Orton's Arm Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Credibility ? LOL Do I look like I'm interested in your opinion? Didn't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I don't follow your logic. Not all starters for all teams are 1st day picks. At a guess I'd say more(most) were 2nd day picks. On top of the second day picks we had, we also brought in several free agents.I would love us to end up with 5 pro-bowl OLs but that concept is just plain silly. 2 pro-bowlers & 3 solid starters is more reasonable but... at this point, 5 solid starters would do me fine. Peters-solid Villarial-solid(if uninjured) Fowler-solid Reyes-solid Gandy-solid(though some disagree) Plenty of raw, young talent learning in the background. Motivation in a team sport is usually a vastly underated factor. Let's see what the new regime can get out of these players. 694456[/snapback] On what basis do you say Fowler is solid? Same question regarding Reyes. To me the offensive line looks more like Peters - promising but to early to say solid Villarial - solid(if uninjured which seems to be a big if to me) Fowler - ? Reyes - ? Gandy - below average I'm skeptical that Levy has addressed the line situation any more seriously than TD did. In fact I'd go so far as to say that TD put a greater, more credible effort into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 On what basis do you say Fowler is solid? Same question regarding Reyes. To me the offensive line looks more like Peters - promising but to early to say solid Villarial - solid(if uninjured which seems to be a big if to me) Fowler - ? Reyes - ? Gandy - below average I'm skeptical that Levy has addressed the line situation any more seriously than TD did. In fact I'd go so far as to say that TD put a greater, more credible effort into it. 694924[/snapback] Once again I ask.... Why do you rate Gandy "below average?" I understand that he isn't Orlando Pace or one of the very FEW dominant LT's in the league other then about 5 teams nobody has one. BUT he did hold his own against top pass rushers....did he get beat every once in a while....yeah...but not NEARLY as often as the interior of our line got torched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Fowler - ?Reyes - ? 694924[/snapback] You are absolutely right. Until they play consistent football for us they remain a ???. (Similar to when BA came in. He was quite highly rated as a FA but look what we ended up with) In the context to taking extra rookies though.... Fowler & Reyes have proven themselves to be decent enough to start in the league & both have potential upside. Rookies(regardless of where taken in the draft...i.e. #4) are all huge ???. I guess it depends on where you place your assumptions. I'm assuming their ability remains the same as last year. This would make them competent though not spectacular. They might be worse but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 From 1990 - 2004, the Bills chose the following offensive linemen on the second day of the draft: Brent Griffith Tony DeLorenzo Dean Kirkland Mike Devlin Corbin Lacina Chris Luneberg Tom Nutten Dusty Zeigler Jamie Nails Marcus Spriggs Victor Allotey Marques Sullivan Mike Pucillo Ben Sobieski Dylan McFarland This track record doesn't exactly inspire me with hope for the more recent additions. Meanwhile, look at the offensive linemen the Bills drafted on the first day from 1990 - 2004: Glenn Parker John Fina Corey Louchiey Ruben Brown Robert Hicks Jonas Jennings Mike Williams While many offensive linemen chosen on the first day were busts, many others worked out well. On the other hand, the Bills are 0-for-15 on the second day of the draft. 0-for-15! So don't tell me the offensive line is being "addressed" just because one or two second day picks were used on it. Show me first day picks, and then I'll say the offensive line is getting its due. 694448[/snapback] Bravo my friend.... effing BRAVO!!!! Now, throw in some sad sack bargain basement free agents (and udfas) such as Joe Panos, Corey Hulsey, Kris Farris, Greg Jerman, and you have a more complete picture of the utter trash that the Bills have been putting out there for a decade or so. Did you ever wonder why this situation exists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 On what basis do you say Fowler is solid? Same question regarding Reyes. To me the offensive line looks more like Peters - promising but to early to say solid Villarial - solid(if uninjured which seems to be a big if to me) Fowler - ? Reyes - ? Gandy - below average I'm skeptical that Levy has addressed the line situation any more seriously than TD did. In fact I'd go so far as to say that TD put a greater, more credible effort into it. 694924[/snapback] While I am also skeptical (what even semi-logical person wouldn't be given the goshawful record of the Bills on the OL since the Kent Hull glory days), I think there is actual good reason to think that the starters on the OL will be better than last year's starters (which given how bad last year's starters were is not hard to do actually). Most important, though certainly any player who has not played a full NFL season in his career is a ??? (Jonas Jennings for example) or any new player is legitimately considered a ??? in a new system with new teammates, all ??? are not created equal. In fact, though I think both Fowler and Reyes are legitimately question marks, I think based on their play, age, seemimg market rate, etc, they both a question marks one should feel good about based on their records. Fowler- He impressed me a lot coming out of college and I had hoped the Bills would take him when he came out. He has actually started a few games becaue more highly regarded starting center Jeff Faine was hurt and word is he played well from what I here. He apparently was not resigned by his former team not because he was bad, but because as an FA the market was likely to reward him with starter money and a starter's role and his former team had other plans at C. I think he is a definite upgrade over Teague in quality of play. Having never started 16 at C before he is a ??? but he is one that more makes me question the concept of Gesinger as our back-up C rather than worry about whether Fowler is good enough. Reyes- Actually he has had a good track record for Carolina in a productive O. In fact, he also was pushed out not because of bad play but because Carolina has a RG behind him they wanted to play, but actually the OL with Reyes playing was so effective he kept a younger highly respected 2nd round pick slotted pay player on the bench. He also was available because the market would give this FA starter money and Carolina already had the locked up. He is headed into the backside of his career but is young enough that he should play for us for years if he plays as well as he did last year. I in fact think Villarial is a bigger ??? than Reyes because he has already begun to show that he will miss a few games with injuries that were formerly nicks he could play through. The main reason he is a ??? is that he was an RG we will ask to play LG, but he has played the position before as a pro and this is a small? In general, I have fewer quesrions about these two than I do about Peters and Villarial and I feel fine about Peters and think CV will be good for half a seaso. I think you grade Gandy too harshly as he was in fact average and not below average as you claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 I'll let Easterbrook do all the talking. Since 1990, Buffalo has had 17 first-round draft picks; the team has used seven on defensive backs, versus five on linemen of all types. Buffalo seems addicted to drafting skinny guys: this may explain why the Bills were consistently blown off the ball on both sides of the line in 2005. Once again it was Skinny City on draft day as Buffalo went first for a safety, then used three of its first four selections on defensive backs. The Bills, having one of the league's worst offensive lines, ended 2005 with waiver-wire acquisitions starting at both offensive tackles -- yet signed no OT in the offseason and did not choose one in the draft until the fifth round. Eric Mangini, product of the New England success system, took over the Jets and at the top of the draft immediately went offensive line, offensive line. It's a winning formula. Endlessly drafting skinny guys who get clobbered because there is no one in the trenches is not a winning formula. While I am also skeptical (what even semi-logical person wouldn't be given the goshawful record of the Bills on the OL since the Kent Hull glory days), I think there is actual good reason to think that the starters on the OL will be better than last year's starters (which given how bad last year's starters were is not hard to do actually). Most important, though certainly any player who has not played a full NFL season in his career is a ??? (Jonas Jennings for example) or any new player is legitimately considered a ??? in a new system with new teammates, all ??? are not created equal. In fact, though I think both Fowler and Reyes are legitimately question marks, I think based on their play, age, seemimg market rate, etc, they both a question marks one should feel good about based on their records. Fowler- He impressed me a lot coming out of college and I had hoped the Bills would take him when he came out. He has actually started a few games becaue more highly regarded starting center Jeff Faine was hurt and word is he played well from what I here. He apparently was not resigned by his former team not because he was bad, but because as an FA the market was likely to reward him with starter money and a starter's role and his former team had other plans at C. I think he is a definite upgrade over Teague in quality of play. Having never started 16 at C before he is a ??? but he is one that more makes me question the concept of Gesinger as our back-up C rather than worry about whether Fowler is good enough. Reyes- Actually he has had a good track record for Carolina in a productive O. In fact, he also was pushed out not because of bad play but because Carolina has a RG behind him they wanted to play, but actually the OL with Reyes playing was so effective he kept a younger highly respected 2nd round pick slotted pay player on the bench. He also was available because the market would give this FA starter money and Carolina already had the locked up. He is headed into the backside of his career but is young enough that he should play for us for years if he plays as well as he did last year. I in fact think Villarial is a bigger ??? than Reyes because he has already begun to show that he will miss a few games with injuries that were formerly nicks he could play through. The main reason he is a ??? is that he was an RG we will ask to play LG, but he has played the position before as a pro and this is a small? In general, I have fewer quesrions about these two than I do about Peters and Villarial and I feel fine about Peters and think CV will be good for half a seaso. I think you grade Gandy too harshly as he was in fact average and not below average as you claim. 695059[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted May 22, 2006 Author Share Posted May 22, 2006 You forgot to list Duke Preston as a second day pick. He seems like he could be pretty solid. My list only included players drafted through 2004, because it's too soon to evaluate anyone taken more recently than that. Preston and Geisinger were taken in 2005. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted May 22, 2006 Author Share Posted May 22, 2006 Bravo my friend.... effing BRAVO!!!! Now, throw in some sad sack bargain basement free agents (and udfas) such as Joe Panos, Corey Hulsey, Kris Farris, Greg Jerman, and you have a more complete picture of the utter trash that the Bills have been putting out there for a decade or so. Did you ever wonder why this situation exists? Thanks for the compliments. In answer to your question, I've wondered why the offensive line's been neglected. Below are some of my thoughts: - Unsettled QB position. The Bills have used six first day picks in an effort to find Jim Kelly's successor; with little to show for it so far. Once someone emerges as a Kelly-like replacement, the QB position could be ignored for the next ten years. This would free up picks for the offensive line. - Failure to hold onto first day picks. Often enough, players like Thomas Smith, Antoine Winfield, or Antowain Smith were allowed to hit free agency too early, creating excessive needs at DB and RB. Holding onto players like that would have let the Bills draft more offensive linemen in the first round. - Too low of a priority placed on offensive linemen by both Butler and TD. - Misaligned coaching/player selection. Back when Johnson was QB, the line featured many big, slow run blocking types. The playcalling was pass-heavy though. Not good. But it's hard to draft players who fit a particular style when there's been so much turnover at both offensive line coach and offensive coordinator. I guess you could sum up most of the above under the umbrella of lack of permanence. The lack of permanence applies to QB, many first-day picks in general, and the coaching staff. Until the Bills get their act together in those areas, it will be that much harder to build a good line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted May 22, 2006 Share Posted May 22, 2006 - Failure to hold onto first day picks. Often enough, players like Thomas Smith, Antoine Winfield, or Antowain Smith were allowed to hit free agency too early, creating excessive needs at DB and RB. Holding onto players like that would have let the Bills draft more offensive linemen in the first round. 695961[/snapback] Although I see the truth in your other points, I want to focus on this particular one. Notice that 2 out of 3 players that you listed are defensive backs. Add in if you will Burress and almost certainly Clements, and the Bills do resemble a dog chasing its tail wrt 1st round pick dbs. This year was worse yet, whereas we went after a boatload of dbs. on day 1, giving up a valueable pick in the process. Just more of the same losing strategy, but perhaps even more pronounced. I guess things will not change until we have a completely new regime in terms of ownership and general manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts