McNally has got the most out of lesser players than Teague. I am not saying he will be good or great. I have no idea. And still think we're getting Shelton to play there. But what, specifically, makes you think he cannot be a very solid LT in this league? He is not small, he is not stupid, he is not slow, he is not a kitty, he is not bad technique wise. I am just not an OL expert and it seems to me if he can make vast improvements at C in one year, has played the position before, and does not possess limitations physically to play LT in this league, what exactly is preventing him from being a reliable LT? Furthermore, that 11.25 sacks in Denver was on a team that had problems all over the offense, not just the far left side of their line. They had three injured RBs I believe, and one WR (Smith caught like 113 passes and the most anyone else had was 15), no Shannon Sharpe or TE threat, and an erratic quarterback. ANd yet still finished 10th in the league in O and had an 8-8 record with a mediocre defense. This is really more of a question looking for a specific football answer. What exactly is it preventing TT from being good? 293094[/snapback] He has had the opportunity to be a starting LT in this league on two occasions and did not measure up. That is why Denver let him go and that is a team that has a history of being a pretty good judge of offensive line talent. We brought him in with the idea of him starting at LT and he was unimpressive enough that we moved him to center, a position he hadn't played since college. As a center, he has been little better than mediocre. I guess anything is possible but speaking for myself, I am not looking forward to handing over the most important position on an already struggling line to a 7th round pick who has struck out as a LT twice and has been a marginal center at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 1, 2005 Author Share Posted April 1, 2005 He has had the opportunity to be a starting LT in this league on two occasions and did not measure up. That is why Denver let him go and that is a team that has a history of being a pretty good judge of offensive line talent. We brought him in with the idea of him starting at LT and he was unimpressive enough that we moved him to center, a position he hadn't played since college. As a center, he has been little better than mediocre. I guess anything is possible but speaking for myself, I am not looking forward to handing over the most important position on an already struggling line to a 7th round pick who has struck out as a LT twice and has been a marginal center at best. 293216[/snapback] Fair enough. I would argue that he was only moved to Center not because he sucked but the Bills simply had two spots to fill and two OL and decided that a Jennings LT/Teague C option was slightly better than a Teague LT/Jennings C option because Jennings had been here and had just come off a very successful rookie season and nothing more. I would also argue that while very mediocre in his first two seasons (and IMO a lot of that had to do with who was next to him as well as who was behind him), TT had a significantly better year last year, and wasn't just mediocre. The 7th round pick means very little several years down the line anyway, especially for an OL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 He has had the opportunity to be a starting LT in this league on two occasions and did not measure up. That is why Denver let him go and that is a team that has a history of being a pretty good judge of offensive line talent. We brought him in with the idea of him starting at LT and he was unimpressive enough that we moved him to center, a position he hadn't played since college. As a center, he has been little better than mediocre. I guess anything is possible but speaking for myself, I am not looking forward to handing over the most important position on an already struggling line to a 7th round pick who has struck out as a LT twice and has been a marginal center at best. 293216[/snapback] actually, I think the fact that Teague was EVER a starting LT in Denver is a positive for him. It shows that he has the talent to play there since Denver knows their o-linemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Fair enough. I would argue that he was only moved to Center not because he sucked but the Bills simply had two spots to fill and two OL and decided that a Jennings LT/Teague C option was slightly better than a Teague LT/Jennings C option because Jennings had been here and had just come off a very successful rookie season and nothing more. I would also argue that while very mediocre in his first two seasons (and IMO a lot of that had to do with who was next to him as well as who was behind him), TT had a significantly better year last year, and wasn't just mediocre. The 7th round pick means very little several years down the line anyway, especially for an OL. 293233[/snapback] I thought you were looking for a "football based" answer though, as in what about him physically or skill wise, etc. So now you're satisfied with an answer that is not based on those parameters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 1, 2005 Author Share Posted April 1, 2005 I thought you were looking for a "football based" answer though, as in what about him physically or skill wise, etc. So now you're satisfied with an answer that is not based on those parameters? 293253[/snapback] Aren't we asking a little too much of people to actually answer the question though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Aren't we asking a little too much of people to actually answer the question though? 293256[/snapback] Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 I think Teague as a LT would do quite well against speed rushers, with his footwork, lateral movement and positioning. The problem is that I think he would get abused by larger DE's and also have trouble on off-tackle plays to his side of the formation where he may have to go man on man with a larger player.... 293112[/snapback] like he doesn't go head to head with larger players while playing C. He will be no worse than John Fina as LT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 actually, I think the fact that Teague was EVER a starting LT in Denver is a positive for him. It shows that he has the talent to play there since Denver knows their o-linemen. 293237[/snapback] They cut him after one year as a starter. As it turns out, he didn't have the talent to play there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 like he doesn't go head to head with larger players while playing C. He will be no worse than John Fina as LT. 293281[/snapback] Actually, he really doesn't very often to be honest. And when he does, he usually gets bowled over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 1, 2005 Author Share Posted April 1, 2005 They cut him after one year as a starter. As it turns out, he didn't have the talent to play there. 293289[/snapback] Well, no. They just didn't resign him after his 3-4 year deal was up. And they did negotiate with him, they just didn't offer him as much money as the Bills did and had other guys on the roster or coming back from injury that they thought they could form a line with. And he had missed almost the entire season before with a serious injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Exactly... if he didn't have the talent, why would Denver, the o-line gurus that they are, have ever put him there in the first place? They saw SOMETHING in Teague. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Aren't we asking a little too much of people to actually answer the question though? 293256[/snapback] I am not sure that is really a fair question. If being a good blocker was simply a matter of having certain quantifiable physical qualities then all you would need to guarantee drafting a pro bowler would be some measuring tape, a stop watch and some weights. It doesn't work that way. My reasons for thinking that TT is less than a sure thing at LT has nothing to do with my believing he is physically limited in some way, it is based on me seeing him miss too many blocks. Whether he missed them because he misread the defense, was too slow, too fast, too weak or too strong, I don't care. You may be right that Teague has some talent as yet untapped that JM will bring out so I see what you are trying to get at with a question about his skill set. I will say this, I spent a lot of time with my recorder playing back running plays this past season to focus on the line. At times, Teague would make a great play out of nowhere. I recall one where he was leading on a sweep and a LB came knifing into the backfield through a gap just behind the play. The LB would have made the tackle for a loss but somehow Trey was able to stop his own momentum enough to dive back to the inside and pick the guy off in the nick of time. It was a great play, no question. However, he just doesn't make them very often or very consistently. For every play like that there were a fistful of plays where he simply got beat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckeyeBill Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 No question do I think that TT can play LT. I think that he is one of the few linemen who can literally play at EVERY SINGLE POSITIONS and do fairly well. He would do fairly well at LT. Maybe not the best, but he would not be a bust. He did block as LT on a dang good Denver Bronco rushing attack team too, don't forget that. I am sure he hasn't gotten any worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tomcat Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Move Tucker to Center, get Sheldon and cut Teague..........out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Please don't answer if you're just going to say he gave up 11.25 sacks. We know that. We also know that he looked extremely average at C until McNally and MM got here. We know that MW looked very average and gave up a lot of sacks at RT before Mouse and MM got here. We know that McNally has got the most out of lesser players than Teague. I am not saying he will be good or great. I have no idea. And still think we're getting Shelton to play there. But what, specifically, makes you think he cannot be a very solid LT in this league? He is not small, he is not stupid, he is not slow, he is not a kitty, he is not bad technique wise. I am just not an OL expert and it seems to me if he can make vast improvements at C in one year, has played the position before, and does not possess limitations physically to play LT in this league, what exactly is preventing him from being a reliable LT? Furthermore, that 11.25 sacks in Denver was on a team that had problems all over the offense, not just the far left side of their line. They had three injured RBs I believe, and one WR (Smith caught like 113 passes and the most anyone else had was 15), no Shannon Sharpe or TE threat, and an erratic quarterback. ANd yet still finished 10th in the league in O and had an 8-8 record with a mediocre defense. This is really more of a question looking for a specific football answer. What exactly is it preventing TT from being good? 293094[/snapback] What most people on this board chose to forget was that Teague was the Broncos' LT and thought he was brought to Buffalo to play that position. He was quite upset when he learned he was being moved to C. He didn't become a pain in the ass and finally accepted this shift but I'm certain he can still play the tackle position. Whether he's willing to go back to it is another question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 1, 2005 Author Share Posted April 1, 2005 I am not sure that is really a fair question. If being a good blocker was simply a matter of having certain quantifiable physical qualities then all you would need to guarantee drafting a pro bowler would be some measuring tape, a stop watch and some weights. It doesn't work that way. My reasons for thinking that TT is less than a sure thing at LT has nothing to do with my believing he is physically limited in some way, it is based on me seeing him miss too many blocks. Whether he missed them because he misread the defense, was too slow, too fast, too weak or too strong, I don't care. You may be right that Teague has some talent as yet untapped that JM will bring out so I see what you are trying to get at with a question about his skill set. I will say this, I spent a lot of time with my recorder playing back running plays this past season to focus on the line. At times, Teague would make a great play out of nowhere. I recall one where he was leading on a sweep and a LB came knifing into the backfield through a gap just behind the play. The LB would have made the tackle for a loss but somehow Trey was able to stop his own momentum enough to dive back to the inside and pick the guy off in the nick of time. It was a great play, no question. However, he just doesn't make them very often or very consistently. For every play like that there were a fistful of plays where he simply got beat. 293434[/snapback] Well that was the kind of answer I was originally looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 I am not sure that is really a fair question. If being a good blocker was simply a matter of having certain quantifiable physical qualities then all you would need to guarantee drafting a pro bowler would be some measuring tape, a stop watch and some weights. It doesn't work that way. My reasons for thinking that TT is less than a sure thing at LT has nothing to do with my believing he is physically limited in some way, it is based on me seeing him miss too many blocks. Whether he missed them because he misread the defense, was too slow, too fast, too weak or too strong, I don't care. You may be right that Teague has some talent as yet untapped that JM will bring out so I see what you are trying to get at with a question about his skill set. I will say this, I spent a lot of time with my recorder playing back running plays this past season to focus on the line. At times, Teague would make a great play out of nowhere. I recall one where he was leading on a sweep and a LB came knifing into the backfield through a gap just behind the play. The LB would have made the tackle for a loss but somehow Trey was able to stop his own momentum enough to dive back to the inside and pick the guy off in the nick of time. It was a great play, no question. However, he just doesn't make them very often or very consistently. For every play like that there were a fistful of plays where he simply got beat. 293434[/snapback] Now you're talkin' Mickey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 What most people on this board chose to forget was that Teague was the Broncos' LT and thought he was brought to Buffalo to play that position. He was quite upset when he learned he was being moved to C. He didn't become a pain in the ass and finally accepted this shift but I'm certain he can still play the tackle position. Whether he's willing to go back to it is another question. 293490[/snapback] My recollection is that he only started one year for them and that was it. They had lost Tony Jones and had no one left besides Cooper Carlisle, a perennial back-up. Didn't they sign Ephraim Salaam in free agency to replace him the year we signed him and Blake Brockemayer? They were in an "anyone but Teague" mode that year in figuring out their starting LT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Nothing. At this point, I view him as the leading candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seq004 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 like he doesn't go head to head with larger players while playing C. He will be no worse than John Fina as LT. 293281[/snapback] I'll agree with that assessment. To me Teague would do no better or no worse than John Fina which is bad news for the Bills O-line again this year. When Fina was playing left tackle how many times did we wish for an improvement in that position. Come on man how long will the O-line be a weak spot in Buffalo? I know a lot of posters have said in "TD I trust" but looking at our record and the offensive line history since he has arrived along with no playoffs I have no idea why some of us would say that. Please don't give the "He helped us out of cap hell" because that is the standard job of every GM in todays NFL. The GM's of the pre-salary cap had to learn the hard way to manage the cap ie Butler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCal Aaron Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 All things being equal, Teague would have to become black, snort alot of coke and wreak havoc on qbs. 1 out of 3 ain't bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo mike Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 What most people on this board chose to forget was that Teague was the Broncos' LT and thought he was brought to Buffalo to play that position. He was quite upset when he learned he was being moved to C. He didn't become a pain in the ass and finally accepted this shift but I'm certain he can still play the tackle position. Whether he's willing to go back to it is another question. 293490[/snapback] That's exactly what happened. Mcnally likes him, so it seems. Training camp is still a ways off, but he looks like our LT right now. Any way you slice it our line is better already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 2, 2005 Share Posted April 2, 2005 First....if it happens....I will support it. But It is not my ideal situation....and it doesnt represent my ideal offensive line. Given the fact that we have rejuvinated Damion Shelton blocking for what probably will be a many time pro bowler WIllis Magehee in the backfield....I want to see this line transfer over to a group of well over 300 pounder road grader offensive linemen that can move their feet at the line of scrimmage....... A lot of it comes from a change in the backfield as well.....I think that by mid season the philosophy of opposing defense is going to do a 180 degree turn from what we have been seeing in past years with Bledsoe....... In past years teams were concerned with just one thing with the bills.....getting pressure (particularly inside pressure) on Drew Bledsoe.....they would sell out to do it.......more then often it worked If they do this they are going to leave a crack in their lanes that is going to allow Losman to sneak out......and when he does it will be for a lot of yardage....now they will work to CONTAIN Losman in the pocket Now all of a sudden the group of road graders who everyone is worried about in pass protection look like they are doing a bang up job because the DEFENSIVE STRATEGY WILL CHANGE now teams will sit back and try to confuse Losman.....Losman is going to throw some picks until he gets NFL aclimated....that is why we come full circle back the ORIGINAL OFFENSIVE STRENGTH..... Big massing run road graders with Magehee piling up the yards......it will also help ups protect leads....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BackInDaDay Posted April 2, 2005 Share Posted April 2, 2005 First....if it happens....I will support it. But It is not my ideal situation....and it doesnt represent my ideal offensive line. Given the fact that we have rejuvinated Damion Shelton blocking for what probably will be a many time pro bowler WIllis Magehee in the backfield....I want to see this line transfer over to a group of well over 300 pounder road grader offensive linemen that can move their feet at the line of scrimmage....... A lot of it comes from a change in the backfield as well.....I think that by mid season the philosophy of opposing defense is going to do a 180 degree turn from what we have been seeing in past years with Bledsoe....... In past years teams were concerned with just one thing with the bills.....getting pressure (particularly inside pressure) on Drew Bledsoe.....they would sell out to do it.......more then often it worked If they do this they are going to leave a crack in their lanes that is going to allow Losman to sneak out......and when he does it will be for a lot of yardage....now they will work to CONTAIN Losman in the pocket Now all of a sudden the group of road graders who everyone is worried about in pass protection look like they are doing a bang up job because the DEFENSIVE STRATEGY WILL CHANGE now teams will sit back and try to confuse Losman.....Losman is going to throw some picks until he gets NFL aclimated....that is why we come full circle back the ORIGINAL OFFENSIVE STRENGTH..... Big massing run road graders with Magehee piling up the yards......it will also help ups protect leads....... 293813[/snapback] Good post John. In the same manner we kept opposing OGs off our LBs with large 2-gap DTs, OBD is attempting to build a wall, OT to OT, to protect JP. We'll sacrifice the fluidity necessary for making many plays work well (long-traps, sweeps and screens), but McGahee has the skills to take the corner on his own. What we'll gain is control of the center of the line. McNally may ask Bobby April to help coach the O-line in the inside-gap blocking techniques his ST linemen learn to protect a placekick. Anything to stuff the push up the middle. You don't need to be an agile OG to accomplish that. Why is this important? Buying the kid the extra second to make his reads and get through his progressions will help him avoid some of the mistakes he's bound to make. Considering the personnel, this stratedgy is a sound one. I may be wrong, but I think that's what they're going for. I don't think Teague at C hurts them here, but Tucker is a better fit. If that pans out then either Teague bulks up, Smith wakes up, Peters steps up, or Shelton shows up to anchor the left side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerJ Posted April 2, 2005 Share Posted April 2, 2005 I find myself wondering why eague seems unable to add any muscle to his frame. At 6'5" I would think he could carry 320 or so without too much difficulty, but he seems stuck at 300 lbs, underweight by today's standards. Does he not participate in offseason weight and conditioning programs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 2, 2005 Share Posted April 2, 2005 I think Teague is an excellent to superior backup utility lineman. He has the versatility to play most positions well enough. He's no HOFer at any of them. If he's our starting LT at the end of next season that will not be a good sign IMHO. Now if they could just begin playing those friggin games so we'll find out the answers to all our burning questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts