K-9 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 keep in mind though that strongside is the weakside and the weakside is the strongside in our scheme compared with all the others that I've heard. Not sure where you heard that but whoever suggested it to you doesn't know what they're talking about. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Not sure where you heard that but whoever suggested it to you doesn't know what they're talking about. GO BILLS!!! First I heard it described that way was by Cato June (who I assume has some credibility). He said that the Buffalo WILL is more like a SAM in a traditional 4-3. Since then I have seen other references, but they may all come back to Cato. Sorry no link. I will try to get one later if nobody else comes through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 First I heard it described that way was by Cato June (who I assume has some credibility). He said that the Buffalo WILL is more like a SAM in a traditional 4-3. Since then I have seen other references, but they may all come back to Cato. Sorry no link. I will try to get one later if nobody else comes through. I'd be interested in seeing whatever links you can provide. And while I don't doubt Cato's credibility, I will take issue with anyone that says that the OLB lined up on the strongside of the offense is the weakside LB. Strongside is dictated by the offense as you know. As for responsbilities of a SAM in ANY 4-3, that's a different matter entirely. Fact remains Ellison was our SLB last season and he's just not made for that position. He was more than adequate as our WLB his first two seasons though. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I think the Bills would love to have Brooks BUT its not a matter of is there no interest on the Bills part it is a matter of is Brooks interested in coming back and if he still wants to play what teams run a system he can be a fit for. And out of those teams that still run the Cover 2 how many have a need for a OLB, I also think that the Bills would be the best fit for Brooks for three reasons. 1- We still run the Tampa 2 and 2- We have a huge need for an outside linebacker 3- We are the only team with both the system and the need that has a decent chance of competing this year. If Brooks were to come back where else would he go? Tampa is changing systems and I just don't see any other teams that have a need for a OLB in the Tampa 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I'd be interested in seeing whatever links you can provide. And while I don't doubt Cato's credibility, I will take issue with anyone that says that the OLB lined up on the strongside of the offense is the weakside LB. Strongside is dictated by the offense as you know. As for responsbilities of a SAM in ANY 4-3, that's a different matter entirely. Fact remains Ellison was our SLB last season and he's just not made for that position. He was more than adequate as our WLB his first two seasons though. GO BILLS!!! I just did a quick search, and have come up with the following: http://www.billsdaily.com/news/archives/2009/mar1.shtml Like Cato June yesterday he said a lot of the terminology and scheme is the same as he is used to so the transition would be pretty easy. He was drafted as a sam linebacker but has played more mike and will linebacker. The Bills play their will linebacker in the sam position. It’s also important to note that in Buffalo, the traditional roles of “SAM” and “WILL” are reversed, as revealed by Cato June on his free agent trip. So, for all intents and purposes, Kawika is our SAM in the traditional sense, and we’re looking for a WILL, if you will. http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2009/3/19/...t-fit-nfl-draft (It's in the comment section, but is a comment from the author of the article) He (Brian Galliford) makes that assertion several times, in various articles. Here's one more: In Buffalo, Tinoisamoa would man the SAM linebacker role - a position which holds the responsibilities of a weak-side linebacker in a traditional 4-3 defense. Now, I thought I actually read Cato's quote, but can't find it quickly. Based on these two blogs (and other stuff if you care to Google) many mention Cato's quite, so I'm fairly certain he made it. The questions seem to be, "Is that true?" and "If it is true, what does it mean?". One poster tries to clarify the meaning of that assertion here: “To further that, Mitchell typically covers the gap between the OT and OG while the SAM linebacker usually handles the gap to the outside of the TE. So the SAM LB gets run at more often than the WILL does, but as far as the necessary size and strength are concerned, the roles are reversed.” http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2009/5/11/...-to-host-pisa-t Make of it what you sam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I just did a quick search, and have come up with the following: http://www.billsdaily.com/news/archives/2009/mar1.shtml http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2009/3/19/...t-fit-nfl-draft (It's in the comment section, but is a comment from the author of the article) He (Brian Galliford) makes that assertion several times, in various articles. Here's one more: Now, I thought I actually read Cato's quote, but can't find it quickly. Based on these two blogs (and other stuff if you care to Google) many mention Cato's quite, so I'm fairly certain he made it. The questions seem to be, "Is that true?" and "If it is true, what does it mean?". One poster tries to clarify the meaning of that assertion here: http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2009/5/11/...-to-host-pisa-t Make of it what you sam. I am Sam! Any reference to the great Seuss is OK in my book. Back to the matter at hand. My initial take on the matter is what I suspected. And I wish to thank the poster who clarified Mitchell's gap responsibilities. He's spot on. But the fact still remains that an LB lined up on the TE side is a SAM by simple definition. I can't recall an instant last season where Ellison and Mitchell flip-flopped. The fact that teams will tend to run more to the strongside (that term again) is no surprise and Ellison getting his ass handed to him when playing the run more often than not underscores he was playing out of position. In our scheme, he lacks the bulk for ANY of our LB positions it seems. But he did fine at Will his first two seasons. The question of size and responsibilities in a given scheme are, as I said earlier, a different matter. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I am Sam! Any reference to the great Seuss is OK in my book. Back to the matter at hand. My initial take on the matter is what I suspected. And I wish to thank the poster who clarified Mitchell's gap responsibilities. He's spot on. But the fact still remains that an LB lined up on the TE side is a SAM by simple definition. I can't recall an instant last season where Ellison and Mitchell flip-flopped. The fact that teams will tend to run more to the strongside (that term again) is no surprise and Ellison getting his ass handed to him when playing the run more often than not underscores he was playing out of position. In our scheme, he lacks the bulk for ANY of our LB positions it seems. But he did fine at Will his first two seasons. The question of size and responsibilities in a given scheme are, as I said earlier, a different matter. GO BILLS!!! Gotcha. I could have saved a lot of time in research. When people say the Bills flip the SAM and Will, they mean the responsibilities of the LBs, not where they line up. They are named for where they lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB Fan 4 LIFE Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 The answer to the Original Post is easy 1) Keith Ellison will be a pro-bowler this year; or 2) Our front office takes the short bus to work; or 3) Our team's buisiness plan places revenue savings over winning. cheap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 The answer to the Original Post is easy 1) Keith Ellison will be a pro-bowler this year; or 2) Our front office takes the short bus to work; or 3) Our team's buisiness plan places revenue savings over winning. cheap Yes...the Bills should spend money on a player who will be cut by the mid point of the season, or will end up being a backup by that point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB Fan 4 LIFE Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Yes...the Bills should spend money on a player who will be cut by the mid point of the season, or will end up being a backup by that point... Lol...a backup? You mean like Ellison? Just please tell me you think Ellison is better than Brooks so I can dismiss everything else you post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIE HARD 1967 Posted June 30, 2009 Author Share Posted June 30, 2009 Yes...the Bills should spend money on a player who will be cut by the mid point of the season, or will end up being a backup by that point... I don't believe that is true, I think he would play often and would also add depth if he doesn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I don't believe that is true, I think he would play often and would also add depth if he doesn't I hope NFL Network shows a replay of one of the Bucs last 4-5 Games from last year, then you can all see Brooks for yourself. I LOVE the guy he is a HOF player, but unless they hid an injury last year Which I doubt, he is done. Why do you think the Bucs cut him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIE HARD 1967 Posted June 30, 2009 Author Share Posted June 30, 2009 I hope NFL Network shows a replay of one of the Bucs last 4-5 Games from last year, then you can all see Brooks for yourself. I LOVE the guy he is a HOF player, but unless they hid an injury last year Which I doubt, he is done. Why do you think the Bucs cut him? They are going with a younger team http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...tml?eref=sircrc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 They are going with a younger team http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...tml?eref=sircrc It is true they are going with a younger team, BUT they didn't cut Rhonde Barber. If you read the article the answer is as I said he has lost it. You don't cut a HOF player that has ANYTHING left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 First I heard it described that way was by Cato June (who I assume has some credibility). He said that the Buffalo WILL is more like a SAM in a traditional 4-3. Since then I have seen other references, but they may all come back to Cato. Sorry no link. I will try to get one later if nobody else comes through. Yes, Cato is correct...this has been discussed numerous times by the Bills coaching staff in various interviews... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Steve Dumeg who knows Derrick Brooks very well talked about him on his show today on WDAE Tampa. He said so far no team has offered Derrick more than the Vet minimum & Derrick will not play for that. Derrick is still holding out hope the Bucs resign him but Steve does not think they will. He also said Kellen Winslow is HAPPY to be back in Fla, is asserting himself in the locker room & showing signs he will be a leader on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts