Buffalo Bills Grooming Chris Hairston At Left Tackle
by Brian Galliford on Sep 7, 2011 10:01 AM EDT
in Buffalo Bills News
Email
Print
When the Buffalo Bills began working rookie Chris Hairston at left tackle during the latter parts of their pre-season schedule, most assumed that they were trying to figure out if Hairston could be the team's primary swing tackle, backing up both sides in his first professional season. After yesterday's acquisition of Sam Young, however, it is now clear that the team's plans for Hairston are different - and much more interesting.
Speaking with Shredd & Ragan on WEDG on Tuesday, Bills GM Buddy Nix all but confirmed that not only is the team very high on Hairston, but they're grooming him at left tackle.
"We've only got one backup tackle, and he's a rookie, and he's trying to back up both sides," Nix explained. "That's tough, because it's more learning for him. We think he's going to be a really good one. But if you put him in one place and leave him, he'll help you quicker. So that's our thinking with (Young) - he'll be at right tackle, and he'll be our backup at right tackle if he does what he did in Dallas."
That, of course, would indicate that Hairston will be the primary backup at left tackle. That's where incumbent starter Demetrius Bell - who does not fit the physical lineman prototype the team is seeking, who lost starter's reps during the pre-season, and who is entering the final year of his contract - resides.
Even though he admitted that the team has a depth problem along the line, Nix is confident that the team is better up front than they were a year ago.
"Nobody listening will believe this, but we're much better in the offensive line," Nix said. "We're better than we were, obviously, and we're better than people think we are."
For now, the team's depth chart appears set. Nix indicated that Andy Levitre would be the backup to Eric Wood at center, and that both Kraig Urbik and Colin Brown have gotten reps in the pivot, as well. Hairston backs up Bell. Young backs up Erik Pears, and the only pure guard on the roster, apparently, is Chad Rinehart.
Back to the issue at hand, however: this clearly spells trouble for Bell, the team's de facto starter at left tackle for the last two seasons, and who played pretty well at times during the 2010 season. He was not good during pre-season action, however, and Chan Gailey gave some of his reps to Levitre, citing inconsistency as the motivating factor.
The Bills are clearly trying to get bigger and tougher up front. Of the team's nine offensive linemen, three are holdovers from the previous regime. Average Bell, Levitre and Wood together, and you've got a 6'4", 308-pound offensive lineman. Average the six hand-picked newcomers (Urbik, Pears, Hairston, Young, Rinehart and Brown) together, and you've got a 6'6", 325-pound lineman.
Time will tell if the Bills are able to get away with massive, slow-footed linemen like Hairston and Young at tackle, where they're willingly sacrificing top-notch pass protection ability for more size and toughness. If this is the long-term plan, Gailey must be prepared to build an offensive scheme that constantly accounts for extra men protecting the edge against speed rushers.
To close, this is obviously good news for Hairston. The left tackle position now appears to have direction in Buffalo. Whether or not it's a worthwhile direction remains to be seen.
188 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Just Wondering
Brian, any idea where this O-line stacks up size wise against the Championship O-line Bills? House Ballard was a monster.
Go big or go home.
That’s not even relevant, really, because the average NFL player – regardless of position – was much smaller during that era of the game. Ballard was the size of the average guy Nix and Gailey have brought in.
Editor-in-Chief, BUFFALO RUMBLINGS®
@BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Sep 7, 2011 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions
You get a pass due to age on this one. ;)
See below.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions
What does age have to do with it? I watched those teams too, my friend. We’re talking about a team that’s now two decades old. Comparing anything about those teams is wholly irrelevant.
Editor-in-Chief, BUFFALO RUMBLINGS®
@BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Sep 7, 2011 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Kemp asked how the size of the two lines compared with one another. That was all. I did not pay attention to your comment "That’s not even relevant, really, because the average NFL player – regardless of position – was much smaller during that era of the game. " simply because I was only going to answer Kemp’s question. What I responded to was your comment “Ballard was the size of the average guy Nix and Gailey have brought in.” I simply clarified for those that may not have viewed those games as adults or even teens that House Ballard was put together in a differant manner than our current O lineman brought in by Nix.
My age comment simply reflected that I figured you were shy of 10 in the early 90s and thus remembered players through the eyes of a young kid and may not have remembered House Ballard was one athletically built 330 pound dude, of which I have seen few before or since. He was basically a larger Richard Seymour. I thought age was likely relevant to your perception and wanted to point out size is more than weight and height, I may be 6 foot and 240, but I look a bit different than Barnett at ILB. No insult intended.
BTW, I do think you can compare the game and players of today to those of the early 90s. But I don’t think that is what Kemp asked.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Statistics would provide some proof that you can’t compare the Bills glory years to today’s players and league.
Andre Reed had great stats during his era, but today they’d be more in line with Donald Driver. Is Donald Driver a HOFer? Is Reed? Yes. He was an exemplar WR in that era. Kelly too. Look at his stats. Guys were built different. OLmen used to be fat, Glen Parker-types (Parker, no offense, you were and are a cool dude). Today, they’re like hybrid TE/DL men.
It is a different era, and the way they train as well as the diets they follow play a role in making them larger than those who came before.
Brett Favre, Jerry Rice, and Bruce Smith are prime examples of players who transcended NFL eras. Otherwise, I think you’re talking a tough comparison in leagues two decades apart.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
My response to the comparison argument is below. I agree with your opinion that comparisons of players from one era to the next are difficult. But as you point out with your examples, they can be done.
I believe 3/5ths of the 90s Bills line could play well today (Wolford, Ballard, Davis) and would be better than the respective players at their current positions. Der Jaeger disagrees re: Wolford. That discussion is below.
I am not arguing any of what you mention above. You must be careful with comparisons but they can be made. The fact of the matter is that the Bills super bowl teams were ahead of their time with the use of a 3, 4, and 5 receiver (including TE and RB split out) sets. Their were several offenive players on the Bills team with physical traits and skill sets that would transcend a mere 18 years (Kelly, Thomas, Reed, Wolfork, Ballard, Metzalaars for blocking, possibly Lofton).
There were very few players on the Bills Defense that would transcend the passage of 18 years. Bruce would. Bennett might because he could really play the run and pass and was a really good all around backer. He is right on the cusp size wise, but I believe he is as big as mattews is today. Talley – no – too small. Hansen at DE? Maybe – he had prototypical size/length. Henry Jones at Safety? Probably. Nate Odomes at CB? Small but probably.
A lot of people just don’t realize how talented those teams were in the super bowl years. Would Reed be a Pro Bowler today? Who knows. But he could play today and I would take him over any WR on our current roster not named Steve.
This Era argument is gray like most things. I long ago learned few generalized arguments are black and white. And by the way, I would take the Cowboys 1993 line lock stock and barrel today over our line. We could use Erik Williams and Nate Newton lined up side by side
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
The Bills had big tackles for the late 80's and early to mid 90s
Howard the house Ballard was a huge guy. He was about 6’6" and went about 330 pounds…an athletic 330. He was not at all fat or sloppy. Nor did he have the build of a body builder. He was simply farm strong or country strong. With todays training techniques the House would likely play at 350, with little fat on him. He had a significantly bigger frame than Hairston or Pears have. Pairs and Hairston would look like 17 yr old high school ball players next to Ballard’s look of a 26 year man. While they might way almost as much as he did, they are composed entirely differently. Wolford was one of the leagues best RTs and one of the first huge OL to make a name for himself.
Will Wolford was also a big guy. He was about 6’5" and played just below 300 pounds. Again, he had a very athletic build and had the frame to carry extra weight. Wolford could easily play at 320 or 330 in todays time. He was an awesome LT.
Those guys probably could have played heavier at that time but the Bills run game required their takles to move and used massive doses of the Counter Trey which requires the tackle to pull and lead the RB (Thurman and Kenny Davis) through the hole. Wolford was awesome on the move. Ballard could also pull despite his size. Over and over again a LB or safety would step into the gap only to face Wolford or Ballard turning the corner. It was seldom pretty for the defenders.
So to answer your question. House was bigger than any of the guys the Bills have had other than Mike Williams (If he lifted like players do today, he might have been that size), Wolford was just as tall but not as heavy. Though, he would play at 310-320 if he played today. Both players were very athletic and moved well in space. Much more so than anyone on todays team.
John Davis started at RG and he was 6’3" or 6’4" and between 300-320 pounds. He was a big dude as well and was a power blocker. My recollection is that John had more of todays Guard build, stocky and powerful. He had a belly on him. He could play and start for the Bills at Guard today.
At Center Kent Hull was probably 6’ 4" or 6’ 5" and 285 – 295. He would be considered a saller center today. He probably could have played a littel heavier and may have towrads the end of his career.
Jin Richter was the littel guy on the line at probably 6’2" or 6’3" and around 270 or 280. He played LG and probably could put on a few extra pounds if he played today. He would likely play at 285-290 if he played today.
So all in all I would say the Bills O line of the early 90s was Bigger than the current O line at Tackle. The same at RG, and smaller at center and LG. However, if we adjusted for todays training/nutrition the 90s line would be bigger-period.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
Lots of info, but I guess my take away was we basically can’t compare? :-)
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
What?
I was simply answering a question put forth by Kemp regarding the size of the two lines. If that was your take away, thanks for sharing.
I did not get into a comparison, but anyone that thinks you can’t compare players, teams, or components of today with those of 20 years ago is, in my opinion, a little short on memory. 3/5ths of that early 90s Bills line would be a huge upgrade as they were in the early 90’s (Wolford, Ballard, Davis). Hull and Richter would be small, but I believe Hull could bulk up. (Actually there were roomers he may have had a bit of help bulking up during his career).
People forget that speed rushers did not just appear out of thin air. Pittsburgh has had speed/OLB rushers since the late 80s (Kevin Green, Greg Lloyd…right on through to Harrison), KC had probably the best speed rusher to ever play the game in Derrick Thomas. The zone blitz has been around for nearly 20 years. Offensive lines of 15- 20 years ago were not all that different from today.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
What?
I did not get into a comparison
Then you close with this from your OP of this string:
So all in all I would say the Bills O line of the early 90s was Bigger than the current O line at Tackle. The same at RG, and smaller at center and LG. However, if we adjusted for todays training/nutrition the 90s line would be bigger-period.
That looks and sounds like a comparison to me.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
A comparison of “eras”. Thank you. The OP wanted to know how the lines compared in size. I answered the question. It was another who went down the path of the can’s compare eras banter.
But the comparing eras banter is alive and well below.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, I was being good natured. After reading all that great info on their sizes, it just sounded like nutrition and conditioning differences make the whole thing really speculative.
It might be useful to compare the Bills O-line of the 90’s to its peers (relative size) or the relative size of d-lineman within each era.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
That's informative
But the NFL is a lot different now than then. Buffalo’s line then had three players that would be considered undersized and underpowered by today’s standards in Wolford, Ritcher, and Hull. Sure, Wolford could have bulked up, but what would that have done for his light feet?
Ballard, by today’s standards, is just a run-of-the-mill RT size-wise. Ballard was an anomaly because he was 330 and could move well.
Most of the Bills 90’s line couldn’t anchor against today’s interior defensive linemen. A guy like Vince Wilfork would completely overmatch Hull or Ritcher.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
I simply disagree with the thought you cant compare current o lines to o lines of 15-20 years ago. First of all, Bell could not hold Wolford’s Jock even if Wolford weighed 290-295. So, the real accurate view is 3/5ths of todays line, including both tackles would not have seen the field 15-20 years ago on the Bills o Line. The 80s and 90s were in large part the golden era of the pass rusher. People forget that speed rushers did not just appear out of thin air. Pittsburgh has had speed/OLB rushers since the late 80s (Kevin Green, Greg Lloyd…right on through to Harrison), KC had probably the best speed rusher to ever play the game in Derrick Thomas. The zone blitz has been around for nearly 20 years. Offensive lines of 15- 20 years ago were not all that different from today.
Sure we happen to play in a division with big 3-4 NTs. There were a ton of dominant pass rushers and DTs in the 80s and 90s. Look at the all time sack list (realizing it only goes back so far as sacks were not recorder before the ? late 70s/early 80s?) There were some physical monsters in that list from the 80s, Eagles teams with Reggie White and Clyde Simmons (not to mention Jerome Brown) that lost to the Bills in Rich Stadium.
Look at the Cowboys O lines that beat the Bills in consecutive years (Nate Newton, Eric Williams, Etc. -), they were massive powerful lines.
Well, each will make up their mind on their own. But look at the list below and tell me which of the players on that list would not start and dominate today? I think that list proves you can compare the NFL of the 90s to todays game.
Damn you Kemp for asking your simple little question that started all of this banter! ;)
Bruce Smith 200
2 Reggie White 198
3 Kevin Greene 160
4 Chris Doleman 150 1/2
5 Michael Strahan 141 1/2
6 John Randle 137 1/2
Richard Dent 137 1/2
8 JASON TAYLOR 132 1/2
Lawrence Taylor 132 1/2
Leslie O’Neal 132 1/2 11
12 Derrick Thomas 126 1/2
13 Simeon Rice 122
14 Clyde Simmons 121 1/2
15 Sean Jones 113
16 Greg Townsend 109 1/2
17 Pat Swilling 107 1/2
18 Trace Armstrong 106
19 Kevin Carter 104 1/2
Neil Smith
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow
Only Strahan, Simeon Rice, and Jason Taylor hit their primes after the mid 90s.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Almost every player you list is an edge rusher. Edge rushers are about speed, therefore a guy like Wolford could hold them at bay while playing at 290 pounds. How would he do against Richard Seymour? Or Aaron Smith? Or Haloti Ngata? These are the 300 pound+ 3-4 ends that don’t rack up enough sacks to make your list. Could a 290 pound Wolford really block Seymour? Ngata? Because if Wolford played today, that’s exactly who he’d have to block.
Ballard, in contrast, would likely have been fine, and Davis maybe so as well.
None of the dominant nose tackles in that era were 300 pounds. Tim Krumrie was considered a load at the time, and he played at 269 pounds. Jim Burt was 6-1/260 pounds. Erik Howard lined up opposite Hull in Super Bowl 25 at 6-4, 275 pounds.
There’s simply no way Hull or Richter could hold against the Wilfork’s of the world. Most defensive tackles under 300 pounds are considered small now. How many folks on this board had heartache with 305 pound Kyle Williams manning the nose tackle position for the team?
There’s simply no comparing Wolford, Richter, and Hull to today. They were great in their era. Today is different. Maybe Wolford bulks up, Richter is an inside linebacker and Hull is a tight end? Who knows. Comparing eras is difficult at best because there are too many variables.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
by Der Jaeger on Sep 7, 2011 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
First of all I stated in my initial post that Hull and Richter were smaller. I have not argued that point at all.
Secondly, all great players of the 90s or today would be great in either era. Refrigerator Perry, and Ted Washinton played in theat era and guess what? They wreaked havoc. Just Like the great big players of today do.
If we are debating whether or not Will Wolford would be effective today I will jump in on the side of yes he would be effective. He would be able to handle the speed rushers better than anybody we have today because of his feet and his great technique. Would he have trouble with some of the big 3-4 ends you mention? Yes he would. Just as 90% of the current OTs have difficulty with those players. If you truly believe a former college basketball player turned OT who has bulked up to 310-315 and struggles with power rushers is better than Will Wolfork of the early 90s then wew have a difference of opinion. I just don’t happen to believe Bell is better in any, and I do mean any, facet of the game than Wolfork of the early 90s. Your knock on Wolford is that he would be unable to set against power players. Well, I believe he would have been one heck of a lot better against Kampman than Bell proved last season.
Funny how we only disagree on one player, but that can lead to generalizations of you can’t compare “eras”. Heck, what about the players that bridged the eras?
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s not that Bell’s ever going to be better than Wolford or Ballard. It’s that he’s built differently.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
In understand that he is built differently. Pull up a photo of Ballard and one of Wolford. They were prototypes of what teams want today as far as height and arm length. Ballard is prototypical of everything they want in a RT today. I will look for some pics to show you. Unless my memory has failed they were long athletes.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
And Kurupt with another post on BR that included a picture of Wolford. Looks like a svelte 294 by his post. I think you will like the length/height he shows in the picture.
http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2009/7/22/954974/top-50-all-time-bills-no-32-ot
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
The very first google repsonse was an article written by none other than Kurupt on BR.
Here is the link. It includes a photo of Ballard. I think you will agree that we should all wish for tackles built like Ballard.
http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2009/6/13/906079/top-50-all-time-bills-no-41-ot
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions
First off, I’ve never said that Bell was better than Wolford. I said that Wolford would have a tough time with 3-4 ends that were bigger than him. That’s not comparing Bell and Wolford.
Second, Perry and Washington didn’t wreak havoc as you suggest, at least early on. Perry couldn’t move well, he simply leaned on blockers. So move blocking schemes, like the one the 49ers used, negated him.
Washington was drafted by the 49ers, who let him walk to the Broncos, who let him walk to Buffalo. When he signed in 1995, it was big news only because he was one of the first big Buffalo free agent signings, along with Jim Jeffcoat and Bryce Paup. But at that point, he had done literally nothing in his career. It wasn’t until Wade Phillips took charge of the defense that he began to dominate. By that time, offensive linemen that were 300 pounds were becoming the norm.
Plus, Washington was drafted out of Louisville at 305 pounds. He didn’t balloon to well over that until after he was in Buffalo. I know, I was at his press conference the day he signed, and he wasn’t the 325 pound beast that he eventually became.
And guys like Wilfork and Seymour don’t give 90% of the blockers they face trouble. If that was truly the case, then offenses couldn’t score the way they do. Seymour gets handled by guys like Oher and Jake Long. But Oher and Jake Long are 30-40 pounds bigger and stronger than Wolford ever was.
You can’t really compare eras. Guys like Bruce Smith transcend because of the position he played. He was and edge rusher with speed and those types really haven’t gotten that much bigger in the past 20 years.
Randy White was an absolute beast inside for the Cowboys. He played at 250-260 pounds. He would get man-handled by guys like Nick Mangold if he played today.
20 years ago is a different world from today. Some greats, like Smith and Reggie White translate. But the above-average to average players, like Wolford, couldn’t compete today at the positions they played.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
by Der Jaeger on Sep 7, 2011 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
A lot of what you write about I covered above with Afghan Twililight above.
What I disagree about is Wolford’s ability to play today. I simply said I believe Wolford is better than our current LTs. I stand by that statement. As I said before, would Wolford have trouble with bid DEs? Yes. And our current LTs have trouble with big DEs. Wolford would be better against speed and in space. Thus, I deduce the power game is a wash and his pass pro against speed, his screen game, and his movement are all superior to Bell. That is the issue I brought up and the one I stick by.
As far as other individual comparisons and discussion thereof we could go on for weeks, but I did post this above in response to AT.
" My response to the comparison argument is below. I agree with your opinion that comparisons of players from one era to the next are difficult. But as you point out with your examples, they can be done.
I believe 3/5ths of the 90s Bills line could play well today (Wolford, Ballard, Davis) and would be better than the respective players at their current positions. Der Jaeger disagrees re: Wolford. That discussion is below.
I am not arguing any of what you mention above. You must be careful with comparisons but they can be made. The fact of the matter is that the Bills super bowl teams were ahead of their time with the use of a 3, 4, and 5 receiver (including TE and RB split out) sets. Their were several offenive players on the Bills team with physical traits and skill sets that would transcend a mere 18 years (Kelly, Thomas, Reed, Wolfork, Ballard, Metzalaars for blocking, possibly Lofton).
There were very few players on the Bills Defense that would transcend the passage of 18 years. Bruce would. Bennett might because he could really play the run and pass and was a really good all around backer. He is right on the cusp size wise, but I believe he is as big as mattews is today. Talley – no – too small. Hansen at DE? Maybe – he had prototypical size/length. Henry Jones at Safety? Probably. Nate Odomes at CB? Small but probably.
A lot of people just don’t realize how talented those teams were in the super bowl years. Would Reed be a Pro Bowler today? Who knows. But he could play today and I would take him over any WR on our current roster not named Steve.
This Era argument is gray like most things. I long ago learned few generalized arguments are black and white. And by the way, I would take the Cowboys 1993 line lock stock and barrel today over our line. We could use Erik Williams and Nate Newton lined up side by side"
I can’t believe I got sucked into this discussion. and we really don’t disagree on my original point re: Wolford or comparing players. It is on a case by case basis.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair Enough
I think it boils down to you think Wolford could be the LT for the team right now, and I don’t. I think we both have good reasons to believe that.
I think Buffalo circa 1990-1994 is a bad team to compare in terms of transcending eras. If Norwood’s kick is good, the 1990 team would be in contention for the best team in a single year, ever. 4, soon to be 5 Hall of Famers on offense, 4 of 5 offensive linemen that could be/were Pro Bowlers. Best pash rusher ever. Top 10 ever linebacking corps if that kick goes through.
Lost in the four Super Bowl losses was one of the greatest collections of talent ever.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
by Der Jaeger on Sep 7, 2011 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
But Norwood’s kick wasn’t good because that super-talented team couldn’t get the ball close enough for him, and also couldn’t score despite several other opportunities. They were great, but at the moment of decision in that first Superbowl they didn’t come through, and they let their oppoent score too many points.
Somewhat agree
I think Bill Belichick had A LOT to do with Buffalo’s offensive performance that night. In retrospect, Jim Kelly was squaring off with a Hall of Fame defensive mind. Peyton Manning fails at that task all the time.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
My contention ever since SB XXV was that the Bills were outcoached. That was their problem in every SB.
Give a monkey a typewriter and infinite time, and he’ll eventually release Maybin. -- stetzwebs
Unfortunately, experience doesn't always lead to wisdom - Joe P.
No one circles the waiver wire like the Buffalo Bills!
by thefourwinds on Sep 7, 2011 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
There’s simply no way Hull or Richter could hold against the Wilfork’s of the world.
There’s so much to comment on in this thread. I couldn’t decide where to make this point.
There’s one huge difference that no one has pointed out yet – the Bills ran a constant no-huddle offense. I mean constant – it’s virtually all they did once they switched to the K-gun. WhatGoesAround made this point:
the Bills run game required their tackles to move and used massive doses of the Counter Trey which requires the tackle to pull and lead the RB (Thurman and Kenny Davis) through the hole.
That is all true, PLUS they were doing all that while they were sprinting up and down the field after every play to get another one off. The Bills OL were amazing athletes, especially including Ballard.
Regarding Wolfork, does anyone remember what a crappy game he had against the Bills on MNF when the 2009 Bills ran no-huddle against the Pats? Wolfork was sucking wind before the 1st quarter ended. That’s how the Bills of the 90s operated on O. Most of those big dudes on defense taking up space in the middle just couldn’t keep up with them.
Give a monkey a typewriter and infinite time, and he’ll eventually release Maybin. -- stetzwebs
Unfortunately, experience doesn't always lead to wisdom - Joe P.
No one circles the waiver wire like the Buffalo Bills!
by thefourwinds on Sep 7, 2011 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yes, they played a chess game with teams. They “cheated” by not allowing teams to substitute players and packages that suited the Bills’ strengths better.
It was awesome and it should never be done again. Today’s players are built nothing like that type of offense requires they be built.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Not just the build, but the conditioning, skill, and talent. I believe it can and should be done again if any team can ever assemble the talent and the QB to make it happen.
Give a monkey a typewriter and infinite time, and he’ll eventually release Maybin. -- stetzwebs
Unfortunately, experience doesn't always lead to wisdom - Joe P.
No one circles the waiver wire like the Buffalo Bills!
Woops, I meant Wilfork. Got the name conflated with Wolford.
Give a monkey a typewriter and infinite time, and he’ll eventually release Maybin. -- stetzwebs
Unfortunately, experience doesn't always lead to wisdom - Joe P.
No one circles the waiver wire like the Buffalo Bills!
The Colts do something similar
Unfortunately, Buffalo had 4 of their starting five that could go to the Pro Bowl every year, and 4 of 5 that could move really well. It was one of the greatest offensive lines in history, IMO.
The issue was that they were blocking 270-290 pound defensive lineman. Today, similar players like Ryan Lilja and Jeff Saturday have trouble opening running lanes because they don’t have the horsepower to drive 325 pound linemen off the ball.
I would take the Wilfork no-huddle game with a grain of salt. Indy plays no-huddle and winds Wilfork and Hampton, but still can’t run the ball like Buffalo did in the 90’s.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
Remember a guy like Wilfork overmatchs most center/guards he plays against today. Just like most of today’s center/guards are not quick enough to prevent K williams from knifing through the line. Just like Reggie White White overpowered almost every Tackle in the early 90s, and Bruce Smith used speed/strength, balance, and technique to beat even the great Anthony Munoz.
White and Smith would dominate today as they did when they played. Likewise the great O lines of the 90s (Skins, Cowboys, Bills) would be great today.
by WhatGoesAround on Sep 7, 2011 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I found a good discussion here:
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?267517-NFL-comparing-players-from-different-eras
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
And I just took a gander at what that forum is all about. A dying breed, those D&D RPG folks. So random a fairly good conversation about NFL players happened there, of all places.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
those were the days- very nice
prob want to mention although Hull & Richter were a bit smaller there was tremendous football smarts w/them, great pass protectors & when pulled would knock the snot out of an lb.
"Alright Men, lets go out there, bust um in the chops & get somebody bloody. Keep working till you get it right. Take the W in battle & make the Bills Nation Proud."
by Blood, sweat & Win on Sep 7, 2011 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, it was Ritcher, not Richter.
Give a monkey a typewriter and infinite time, and he’ll eventually release Maybin. -- stetzwebs
Unfortunately, experience doesn't always lead to wisdom - Joe P.
No one circles the waiver wire like the Buffalo Bills!
ahh the spelling things
it was one of the tuff ones, even wikipedia has it wrong as most people did pronounce it Richer.
At any rate he was #51, center to guard, outland trophy, etc, etc Did I mention that he could pull & block like old Reggie?
"Alright Men, lets go out there, bust um in the chops & get somebody bloody. Keep working till you get it right. Take the W in battle & make the Bills Nation Proud."
by Blood, sweat & Win on Sep 7, 2011 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This made me "LOL --->
“Nobody listening will believe this, but we’re much better in the offensive line,” Nix said. “We’re better than we were, obviously, and we’re better than people we think we are.”
Never change Buddy Nix, Never change.
We aren't who they thought we were.
by CJ_Scudworth on Sep 7, 2011 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
We're better than youse all done thought we was, er were, uh, will be.
Colin Brown...Pancreas Yellow...
“But i’m not so certain I can tell you right now that I do or don’t know who i think we might need to try to be, without getting to see how far we are from getting to that point first…and then making sure we’re not farther along than the level we thought we were close to being at back when we weren’t sure we were at the right place to be near the beginnings of that original goal.”
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions
well said Brian
I think some of the skeptical views of Bell have been/are accurate. I think the injuries he’s had have kind of masked his shortcomings in that we weren’t sure if it was health or talent holding him back. I think we now have a clearer idea. I seem to recall in one of your draft pieces that you didn’t think much of Hairston as a left tackle. While the outcome of the experiment remains to be seen, can you repeat your view of Hairston as a LT? Thanks.
Y'all- There's a "D" in rebuild, but no "O"- The gospel according to Buddy Nix 4:12
went back
and answered my own question. Here’s what you said, in http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2011/5/2/2149486/chris-hairston-buffalo-bills-2011-nfl-draft:
Hairston is still a work in progress. He is perhaps the strongest offensive tackle in this year’s draft class, at least in the upper body, and he led tackles at the 2011 NFL Combine with 33 reps on the bench press. However, he is slightly limited athletically, where he has adequate quickness to play the edge, but is also heavy-legged, not as strong as you’d like in the lower body and not a great straight-line athlete. That’s why Bills coaches plan to move him to right tackle, where he’ll have a tight end and a back to chip more often than if he were on the left side
Y'all- There's a "D" in rebuild, but no "O"- The gospel according to Buddy Nix 4:12
That sounds like a fair bit of yuck for a LT prospect.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
As Brian alludes too, speed rushers will be his biggest challenge most likely.
It’s amazing how much more competent and comfortable Hairston looked at there compared to everyone else who was getting reps at LT.
Of course, he did not face any elite speed rushers in the pre-season. His strength and size really is a contrast to Bell when you watched ends try to power or counter on him, he simply engulfed the defenders.
Perhaps jumping the gun?
I think this analysis makes sense, but it may be jumping the gun a bit. Beyond any doubt Nix was signaling that Hairston is going to be groomed as a LT who can step in if Bell goes down. However, he did not indicate that the Bills were definitely planning on replacing Bell, who has played well in the past and who has drawn lavish praise from both Nix and Gailey. My reading is that they are setting up some competition at LT to see how Bell will respond. If Bell steps up his game this year, the starting position will remain his. If he doesn’t and if Hairston improves notably, then Bell could find himself sitting on the bench or off the team. It will all depend on how Bell performs in 2011
It’s important to remember that Bell is now up to the vicinity of 320 lbs, so he certainly does not belong in the category of a “small” o-lineman. He is also much more talented than Hairston in terms of quickness and agility — key attributes for playing LT. So one would suspect that he has a good chance of winning this competition. At this point the team has made clear that it is very much up to him.
What? When did Demetrius Bell draw lavish praise from Chan Gailey? In a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately league, if he did in fact get said praise, it’s negated by the fact that a) he lost starter’s reps, and b) Gailey openly questioned his consistency.
Editor-in-Chief, BUFFALO RUMBLINGS®
@BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Sep 7, 2011 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I don’t have time to look it up, but Gailey has praised him to the skies on at least two occasions, talking about his extraordinary athletic abilities. I’m not making this up. Gailey went on and on. There’s no doubt that Gailey was very disappointed by Bell’s outing against Denver and he should have been. That doesn’t negate Gailey’s earlier praise, but rather goes alongside it to suggest that Gailey is trying to figure out exactly what he has in Bell. Is Bell the LT with enormous upside that Gailey thought he was, or is he a major disappointment? I suspect that’s the question in Gailey’s mind at the moment, and grooming Hairston as a potential replacement is the best way to motivate Bell so that the coaches can find out for sure which it is.
I’m not accusing you of making anything up; I just seriously don’t recall such lavish praise.
Editor-in-Chief, BUFFALO RUMBLINGS®
@BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Sep 7, 2011 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
I recall the praise as well, at least twice, but no idea anymore when. I think it was post-game interviews, but not 100% sure.
yup
i believe it was after first couple of practices of Gailey watching Bell
by Bestbillieve86 on Sep 7, 2011 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I remember this too. I remember something along the lines of their feeling pretty set with Bell as their LT.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions
rec'd
let’s also remember that Chix have not proven to be as straight forward with their comments as many have expected.
We heard before Lee Evans’ trade that the Bills were trying to get him more involved in the offense this season.
We heard before Posluszny was signed away that they had him as a highest priority and wanted him to return as a Bill.
We heard before the Marshawn Lynch trade that the Bills believed a three headed rushing attack was viable.
We heard before Geoff Hangartner was cut that he would be given ever opportunity to compete with Wood for the center position, something that never fairly manifested itself.
I’m not making a judgment on the wisdom of being honest or dishonest or making an assessment of these moves, just noting that not a one of those guys is on the team anymore.
Whatever praise might have been made about Bell last year may not have been very indicative of his standing on the team.
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
Last year was also last year, the praise may be dated. I think these guys are pretty straightforward, but there are times when you need to read between the lines and understand when they can’t really afford to throw their player under the bus (see Lee, Marshawn, and Bell last season).
Though the Lee talk was actually pretty clearly a critique of Lee.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Ehh…when has Bell played well in the past, besides a game here or there? Passably, maybe, but well?
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
Competition is good
We are not good enough to have defacto starters
Get a few Pro Bowl nods and that might earn a hall pass
If Bell doesn’t do it this year – a contract year – then we have to assume he never will and move on
obviously, and we’re better than people we think we are."
Is that a typo or actually what Buddy said? One too many "we"s?
Y'all- There's a "D" in rebuild, but no "O"- The gospel according to Buddy Nix 4:12
Transcribing error. My bad. Should read “… and we’re better than people think we are.”
Editor-in-Chief, BUFFALO RUMBLINGS®
@BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Sep 7, 2011 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Meh
If they want Hairston to concentrate on playing LT, why not sign a player that is actually ready to play RT now, if needed? Young is a developmental prospect that I would not feel comfortable with if he was forced onto the field. I don’t think he’ll be active on gamedays anyhow. I wasn’t impressed with Young during the predraft process last year and he just seems way to stiff and unathletic. Luckily, guys can get away with that to an extent at RT. Hope he works out.
As for Hairston at LT, I don’t know if he’s capable. He’s looked decent all preseason, but is he fluid enough to handle some of the best pass rushers in the NFL? They can try him out there all they want, but I’m not convinced he’s physically gifted enough to play there and play there well. I’m guessing this move has some to do with Hairston and a lot to do with Bell.
Hey Buddy, just because you say you think the OL is better than people give them credit for doesn’t mean the OL is actually any good. Saying it doesn’t make it true. Those guys have to actually prove they aren’t as bad as last year’s unit that is basically the same group. I have a hard time believing this group is any good right now.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on Sep 7, 2011 10:24 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
Hey Buddy, just because you say you think the OL is better than people give them credit for doesn’t mean the OL is actually any good.
Pretty sure he says that in the interview. But he emphasizes he likes the interior of the line. I agree with him there, we have about 4 guys who can really do a nice job on the interior.
Those guys have to actually prove they aren’t as bad as last year’s unit that is basically the same group.
Not even close to true. Compared to opening day, 2 of 5 starters are different. A third is in a new position. All the key reserves are different. For the entire unit, 3/9 are the same. How is this the same group?
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
The top 6 OL were all with the team last year
Who said anything about the opening day lineup? The 5 starters all started games last year and none were overly impressive. As I said, its basically the same group we had last year, even if the starting lineup isn’t exactly the same, since that seemed to change on a weekly basis.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on Sep 7, 2011 11:31 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Adding guys mid-season doesn’t put them in a position to succeed. Even if by the end of the year they were together — this starting lineup never played together in this formulation.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Yeah, but that works two ways. It’s tough for Nix to say it is better until we see that it actually is on the field.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
Yeah, Nix should say that. “I don’t know if its better.” That would get a decent response from critics on the board.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
The issue isn’t what Nix should or shouldn’t say, because you’re right. He’s either got to say nothing or say what he did. The issue is the first part of that statement, “Nobody listening will believe this”. Which Nix acknowledged.
I’ll rephrase what I said. It’s tough for Nix to believably say it is better until we see that it is.
As a side note, I actually think our interior line is underrated. I’m of the opinion that our center and guard positions are much better than they’re given credit for.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
what's he gonna say
“We made some moves, and really, we haven’t improved in any way.”
seriously. he is the GM. he will back up his own moves, because it is silly not to. but when comparing what he WANTS and what we had, it would be hard not to improve. He wants finishers. He wants maulers. he wants big guys, who can push defenses around. this seems incredibly obvious to me. so if you think a guy like Hang is too small and weak, then you probably are a fan of a guy like Wood, or Urbik, or Rinehart. it is obvious he wants to get bigger on both sides of the ball, which is definitely a need for a cold weather team. we were built like a dome team, who didn’t even play in a dome. which is dumb.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
I think I understand the sentiment of the big Line
With a back like Spiller who is quick as a cat, all he really needs is a bit of space. The big guys up front should be able to create rushing lanes for him and with the size of the OL defenses should have a hard time locating him right off the bat because of the pure size of our OL.
Couple that with the fact that Fred Jackson is arguably one of the mose elusive backs in the NFL and our size up front should really provide our rushers with that split second they need to produce big gains.
The only part that confuses me is, we are built to run a spread offense which relies heavily on pass blocking, which is the area that our line struggles most at. Its definatly a head scratcher but if Buddy Nix thinks we are better up front I would have to agree with him.
I also believe with a line this big it will really help Brad Smith in the WC.
"Big Gulps Eh, Well See ya later" - Lloyd Christmas
" You Gus ready To Let The Dogs Out" "What?" " you Know, Who Let the dogs out rough rough rogh rough" - Zack Galifinakis - The Hangover
yup
I like size on the line to help hide and give that extra second to the ultra quick CJ Spiller and elusive Fred. Your point about Brad Smith in the wildcat is a good one as well Paully
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
we need posts about the wild cat real bad.
I mean we bring in Brad Smith, pay him almost 4 million. You got to know that this is going to be a huge part of Gailey’s plan. I am not sure I like it but it is there and no one is really talking about it…….yet. I am not the one to generate the post but you don’t make that kind of investment without talking a lot about it.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
by VanScottM on Sep 7, 2011 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
totally agree
how often do you suspect we might see the wildcat per game? Brad Smith is a big investment and it wont be just for a kick returner!
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
VanScottM, I was going to comment on this over on Arrowhead Pride, but I thought I’d just let them wait and see it for themselves. I’ve been thinking that Gailey is planning on using a LOT of B.Smith in the Wildcat, especially in the first game.
Give a monkey a typewriter and infinite time, and he’ll eventually release Maybin. -- stetzwebs
Unfortunately, experience doesn't always lead to wisdom - Joe P.
No one circles the waiver wire like the Buffalo Bills!
Over/under
What’s the over/under for when Hairston is the starting left tackle? I’ll set it at Week 5.5 with the smart being on the under. Buffalo’s restlessness with Bell couldn’t be telegraphed any clearer.
"There's only one C.J. Spiller." -Buddy Nix
As much as I'm not a fan of Bell
I think he’s definitely preferable to Hairston. Hairston might be ready in a year or two, but starting him this early before he develops is just pulling a Demetrius Bell 2.0. Bell, while infuriatingly inconsistent, at least…(sigh) at least isn’t consistently awful at this point.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
been saying for a little while now that the tea leaves are telling me Hairston takes over coming out of the bye.
by Brian in Shortsville on Sep 7, 2011 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
switch to coffee my friend.
I am excited about Hairston as many are, but as good as he looked in that last preseason game, I recall how fish out of water he looked in camp. I am just tempering my expectations and thought I would share. It’s all good, but lets give him time.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
It's all up to Bell, but I could see as early as week 3 honestly.
If this lights a fire under Bell and he starts to play more like he did at the end of last year then he will be safe this season.
Week 9 he’ll start getting action imo.
by cencalclassics on Sep 7, 2011 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I think this is just insurance for Bell. If Bell shows progression, you consider re-signing him. If not you’ve already started the development for another player. I think Bell gets most the season as the starter barring egregious errors
http://buffalopp.com
by buffalosportsfan on Sep 7, 2011 10:28 AM EDT reply actions
To be honest
If Bell is healthy he will play there all year.
Then his contract is up and we wash our hands of him and hopefully Hairston is ready after a full year of practicing/conditioning/watching.
The Ideal situation here is Bell plays steady, Haiston develops into a solid tackle, Fitzy plays his butt off and we spend our 1st rounder on a bonafide LT. Thats our Ideal situation.
Realistic situation, Bell plays steady, Hairston develops into a decent T, Fitzy plays to a level comparable with last year and we draft a QB and take OL later in the draft.
"Big Gulps Eh, Well See ya later" - Lloyd Christmas
" You Gus ready To Let The Dogs Out" "What?" " you Know, Who Let the dogs out rough rough rogh rough" - Zack Galifinakis - The Hangover
The ideal situation is Bell plays great and/or Hairston comes along and impresses and we don’t have to spend any picks on a tackle.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I can't agree with that sorry
There needs to be a tangible investment in our OL.
And it truly solidifies your OL when you make that Tangible investment. Miami has had a pretty impressive line since the drafting of Jake Long, The Jets have had some serious success since the drafting of D’Brickshaw Ferguson, The Ravens benefitted greatly from Michael Oher.
Obviously there were some busts aswell but just hearing Dallas talk about Tyron Smith and how much he is helping their O line I mean ther just needs to be 1 elite player on the line and it would make a whole world of difference.
"Big Gulps Eh, Well See ya later" - Lloyd Christmas
" You Gus ready To Let The Dogs Out" "What?" " you Know, Who Let the dogs out rough rough rogh rough" - Zack Galifinakis - The Hangover
by PaullyPforPrez on Sep 7, 2011 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
My opinion, may be different then yours, but thats my opinion
"Big Gulps Eh, Well See ya later" - Lloyd Christmas
" You Gus ready To Let The Dogs Out" "What?" " you Know, Who Let the dogs out rough rough rogh rough" - Zack Galifinakis - The Hangover
by PaullyPforPrez on Sep 7, 2011 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Tangible Investments don’t solidify anything. Having players play great do. Why would I prefer having to take a risk to draft and fill a need over actually having the players on my roster work out?
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions
This is a line of argument I’ve never understood, that the picks have to be costly for us to have a good o-line. That MIGHT be whats needed, but its like saying I need to pay a lot for a car or its not any good. Ideally, I get a good o-line and I don’t have to invest any more picks in it.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm with Paully on this one
I’m of the opinion that Bell overperforming would be a step backwards for the line, as convoluted as that sounds at first. It might fool the coaches into thinking he’s enough. And it. . . just. . . isn’t enough to have Demetrius Bell as your starting left tackle.
I don’t care when the picks or free agents come from, we’ve got to do better at that position than what’s currently here.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
If he is enough, we aren’t ‘fooling’ anyone.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions
All you are saying is that you think Bell will stink this year, therefore you want to draft someone. But Paully outlined the ideal situation is we draft a LT. I guess I’m just pointing out this assumes Bell stinks. If he surprises us and develops into what looks like a starting LT or Hairston does, why would I want to draft a LT.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
He does stink, though. He’ll have one or two good games a year. At this point in his Bills career Bell’s chances at left tackle are almost out. He’s got to have the best season of his career in a way that signals noticable improvement. We’re talking Most Improved Player level of improvement. If he doesn’t….don’t keep trying to polish the turd. It’s a much shorter route to acquire talent whose potential alone is better than Bell’s realized potential.
If he wasn’t playing starting left tackle he might stick around. But this is a position on your football team where you can’t start a C- player and keep seeing micro-incremental progress for years.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
Well now you are both arguing a different point.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Not really.
We need somebody better than Bell at that position.
At LEAST…at least in the very least get some competition in here for Bell. Draft a guy or sign a free agent and don’t just give him the job. Let him take it from Bell. I’d be all for that, in fact. If Bell can prove that he’s better than a talented alternative on our roster, which I strongly suspect wouldn’t happen, then by all means let him play.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
Yes really. You are just blasting Bell, my point is IDEALLY he becomes your most improved player candidate (I don’t think he needs that much work but he needs work). It doesn’t look likely after an up and down preseason. But I’d much rather have a guy on the roster fill the role than insist I need to start using my top draft pick to do it.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m not just blasting a random player that I don’t like, man. He’s at a high responsibility position, and through his mistakes and lack of development, he’s earned every bit of criticism that he’s getting from this fan base. He’s earned the pessimism. It’s not unjustified skepticism when I say that If Bell’s the most improved player on the 2011 Bills, I’ll eat my hat.
Is it likely he’ll improve? Maybe. Is it likely he’ll improve enough to actually hold down the position he’s been gifted? No. But hey, if he can pull a Jim Plunkett and turn it around this year, great. But there really is no more time for this guy when there’s shorter ways to get better. Otherwise, he’s got to be cut or demoted to swing tackle, which is a position equal to his talents.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
As I said you are now arguing something different — Bell’s qualities. I’m just pointing out we shouldn’t root for an ideal world where we need to use draft picks to replace him. We should root for an ideal world where we don’t. Thats it.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions
There was a time when I, along with a lot more people in this fan base supported Bell’s developmental process. It didn’t happen at the same moment in time for us, but we’ve moved on. We want him to succeed, but we’ve seen enough where the ideal world where he doesn’t have to be replaced — that doesn’t exist any more. Giving up on that process taking place isn’t a bad thing — just as giving up on turning lead into gold isn’t bad. It’s progress to take that step.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
You are confusing ideal with reality. There is a season’s worth of football before the draft. Giving up now doesn’t get you anywhere.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
We’re going to have to watch him play one more season, I know. When he over-performs and proves to everyone that he’s a starting left tackle in this league, I’ll admit everything I said about him was wrong. I’m not above that. But when he plays at a C level all year, for the third year in a row, it’s going to be even more clear than it is now.
I’m willing to let the season play out, but going in, I’m confident in this assessment.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
So Bell needs to overperform to stop the overreaction.
Fine, it will start this Sunday at 1pm. Personally I would like the entire offensive line to overperform, including Eric Wood and Andy Levetrie. Our #1 and #2 pick. Since overperforming will quite the skeptics from medocrity land. Maybe we can win a few more games to help this cause.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
by VanScottM on Sep 7, 2011 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m not saying you are wrong about him. I’m saying IDEALLY you are wrong and we can turn him into Orlando Pace 2.0 :-)
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
@Mr.Greysquirrel (if you are a mrs I apoligize)
In an ideal world the Bills finish 16-0 and win the superbowl right? To me that is the higehest end Ideal situation.
I am trying to be somewhat realistic but still speaking out of an ideal situation by saying if Bell plays well he is still a longshot to be resigned by our current regime. If that makes sense?
I am just saying it would be great if we didn’t have to play Hairston at all this year and he could actually develop the way you are supposed to by learning and learning your position to perfection before you start actually playing it.
I (imho) would love to see the Bills not have to draft a QB (because that puts us that much closer to contending) and would like to see them put a high investment in the lowest level skilled position on the football team and that my friend is our LT
"Big Gulps Eh, Well See ya later" - Lloyd Christmas
" You Gus ready To Let The Dogs Out" "What?" " you Know, Who Let the dogs out rough rough rogh rough" - Zack Galifinakis - The Hangover
by PaullyPforPrez on Sep 7, 2011 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Sure, I get it if we are starting from the premise Bell is done. I just think about ideal worlds as places where I don’t feel compelled to draft any position in the first round. Drafting players high and having to draft them high I think of as “problems” not solutions. Realistically, what are the odds a first round tackle will be an above average LT? At least for the first few years kind of low.
The more flexibility we have, the better. If Bell/Hairston plays well, we have more flexibility. And if they play great, well, thats “ideal” in the extreme sense.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
I thought Andy LeVetrie was the smallest offensive lineman on the team.
Wasn’t Andy the one that first got Chan’s foot stuck somewhere. Wasn’t it after the modified attempt by Chan during the Bronco’s preseason game that brought Bell to the forefront of offensive line problems when the entire line played poorly. Wasn’t it Chad Rinehart’s efforts that earned him an opportunity to compete for a spot. Wasn’t it Demetrice Bell that played flawless against the Jaguars following that poor attemt to single handedly stop Eric Dumerville and Von Miller during the broncos game. Am I the only one that is seeing things differently here. Probably, I usually do. I am not going to go into excuses for Demetrice Bell, I spent an off season doing this. It is unquestionably the time for him to step forward and lock down this position if he is man enough. Chan has pushed, shoved and twisted this situation into a battle of you better walk the walk Vs Walk the talk. Everyone on this board should be pulling for Bell to succeed because if he doesn’t Young or Hairston is not the answer. They are big bodied offensive lineman that have played college ball at tackle and have done average to quite well for their programs. D. Bell has played in 24 NFL games in his career, he has completed his first non injury season as a starting LT with some good and some bad games. He is our LT and now he has compitition which is what we all wanted. If Chix was serious about replacing him, this would of been dealt with a long time ago.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
It means something that Jacksonville was missing as many as 3 starting defensive linemen. That doesn’t mean much in itself as a 1 game sample, true. But that also means that Bell’s track record isn’t getting any better.
Young/Hairston is not the answer, but we need something better than Bell OR Hairston/Young.
Go Buffalo Bills, Utah Jazz, and Arkansas Razorbacks
Chan has lit a fire
under his butt, I agree. If he works out good, if he doesn’t draft one and keep looking developing guys. I agree with what they are doing.
I want him to succeed. I want them to keep the try outs going on (like last year) until they find THE guy or Bell gets it.
Interesting
I like how Buddy opens up to the fans after the decisions have been made. I obviously don’t want them giving information away before (and they wouldn’t) but as a fan it has been refreshing to hear the organization discuss some of their decisions like Lee Evans and now Sam Young.
I also like that they appear to have a plan and the confidence to make some hard decisions to get there. We will need more time to determine if Hairston is the man or if Sam Young can push for some playing time, but at least they are making some moves with a clear objective. It seems like they are stocking talent and churning through until they find something stable that works.
I am not ready to give up on Bell yet. I am not as excited as some are about his athletic ability etc. I think he really NEEDED some competition. I feel like I have seen some lazy play from him over the years. Lack of focus. I think Chan is trying to push him. Either step up or step out.
by CarolinaBills21 on Sep 7, 2011 10:59 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Exactly, thank you.
I feel like I have seen some lazy play from him over the years. Lack of focus. I think Chan is trying to push him. Either step up or step out.
We haven’t even played a game yet this season and Bell is the offensive Chris Kelsay. Fans know more than the coaches and everyone wants a New England style offensive line. Just like everyone wants a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning. Let’s not work to get this, lets just blame the coaches for not purchasing Manning’s contract or conceding to Peters demands. We got our competition, let it play out and move forward. I agree with Buddy, this unit appears better than last year and will continue to agree with that until we start seeing the revolving door at a position or two like last season.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
or when the injuries start
which should happen less (in theory) with bigger stronger guys (I am kind of put off by him including faster in there as big guys just are NOT faster).
You know... the team has DIRECTION.
Isn’t that what Buffalo fans have wanted the most the last few years? Nix/Gailey have a plan in place… it’s more than we’ve had the last few regimes! It’s progress.
by Khegobier on Sep 7, 2011 11:39 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Disagree on one point
Time will tell if the Bills are able to get away with massive, slow-footed linemen like Hairston and Young at tackle, where they’re willingly sacrificing top-notch pass protection ability for more size and toughness. If this is the long-term plan, Gailey must be prepared to build an offensive scheme that constantly accounts for extra men protecting the edge against speed rushers.
Young, yes. Hairston has LT feet and is capable of playing the position. His footspeed is no worse that another Nix tackle, Marcus McNeill. Gailey won’t have to change much. Norv Turner didn’t.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
I think that quote is the most interesting part of the piece and isn't getting much attention
To me this is a clear indication of the long term plans for the Oline. The Bills are not going to spend money or high picks for top athletes. They are going to use big guys that can’t be moved in the pass game and can push the pile in the run game. Outside speed rushers will be picked up by blocking TEs (which we already have been stockpiling) and/or the RB.
QB SMASHER KING KONG JASPER
Dareus will put you on you Dar-e-ass
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
I think Hairston is more than just a big guy who can't be moved
I think he’s a 2nd round type that dropped due to weight issues. I don’t think he’ll need much RB or TE chip help.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
then he should be starting now, because Bell sure as hell does
If CHIX want big lineman, then dropping weight isn’t the answer. He is going to have to add muscle and lose the fat.
QB SMASHER KING KONG JASPER
Dareus will put you on you Dar-e-ass
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
C’mon Joe. You know a lot better than this. There’s a huge difference between 335 pounds of conditioned, thick muscle, and 335 pounds of unconditioned muscle with a layer of fat.
Hairston has been the latter, and needs to be the former. Until he makes that change, he won’t unseat anyone.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
I said he had to add muscle and lose fat, right??????
Bottom line…..if Bell can’t do the job and Hairston can, he should play. If nothing else, Chix have shown a willingness to give a shot to guys who have earned it. I don’t see why Hairston would be any different.
QB SMASHER KING KONG JASPER
Dareus will put you on you Dar-e-ass
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
this clearly spells trouble for Bell
Well its about time. Bell has been handed his job for too long. Let’s see how he responds to a challenge and I for one, am now more encouraged by the front office IF – and its a big IF – the intention behind selecting Hairston was the Nix thought he could be a left or right tackle in the future as it would indicate they saw the same concerning play and situation for Bell that some of us fans have. If this was not the intention it might indicate that Gailey stormed into Nix’s office and gave him a piece of his mind regarding his feelings on Bell and the lack of attention to upgrading him, challenging him, or providing long-term direction that did not include him as a starter.
played pretty well at times during the 2010 season.
Obviously, I have found this assessment of Bell’s play last year to be generous for a while now. NFL men have continually stated either through articles or television assessment that I’ve seen from former “in the business” types, that they place a much smaller emphasis on preseason performance than we the fans do. Thus, I find this development to indicate that the Buffalo Bills (or perhaps just Gailey) do not share the idea that Bell played well last year. He is an up-coming free agent and this would indicate to me they are telling Bell either put up or shut up or you will be benched THIS season.
Just my humble opinion is all. But this development is exciting and I hope things work out at left tackle no matter who the starter ends up being. Fitzpatrick has shown us plenty behind way too much pressure, he deserves a shot to show what he can do with NFL caliber pass pro.
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
sounds like satisfaction. Whew! even if just a little.
Can we move onto the season now. I mean with giving Bell a chance to show if he can man up or not? Fair comment Poz, let’s ride the wave until it decipitates. Time to look towards bigger and better things.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
definitely some satisfaction
you know better than anyone that I have been dying to see some sort of movement at the left tackle position, really anything at all! To see that a rookie is going to be taught the position and allowed to focus on it provides the satisfaction that if my assessment of Bell is correct (which remains to be seen, I thought Trent Edwards had turned a corner into a starter before he flamed out) there is at least a safety net and a plan. Its not a very strong one but it has the potential for a good return.
My only concern was the Andy Levitre experiment. This is now round 2 of giving Bell competition. Is Chan seeing something in practice from our LT that has him waking up in cold sweats? If so, it is disturbingly late to hope for a replacement. The best case scenario is either Bell vastly improves or Hairston is NFL ready sooner rather than later, both are very unsure options.
And bigger and better things indeed my friend! Bring on the Chiefs. With their banged up squad I am looking forward to our first win of a hopefully 9-7 season! Lets win some games Buffalo!
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
sorry, but I have an opinion on this.
My only concern was the Andy Levitre experiment. This is now round 2 of giving Bell competition. Is Chan seeing something in practice from our LT that has him waking up in cold sweats?
My opinion is that Chan was so dissatisfied with Bell’s effort against the Broncos that he had to scrap much of the offense he wanted to install this year. Chan came right out and said he went vanilla with the offense in that game. He wanted to see what they have learned to that point and he wanted to measure progress from that group. The entire line failed and Bell failed miserably. This tells me that Gaily had to table some stuff because his group was not close to being ready. If we are going to a spread offense, there could be much opportunity for Fitz with just his line in front of him for protection. That protection got devored by a formidable pass rush and did not leave Fitz anything to work with. Now we all now that we can scheme against that and give Fitz more time, but that may not correlate to what Gailey wants to do. There will be alternatives but the best alternative is to light a fire under someones backside. IMO Bell will be hearing this for the near future. Gailey has a plan and you will need to get on board. Time will tell of course and the fire has been lit. The season will be the answer, putting Fitz in a better surrounding will be the proof that those actions helped. A step has definately been made.
YOU ARE OUT of you kuku fufu mine craker laker Flaber baber FUNKI chunki brain. WE want to winn every year -- abayarde
by VanScottM on Sep 7, 2011 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I can see that
do you see this position switch of Hairston as a furthering of the fire under his backside now that Levitre had to be moved back to guard?
My only issue with the switching around of all these guys is that it seems like a lot of moving around so close to the season just to light a fire under Bell. Then again, its also close to the season to be moving guys around in the hopes that someone takes his spot. You could very well be right.
Do you think we go run heavy or pass heavy against the Chiefs on Sunday?
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Thar she blows.
Poz, when you talk about Bell last season, you really sound like Ahab stalking a white whale. You are now evaluating his performance via the addition of a fourth round draft pick.
We can see what he did last season. We might not think he is good enough, but he was pretty clearly better last season. Stats say so, Ron says so, tape suggests it. We don’t need to stalk secondary and tertiary sources for justification of this position. The question remains if he can continue to improve or if he can be good enough for the future. Even if last year was fine, drafting Hairston makes sense.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Point of Clarification
I actually just finished reading Moby Dick, and Ahab was dangerously (indeed, disastrously) psychotic.
I think you used the comparison to say that poz is relentless in his pursuit, not that he’s nuts, right? ;o)
We’ve waited this long whats another year? hahahaha
- PaullyPforPrez
by ChuckBuffInFlo on Sep 7, 2011 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
No I’m just teasing Poz. He sees shades of Bell’s failures everywhere. If the staff really hated Bell’s 2010, I think they’d do more than draft Chris Hairston. I think they were encourage by his performance last year, hence a longer-term tackle prospect. Though I think they were discouraged by his preseason performance, hence the critiques and the choice to focus Hairston on the left and the experimentation.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
there is no proof Im not nuts! haha
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
You are now evaluating his performance via the addition of a fourth round draft pick.
Are my questions not justified by the comments of his coach?
By the allowing of a fellow starter to take first team reps at his position?
By the allowing of a fourth round rookie RT to switch positions?
Brian had to publish a front page article asserting that Bell has been confirmed as a starter for week 1! Week 1! Its not just the addition of a fourth round pick to his position, its the coming together of a whole host of circumstances, following an unimpressive year for him, and an even more unimpressive preseason. I dont think Im being Ahab crazy am I :)
Stats say so, Ron says so, tape suggests it.
Ron’s stats say Bell was a disaster in pass protection last year and tape, to me, suggests the same.
It is the combination of all these factors that leads to a conclusion that Bell is indeed on the hot seat. How can he not be?
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Well he ranked average in pass blocking efficiency. Ron didn’t say he was a disaster and Brian’s rewatches led him to suggest he was not a disaster. He reduced his sacks and and reduced his penalties. Again, I’m not arguing Bell was awesome, but the hyperbole (DISASTER), really is what gets me, its just seem exaggerated.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
Im not sure what you make of Rons numbers
but to me they spell disaster, which was exactly what I witnessed on the field.
According to Ron, in 2010 Demetrius Bell had 25 bad running plays, 6 killed running plays. Thats the good news.
In pass protection, which is the only issue I have ever raised about Bell (I have in fact suggested he is a good run blocker) Ron’s stats show Demetrius Bell was helped on 48 plays and while giving up 8.5 sacks and killing 17.5 plays to go with 45 bad plays. How is that not a disaster by Rons numbers? 8.5 sacks and 17.5 killed plays! Forget the 45 bad plays that also occurred.
I dont think its hyperbole at all.
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions
We rehash the same stuff
We’ve gone over these numbers so many times I don’t see the point of doing it again. Suffice it to say, I interpret the numbers differently. As have other collectors of stats that compare across teams. Especially when you consider the sacks that were courtesy of Trent Edwards managing the game or Brian Brohm. Ineptitude behind you makes your job pretty difficult.
PFF Calls him much improved. I guess he could technically still be a disaster, but I don’t think thats their point.
Brian here didn’t interpret the year as that bad
You can see essentially half his sacks came in games 1, 2, and 16, when we had knuckleheads behind center. His help numbers are inflated by a Julius Peppers amtchup (I would argue most tackles need help there). HE also showed he can has the skill to perform against better competition (PIT, BAL NYJ @ home), what he needs to do is be more consistent. 17.5 killed plays out of 514? I mean how does that compare across other teams? I have no idea, but it sounds smaller when its divided by over 500 plays. One a game (basically). That doesn’t sound absurd.
I also think that you can’t use these grades to say he is a better run blocker — they aren’t intended to compare run-blocking to pass-blocking skillsets, it makes our whole team look like better run blockers than pass blcokers, and last year I really don’t think that was the case.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
none of that matters though
to this discussion, you were implying that my observation that he was terrible last year stood alone and even used Ron’s numbers specifically to imply as much. I was simply pointing out that this was not the case.
We have been over those numbers, the issue here was
Stats say so, Ron says so, tape suggests it.
Ron doesnt seem to say so to me. The stats are certainly debatable from various sources and the tape does suggest it to me if not to you. Thats all I was saying. Im not just chasing a white whale here, Ive had the same belief since watching the games last season as I do now, and that is that Bell was below average and badly struggled, but as you said, we’ve been over that :)
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, well as I explained, those numbers mean nothing out of context. We need some idea of how other tackles do. How many plays are invovled, and who the opponent is. Listing those numbers just doesn’t sound like a disaster to me. I guess it does to you.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
its not the numbers though grey
the numbers alone dont mean anything to me. Its that they are conferring what I SAW on the field. I cannot emphasize this enough. If you go back to my posts from last season after games I was consistently saying how badly Bell looked out there and how many drives he was costing us. Ron’s observations simply confirm what I was seeing. If I wasnt believing something from watching I would never hold such a strong belief based on someone else’s numbers without making my own determination first.
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Look this is about glass half empty or half full. I thought Bell was horrendous in 2009. He was much better in my eyes last year. Given how raw he is and the injury he was coming back from, I was encouraged by his play and his improvement. Does that mean he was awesome, no. But If 2009 was a disaster (and it was in my book) 2010 has to be something less. Maybe its semantics, but when a guy gets better I have a tough time keeping him in the doghouse.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
I just see it as calling it like it is
But If 2009 was a disaster (and it was in my book) 2010 has to be something less
Maybe, but at the end of the day, the judgment should be made on whether or not he makes us a better football team as a starter. If the answer is no, movement at the position is the right thing to do. At least moving Hairston over is a start, no?
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes. I think having someone to backup and compete for LT is progress compared to what it looked like at the beginning of training camp. I’m not as convinced Hairston is gonna be ready this year as some on this board, but I feel better thinking there is a prospect at the spot as opposed to nothing. Our tackle depth has been a glaring weakness, no matter what we think of Bell, if he went down it would go from “disaster” to mega-disaster.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
Disaster to me is Cornell Green / Jamon Meredith etc. Bell to me was not inspiring, but improved. Rarely did a game finish where I thought Bell was the secret to the win or loss (thats a good thing and a bad thing I guess).
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
oh boy I disagree grey
Bell cost us touchdowns with bad penalties in the redzone, killed drives by getting blown up on key third downs, and gave up many pressures that resulted in either a fumble or interception.
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Sounds like you are too focused on Bell. Seriously, Ron’s says he had 23.5 killed plays (runa nd pass) all season. So he killed 1.5 plays a game (the things you describe above should all qualify, but a killed play need not be THAT bad, but lets assume it is). Given we run over 55 plays a game and Bell is on the field for every single one of them, it suggests he killed around 2.5% of our plays. I can’t come away thinking that was the critical factor from the game.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
When I watched last years o-line, the problems seemed so much more than Bell. And frankly, the team’s problem seemed so much larger than Bell. I find it difficult to put so much effort into debating this position.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
Again, I’m disputing he was inconsistent in preseason, but adding Hairston does NOT confirm he was a disaster in 2010. Just grasping at straws in my opinion. Adding MCkinnie, Gaither, drafting a tackl in the first round, or some other free agent, that would have told us they were desperate for a tackle prior to preseason. But drafting Hairston does not tell me they say 2010 Bell and made LT a priority.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Sep 7, 2011 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
hyperbole? grasping at straws?
I never said they made LT a priority, that is my whole problem, just wondering if Hairston was intentionally drafted to be a LT.
Im not sure why my assessment is hyperbole or grasping at straws when the guy we are talking about had to be confirmed as a starter in week 1 today. Based on everything I watched last year, Bell was a very very bad left tackle in 2010. I ve stayed consistent with this belief, it is not based on exaggeration, it is based on assessment and opinion.
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions
the intention behind selecting Hairston was the Nix thought he could be a left or right tackle in the future as it would indicate they saw the same concerning play and situation for Bell that some of us fans have.
Thus, I find this development to indicate that the Buffalo Bills (or perhaps just Gailey) do not share the idea that Bell played well last year.
I think trying to turn Bell’s preseason roster spot fight into a statement about last year or Hairston into a statement about last year is a bit of a stretch.
All these moves seem to be eyed through the tunnel of grading Bell’s 2010 performance. Why can’t they just be about adding tackle depth or Bell coming back unfocused?
If they were really freaking out about left tackle the way you ahve been, I think they would have done more than develop a fourth rounder or signed Wrotto to a 2 year extension. To me the coaches are trying to light a fire under him, but I think its pretty much been premised on a disappointing preseason.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
Essentially I do not see a team panicking over preseason performance from a two year starter unless his regular season history leaves much to be desired. Noticed I used the word “could” with Nix, making it a question mark and something I personally do not believe, but assert that it looks to me like Gailey was not happy. I dont think Gailey and Nix are on the same page regarding the oline
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions
You think Gailey wanted one of the free agents? I don’t really see a schism here.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
I think Gailey
wanted more focus on offense at this point. I dont know if he was right but often when a team brings in a head coach who is stronger on offense or defense, they tend to give him the resources to exploit those strenghts. Gailey is an offensive guy and thus far, Nix hasnt given him a major investment from free agency or the draft beyond CJ Spiller. I wonder if Gailey is a tad frustrated
This even grates my passive cheese - LeClaire Bill
by poz on Sep 7, 2011 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I haven’t seen anything that suggests there is a disagrement between them. He got his waterbug. Last year he arguably had the league’s worst defense. So the emphasis seems fairly consistent. If he needs something its o-lineman, but the defense needed linebackers, safeties and d-linemen.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
any chance
if Bell performs well this year, we change him to RT and draft a LT? I think he’s better than Pears, and could be a really good RT long term.
by Fernando brazil on Sep 7, 2011 12:17 PM EDT reply actions
Jasper has moved over to the offense line. I believe they might now hope to get him ready to be their next long-term RT.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
TAT, do you think they are thinking Jasper can be starter material or merely a competent backup?
Give a monkey a typewriter and infinite time, and he’ll eventually release Maybin. -- stetzwebs
Unfortunately, experience doesn't always lead to wisdom - Joe P.
No one circles the waiver wire like the Buffalo Bills!
I think he might be a guard
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Quarterback in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
Who is this Average Bell you speak of?
Average Bell, Levitre and Wood together
At first glance I thought you were giving Demetrius Bell a new nickname.
There is nothing worse than exaggeration!- Me
We all say, GO BILLS and I've always wondered, where do we want them to go? I guess to the Super Bowl! -Me
Haha, yeah I had to read that twice too.
"It’s like I’ve always said, don’t tell me about the labor pains, just show me the baby. That’s what we’ve got to do. We’ve got to show you the baby, and the baby is winning." - Buddy Nix
I believe this sounds like they are going to need a bigger more athletic QB in the future too!
The Bills are trying to get bigger and tougher up front… Average Bell, Levitre and Wood together, and you’ve got a 6’4", 308-pound offensive lineman. Average the six hand-picked newcomers (Urbik, Pears, Hairston, Young, Rinehart and Brown) together, and you’ve got a 6’6", 325-pound lineman.
IMO, the writing is on the wall with the type of prototypical QB that is coming out of college with big arms that can throw on the run and a lot of mobility to tuck and run and can take a hit or two… The downfall from this is also finding a QB with accuracy (unless your name is Andrew Luck). It is just a hunch, but once the OL is solidified as we worked on the defense in the draft and FA, now we can focus on the QB’s for the future.
by dabillsr1 on Sep 7, 2011 12:28 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I thought robert griffin III looked like a gailey type qb.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Sep 7, 2011 12:48 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
There's a stench in the air, and I don't care for it.
If, as it now appears may have been the case for a while now, Bell is not their guy, why so much public confidence that he HAS BEEN their guy, and why has no REAL, high-talent competition been given to him.
Why did they waste so much time playing him as the starting LT, and instead of taking ANYONE as an upgrade early last year, they take “you-know-who” and Torrell Troup. Why does logic seem to eternally escape this franchise’s front office?
I don’t get it. I don’t get why Nix likes to talk so much when all it is is lip service done in a manner that sounds like he’s letting you in on family stories of days gone by. Maybe I shouldn’t be, but he’s really gotten me upset. This is not the time to fiddle around with fringe talent at LT.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:23 PM EDT reply actions
But that seems exactly what there plan is
This is not the time to fiddle around with fringe talent at LT.
CHIX plan for the OT position…..Polish big turds and give them help blocking speed rushers
QB SMASHER KING KONG JASPER
Dareus will put you on you Dar-e-ass
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
Most LT get help with elite speed rushers
That part is simple schematically. Bell’s inconsistency with power and inside counter moves is a larger Achilles heel then a LT without superior quickness.
I was shocked how much Bell had regressed in the pre-season. He was continually lowering his head, which is usually disastrous for an OT, and lunging at rushers. I think that is part of the reason Gailey and the coaching staff displayed such exasperation with Bell, he’d regressed in my view.
Good post....but I wasn't considering Bell as part of the long term plan at LT
My point was that a bigger LT might be slower, but CHIX are willing to give up some quickness and account for that by using the TE and/or RB to help block.
QB SMASHER KING KONG JASPER
Dareus will put you on you Dar-e-ass
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
There’s been a of that on the menu with Bills fans. The time is now. The players aren’t right. The evaluation is flawed, on many levels.
In the year two thousaaaaaaand.
In the year two thousAAAAAAND!
by TheAfghanTwilight on Sep 7, 2011 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is probably...........
………… the greatest thread we have had in a looooong time.
Love all the comments and appreciate all of the different views.
Awesome.
"There is not a loser in this room." Marv Levy.
by SERGEANT MAJOR THOR on Sep 7, 2011 8:07 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I’ll second that, ’though from a position of far inferior longevity.
We’ve waited this long whats another year? hahahaha
- PaullyPforPrez
by ChuckBuffInFlo on Sep 7, 2011 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmm..
though im sour on the ol.. Im at a point of thinking where ive gained interest in the players signed this year. Hairston..Jasper..Young. Yes they are all unproven. But I see three buffalo bills…early in their career with desire, attitude and toughness. I like the guys who seem to play with chips on their shoulders. Something to prove. I see these guys giving it their all to get to the starting line. Dont sleep on them just yet.
by Feedjasper on Sep 7, 2011 10:12 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Buffalo Rumblings
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Things to know about NFL men who served in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam
- How Kyle Orton almost cost the Colts Andrew Luck
- Detroit Lions DT Nick Fairley arrested again; now has more NFL arrests than NFL sacks
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
