RunTheBall Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 I'm watching ESPN Classic right now. Watching Jim Kelly stand behind a line of 5 guys and having time to survey the field really demonstrates just how bad the O-line has been neglected over the years. Ahh, nostalgia. RTB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Well, that was up until the Super Bowl, when the Redskins beat poor Jim to a pulp. There is still that classic clip we always see of a couple of players propping an unconscious Jimbo up on the sidelines during that game. They usually show this clip when they start talking about concussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 I'm watching ESPN Classic right now. Watching Jim Kelly stand behind a line of 5 guys and having time to survey the field really demonstrates just how bad the O-line has been neglected over the years. Ahh, nostalgia. RTB 312958[/snapback] Not really a fair assessment as Jim wasn't anywhere near as lead-footed as DB, TH wasn't anywhere near the blocker/receiving threat Thurman Thomas was, Pete Metz/Keith McKellar were far more feared than our current TE duo, and until this past season there wasn't a second threat the equivalent of James Lofton. There's simply more to it than just the OLine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Not really a fair assessment as Jim wasn't anywhere near as lead-footed as DB, TH wasn't anywhere near the blocker/receiving threat Thurman Thomas was, Pete Metz/Keith McKellar were far more feared than our current TE duo, and until this past season there wasn't a second threat the equivalent of James Lofton. There's simply more to it than just the OLine. 313110[/snapback] Right......that line knew how to pick up the blitz and whatnot! Thurman and Kenny had huge holes to run thru IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCBoston Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 There's simply more to it than just the OLine. 313110[/snapback] Like Hall-Of-Famers at virtually every position in the offense? Go figure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Not really a fair assessment as Jim wasn't anywhere near as lead-footed as DB, TH wasn't anywhere near the blocker/receiving threat Thurman Thomas was, Pete Metz/Keith McKellar were far more feared than our current TE duo, and until this past season there wasn't a second threat the equivalent of James Lofton. 313110[/snapback] I agree, although I'd be willing to say that JK was just as lead-footed as DB, but he seemed to always find a way out of a jam. Kind of like the way Thurman used to disappear into a pile of offensive and defensive linemen, and somehow emerge sprinting out the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunTheBall Posted April 22, 2005 Author Share Posted April 22, 2005 Not really a fair assessment as Jim wasn't anywhere near as lead-footed as DB, TH wasn't anywhere near the blocker/receiving threat Thurman Thomas was, Pete Metz/Keith McKellar were far more feared than our current TE duo, and until this past season there wasn't a second threat the equivalent of James Lofton. There's simply more to it than just the OLine. 313110[/snapback] Ya, what was I thinking. Jennings was as good as Wolford. I'd take Lawrence Smith over Richter. Teague would give Hull a run for his money. Davis was no Villarial. And House Ballard wasn't anywhere near as good as Mike Williams. I understand having hall of fame players such as Kelly/Thomas/Reed on the O will make your o-line look good. That being said, our current o-line would be lucky to back up our line in 1991. RTB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 I agree, although I'd be willing to say that JK was just as lead-footed as DB, but he seemed to always find a way out of a jam. 313180[/snapback] Later in his career I'd agree but not in 1991 when he could still move some. He sure wasn't mobile, but nowhere near as statuesque as Drew. The play on the first TD to Lofton against the Raiders in the AFC Championship says it all. Drops the ball, picks it up, ducks, spins, runs a few yards to his right, and finds Lofton crossing from the right flat for the easy 6. Drew would have curled into the fetal position or skipped the ball off the turf 10 yards in front of the closest blue jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Ya, what was I thinking. Jennings was as good as Wolford. I'd take Lawrence Smith over Richter. Teague would give Hull a run for his money. Davis was no Villarial. And House Ballard wasn't anywhere near as good as Mike Williams. I understand having hall of fame players such as Kelly/Thomas/Reed on the O will make your o-line look good. That being said, our current o-line would be lucky to back up our line in 1991. RTB 313183[/snapback] There isn't one player on the current offense that would have started on that team. NOT ONE. That was one of the greatest offenses of all time and it was assembled because there wasn't a salary cap to hinder them. How many players currently playing on the best offense in the NFL (Colts) would've started on that team? Maybe 2? Like I said, there's more to it than just the offensive line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duey Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Right......that line knew how to pick up the blitz and whatnot! Thurman and Kenny had huge holes to run thru IIRC. 313136[/snapback] Just as a side note...how freaking good was Kenny Davis. This guy was the perfect backup running back...we lost NOTHING when he subbed for Thurman. I was at the Colts game where Kenny broke like 15 tackles on a 70 something yard TD run. It's on the NFL's 100 Greatest TD's tape. Awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 duey, i'd go on record for saying that kenny davis was the best backup RB of all time, but i won't since i lack the energy to research all time backup RBs since 1920. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 There isn't one player on the current offense that would have started on that team. NOT ONE. That was one of the greatest offenses of all time and it was assembled because there wasn't a salary cap to hinder them. How many players currently playing on the best offense in the NFL (Colts) would've started on that team? Maybe 2? Like I said, there's more to it than just the offensive line. 313188[/snapback] Darin, I would have to disagree with you a little bit here. Fullback was typically a weak spot on the SB bills teams, and I would have to say that Shelton was better than Gardner or Mueller. Plus I would take Moulds right now over Lofton in his last couple years. As far as the colts, You have to say that at least two of their lineman were better than the SB Bills. Also, I would say that Marvin Harrison would have started over Lofton. You can make an argument for the Colts' TE's, Edge, and Peyton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Darin, I would have to disagree with you a little bit here. Fullback was typically a weak spot on the SB bills teams, and I would have to say that Shelton was better than Gardner or Mueller. Plus I would take Moulds right now over Lofton in his last couple years. As far as the colts, You have to say that at least two of their lineman were better than the SB Bills. Also, I would say that Marvin Harrison would have started over Lofton. You can make an argument for the Colts' TE's, Edge, and Peyton. 313232[/snapback] The fullback thing is semantics. Gardner had 4TDs that season and averaged 3.5 YPC, but he wasn't on the field when the K-Gun was at full tilt and that's what I was referring to. Harrison/over Reed or Lofton was one position and Stokley over Beebe was the other. You can have Peyton Manning - I'll take Jim Kelly. Feel free to tell me which lineman you think were better than their counterparts on the '91 team (Wolford, Ritcher, Ballard, Davis, Hull). I don't see it. Negative on the TE's, too. Metz/McKellar vs Clarke/Pollard? Not me, especially not in nasty weather against a good defense. As for Edge vs TT, no friggin' way. Maybe before his first NFL injury the case could be made but he's a shell of that player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Not really a fair assessment as Jim wasn't anywhere near as lead-footed as DB, TH wasn't anywhere near the blocker/receiving threat Thurman Thomas was, Pete Metz/Keith McKellar were far more feared than our current TE duo, and until this past season there wasn't a second threat the equivalent of James Lofton. There's simply more to it than just the OLine. 313110[/snapback] So basically you're saying Kelly needed a group of Pro Bowlers in order to look as good as he did? CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Later in his career I'd agree but not in 1991 when he could still move some. He sure wasn't mobile, but nowhere near as statuesque as Drew. The play on the first TD to Lofton against the Raiders in the AFC Championship says it all. Drops the ball, picks it up, ducks, spins, runs a few yards to his right, and finds Lofton crossing from the right flat for the easy 6. Drew would have curled into the fetal position or skipped the ball off the turf 10 yards in front of the closest blue jersey. If you want to compare apples to apples, that was JK's 7th year of pro ball (he played 2 years in the USFL which spanned 3 years in the NFL). Drew's 7th year was 1999. And I can't recall Jimbo, despite his amazing O-line and the talent around him, being sacked less than 1.5 times in an 11-game span, namely with Thurman in the backfield. Oh and Drew spun out of trouble several times, only to have receivers drop the ball or player run the wrong routes, etc. Sure Drew is on the tail-end of his career and not what JK was in his prime, but let's not overstate the greatness of the team around JK, or the fact that he never QB'd the Bills to a SB win, mainly because he was always up partying hard the night before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 If you want to compare apples to apples, that was JK's 7th year of pro ball (he played 2 years in the USFL which spanned 3 years in the NFL). Drew's 7th year was 1999. And I can't recall Jimbo, despite his amazing O-line and the talent around him, being sacked less than 1.5 times in an 11-game span, namely with Thurman in the backfield. Oh and Drew spun out of trouble several times, only to have receivers drop the ball or player run the wrong routes, etc. Sure Drew is on the tail-end of his career and not what JK was in his prime, but let's not overstate the greatness of the team around JK, or the fact that he never QB'd the Bills to a SB win, mainly because he was always up partying hard the night before. 313423[/snapback] Thanks for trying to make this into a "does Drew suck or not?" thread. Let me know if you can find an 11 game stretch during the early 1990s where we played as pathetic a schedule as the same stretch last season, we'll attempt to compare apples to apples. The largest difference between Kelly and Drew was Jim's ability to get others around him to elevate their play. But if you want/need to root for the QB of the Dallas Cowboys, don't let me get in your way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Thanks for trying to make this into a "does Drew suck or not?" thread. Let me know if you can find an 11 game stretch during the early 1990s where we played as pathetic a schedule as the same stretch last season, we'll attempt to compare apples to apples. Yeah I'm sure in all of Jimbo's time in Buffalo the Bills never played a similar 11 game stretch, back in the days before parity. The largest difference between Kelly and Drew was Jim's ability to get others around him to elevate their play. But if you want/need to root for the QB of the Dallas Cowboys, don't let me get in your way. Yep, REAL hard to "get others around [you] to elevate their play" when they're already great players. I mean, guys like Thurman, Andre, Lofton, MetzMcKellar were REAL slugs who needed to be motivated by Jimbo. Hell about the ONLY player I wish would have elevated his play was Jimbo himself in the SB's, mainly by NOT drinking heavily the night before/morning of the big game. It was his lead that also made a lot of the other players do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Yeah I'm sure in all of Jimbo's time in Buffalo the Bills never played a similar 11 game stretch, back in the days before parity. I can't think of one off the top of my head where we managed to play so many bad teams in such a short period of time. I also couldn't think of any where Jim didn't have a 300 yard passing game or Obviously you couldn't either. But smacking your head a few more times might help. Good luck. Yep, REAL hard to "get others around [you] to elevate their play" when they're already great players. I mean, guys like Thurman, Andre, Lofton, MetzMcKellar were REAL slugs who needed to be motivated by Jimbo. Hell about the ONLY player I wish would have elevated his play was Jimbo himself in the SB's, mainly by NOT drinking heavily the night before/morning of the big game. It was his lead that also made a lot of the other players do the same. 313439[/snapback] Yeah, Kelly was the biggest reason we lost SB's. Remember the game against the Giants when Kelly was dropping perfect passes and all the tackles he missed on that 10 minute 3rd quarter drive that completely changed the game? Yeah, me too. Now defend Drew Bledsoe (you know, the guy who couldn't even get us to the playoffs, much less a sniff of the SB), ya friggin' hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Later in his career I'd agree but not in 1991 when he could still move some. He sure wasn't mobile, but nowhere near as statuesque as Drew. The play on the first TD to Lofton against the Raiders in the AFC Championship says it all. Drops the ball, picks it up, ducks, spins, runs a few yards to his right, and finds Lofton crossing from the right flat for the easy 6. Drew would have curled into the fetal position or skipped the ball off the turf 10 yards in front of the closest blue jersey. 313185[/snapback] Dude ur funny! Seriously, this is not a sarcastic bitchslap dude, ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 I can't think of one off the top of my head where we managed to play so many bad teams in such a short period of time. I also couldn't think of any where Jim didn't have a 300 yard passing game or Obviously you couldn't either. But smacking your head a few more times might help. Good luck. Obviously that strategy hasn't been working for you, so I'll take a pass, thankyouverymuch. Yeah, Kelly was the biggest reason we lost SB's. Remember the game against the Giants when Kelly was dropping perfect passes and all the tackles he missed on that 10 minute 3rd quarter drive that completely changed the game? Yeah, me too. Now defend Drew Bledsoe (you know, the guy who couldn't even get us to the playoffs, much less a sniff of the SB), ya friggin' hypocrite. Pot, meet kettle. Notice color similarity. Either it's all about the QB, or it isn't. Jimbo has a lot of blame to bear for the Bills' failures in the SB, and again like I said, his lead was followed by many on the team. Bury your head in the sand a little more if you like, I'm just stating the facts. Oh and I liked Jimbo a lot more than I liked Drew, but I was pissed-off when I learned about him partying into the wee hours on the morning of EVERY SB, and realized his selfishness is what helped cost the Bills a title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts