Jump to content

Bills' mishandling of the CB position


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, TwistofFate said:

This is exactly why I can see them drafting CB in round 1 of the draft....or Edge rusher, or LB. 

 

Im sure they will be looking at value considering we will be picking so far down, but it wouldn't surprise me at all to see defense get the nod in round 1.

IMHO I think there is minimal chance getting a CB in round one.  15%.  If it was my choice I would say zero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

The NFL should really make week 17 a week in which every player on the roster is active. There's no reason not to, and these week 17 games involving teams locked into playoff slots have been a problem for a long time. 

His injury had nothing to do with his small frame. It was a freak leg injury on a non-contact play.

 

The NFL roster size should be expanded to 57 and the amount you dress should be 53. Teams are so thin in general even if they were able to dress everyone. I don't see why a few extra backups and a few extra active people would hurt. This would allow players to come back from injury slower. I also think the NFL should have a "disabled list" where you can put guys on it for 4,6, and 8 weeks and then call up a PS player to replace them for that amount of time or sign a guy off the street. 

 

It would allow teams not have to force to carry and rush back hurt players because they need the bodies. The current IR designated for return tag isn't that great it puts guys out for far too long. You could limit the amount of slots you are able to use but there needs to be a complete overhaul of the NFL's injury system. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We only have 44 active players on the roster for game day.  It's absolutely impossible to sit EVERY SINGLE STARTER.  Even if you believe our entire bench could play 100% of snaps and special teams, that still leaves 3 starters that need to play.

 

Every player you add, requires another to be released.  So you are suggesting that we SHOULD have signed an extra CB (let's say EJ Gaines or Captain Munnerlyn) to ensure that we can sit Levi Wallace for the meaningless Week 17 game.  Then who do you release?

 

Release an offensive lineman on the back-end of the roster, and that means you need to push more starters at THAT POSITION into the starting lineup on Week 17.  You are simply trading the risk with Wallace for the risk with Dawkins/Spaine/Morse/Feliciano/Ford.  Release a linebacker, and you may be forced to play Matt Milano or Tremaine Edmunds the entire game.  Etc., etc.  I think you get the idea.

 

In my opinion, the only questionable move was starting Josh Allen.  He was in a no-win situation, playing with backup receivers.

 

30 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

The NFL roster size should be expanded to 57 and the amount you dress should be 53. Teams are so thin in general even if they were able to dress everyone. I don't see why a few extra backups and a few extra active people would hurt. This would allow players to come back from injury slower. I also think the NFL should have a "disabled list" where you can put guys on it for 4,6, and 8 weeks and then call up a PS player to replace them for that amount of time or sign a guy off the street. 

 

It would allow teams not have to force to carry and rush back hurt players because they need the bodies. The current IR designated for return tag isn't that great it puts guys out for far too long. You could limit the amount of slots you are able to use but there needs to be a complete overhaul of the NFL's injury system. 

 

Agree 100%.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, no.  The DBs have been a strength of the team all season long.  You can't sit everyone with only 53 on the roster and 46 active on game day.  There's a reason Marlowe is the 9th string corner.  But I'm confident enough in McBeane that Marlowe is the best 9th string corner available to the Bills (although watching Bodork every week makes me throw up in my mouth a little at that).  The roster is what it is, and we have to live with it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

The point is there should have been someone else on the roster to play corner. Most teams have backups at that position. The Bills kept six safeties instead -- four backups for two starting safeties, and only one backup for three starting corners.

Yeah. It's hard to believe that people saw McKenzie out there yesterday and still feel we're in a just fine position depth-wise. I mean, there's all the evidence you need.

You do realize we were sitting starters yesterday right

Edited by John from Riverside
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mjt328 said:

In my opinion, the only questionable move was starting Josh Allen.  He was in a no-win situation, playing with backup receivers

 

IMO they had a specific script they wanted Josh to execute in a real-game situation with real defenders putting pressure on the OL and "speeding up" his clock.  They had adequate receivers for the purpose, including 3 who play significant snaps in games (Gore, Kroft, McKensie).  They accomplished

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LABILLBACKER said:

We have to assume Wallace will be out. That leaves Taron or Kevin covering Stills/Fuller. 

 

YIKES

Sorry,  I don't feel as warm and fuzzy as some of you do with the Johnson's holding down the fort. They are both small and mediocre tacklers.

Kevin Johnson is 6' 185, since when is that small for a corner? Taron is 5'11" 192, not exactly small for a cb either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

No, it's not about the freak accident. He shouldn't have been playing in the first place; the rest of the starters were gone by then.

 

If someone gets hurt on Saturday, are you comfortable with Siran Neal or Isaiah McKenzie covering Kenny Stills?

 

Dude, you can't sit everyone.  If he sat then who plays?  Its a numbers game for every team.  The Ravens played their starting corner that just signed a huge contract.  They have to.  Its numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

I remain thoroughly puzzled. It's hard for me to believe that any objective observer could look at the situation right now and feel comfortable with the depth at the cornerback position.

 

Every single team has depth issues somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think when you say the FO should have had a better plan, you should be forced to say what your better plan was. Otherwise, it’s just whining. 

 

I mean, it’s not like we had a sucky defense! I think they did a LOT right. It’s all a matter of trade-offs. 

 

Edited by Augie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

Right. But if Wallace can't go, we're going to trot out White, Johnson, and Johnson as the starters with no backups other than safeties. Any way you slice it, that is paper thin and an area of concern. If one of White or K. Johnson goes down, who goes to the boundary? If T. Johnson goes down, do we think Neal can keep up with the Texans' playmakers in the slot? It's a huge mismatch and could make a difference in the game, even if a guy only misses a series or two.


On this one, take the “L”, Dude. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...