colin Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Third and long will STILL be a problem due to the lack of pressure from the front four. Just a hunch. 687031[/snapback] don't you think our passrush will be better with spikes back as well as having mccargo and tripplet, 2 guys that can rush the passer from inside? we haven't had a good threat from the inside for years turn your :< upside down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 I've read posts that said Losman played poorly because he lacked pass protection. Losman played poorly because there weren't enough running plays called. Losman played poorly because most QBs play poorly their first nine games. Losman played poorly because his WRs didn't try hard enough. Losman played poorly because the playcalling wasn't good enough. But this is the first thread where I've seen it written that Losman played poorly because the defense played poorly. By the end of August, let's try to come up with at least three more ways to explain away Losman's poor play! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 By the end of August, let's try to come up with at least three more ways to explain away Losman's poor play! 687154[/snapback] We'll do our part if you do yours and manufacture three more ways to believe Holcomb is anything more than a backup who won't look like Billy Joe Hobert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 We'll do our part if you do yours and manufacture three more ways to believe Holcomb is anything more than a backup who won't look like Billy Joe Hobert. 687162[/snapback] I'm sure there are plenty of Losman defenders who will be happy to do their part regardless of whether I do mine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 3rd and long should be a lot better with the new D, at least I hope it is. But as long as Tim Anderson is the primary NT, I'm not too optimistic about 3rd-and-short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 There's been a lot of gnashed teeth over the lack of O-line picks,686448[/snapback] And I'm not sure why there is much logical reason for this gnashing of teeth since the draft has been notoriously bad in terms of real world events for us in terms of building an OL. Sure there are examples of great OL players getting drafted as good players have to come from somewhere. However, to have as a central strategy a team getting Boselli or Pace as a draft pick is not the only or even the best strategy as for the crapshoot of the draft giving you a Mike Williams or Bryant McKinnie for every Johnathan Ogden. In fact in terms of real-worl occurence the best thing we could have done at OL in the 2002 draft if you insist on going a hindight way is if we traded down and picked Levi Jones. As far as the Bills for 2006, I agree that we are thin on OL, but it strikes me again looking at real world occurences that JMac did actually coach an NYG OL led by former Bills Glenn Parker and Dusty Ziegler to an SB berth. While the rants of the Coach against the man he called Porky Parker were designed far more to get good radio ratings rather than be good football thinking (the proof in the pudding is that his candidate to replace Parker was the illustrious and soon deserving to be cut after he got the LT job Corey Louchiey) Parker was not a stud and has a talent level which looks a lot like Gandy. I loved Dusty as well, but FA acquisition Fowler shows more upside at C than Ziegler showed when NYG snatched him from us because they put him in competition at C on their depth chart rather than have him compete at numerous positions as we had planned. A starting OL of Gandy.Reyes,Fowler,Villarial, and Peters strikes me as questionable to really go all 16 but simply is at least comparable in talent to an OL JMac led to success in real life. The problem I see with the Bills OL is that its depth and back-ups are really questionable. When we are starting guys like Villarial (a solid starter with a nice touch of nastiness who has begun to lose starts to nicks the last two years indicating he is about done as a player) AND we need Fowler, AND Reyes, AND Peters to be soild (which they well may be) when none have started 16 for the Bills before is a bit too much to rely on without quality back-ups beyond the Geisinger, Matt Mprgan level. This team needs some reliable OL back-ups but yet we do have a couple of ways of pulling this off 1. Internal development- JMac is on record saying he is no miracle worker, but even though he has a record of getting good performance out of starters who have the questions our starting 5 have, he would be a miracle worker if he led development of our current slate of back-ups into reliable fillers of that role if he were to bring this off. Right now we have: A. Matt Morgan as second on the depth chart at LT and he was on a PS in 04 and played all of one game at T last year and seems pretty questionable. Butler is listed as 3rd on the depth chart and some posters are hyperventilating thar he will start. Read my lips... he is a rookie who will spend his first year by definition learning how not to be a rookiw. Folks seem to like him because his kneecapping of a fellow athlete after the play was over is some sign of the nastiness an OL needs in this league. However, he was correctly suspended for this hit and though the Bills as a corporation may have some splainin to do since they have told their customers that character will rule, its a asked, answer and punished question for him that he need not dwell on personally even if the corporation correctly can be questioned. However, HE WAS A SECOND DAY CHOICE who may have slipped a round because of his transgression, but I think he was a second day choice because word is he has some footwork issues to focus on and he has little chance of being a starter quality player this year and MAY develop later in the season into a quality back-up. B. LG is the only OL position where there is a bit of a logjam as Benny Anderson is first on the depth chart, but almost all Bills fans were incredibly pissed and disappointed with his lack of focus and poor play after starting for the Ravens and being paid big bucks as an FA by us. Reyes strikes me as a far more likely starter at LG as he started for a successful Panthers unit. He was pushed off the team there because a youngster behind him had more long-tem upside for them to give him a large FA contract, but he should be good enough to start for us (he was an RG with NC but has played LG as a pro). Interestingly the Bills moved Preston from #2 C on the depth chart to #3 LG. He showed enough talent in his rookie year developing later rather than out of the box as a reserve starter as second day rookie picks can do (he actually saw action in the first game and was able to start after the middle of October as Villarial began to show his age. I actually like him better as a back-up RG for Villarial again who might even pressure him for the starting role or backing up Fowler if this FA disappoints at C. Despite folks hatred for Anderson, because of the money we have already paid him and we will be charged for whether he is cut or not, it actually might be the best move to keep him as a back-up to Reyes and shift Preston over to compete against and back-up Villarial. C. I was impressed with Fowler when he came out of college and was disappointed we did not draft him. He played C last year as a back-up starting for a well-regarded injured player and word is he did well. Like Reyes he earned starter money on the market and he was let go not because he was bad but because his team was committed to another player at C. We are paying him starter money and he will get every shot to start for us at C. However, i have big ? about Geisinger backing him up. This is the main reason I see Preston as my choice #2, but when Villarial sits and if Fowler needs to at the same time we will be in big trouble. LG- Villarial as I have said and comparison of his past history as a starter when he routinely started 16 and today where what used to be nicks he could play through cost him effectiveness in several games show we need a back-up here badly.I simply do not see Thomas, Merz or McFarland being adequate back-ups and much prefer Preston here and hope that Fowler performs. RT- Peters seems to deserve the lauds he gets as a great athlete and when the MW reign of error finally ended with his ill-fated transfer to guard status, Peters proved he could play RT. There still remains a question to how he will do being an OL starter for a full season for the first time. His back-up Gibson was clearly more than talented enough to back-him up (or even start at RT in his early days. However, that was then and this is now and he is a wild card as a back-up and we will simply have to see. At any rate, my personal depth chart guess is: LT- Gandy (only adequate but still adequate) LG- Reyes (I liked this signing) C- Fowler (I liked this signing as well and we seem to target guys the market said were starters but his old team had someone else at the slot long term. RG- Villarial (a good player but will he even last until October this time) RT- Peters (he still needs to demostrate he is 26/26 but he has shown enough he will do this if the injury goad cooperate. Back-up LT (we need to pick-up a cheaper available FA like a Riley. He is no starter but should be able to back-up here. Eventually Butler may be able to do this, but October at the earliest and more likely for the last few games will he even be a credible back-up from what I hear and see). Back-up LG- It will be great if Anderson actually plays well enough to be a back-up but he needs to show us. Preston can handle this most likely but if so then folwer cannot disappoint. Back-up C- I doubt Geisinger cuts it. I either hope we do not need one because I think Preston is the guy and he will be needed to back-up either guard slot and likely start for Villarial by October due to the quality of his play or nicks to Villarial. I think Cory Ratmer as a back-up C from FA may be our best shot. Back-up RG- This is where i would slot Prestion Back-up RT- Gibson is a wildcard and Riley looks like the guy we can afford who should be able to back-up. Overall I keep 9 OL players and in my fantasy world they are Gandy, Reyes, Fowler, Villarial, Peters with Preston, AND Gibson, OR, Anderson, AND Riley OR Rayner, AND Butler OR Geisinger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted May 9, 2006 Author Share Posted May 9, 2006 I've read posts that said Losman played poorly because he lacked pass protection. Losman played poorly because there weren't enough running plays called. Losman played poorly because most QBs play poorly their first nine games. Losman played poorly because his WRs didn't try hard enough. Losman played poorly because the playcalling wasn't good enough. But this is the first thread where I've seen it written that Losman played poorly because the defense played poorly. By the end of August, let's try to come up with at least three more ways to explain away Losman's poor play! 687154[/snapback] Way to totally miss the point, buckshot. Go back and read what I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Way to totally miss the point, buckshot. Go back and read what I said. 687183[/snapback] Ummm . . . I wasn't responding to you. Go back and read the first page of the thread, and you'll see which people I was responding to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Read my lips... he is a rookie who will spend his first year by definition learning how not to be a rookiw. 687174[/snapback] Hare lip? j/k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Hare lip? j/k 687186[/snapback] Would I? (Very old joke.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 I've read posts that said Losman played poorly because he lacked pass protection. Losman played poorly because there weren't enough running plays called. Losman played poorly because most QBs play poorly their first nine games. Losman played poorly because his WRs didn't try hard enough. Losman played poorly because the playcalling wasn't good enough. But this is the first thread where I've seen it written that Losman played poorly because the defense played poorly. By the end of August, let's try to come up with at least three more ways to explain away Losman's poor play! 687154[/snapback] Fundamental to JP being inadequate as a QB last year was the same reason most likely the same reason why Holcomb was inadequate as a QB for us last year Holcomb was clearly better than JP as a QB last year but being better than JP does not mean a player was good. I know Holcomb was better than JP but do you really feel his production at QB was adequate last year?). The shared reason which was a big part in the inadequacy of both athletes was that our O scheme and play as a team simply sucked. What you are arguing here (if any of the QB partisans arguments are based in the real world) is whether they feel better about the excuses for JP that he will improve to be adequate or the excuses for Holcomb that he will improve to be adequate. My sense is this is a close question: JP excuses: He does have the talent that merited a 1st round choice being spent on him. Having yet played 16 games as starter, there is some learning yet to be done by him which can be apparent in better play once the game slows down a bit for him which comes from real game practice. He has shown enough progress from his horrid start when thrown into the NE game a couple of seasons ago and with flashes of brilliance like early in the Miami game where he and Evans cinnected for 3 TDs, that merely looking over the center's shoulders in pre-season should show enough that he will not make too many fatal errors to have him start the season and by the end of the season be a threat. For this to be a reality will take a lot of works and breaks but it can happen. Holcomb excuses: He was far better than JP last year and his episodes of brilliance as a back-up such as in CLE will allow him to be adequately productive or better when he gets a chance. The Golden Boys are committed to winning this year and even to making a credible playoff run. Holcomb's experience will allow him to use a quicker release, realize when you need to dump it down and live to fight another play and not make mistakes so that if ST continues its performance and Jauron really is a D genius we can win (at least do much better) now. It could happen. The battle between JP nd Holcomb is one of whose excuses do you believe more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 And I'm not sure why there is much logical reason for this gnashing of teeth since the draft has been notoriously bad in terms of real world events for us in terms of building an OL. 687174[/snapback] That's because we keep drafting second day o-linemen, which we did AGAIN in this draft. In the past 8 Bills drafts, we've spent a total of TWO first day picks on offensive linemen. Two!!! One was Jonas Jennings, who turned out to be terrific value for a third rounder, even if injury prone. And Mike Williams, who was lazy and injured a lot but still showed potential when he was on the field, including half a season of dominating runblocking a few years back. Our lesson here is NOT that we shouldn't draft o-linemen, it's that we need to pay more attention to a player's injury/weight history. We should've spent more than two first day draft picks on o-linemen in the past 8 years, and it was a mistake not to do so. However, to have as a central strategy a team getting Boselli or Pace as a draft pick is not the only or even the best strategy as for the crapshoot of the draft giving you a Mike Williams or Bryant McKinnie for every Johnathan Ogden. 687174[/snapback] Actually, offensive tackle is a position with a tremendous success rate in drafts, especially when you're dealing with top 10 picks like the ones you mentioned. Check the history. We got unlucky/stupid with Mike Williams. But that has more to do with our stupidity for giving an overweight player lots of money instead of a problem with the position itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 The battle between JP nd Holcomb is one of whose excuses do you believe more. 687201[/snapback] That's why the Bills signed Nall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMIEBUF12 Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 this has been a problem since even when we had that great defensive guru greg williams god i hope we finially have a defense we can brag about again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 I've read posts that said Losman played poorly because he lacked pass protection. Losman played poorly because there weren't enough running plays called. Losman played poorly because most QBs play poorly their first nine games. Losman played poorly because his WRs didn't try hard enough. Losman played poorly because the playcalling wasn't good enough. But this is the first thread where I've seen it written that Losman played poorly because the defense played poorly. By the end of August, let's try to come up with at least three more ways to explain away Losman's poor play! 687154[/snapback] What are the excuses for why Holcomb played poorly? Oh...I am sorry...he is good at the 4 yard pass play... My bad.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 What are the excuses for why Holcomb played poorly? Oh...I am sorry...he is good at the 4 yard pass play... My bad.... 687458[/snapback] Not every play can be a 40 yard bomb to Evans. Sometimes, the pass protection just isn't there. In fact, with Anderson, Teague, and an injured Villarrial in the lineup, the pass protection was almost never there. A 4 yard gain sure is better than a sack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Holcomb couldnt throw a ball through a pain of glass Holcomb DOESN"T have the arm to throw downfield at all BECAUSE he doesn't have the arm strength....he doesnt throw deep therefore defenses play up....overloading against our running game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Not every play can be a 40 yard bomb to Evans. 687466[/snapback] But when three of them ARE, and they are all for TDs, and they all take place in the first quarter, against Miami, and the team still loses, then you tell me...exactly HOW does Holcomb offer us a better chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 But when three of them ARE, and they are all for TDs, and they all take place in the first quarter, against Miami, and the team still loses, then you tell me...exactly HOW does Holcomb offer us a better chance? 687497[/snapback] Shhhhh, a QB's performance has nothing to do with the defense....That's a "loss" in the "Loss-man" column. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Shhhhh, a QB's performance has nothing to do with the defense....That's a "loss" in the "Loss-man" column. 687504[/snapback] Clearly, because Losman was the one calling the plays, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts