State of the Roster: Bills Wide Receivers
![]() |
|
|
Welcome to the off-season, Bills fans. The NFL playoffs have reached the divisional round (go Jaguars!) (and we'll discuss those games briefly later on this week); for Bills purposes, however, we're continuing our roster breakdowns, which started yesterday.
This, folks, is the second posting of what will likely be at least 13 such posts in a series we're calling "State of the Bills Roster". We started with quarterbacks; today, we're skipping to wide receivers. Keep in mind the following: this exercise isn't entirely about talents and strengths/weaknesses as much as it is about status, usage and growth potential. This is a tool to help us predict/determine what the best plan of attack is for the Bills this off-season as they attempt to build a playoff roster for 2008.
Here's a breakdown of Buffalo's wide receiving corps:
Lee Evans
Evans had a disappointing 2007 season as the Bills flip-flopped quarterbacks, seeing his reception total drop from 82 to 55 and his big plays become few and far between as well. The Bills generally ran Evans on two types of plays - fly patterns and deep digs. However, with defenses keyed in on Evans - he was Buffalo's only viable receiving threat - double and triple coverage often left him covered. He dropped a fair share of throws as well. There's no question that Evans has elite deep threat tools, but it's also clear that he can't carry a receiving corps without help.
Will Improve in '08 if - a new offense finds better ways to get him the ball :: the Bills find stability at QB :: he gets some help in the red zone
Josh Reed
If there was a wide receiver that could be counted on week-to-week, it was Josh Reed. The young veteran had one of his best seasons to date, finishing second on the team in receptions (51) and developing into the Bills' top possession threat. When he was forced into starting action, he was not as effective - explaining why the Bills would often split Roscoe Parrish wide and let Reed continue to operate from the slot. Reed is at his best when he's not a focal point of the offense, as defenses can overlook him. He's certainly got a niche in the offense, and that niche will be better utilized if more talent is brought in.
Will Improve in '08 if - he doesn't have to start :: he no longer is a focal point of the offense
Roscoe Parrish
At one point, Parrish was complaining to the media that he was not being used properly in the offense. That may be true, but he still finished third on the team with 35 receptions and 352 yards. One of the NFL's elite punt return men, Parrish likely doesn't - and probably shouldn't - have much of a future role in the offense. He's simply too valuable elsewhere. Sure, he'll run the occasional reverse and he'll be on the field - at a minimum, he's a very scary slot threat, no matter how he's producing - but he'll probably never put up better numbers consistently than he did this season.
Will Improve in '08 if - the new O-Coordinator is creative in getting him the ball :: he doesn't have extended playing time, diluting his big-play potential :: he stays healthy for another full season
Peerless Price
Surprisingly, Buffalo's offense struggled when Price was placed on Injured Reserve after four games. Not because Price was productive - let's face it, his 7 catches in four games weren't making much of an impact - but because his loss forced Reed and Parrish to play out of their distinctive niches. With the popular opinion that the Bills will be looking to bolster their receiving corps prevalent, Price may not have a roster spot awaiting him in '08 - despite having two years left on his deal.
Will Improve in '08 if: he's used out of the slot more :: he can stay healthy :: he's on the roster
Sam Aiken
Aiken - one of Buffalo's top special teams performers over the past few seasons - is a free agent. Whether the Bills re-sign him or not depends solely on his special teams abilities, because in four seasons, he hasn't been able to see much playing time at wideout despite having a size advantage over his teammates.
Will Improve in '08 if - he stays healthy :: he focuses on special teams - let's face it, Sam, your career as an NFL receiver is essentially over
Justin Jenkins
Jenkins started the 2007 season on the Bills' practice squad, and was called up to the active roster after the season-ending neck injury to Price. In terms of wideout, Jenkins actually jumped the veteran Aiken rather quickly on the depth chart - in four-wide sets, it was Jenkins lining up with Evans, Reed and Parrish. The youngster even played well on special teams as a punt gunner; if special teams coordinator Bobby April feels comfortable having Jenkins fill the role that Aiken has the past few seasons, Jenkins may allow the Bills to let Aiken walk.
Will Improve in '08 if - he can stick on the roster again :: he develops his punt gunner skills :: he develops a rapport with Buffalo's backup quarterbacks
Other wideouts: Scott Mayle, Felton Huggins. These two were afterthoughts this season; Mayle spent 16 weeks on the practice squad, and Huggins was signed to the squad only after Mayle was promoted to the active roster for the season finale. These two will probably be around for training camp, but their chances of making the roster - or for that matter, the practice squad - are minimal.
Off-Season Outlook
Let's make this perfectly clear: the Bills don't have a bad receiving corps. Each player, specifically the top three guys, have distinctive roles within the offense. That's the inherent problem, however - all of Buffalo's current wideouts are role players. There is not one athlete among this group that has transcendent skills and can hurt defenses in more than one way. Until that player is added, Buffalo will continue to struggle in the passing game.
Possible additions: big, physical veteran; big, physical rookie; tall deep threat
Possible subtractions: Price, Aiken
0 recs |
31 comments
Comments
Tall Wide Outs
So originally I believed signing a vet to be critical. My question is; do we need to spend money to bring in a new guy, or is a healthy Peerless Price really what we need. I know he isn't the big, tall, physically imposing figure that we all want but he is a vet receiver whose absence, as Brain said caused the offense to struggle. Everyone want two receivers in the off season one vet and one rookie, I'm wondering do we maybe just have to draft one and hope Peerless is healthy.
Any thoughts?
by sireric on Jan 7, 2008 12:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
RE:
My question: Besides the fact that Trent Edwards likes to throw to the tight ends, why is Marv Levy so adamant about needing to get more production from the tight end position? When the offense had so much success in 1990 and 1991, I believe that Andre Reed, James Lofton, and Thurman Thomas were the primary pass catchers; I don't recall TE Keith McKeller being involved that much at all, and TE Pete Metzelaars did not emerge until later. Certainly an offense can have success without featuring the tight end (see Bengals). Everyone says that tight ends are required to threaten the middle of the field, however what's to say that putting a receiver in the slot, as one example, would not accomplish the same thing? Why doesn't Levy say they need help at tight end and wide receiver? Why the emphasis on tight end? Remember your success as the Bills coach, Marv? It doesn't matter to me, TE or WR, as long as he is a great player.
As a side note, I wonder if Edwards favors throwing to the TE (and to the middle of the field in general) rather than the WR's because he is not confident that he can consistently make the tough throws to the sidelines where the WR's typically operate?
by Fort Worth on Jan 7, 2008 1:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RE:
As for your side note, I can only say that you may be right about that, and maybe in 2008 when he has more experience, the WRs will get more work, as Trent is more comfortable trying to make those throws.
by sireric on Jan 7, 2008 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Metzelaars
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Size
Good football teams have big targets; their size makes up for the lack of speed. Burress isn't fast by any means, but his size makes him a deep threat. The same is true for Ernest Wilford, D.J. Hackett, Vincent Jackson, etc. Big offenses are the toughest to defend (just look at Cleveland). We need actual, physical size - it almost always helps.
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: My Question is
by sireric on Jan 7, 2008 2:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say no
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 2:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Veteran Wideout
by fletcherjd on Jan 7, 2008 3:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is not
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Deal
by fletcherjd on Jan 7, 2008 6:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Meant to add...
by fletcherjd on Jan 7, 2008 6:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Re: Size
by fletcherjd on Jan 7, 2008 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
tall wide outs
by sireric on Jan 7, 2008 4:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Size again
That is why I believe the scheme is so important. The change of offensive coordinators will be huge for this offense. Our guys have skills but were used wrong and that had a big effect. I'm not saying we don't need to add talent, but I think we are better off than some think.
by RabidBuffalo on Jan 7, 2008 6:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 6:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
TEs in the Super Bowl era
All of this isn't to say that a top-notch TE is an essential element of a successful offense, but just to clarify why Levy values a top TE so much.
by Future Considerations on Jan 7, 2008 6:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And to that end...
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 6:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Quickest solution
by Kurupt on Jan 7, 2008 4:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
RE: Quickest solution
by Fort Worth on Jan 7, 2008 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Patience
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: Patience
by Fort Worth on Jan 7, 2008 6:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: elite talent
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 7:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: elite talent
by Fort Worth on Jan 7, 2008 7:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you on O
If the Bills want to win games, they need to score points. Think of the extra games Buffalo would have won - maybe as high as 4, elevating their record to 11-5 - if they'd had a good offense, even with the defense maintaining its #30 ranking! We're so close; you don't need an overwhelming defense to win anymore. You need a consistent offense and a playmaking, not dominant, defense.
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 8:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No sure I entirely agree
12 of the top 14 defenses made it into the playoffs; thats a pretty strong correlation in my book. And its as good a reason as any why the Browns, Vikings, and Bills for starters couldn't seal the deal on a playoff run.
by Zumone on Jan 7, 2008 9:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
*Not* sure that is
by Zumone on Jan 7, 2008 9:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, but...
Follow the Colts blueprint - build your offense, get them explosive, and then let them refine their game while you build your defense with young, fast talent. That's how the Colts did it, and they're perpetual winners.
by Brian Galliford on Jan 8, 2008 7:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
re: Quickest solution
by Zumone on Jan 7, 2008 4:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Arizona > Chicago
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 5:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No argument here
by Zumone on Jan 7, 2008 6:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree
by Brian Galliford on Jan 7, 2008 6:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 























