MM: Please keep Bannan at left guard

[seq004]

I've got the TD's on tape and he was just mowing over people at the goaline. I at least hope to see him in the red zone on running plays. He's not playing defense so why not? That is a weak spot on the line( LG.) He seems to make the difference in the red zone.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I agree. I've been underwhelmed/disappointed in Lawrence Smith at LG. Since Bannan isn't seeing much time (maybe time to elevate Anderson while were at it), might as well use him there. As a defensive player, he's got to have the nastiness!

[BillsNYC]

I like that MM is doing whatever it takes to win....bout time.

[nodnarb]

Are you people High, or just stupid?

 

You can move people around in individual plays that they've rehearsed and they know their responsibility for one or a few plays, but to play guard he'd have to know the entire offense and all the line calls.

 

That would take WEEKS for him to learn. What do you think training camp is for?

 

He's not a guard. If he was our starting guard, he'd get OWNED.

 

They used him in a specific situation to utilize his low leverage.

 

[MadBuffaloDisease]

Are you people High, or just stupid?

 

You can move people around in individual plays that they've rehearsed and they know their responsibility for one or a few plays, but to play guard he'd have to know the entire offense and all the line calls.

 

That would take WEEKS for him to learn. What do you think training camp is for?

 

He's not a guard. If he was our starting guard, he'd get OWNED.

 

They used him in a specific situation to utilize his low leverage.

 

97021[/snapback]

Yep, Bannan sucked in the redzone (which is when we were talking about using him mostly) against the best redzone defense in the NFL. Next time try following the context of the thread.

[nodnarb]

never said he sucked in the redzone. I'm sure they'll use him in certain situations to exploit specific matchups near the goal line.

 

But the title of this thread is 'keep bannan at left guard', which, if logically extrapolated, translates to "He should play left guard all the time". And this idea is laughable.

[bobblehead]

Next time try following the context of the thread.

97045[/snapback]

 

No, you both said keep Bannan at left guard. Can he even pass block?

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I was agreeing with seq who said he hopes to at least see him in the red zone, where I think Smith has been disappointing. Of course he doesn't know all the offensive plays! I'm not even sure he knows all the DEFENSIVE plays.

[Alaska Darin]

These experiments are just that. They will work until opposing teams are able to gameplan them. Arizona didn't adapt quickly and that's why they were successful.

 

If the BILLS continue to do exactly the same thing with Bannan, the results will be disasterous.

 

It takes years to teach an OLineman to play their position. Bannan would be "Ole" blocking all day long if he was put in there as a regular. He'd look like a screen door in a hurricane.

[Realist]

Once the Jests see Bannan on tape they're going to know which plays may be run. Using Bannan may already have run its course, unless he knows more than those few plays.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

Once the Jests see Bannan on tape they're going to know which plays may be run.  Using Bannan may already have run its course, unless he knows more than those few plays.

97120[/snapback]

I'm sure they'll bring him along slowly. And it's no different than bringing in 3 TE's or "heavy jumbo" packages near the goalline.

[DreamOnDan]

I bet he can learn more than those few plays. I'd like to see a little more of Bannan. I agree, he shouldn't start but he looks much better in run blocking than Smith. I say put him in there this week and pass on the goaline. That will definately throw the Jets off. Better yet just run.

[Alaska Darin]

I bet he can learn more than those few plays.  I'd like to see a little more of Bannan.  I agree, he shouldn't start but he looks much better in run blocking than Smith.  I say put him in there this week and pass on the goaline.  That will definately throw the Jets off.  Better yet just run.

97142[/snapback]

Smith has been fine in run blocking. His problem has been blocking in space and engaging at the 2nd level. He's simply not nifty enough to hit his target. I think that's Bannan's strength.

[John from Riverside]

My question to this is.....if this is working with Bannon....why not just bring up Jason Peters from the practice squad and use him in this capacity....

 

That way we have someone who can CATCH the ball to?

[seq004]

never said he sucked in the redzone. I'm sure they'll use him in certain situations to exploit specific matchups near the goal line.

 

But the title of this thread is 'keep bannan at left guard', which, if logically extrapolated, translates to "He should play left guard all the time". And this idea is laughable.

97053[/snapback]

Hey genius , I said "In the red zone" "at least on running plays" Some of you are pathetic. OMG, we could NEVER put in a defensive player or a player who plays a different position at the O-line. I bet Bears fans were saying the same thing about the Perry in 1985 but he palyed RB many times in 1985 and you know what oppenents could not stop him simply because they were over matched. A player does not have to go thru an entire training camp to learn a couple of plays on offense. What I meant was keep him in their in their at least in red zone running plays. So, BFD if the Jets see it, the question is can they stop it? I think Jason Peters can do what Bannan is doing and he is a tight end. Ever play football? You don't have to be a rocket scientist. Wow "extrapolated" that's a big word.

[CarolinaBill99]

Check him out now in goal-line situations but there could be a switch next year with an off-season to learn. It does not take "years" to learn guard for every player but a complete offseason with camp might be possible. He does have athletic potential and is not being used on defense very much.

[HarkinBanks]

I had this same conversation with a college football coach today. Bottom line, he said if Bannan is a good enough athlete, the switch would not really be all that hard. Did not put into context how long in would take (i.e. weeks vs. an entire training camp). Just said it was very possible if he was a good enough athlete.

[Lori]

A question, since I don't have a tape to review yet. From what I saw at the game, Bannan pulled and the Bills ran to the right every time he was on the field. Is this correct?

[seq004]

A question, since I don't have a tape to review yet. From what I saw at the game, Bannan pulled and the Bills ran to the right every time he was on the field. Is this correct?

97574[/snapback]

Yes Lori you are absolutely correct. Everytime he came in they ran the trap to the right and everytime it worked to some degree. When I went back and looked at the tape again I did notice that their was a play or two that was NOT in a red zone situation but most of it was. It looked like the Cards new it was coming again but good not stop it. They were all at left guard and they were all running plays and he steam rolled players and put them on their backs. I think we will see more of this as the season goes on because of the desperate need for upgrading the LG position.

[Lori]

Thanks, seq. Wasn't sure if I had caught all the plays he ran on offense, but I knew he was pulling right every time I saw him.

 

(Although I definitely remember the play with the false start on Euhus - saw Smith going off the field, wondered aloud if he was dinged, looked at the huddle to see who had replaced him, saw #97, immediately turned to my stepdad and said "what the...... they've got BANNAN in at left guard?!?")

[nodnarb]

this has really become amusing. if you meant only in occasional goal line run plays when the matchups are right, then i agree with you. i thought you were suggesting that bannan should be our LG. If I'm in error, my mistake. And extrapolate *shouldn't* be a "big word".

[34-78-83]

I actually called in to the MM show last night and asked Mike if, going forward, he would be using a counter action play or two to go along with the ones where they used Bannan pulling to the right. He said that on one occasion in the game, they actually did do that already. I can't remember if he said it was a pass or simply a run to the left but he did confirm that there was one play where Bannan was in and did not pull to the right.

[Ray]

One goal line block does not make a good O lineman. As I've continued to say, our OL is not that bad at all. We have RBs that have rushed well and a QB that has always been prone to the sack. In New England they thought their O-lines were terrible until they replaced one player and all of a sudden the awful O-line was a bunch of Super Bowl champs the same season.

[Lori]

One goal line block does not make a good O lineman.  As I've continued to say, our OL is not that bad at all.  We have RBs that have rushed well and a QB that has always been prone to the sack.  In New England they thought their O-lines were terrible until they replaced one player and all of a sudden the awful O-line was a bunch of Super Bowl champs the same season.

97604[/snapback]

Interestingly enough, the Bills replaced one player on offense for the Cardinals game and scored 4 offensive TDs without giving up a sack or a turnover.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I think you have to be pleased with how effective the redzone offense was with Bannan and particularly because there does seem to be less of a role for Bannan in our DT rotation (Edwards seems to have found his game and though calls for him to start are a bit over the top and calls to move him to DE seem pretty stupid he has clearly pused Bannab to the #4 DT slot. Anderson will be given every chance to beat him out this off-season so the only way I see for Bannan to stick is for us to lose either Phat Pat or Adams or for him to provide other benefits).

 

However, I think nodnarb is right that a reasonable expectation or hope for Bannan at OG is not the idea that he is going to become our starter or that he will be useful at OG beyond a few situations.

 

I think we will and we should make noises about him playing LG in the redzone and perhaps at other times simply because it will waste opposing defenses time trying to figure how how to exploit him. I would use him if I could as a position player a few times, but only as a fake to occupy the minds of opponents.

 

Leonard Smith has not been adequate as a starting LG, but he has made phenomenal progress even though the judgment of him as not being good enough (yet) is true. He has moved from the practice squad of another team as a UDFA to being a starter in a incredibly short amount of time.

 

He merits working with to see how far he can go. However, my sense is that once opponents get some film on Bannan at LG his production will drop unless he works hard and full time at guard play and develops some additional skills and tricks.

 

In the end, the thought that he should be used as a regular in the redzone at LG and certainly as a regular player at LG actually means that you are expressing more confidence than would seem to be warranted by his play in Tim Anderson as our # 4 DT.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

In New England they thought their O-lines were terrible until they replaced one player and all of a sudden the awful O-line was a bunch of Super Bowl champs the same season.

97604[/snapback]

You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Compared to the previous season, the Pats had 3 new fulltime starters on their O-line (Compton, Robinson-Randall, and Light) in 2001. And Light, one of the best LT's in the game, made his first start in the 2nd game against the Jets. Another thing to note is that Antowain didn't get more than 10-11 carries in either of Bledsoe's starts in 2001, and didn't run too well with averages in the 2's (but that's Bledsoe's fault, right?). Last of all, in those 2 games of 2001, Bledsoe was sacked 5 times, which was less per game than Brady was sacked that season (2.5 versus 2.9). So obviously there were other factors, and I already mentioned Brady's need for a top-6 scoring defense.

[seq004]

this has really become amusing. if you meant only in occasional goal line run plays when the matchups are right, then i agree with you. i thought you were suggesting that bannan should be our LG. If I'm in error, my mistake. And extrapolate *shouldn't* be a "big word".

97599[/snapback]

No harm, no foul. It would not surprise me to see him back in that spot for some plays in the Jets game. They should use him more if it continues to work on the trap play to the right. He looks a lot better than our regular LT. He flattened everyone he hit. Our guards and tackles are to dam slow and I think that has something to do with so many sacks. I would think that's the reason their using him.