Simon Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Are you suggesting the team should pick guys who don't fit what the current philosophy With the high turnover rate in the modern NFL, I think it's unforgivably self-defeating to acquire personell who only fit one particular style of play. I want my team picking the best players regardless of philosophy or skill set and my coaches designing schemes that best fit the available talent. The Bills seem to be stuck in a vicious cycle of turning everything over every few years when a new stuckinhisways coach is hired every few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 With the high turnover rate in the modern NFL, I think it's unforgivably self-defeating to acquire personell who only fit one particular style of play. I want my team picking the best players regardless of philosophy or skill set and my coaches designing schemes that best fit the available talent.The Bills seem to be stuck in a vicious cycle of turning everything over every few years when a new stuckinhisways coach is hired every few years. You certainly wouldn't consider picking a player you feel CAN'T excel in your system, would you? I agree the FO should pick players with skills that can translate to multiple philosophies. But if you pick guys that don't fit what you plan to do this year, you help guarantee this year's failure. I never suggested anyone acquire players that only fit one particular style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthICE Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 With the high turnover rate in the modern NFL, I think it's unforgivably self-defeating to acquire personell who only fit one particular style of play. I want my team picking the best players regardless of philosophy or skill set and my coaches designing schemes that best fit the available talent.The Bills seem to be stuck in a vicious cycle of turning everything over every few years when a new stuckinhisways coach is hired every few years. Before free agency teams had a philosophy on how they did things. They ran an offense and drafted players for that offense, same on Defense. I agree completely the turnover is just too great these days to do that. I do feel that Guards and DT's need to be BIG. That is how you push both pockets, with size and power. We are in trouble on Defense in my opinion because when Marv came back he forced the Tampa 2 on us and we have drafted and signed free agents for that defense. The thing is, in 2001 when Jauron actually had a winning season and was coach of the year, his DL was HUGE! http://www.pro-football-reference.com/team...2001_roster.htm But Marv wanted the lighter linemen even though just a few years back, we had a top ranked D with two big DT's In all I agree, you guys can't draft specifically for a system any longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 With the high turnover rate in the modern NFL, I think it's unforgivably self-defeating to acquire personell who only fit one particular style of play. I want my team picking the best players regardless of philosophy or skill set and my coaches designing schemes that best fit the available talent.The Bills seem to be stuck in a vicious cycle of turning everything over every few years when a new stuckinhisways coach is hired every few years. Absolutely. Chances are if you pick good football players, well, they'll play good football for you. Regardless of philosophy or scheme. It's always going to be a players' league. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Ok so what happens when Jauron and company are fired? What if the next HC/OC want Big linemen to put a hat on a hat and pound the ball with marshawn? Bad planning with a HC on the hot seat So Jauron and co. are supposed to draft players for the next HC/OC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthICE Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 So Jauron and co. are supposed to draft players for the next HC/OC? No the Front office shouldn't have retained him in the first place nor anyone but April on the staff. But it's all moot point now. I guess we need our next HC and OC to want a light, more mobile OL or we are going to be out of luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartacus Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 No the Front office shouldn't have retained him in the first place nor anyone but April on the staff. But it's all moot point now. I guess we need our next HC and OC to want a light, more mobile OL or we are going to be out of luck. now only if the rest of the league would replace their NFL caliber DLs with undersized guys, then our OL will be worth something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthICE Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 now only if the rest of the league would replace their NFL caliber DLs with undersized guys, then our OL will be worth something Exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 The Bills drafted Levitre a few picks before the Vikes took huge Phil Loadholt. Loadholt is a "load", 6'8 335 lbs. He's already starting at RT today against the Browns for the Vikings. Watching this kid play pretty well today, I'm confused as to why the Bills took a smaller RT in Levitre, and went to the trouble of converting him into their starting guard, when Loadholt was available for them to draft. Brad Butler had just finished playing a pretty good season at guard, so he could have stayed there with a year experience under his belt, while obviously, Loadholt would be the Bills' starting RT going into tomorrow night. Instead, OL coach Kugler had to help Levitre learn the guard position coming from playing tackle, and Butler had to learn the tackle position coming from guard. I would would have preferred Loadholt or Sidbury over Bryd - Hope Bryd is the next Ed Reed - otherwise I'm gonna be critical of the pick for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 - I was on board with the Peters trade - I was on board with the drafting of Wood AND Levitre - I got completely nervous when we played Langston Walker at LT all offseason....then cut him with a week to go before the opening game. I just think this puts too much pressure on D. Bell who we need to put in a position to succeed rather then fail.....if he plays badly on Monday people here are going to tear him apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 The Bills drafted Levitre a few picks before the Vikes took huge Phil Loadholt. Loadholt is a "load", 6'8 335 lbs. He's already starting at RT today against the Browns for the Vikings. Watching this kid play pretty well today, I'm confused as to why the Bills took a smaller RT in Levitre, and went to the trouble of converting him into their starting guard, when Loadholt was available for them to draft. Brad Butler had just finished playing a pretty good season at guard, so he could have stayed there with a year experience under his belt, while obviously, Loadholt would be the Bills' starting RT going into tomorrow night. Instead, OL coach Kugler had to help Levitre learn the guard position coming from playing tackle, and Butler had to learn the tackle position coming from guard. We could have taken him at 42 instead of yet another DB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Loadholt instead of Levitre was where I was leaning, but it's WAY too early to tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Ok so what happens when Jauron and company are fired? What if the next HC/OC want Big linemen to put a hat on a hat and pound the ball with marshawn? Bad planning with a HC on the hot seat The teams over the past few years that have had the best running games(Denver, Atlanta, Green Bay, etc) have all featured a lot of zone blocking runs which call for quicker, more agile lineman instead of big, slow OL that can't move well... Those type of players are becoming less successful in today's NFL... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transient Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 No the Front office shouldn't have retained him in the first place nor anyone but April on the staff. But it's all moot point now. I guess we need our next HC and OC to want a light, more mobile OL or we are going to be out of luck. Hopefully our next staff will be about maximizing the potential of the players around them instead of a systems coach (which would guarantee another year or two of rebuilding to get the roster to fit their needs.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilsner Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Right or wrong Loadholt probably doesn't fit what the Bills think they are trying to do, whatever the hell that is. For the record though, I never liked Butler at G. He never got any push no matter what stupid "they had the highest rush average behind him" argument anyone wants to bring up and although Levitre hasn't shown he's any better in this area, he already has shown he's more athletic getting to the 2nd level and will only get better. I think the interior has a good future ahead of it but yeah, I'd like to see another tackle brought in as well. A new right tackle who is agile and can run. So we can start running the counter trey again lol I can only wish. Anyway, Denver has done fairly well in the past with quick agile o-linemen. Perhaps we're going that route. We definitely need linemen with agility, speed, and Stamina to stay with a faced paced high octane hurry up offense. (Well I hope that's the kind of offense we'll see on the field) Time will tell. Go Bills!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 The Bills drafted Levitre a few picks before the Vikes took huge Phil Loadholt. Loadholt is a "load", 6'8 335 lbs. He's already starting at RT today against the Browns for the Vikings. Watching this kid play pretty well today, I'm confused as to why the Bills took a smaller RT in Levitre, and went to the trouble of converting him into their starting guard, when Loadholt was available for them to draft. Brad Butler had just finished playing a pretty good season at guard, so he could have stayed there with a year experience under his belt, while obviously, Loadholt would be the Bills' starting RT going into tomorrow night. Instead, OL coach Kugler had to help Levitre learn the guard position coming from playing tackle, and Butler had to learn the tackle position coming from guard. The Bills didn't need an RT, they needed an LT. That's why they didn't take Loadholt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VJ91 Posted September 14, 2009 Author Share Posted September 14, 2009 Didn't we just cut a huge guy? What game were you watching, the Vikes had line problems all game and Loadholt was the weak link. The Vikes had line problems all game?? That's funny, I thought I watched the Vikes beat the Browns 34-20: Favre: 14/21; 110 Yards 1 TD 95.3 rating (He was sacked 4 times, I'll give you that, but the guy's 40 years old!) Peterson: 25 Carries for 180 Yds 7.2 Yds/Carry 3 TD's. (Any "weak links" out of those numbers?) Vikings Total Yards : 310. So, what game were you watching? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts