PeteBills4ever Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 I would assume that Byrd is a lock to keep starting at SS, do they sit Wilson and put Whitner at FS to start along Byrd, or Scott gets the nod? As much as I hate sitting Wilson who's been playing great, I would go with Byrd at SS and Whitner at FS. Would like to know who would you start at FS and SS with Scott and Whitner healthy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toledo Bill Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 I would assume that Byrd is a lock to keep starting at SS, do they sit Wilson and put Whitner at FS to start along Byrd, or Scott gets the nod? As much as I hate sitting Wilson who's been playing great, I would go with Byrd at SS and Whitner at FS. Would like to know who would you start at FS and SS with Scott and Whitner healthy? Byrd and Wilson. I even prefer Scott to Whitner. At this point Byrd is a no brainer. Wilson is a great competitor that plays well and fires up the troops. Let's forget Whitners draft position and I think he should be on the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 At this point Byrd is a no brainer. You mean because we're going to get to play Delhomme, Anderson, and Sanchise every three games? One can only hope there are 3 equally pitiful performances in the future because that'll continue to cover the fact that there are receivers running wide open all over the secondary and that the safeties everyone is so enamored with are FAR away from their responsibilities when the ball arrives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloRebound Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 I would assume that Byrd is a lock to keep starting at SS, do they sit Wilson and put Whitner at FS to start along Byrd, or Scott gets the nod? As much as I hate sitting Wilson who's been playing great, I would go with Byrd at SS and Whitner at FS. Would like to know who would you start at FS and SS with Scott and Whitner healthy? Might as well go with 6 DB's on the field since our OLB's are not much bigger, but much slower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonInBuffalo Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Byrd stays at FS. He's simply playing too well to keep off the field. Whitner moves to SS. Wilson has looked good primarily because they were playing such inept offenses. Scott, probably the best S against the run, gets on the field in a variety of packages: - in the goal line package, probably Byrd comes out. Range is of limited use with such a short field. - as another poster mentioned in a different thread, they used a nickel package with Bryd at FS, with Whitner and Scott lined up about 5 yards off the LOS in the New Orleans game. Essentially any time the offensive personnel and/or the down & distance give them the opportunity, they'll put Scott on the field and take out one of the LBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toledo Bill Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 You mean because we're going to get to play Delhomme, Anderson, and Sanchise every three games? One can only hope there are 3 equally pitiful performances in the future because that'll continue to cover the fact that there are receivers running wide open all over the secondary and that the safeties everyone is so enamored with are FAR away from their responsibilities when the ball arrives. I have always been impressed with Wilson's play. I have also been impressed with Byrd's hustle and hitting (the interceptions help). Yep, when we play a quality quarterback they may be greatly exposed... I hope not. As a casual fan I am impressed with both Byrd and Wilson and not impressed with Whitner. Your point is well taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 What a fun problem to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berndogg Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Byrd has earned a spot, no question about it. When Whitner and Scott come back I think George wilson goes to the bench. While Wilson does get to the ball on passing plays and is pretty good in coverage, he is a piss poor tackler and doesn't provide much support in the run. I say Scott should take over the other safety position because he is the best safety on the team when it comes to run defense. I understand this shouldn't be the most important attribute for a starting safety, but with how soft our front seven is, they need some support from the secondary against the run and scott is the best one to provide it. Whitner being out of position or taking bad angles on running plays has cost the team too many times throughout is career. I know it's strange to have a captain and a top 10 pick on the bench, but right now I think scott an byrd are the best options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 It's not a big debate. Byrd and Whitner will start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 You mean because we're going to get to play Delhomme, Anderson, and Sanchise every three games? One can only hope there are 3 equally pitiful performances in the future because that'll continue to cover the fact that there are receivers running wide open all over the secondary and that the safeties everyone is so enamored with are FAR away from their responsibilities when the ball arrives. So you're suggesting it's too soon to put Byrd up on the Wall at OBD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I wonder if Bryan Scott could start at OLB in place of Ellison? Scott is 6'1" and 220 lb, which makes him huge by our current LB standards. That would allow us to move Whitner back to SS and keep Byrd at FS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No QB - No Bueno Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 You mean because we're going to get to play Delhomme, Anderson, and Sanchise every three games? One can only hope there are 3 equally pitiful performances in the future because that'll continue to cover the fact that there are receivers running wide open all over the secondary and that the safeties everyone is so enamored with are FAR away from their responsibilities when the ball arrives. Byrd's got a lot of learning to do, but I'd rather have him on the field getting experience. He's made some bad plays in run support, still I doubt either Whitner or Scott come up with the the same picks no matter how bad the qbing has been. Will he grab two a game? Doubtful. But even considering the horribly thrown balls he's snagged, Byrd has demonstrated excellent awareness and h/e on the two tipped knucklers. I don't know if the majority of dbs make those catches. He's not well rounded yet, but he seems to a have a knack for being near the ball. Face it - without those turnovers and shortened field, there's no way in hell the Bills offense scores enough to win the last two. I'm not going rehash the Whitner debate. Solid player, sure. Hasn't displayed the ranginess or awareness on the ball at free imo, and though he can play physical, is too small at strong (especially when covering TE's). Plus, he's been injured for stretches the past couple of years. I wonder if it is an anomaly, or he simply can't hold up to the level of physicality he tries to exert. Scott is basically a linebacker at strong with all the benefits and liabilities that brings (Louis Oliver anyone?), and Wilson's best attributes are that he's smart and a gamer. The kid has to stay in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts