Guest Guest_eyedog_* Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 BuffaloBob, I can't even read your posts they are so stupid and uninformed. I scanned it and found it again, it's spelled McKinnie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 and scoffs at the notion that RT is as hard to play as LT, a ridiculous assertion considering the LTs have more responsibilities, are paid more, are drafted higher, and tend to be more agile and better athletes. Now, go back to slamming other posters. 109591[/snapback] Oh please Bill, not you too! This is a high school argument. He has more responsibilites? Do left tackles have to block two guys instead of one? His job is harder because he's paid more, because he's drafted higher? Because he's a better athelete?? I thought you were smarter than this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 BuffaloBob, I can't even read your posts they are so stupid and uninformed. I scanned it and found it again, it's spelled McKinnie. 109602[/snapback] When you cannot reason logically, the next best thing is to call it stupid and claim you can't read it. Good for you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 ROTFLMAO! Exactly how does it make your job harder because the guy you are blocking for can't see you do the job?? Bingo Bob. What part of having his blindside don't you understand ? That is why it's a tougher job and the better tackles play the left side. You see Boob, and that's not a misprint, you answered your own question. And wtf was that blabber about a salesman ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 First of all, MW did not"handle" Ellis in the first jest game. On at least one of the sacks by Abraham, Ellis was right there and would have hit Drew even if Abraham was not in the play. Also, this poster is abviously anything but a fool. He is an articulate Bills fan with an opinion that seems to differ from yours. He listed poorly played games by Big Mike, and scoffs at the notion that RT is as hard to play as LT, a ridiculous assertion considering the LTs have more responsibilities, are paid more, are drafted higher, and tend to be more agile and better athletes. Now, go back to slamming other posters. 109591[/snapback] Still the fact remains that there is never any evidence given. I don't slam posters unless I see them brashley coming out with statements (not necessarily opinions mind you) with no backing, something you have also done from time to time. I am not concerned with opinions. I try to stay involved with facts only. Facts are not disputable by opinion. LT's do not have more responsibilities than Rt's. Those days are long over. That is a fact. As stated by others here, they are usually the "better" player because they protect the blind side of the right handed QB. And btw, when a tackle plays against an upper level DE (ie Ellis), he is not required to completely shut him out (ie. 0 tackles, 0 pressures) in order to be considered having a good game against him (ie. "handled him") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Just my 2 cents. I dont think its fair to compare McKinnie and Williams. One OT is blocking for the least mobile QB in the NFL, and the other is Blocking for a top 3 QB when it comes to Mobility. Another thing, If we are talking about the most important position on the OL, I think the OG's and C are more important to a QB like Bledsoe who has trouble moving. Another thing, McKinnie isnt even better than Mike Williams. The guy gets beat all the time. Most of the time Cullpepper escapes the rush. Dont go by Madden ratings or what you read in the paper. If anyone watches McKinnie and says he is better really doesnt know football. Another thing, The Vikings didnt even want McKinnie. They felt, like most GM's, that Williams was the best OT in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Great thread! I'm one of the biggest MW bashers, but I have to admit he has shown a lot of progress throughout this year, and it looks like he is finally starting to come around. I give JMac 100% of the credit for this, GOD BLESS JIM McNALLY! Though Drew had a nice game this week, I think MW will look a lot better once JP takes over & he has a more mobile QB to protect. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK MW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Oh please Bill, not you too! This is a high school argument. He has more responsibilites? Do left tackles have to block two guys instead of one? His job is harder because he's paid more, because he's drafted higher? Because he's a better athelete?? I thought you were smarter than this! 109605[/snapback] Bob, who are the best OTs you ever saw? Please be honest. Munoz, Pace, Shell, Ogden, Jones, etc? All LTs, right? I will give you Erik Williams and Bob Brown as great RTs, but even they were bruisers more so than being agile, which is probably why Dallas stuck with Tunei at LT. The responsibilities are similar, but Drew was able to see the rushers speeding unobstructed by MW. Not so at LT, so protection becomes more vital from the blindside. He has to hold the defender off for a longer time, no? If you ever should have time, please review the tapes of Kurt Warner in his superbowl wins. He had zero fear of a blindside rush. Nada! He was able to see all of the danger and stand in the pocket forever, waiting for his speedy receivers to get open. THIS is why you put the best tackle to the left. Perhaps much of this discussion is based on semantics, I dont know, but if MW was good enough to play LT, he would be doing so. Not only that, Jennings looked better at RT than he did at LT, wouldn't you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Still the fact remains that there is never any evidence given. I don't slam posters unless I see them brashley coming out with statements (not necessarily opinions mind you) with no backing, something you have also done from time to time. I am not concerned with opinions. I try to stay involved with facts only. Facts are not disputable by opinion. LT's do not have more responsibilities than Rt's. Those days are long over. That is a fact. As stated by others here, they are usually the "better" player because they protect the blind side of the right handed QB. And btw, when a tackle plays against an upper level DE (ie Ellis), he is not required to completely shut him out (ie. 0 tackles, 0 pressures) in order to be considered having a good game against him (ie. "handled him") 109627[/snapback] Bro, I am not looking to have a nasty, stupid battle with you, but you do the EXACT same thing that you chastize others for. >>>LT's do not have more responsibilities than Rt's. Those days are long over. That is a fact.<<< Why is that a fact? Because YOU say so? If it becomes necessary, based on position, to hold a block longer, certainly this can be construed to mean "more responsibility." The truth is, few of us are total experts. Most of us, because we are passionate fanatics, know more than average fans, but we are on a football message board, not a war room on draft day. On thing that I will say is that if there truly are 'experts" on TBD, you insulted one of them. Badolbilz is a walking football encyclopedia who goes as far as to watch college film and more. Have a beer with him at RWS and see for yourself. He is also a good guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Great thread! I'm one of the biggest MW bashers, but I have to admit he has shown a lot of progress throughout this year, and it looks like he is finally starting to come around. I give JMac 100% of the credit for this, GOD BLESS JIM McNALLY! Though Drew had a nice game this week, I think MW will look a lot better once JP takes over & he has a more mobile QB to protect. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK MW! 109645[/snapback] Chris Villareal plays a significant roll as well. Not to dismiss JM's contribution... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Chris Villareal plays a significant roll as well. Not to dismiss JM's contribution... 109692[/snapback] That is a bigger change than anything in my book. I recall last year, the times that Big Mike really looked bad, and there were many, it always seemed to be because there were several guys at the line, or blitzing and Pucillo was doing nothing, and Big Mike would end up being killed because he couldn't decide between two guys which one to block, or he would be leaning left. Yes, sometimes speed rushers beat him but they beat every tackle sometimes. When he really looked bad I thought it was because Pucillo was just terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 That is a bigger change than anything in my book. I recall last year, the times that Big Mike really looked bad, and there were many, it always seemed to be because there were several guys at the line, or blitzing and Pucillo was doing nothing, and Big Mike would end up being killed because he could decide between two guys which one to block, or he would be leaning left. Yes, sometimes speed rushers beat him but they beat every tackle sometimes. When he really looked bad I thought it was because Pucillo was just terrible. 109705[/snapback] Good points, but there were also some plays on which MW made Pucillo look bad. They were both wretched. Chris V is a huge upgrade, but I still give JMac the lion's share of the credit, if not quite 100% as I said above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Bro, I am not looking to have a nasty, stupid battle with you, but you do the EXACT same thing that you chastize others for. >>>LT's do not have more responsibilities than Rt's. Those days are long over. That is a fact.<<< Why is that a fact? Because YOU say so? If it becomes necessary, based on position, to hold a block longer, certainly this can be construed to mean "more responsibility." The truth is, few of us are total experts. Most of us, because we are passionate fanatics, know more than average fans, but we are on a football message board, not a war room on draft day. On thing that I will say is that if there truly are 'experts" on TBD, you insulted one of them. Badolbilz is a walking football encyclopedia who goes as far as to watch college film and more. Have a beer with him at RWS and see for yourself. He is also a good guy. 109688[/snapback] I did not personally attack BADOL, thankyou. I'm sure he is a great guy. I also did not make the statements initially and thus had no need to defend them with facts. Please tell me how in the world a LT has to hold a block for longer than a RT? Are we still running strictly pro sets where the strong side is always on the right in the NFL today ? no. I will never claim to be a TOTAL expert, but when I come out with brash statements about a guy sucking , I'm surely going to back them up with SOME sort of analysis. Especially if I'm going to go on and on with it over a period of months trying to beat a dead horse into a pile of mush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Bob, who are the best OTs you ever saw? Please be honest. Munoz, Pace, Shell, Ogden, Jones, etc? All LTs, right? I will give you Erik Williams and Bob Brown as great RTs, but even they were bruisers more so than being agile, which is probably why Dallas stuck with Tunei at LT. The responsibilities are similar, but Drew was able to see the rushers speeding unobstructed by MW. Not so at LT, so protection becomes more vital from the blindside. He has to hold the defender off for a longer time, no? If you ever should have time, please review the tapes of Kurt Warner in his superbowl wins. He had zero fear of a blindside rush. Nada! He was able to see all of the danger and stand in the pocket forever, waiting for his speedy receivers to get open. THIS is why you put the best tackle to the left. Perhaps much of this discussion is based on semantics, I dont know, but if MW was good enough to play LT, he would be doing so. Not only that, Jennings looked better at RT than he did at LT, wouldn't you agree? 109651[/snapback] Bill, the fact that the best tackles were left tackles historically does nothing to change the fact that they were merely put on the left side because, all things being equal, you put the better guy on the blind side because its the blind side, not because it's harder to play. The fact that protecting the blind side of a QB is more important does not in itself make it a harder postion to play! Moreover, when it comes to a QB like Bledsoe, seeing the right side rush before feeling the left side rush hardly matters, because he really can't escape any of it! There may have been a time when strategically, the best pass rushers were put on the blind side because of the notion that it is the weaker side to exploit, but those days are passed. There is nothing more difficult about playing the left vs, the right side. And as for Mike not playing the left side as evidence that he cannot is unavailing. He played the right side at Texas because his QB was left-handed. So he protected the blind side in college. However, because that became his natural position, he has remained there. I do not recall a single Bills coach saying that they would have liked Mike to move over to the left side but we don't think he can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 ROTFLMAO! Exactly how does it make your job harder because the guy you are blocking for can't see you do the job?? Bingo Bob. What part of having his blindside don't you understand ? That is why it's a tougher job and the better tackles play the left side. You see Boob, and that's not a misprint, you answered your own question. And wtf was that blabber about a salesman ? 109624[/snapback] God, you really are as dense as I think you are! Just because a job is more important strategically does not make it harder to perform. But sadly, I doubt this will ever be something you will be able to grasp. And as far the sales analogy, my bad! I should have never assumed that you would be capable of analogical reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_eyedog_* Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 It's harder to perfrom because the qb can't see the pressure coming, thus the need to sustain their block longer. Jesus Christopher, you've even answered it yourself in one of your half-assed explanations and you still don't realize it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risin Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 I don't mean to interrupt a great debate, but there is one thing I want to add. I can see both sides of the argument, and have no real opinion on which is tougher to play. Traditionally, the right side of the formation, is by default, considered the strong side. (ie: TE will line up there more times then not.) That in itself will cause the LT to be on an island more often. (ie: Max protect situations, etc.) Also, typically the D's best pass rusher lines up on the QB's blind side, if that's the case, it would logically make the LT's job more difficult then the RT's job. I'm not an expert, just someone who is a student of the game. Please continue, this is a good debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Traditionally, the right side of the formation, is by default, considered the strong side. (ie: TE will line up there more times then not.) That in itself will cause the LT to be on an island more often. (ie: Max protect situations, etc.) Also, typically the D's best pass rusher lines up on the QB's blind side, if that's the case, it would logically make the LT's job more difficult then the RT's job. 109868[/snapback] Agree 100%, & that's why LT is more important than RT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Now, I really hate to bring stats into a thread like this, because it really does muddle up the ability of people like eyedog to simply make statements like, "Oh, I remember he was abused by this guy, and he sucked against that guy" sort of posts. But hey, I'm the one who is so stupid and uniformed. LOL! So, reviewing the box scores of every game, it turns out that worst case, assuming that all sacks given up to a guy playing the position opposite Mike were his sacks and not some foul up by one of his teammates who failed to pick up that man because they are zone blocking or because it was actually Price in there instead of him (I believe Price relieved Mike in at least one game in which Price gave up a sack), or that Drew was holding the ball too long etc. Big Mike has given up a grand total of 5 sacks. OH MY GOD, THE MAN SUCKS!!! He's a bust! He's still not earning his money. He still has a long way to go........BLAH BLAH! He gave up zero sacks against Jax (Jennings gave up the only sack in that game) zero sacks TWICE against the Jets (Jennings/Price gave up 4 on the left side in the first game) and zero sacks against the Cards. He gave up two against Oakland, 1 against the Pats and 2 against Suggs in Baltimore. Clearly, he does struggle more against fast OLBs playing a 3-4 and rushing from space. But even if he gives up the same number in the second half, he will have improved hugely over the 19 he gave up last season. And no, I don't care about the one time when his guy would have sacked Drew if it hadn't been for the fact that Jennings' man got to him first! Those are irrelevant, just like where he would have given up the sack if Drew hadn't thrown the ball sooner. Mike has improved sigificantly. I don't know how much that has to do with the running game going better, with the simpler offense and blockig schemes, or McNally. But that is all just details. Sorry for introducing a little reality to this thread. Now eyedog can go back to telling us how he stunk the place up for most of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 He gave up zero sacks against Jax (Jennings gave up the only sack in that game)109879[/snapback] No, I remember MW gave up the sack to Spicer who was playing LDE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts