Hello. Here's a layman's outlook for our offensive line (in the Xmas/offseason spirit):

by Kumario! on Dec 19, 2009 12:16 AM EST

(I'm no RonFromNM here. I certainly can't question the stats and efficiency ratings of Demetrius Bell. All I can say is what warrants concern from what I've seen. Just a student of the game, former player, current Michigan team manager, that has watched each Bills snap once or twice this season.)

Abstract: While many consider our current line to have some upside, the majority of the players we have used are fringe NFL players and have not displayed any sort of "flash" beyond flashes of inconsistency. Shown below are the reviewal of those who played in 2009, outlook to 2010 concerning each of 2009's players, the implications of 2010 outlook, recommendations and conclusion made for optimal improvement based on the implications. A progressive (as opposed to conservative) approach is taken.

In my mind,

Hang has ranged between serviceable (read: Trey Teague) to slightly above serviceable. I believe this will be a constant.
Levitre is the only player on the line who has shown the capability to be brilliant at his position. Wood showed this to a limited degree but his leg has complicated his potential for an excellent 2010 campaign.
Scott joins Kiwi Mitchell as the two players that should never be in the starting lineup again.
Bell's only saving grace has been the play of Scott, he's merely been the lesser of two evils (plus he's got the injury excuse as well).
Butler's play has been solid, but with his tendency for injury (documented since the draft), he's been even less useful than Scott (and that's saying a lot).
Jury is out on Meredith. Certainly his breakdowns are the most justified because of his rawness and I've actually liked what I've seen. I don't know if he can or should start 2010 but he's a good developmental player that should stick around after the axe falls.
You could do worse (and slightly better) than Chambers in the reserve tackle spot. A worthy 1st or 2nd lineman off the bench as a stopgap. Miles ahead of McKinney.
Simmons came in as a stopgap player and has fulfilled his role with mediocre play in a situation designed for failure. Should not be a starter in 2010.
Jury obviously out on Incog (excited to see him play). Could be around in 2010 competing for a starting spot if he keeps his head on.

In recap, I divide all the relevant Oliners into three categories:
Shown to be part of the answer
I feel players Levitre, Hangartner, and Chambers (reserve) are the players we have now that we can win with.

Jury is out OR have NOT shown that they are NOT part of the answer
The jury is out on Wood, Incog, Meredith. Wood belongs in the higher category if he can return and stay at full health. These are players who have not shown failure or have not shown culpable failure and may belong in the above or below categorization- we just don't know.

Have shown culpable failure and should not be counted on (with potential replacements to be sought out)
Counting on players such as Scott, Bell, Butler, McKinney, Simmons in any role incurs a great deal of risk as they have shown sufficient inadequacy in their roles. In an ideal world, these players will not be considered "the answer" in 2010 and replacements will be attained.
Note: I know there are a lot of Bell fans out there who'll put him in the "jury is out category" but in my mind he has shown enough to make me believe he'll never be in the top half of LTs in terms of consistency. He's got the talent, but like Scott, just has a strong tendency for mental breakdowns.

IMPLICATIONS OF CATEGORIZATION:
- Between 4 players Hantgartner, Wood, Levitre, and Incog, I assert we have an interior set.
Seek: One capable backup, possibly two in the case of a Wood health setback or Incog departure

- Meredith should be in the competition at RT with FA/draft prospect to take over if/when Butler gets hurt. Low potential here that Butler gets beat outright.
Seek: One RT competitor

- LT is biggest area of concern.
Seek: HIGHEST caliber player via draft rounds 1/2 or 1st Tier-FA to A. start at LT or B. Force Bell to play at a highER level in order to play.

CONCLUSIONS: THREE additions: high player at LT, moderate player at RT, average player along interior. Make everyone not mentioned here walk.

Thanks for reading.

Just another great fan opinion shared on the pages of BuffaloRumblings.com.

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 2 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

This is pretty superficial stuff — just some off-the-cuff opinions without any analysis or evidence to back them up. It also runs in the face of Ron’s careful work, which showed Bell and Wood to be the two strongest players on the o-line at the time of Bell’s injury (with Levitre not far behind). It also ignores the fact that NFL players are often inconsistent and make mental mistakes in their first year of playing in the league. Many of those same rookies who look so bad initially go on to have excellent careers.

As I have pointed out a couple of times, Jason Smith of the Rams and Eugene Monroe of the Jags, who were both top ten picks overall this past year (Smith going #2 overall) have looked every bit as inconsistent as Bell in 2009. And Smith has been playing RT, which is a less challenging position than LT. Does that mean that their teams should cut them and start over?

It makes a lot more sense to try to evaluate vets like Hang, Simmons or Chambers, but even in those cases you are talking about guys who have had to play under highly unusual circumstances this year, making any judgments difficult.

In short, I think it’s hard to take your “outlook” seriously until you back it up better.

by Macktruck on Dec 19, 2009 12:57 AM EST reply actions

The exact first thing I state

is that I can’t argue against Ron’s statistical analysis. From the beginning, I say that all I’m going on is what I have observed over the season to have largest detrimental effect on the offense, specifically from the offensive line.

Some of Ron’s killed plays and missed blocks are more salient than others. Some false starts and holding penalties have a greater effect than others. The variance of importance is NOT reflected by the stats. Over these weeks, I have merely observed that when these more crucial occurrences of penalites/killed plays occur, more often than not, it has been through our tackles Bell and Scott. Is that so superficial or unreasonable?

As for evidence, can I really precisely pick, choose, and show plays to prove my formed opinion?

I clearly state that, from the culpable failure to the conclusions, it is ALL based on my observation. Clearly that may be different from yours or from others. Rather that criticize the quality of the poster or post, why not discuss which specific statements you disagree with (i.e. that player X is not culpable), and add what observations you have made to make you feel that way?

You seem to disagree with a statement I never made for example. I do not ever discount these young players as a lost cause. Am I asking for player X to be cut? Is it unreasonable to observe our LT play as a detriment to our season and recommend a high caliber addition to push the incumbent or take over themselves? Is it impulsive to state that Butler’s health should not be counted on and we should develop Meredith through competition with another capable tackle?

GO BLUE!!!

by Kumario! on Dec 19, 2009 1:48 AM EST up reply actions

But there is evidence to work with. At a minimum you could have gone back and looked at some of Ron’s analysis, especially his midseason summary report. (I disagree, by the way, that some missed blocks and killed plays are more important than others in evaluating a player’s performance. A missed block might make a big difference or a small difference in the flow of a game, but what does that have to do with the fact that a guy failed to carry out his assignment? If a player misses his block 70% of the time, but holds it during all the most important plays does that make him a better OT or OG?) Brian has also checked the tape of most games on the day after and reported on how well particular players have done. You might have looked at those posts to go beyond your own off-the-cuff observations. And there are a number of websites that report on the quality of performance for individual NFL players. Had you looked at one of those you might have discovered, for example, that Bell is credited with giving up 5 sacks during the time he played, which would be an average amount (Eugene Monroe, by comparison, has given up 8 despite being a top ten draft pick). That’s the kind of factual evidence I’m talking about. Instead you write: “Bell’s only saving grace has been the play of Scott, he’s merely the lesser of two evils.” Nothing more than that. I’m sorry, but that’s superficial and meaningless. You are certainly entitled to post your observations, but they would carry a lot more weight if you would take the trouble to substantiate them.

by Macktruck on Dec 19, 2009 11:06 AM EST up reply actions

A missed block might make a big difference or a small difference in the flow of a game, but what does that have to do with the fact that a guy failed to carry out his assignment?

But what your forgetting is that the players that a lineman faces are going to have different skill levels, strengths and weaknesses. That is not something that is represented in stats. For instance, If someone gives up 3 sacks to a player that ends up having 20 sacks in the season, is that the same as giving up 3 sacks to a player that ends up having 3? Statistically they would be the same, 3 sacks, but how they reflected on the lineman would be quite different. That is an area where subjective analysis is appropriate.

Ron’s stats are well done and quite useful, but they are not the only way to view players. And Brian’s admirable work that you cite is based largely on subjective analysis. While I think your criticisms of Kumario!’s results are valid, I think your dismissal of “off-the-cuff” analysis (by which I read non-statistically derived) would rule out about 98% of the content on this website. While you could rely entirely on stats to assess a player this would be unfair because, as you rightly pointed out:

NFL players are often inconsistent and make mental mistakes in their first year of playing in the league

by AussieBill on Dec 19, 2009 10:15 PM EST up reply actions

Good post

As I am not good at analyzing the O-line at all beyond obvious things I see on game day, I appreciate any input and opinions of this critical piece to our jumbled puzzle.

With all of the injuries and misfortune this line has faced this year I think there has been development with some of the young players and I think the staff has done a good job finding guys to come in and help. I was a big fan of Maridith. The guy has the size and athleticism but like the rest of the line but lacks both polish and experience as a NFL lineman. I do disagree about Bell. I think he has done a better job than you give him credit for. There is no way he was prepared to be a starting left tackle this year. This is Dick’s fault.

A lot of changes were made this offseason to the line that made little sense and is the cause of a lot of the turmoil it has faced. The no-huddle approach was a good idea in theory when looking at Trents’ strengths, but when looking at the inexperience on the line it was a horrible decision.

I pray twice a night for the return of wood next year but worry he will be laid up for longer. Once again I think the Perry Fewell regime has done a good job in taking a risk on a guy like Cogs.

Overall, the line has been a disappointment but I think we all knew this was the case. So as Bills fans we covered it up with a few cups of kool-aid and went on with the season. Next year these guys will have more experience and possibly a few more pieces that will be able to form a better line.

"Hold ya chin up...nuh nuh nuh...gone" -Marshawn Lynch-

by billsoferie on Dec 19, 2009 9:54 AM EST reply actions

Good Post Kumario

i agree with alot of ur analysis, i think that the interior is set if we can get out of cogs what we had hoped to get out of wood then we are good inside for the forseeable future and the tackles could be set if we get back butler at rt and bell can compete with a rookie drafted in the 1st or 2nd rd next year at the draft, i would like to see nick kazcur brought in next year he is a FA and with Vollmer seemingly a T of the future in NE then they can afford to let Kazcur go he could come in an play RT and butler could be our reserve tackle capable of playing both RT or LT in a pinch

my starting Oline would be

LT bell / rookie LT
LG levitre
C hangartner
RG cogs
RT butler / Kazcur (if he were signed)

reserves could be wood if healthy at the G/C and meredith or butler depending on kazcur being signed at T

with more time together this unit could excel and have some nastieness too levitre and cogs maybe have that mean streak to get some push inside cuz thats what we need

"The only yardstick for success our society has is being a champion. No one remembers anything else." John Madden

by BRIANMULHALL on Dec 19, 2009 11:22 AM EST reply actions

I think your conclusion is dead on. But...

I think that your selling Bell extremely short as he has shown way more consistentsie, and more ability to learn then Meredith has. Heck he`s even played on par with all the first round rookie tackles not named Oher. His injury just stopped him from improving more (which i think would have happened had he stayed healthy).

I think that the future of our line is bright, especially if we draft a good LT in the first round this year and have Bell/Butler/Meredith battle it out for the RT spot. Its just the injuries that have been crippleing us.

by CanadianBillsFan on Dec 19, 2009 12:18 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

Well said.....no need for me to repeat the same thing :-) rec'd

"The Bills have no playoff aspirations" – Dan Dierdorf

by Joe P. on Dec 19, 2009 12:33 PM EST up reply actions

Nice write up.

Bell was improving but still has a long way to go. Like you, I’m hoping the Bills get the top LT on their board because Buffalo can’t just go on with question marks along the offensive line. I think Bell has shown enough to merit a look at RT but I would be terrified if the Bills simply named him the starter and hoped for the best.

Levitre has been a real find for Buffalo. With Byrd the Bills had a terrific second round in the 2009 draft. Levtire has also been durable, taking almost every snap (McKinney gave him a couple of series off), and he’s been good—not just good by Buffalo standards but good.

Hang has been an upgrade over Flower and Preston but that’s not to say that the Bills couldn’t do better. I’ve got to say that I’d love to see what a healthy Wood could do lined up next to Levitre. Depending on how things shake out, Hang may be called upon to start. Wood’s injury and Incognito’s temperment will be the key factors.

It would be great if Incognito can play as well as he reportedly has while keeping his ego in check. The last thing Buffalo needs is a linemen killing scoring opportunities via personal stupidity—a la Duke Preston squabbling instead of snapping on a FG attempt. TO did seem to find a quieter place in Buffalo so perhaps Incognito will as well. I’m just not going to count on it.

The RT slot has been a mess. Butler can’t be counted on to be available, which is a pity as I’m a Butler fan. Scott isn’t an realistic option and I’m not yet convinced that Meredith can get the job done either. Sliding Bell over to RT might stabalize the position.

Given the needs Buffalo has outside of the offensive line (QB & LB are top of that list), I’m hoping that the Bills commit to getting their top rated LT, whether that be in free agency or the draft. The line could then look like:

New LT—Levitre—Hang—Wood—Bell with Butler, Chambers and Incognito in reserve

New LT—Levitre—Wood—Incognito/Butler—Bell with Incognito/Butler, Chambers and Hang in reserve

Having addressed LT, Buffalo should then be able to either chase other positions in free agency or devote draft picks to them. I haven’t seen a list of LTs who will be available if there isn’t a cap but it’s a good bet that Buffalo won’t be getting their guy that way. Anyone good enough to clearly be a starting LT is going to be scooped up by teams that can throw stupid money at him—maybe even just to keep him away from competitors. Ultimately, I think it will come down to the draft….unless Buffalo works out a trade before then. Of course, who is going to trade a good LT? Oh, wait, I know.

Of course we could make things more challenging, Lisa, but then the stupider students would be in here complaining, furrowing their brows in a vain attempt to understand the situation--Seymour Skinner

by Ron From NM on Dec 19, 2009 1:53 PM EST reply actions

WIthout a cap there aren’t any unless a guy like Matt Light gets cut.

Marcus McNeil will be a RFA. That’s the long and short of it.

"Play like hell and win." - Perry Fewell
Your daily source for Buffalo Bills information.

by MattRichWarren on Dec 22, 2009 9:55 AM EST up reply actions

Of course, who is going to trade a good LT? Oh, wait, I know.

I think a slightly more accurate question would be, “What good LT is going to force a trade off his current team in order to play in Buffalo?”

2010 Bills' truth in advertising: "Look out Cleveland, this year we score 6!" - bluecollarbuffalo

by thefourwinds on Dec 19, 2009 6:42 PM EST reply actions

Darn, this was supposed to be a reply to Ron from NM.

2010 Bills' truth in advertising: "Look out Cleveland, this year we score 6!" - bluecollarbuffalo

by thefourwinds on Dec 19, 2009 6:42 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t think that Peters was trying to get to Philly so much as trying to get paid oodles of cash—more than he knew Buffalo was going to pay. So, I don’t know that any LT is going to agitate to get traded to Buffalo but if an unhappy LT got off of his current team and was happier where he landed, yeah, I guess I could see it. However, Buffalo would have stiff competition from spend-happy owners with no cap to worry about.

by Ron From NM on Dec 19, 2009 7:39 PM EST up reply actions