HudsonValleyBillsFan Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 I will go back to the offensive line point. Because of free agency .. you cant put together an Oline like the bills had back in the day. Not to mention having a top quarterback, running back, two top shelf receivers and a pro bowl fullback to boot. The watered down defenses of today would get 40 points scored on them by the 90' bills offense before kickoff. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HudsonValleyBillsFan Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 And to address the defensive issues. I guess I just give so much more respect to teams that haven't watered down by the new free agent rules. So just comparing the numbers is not really fair to the 90' bills (or any team that existed before free agency for that matter) I think a defense with bruce smith, c. bennett, nate odom, etc would have been able to get our defense off the field against Brady and the Pats who can operate easily on the mediocre defenses of today. But I know that is a subjective viewpoint, but that is just how i feel. I'm not saying that Bills D could dominate all the teams of today, but I think they would be effective enough to compliment the K-gun offense. I think most of us would agree (and please correct me if i'm wrong here, and tell me why) that the watered down defenses of the modern era would be no match for that offense. Quick snapshot view of the Colts '06 offense vs. the Bills' 90' offense. Peyton Manning may be better than jim kelly .. but not by much. This is a wash to me. Does anyone want to argue that the colts offensive line is better than the wil wolfords, glen parkers and kent hulls of the world? I think that bills offensive line is head and shoulders above these guys and Jim Kelly would have all day to throw the ball. Andre Reed and Marvin Harrison is a wash. I think Lofton is head and shoulders above Wayne. But that is an argueable point. There is no comparison regarding the running game. Kenneth Davis is heads and shoulders above both addai and Rhodes. Not to mention a hall of famer named thurman. I think Mckeller is much better than dallas clark. But That also is argueable. If you asked bill polian in his heart of hearts which offense (both of which he built) he would take if he had to win one game ... does anyone on this board really think he'd even consider taking the colts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaLee83 Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Face it...during the Super Bowl years, our D sucked. For all the big names we had, that D gave up yardage by the hundred. They couldn't get the other team off the field...so it was a good thing we could score some points. Of course, when it came down to the big game... props to you man, I completely agree. Give me the superbowl years offense with the '02 defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 props to you man, I completely agree. Give me the superbowl years offense with the '02 defense. Wasn't the '02 defense as bad as this year's? As for the list, I don't really have a huge problem with it. There are some things I'd change, but re: the Patriots - the 03/04 teams were legit teams; while the '01 team was a fraud; which they explain pretty well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Face it...during the Super Bowl years, our D sucked. For all the big names we had, that D gave up yardage by the hundred. They couldn't get the other team off the field...so it was a good thing we could score some points. Of course, when it came down to the big game... Our 87 and 88 Ds were much better than our SB Ds. Too bad--its timing...-We were way undersized on the D line and too slow at safeties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Face it...during the Super Bowl years, our D sucked. For all the big names we had, that D gave up yardage by the hundred. They couldn't get the other team off the field...so it was a good thing we could score some points. Of course, when it came down to the big game... If we had a dominating run stuffing DT, Jeff Wright ends up a first ballot Hall of Famer- no questions asked. That guy had a better first step than John Randle. Too bad he had to be a 2-gap guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 If we had a dominating run stuffing DT, Jeff Wright ends up a first ballot Hall of Famer- no questions asked. That guy had a better first step than John Randle. Too bad he had to be a 2-gap guy too bad we played a 3-4 and Jeff Wright was THE NT. Walt Corey was the problem. He was a complete buffoon -and Marv did not deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 too bad we played a 3-4 and Jeff Wright was THE NT. Walt Corey was the problem. He was a complete buffoon -and Marv did not deal with it. Doggone swizzle stick! grrrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts