| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Southlight
United States11766 Posts
On August 23 2010 23:38 SPYTE wrote:Either way, I was really upset at the draft choices for the Bills when they CLEARLY needed a change in the quarterback position. You sound like the Redskins (management... the fans have slowly wizened up to the importance of offensive lines in the past decade of fail, although in fairness Bruce Allen seems to understand it now). "NEED MOAR WRS" "NEED BETTER QBS" "WHAT IS AN OFFENSIVE LINE" | ||
|
SPYTE
United States289 Posts
On August 23 2010 23:49 Southlight wrote: You sound like the Redskins (management... the fans have slowly wizened up to the importance of offensive lines in the past decade of fail, although in fairness Bruce Allen seems to understand it now). "NEED MOAR WRS" "NEED BETTER QBS" "WHAT IS AN OFFENSIVE LINE" I'm sorry but I don't like to watch a quarterback that throws a ball 5 yards hoping for the WR to get the extra 5. Yes this may be the play calling of the coach and not the QB, but a QB has the ability to change the play if necessary and should be able to make plays down field. And I'm sorry but getting a 3rd RB at this point in time just really doesn't make sense in my mind (regardless of thinking they will trade later). BTW, Redskins just released a WR and got a new QB and will probably have a much stronger season. Yes obviously a O Line is necessary to have an efficient offense, BUT it sure does help to have a non-drone QB who has the presence of mind to move out of the pocket or throw the ball when necessary | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32044 Posts
On August 24 2010 00:06 SPYTE wrote: I'm sorry but I don't like to watch a quarterback that throws a ball 5 yards hoping for the WR to get the extra 5. Yes this may be the play calling of the coach and not the QB, but a QB has the ability to change the play if necessary and should be able to make plays down field. And I'm sorry but getting a 3rd RB at this point in time just really doesn't make sense in my mind (regardless of thinking they will trade later). BTW, Redskins just released a WR and got a new QB and will probably have a much stronger season. Yes obviously a O Line is necessary to have an efficient offense, BUT it sure does help to have a non-drone QB who has the presence of mind to move out of the pocket or throw the ball when necessary He is saying that it wouldn't matter if Peyton Manning was the Bills' QB because their line is terrible. He's not disagreeing that Spiller was a terrible luxury pick by a shit team, but he is disagreeing that a QB is what the team really needed. Look around the league. You can't find a good team with a crappy line. They don't exist. | ||
|
Southlight
United States11766 Posts
On August 24 2010 00:06 SPYTE wrote: BTW, Redskins just released a WR and got a new QB and will probably have a much stronger season. Yes obviously a O Line is necessary to have an efficient offense, BUT it sure does help to have a non-drone QB who has the presence of mind to move out of the pocket or throw the ball when necessary Even Redskins fans are rejoicing more about Trent Williams than McNabb, and everyone knows the season rests more on how well Williams can block McNabb's blind side more than McNabb himself. Yes, it helps to have an established QB, because you can rest calmly knowing he's probably not gonna screw it up, but if your offensive line is a disaster the QB won't get anything done. For example, Jason Campbell was unfairly scapegoated because he had all of 0.5 seconds to throw a ball. So people whined and cried about his inability to move out of the pocket, throw deep balls, etc. when he had zilch time. The Bills' offensive line issues have been well chronicled, particularly in light of their letting go of Jason Peters (I think was his name) last offseason, and having done nothing to do account for it. Complaining about QB play in light of one of the worst offensive lines in the league, and after having done nothing to deal with that is very Vinny Cerrato. | ||
|
SPYTE
United States289 Posts
On August 24 2010 00:09 Hawk wrote: He is saying that it wouldn't matter if Peyton Manning was the Bills' QB because their line is terrible. He's not disagreeing that Spiller was a terrible luxury pick by a shit team, but he is disagreeing that a QB is what the team really needed. Look around the league. You can't find a good team with a crappy line. They don't exist. AHhhhh, yea actually I revoke my previous statements now that I see the overall point being made. The O Line itself is horrible on the bills and it has been that way through the last 3-4 seasons. I was just trying to point out the first selection which is the one time you should be spending a pick on the obvious "allstar" choices. Recreating the O Line should be done through trades or later in the draft imo (at least not 1st round). | ||
|
Southlight
United States11766 Posts
On August 24 2010 00:13 SPYTE wrote:Recreating the O Line should be done through trades or later in the draft imo (at least not 1st round). ^^ It's a tough call, but IMO most top-end tackles are found in the first round... it's pretty unlikely (I think? no stats to back it up but as far as I can remember most of the good tackles these days are all first-rounders) to find a good one later on. C you can often pick up later in the draft (mostly as a converted G I think), and G are historically less highly-rated than T and thus have been more likely to "fall." That's not to say a top-pick T is going to pan out (ie. Andre Smith vs Michael Oher) but I definitely feel like there's a pressing need to "invest" in it, especially if your offensive line is dreadful and/or your team hasn't touched on it at all for several years. That's just my opinion, though. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32044 Posts
| ||
|
Southlight
United States11766 Posts
On August 24 2010 00:20 Hawk wrote: 1st round Oline picks definitely seem to pan out more than other positions, and there always seems to be more later round OL gems. It's weird, I remember some sportswriters noticing that most successful QBs these days are first-rounders, which is why you dance the deadly dance when you draft a first-round QB, but when you actually look at the success rate of 1st round QBs compared to others you see a huge disparity that makes it necessary. Yay for drafts. | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On August 24 2010 00:12 Southlight wrote: Even Redskins fans are rejoicing more about Trent Williams than McNabb, and everyone knows the season rests more on how well Williams can block McNabb's blind side more than McNabb himself. Yes, it helps to have an established QB, because you can rest calmly knowing he's probably not gonna screw it up, but if your offensive line is a disaster the QB won't get anything done. For example, Jason Campbell was unfairly scapegoated because he had all of 0.5 seconds to throw a ball. So people whined and cried about his inability to move out of the pocket, throw deep balls, etc. when he had zilch time. The Bills' offensive line issues have been well chronicled, particularly in light of their letting go of Jason Peters (I think was his name) last offseason, and having done nothing to do account for it. Complaining about QB play in light of one of the worst offensive lines in the league, and after having done nothing to deal with that is very Vinny Cerrato. Jason Campbell was not unfairly scapegoated. He couldn't get through all of his reads and always threw the check down pass which is why he had >60% completion percentage but we had a losing record of about 17-28 with him. On any 3rd and long (say 3rd and 10 for example) he would always throw a 7-9 yard pass, and we would have to punt. It was terrible. We were rejoicing this last game because McNabb actually converted some 3rd and longs. Last years O-line was abysmal... I'll give you that. However, before that in the '07 and '08 seasons he didn't fare much better. In fact, remember when we made the playoffs in '07? Yeah, that was when Campbell got hurt and Collins came in and took us on a 4 game winning streak. Campbell was 5-7 before that. Anyway, I'm glad Vinny is gone and we have a real GM and Coach. Real excited that we have an actual O-line now.. and that Trent actually got abused by Suggs in this last game so that he knows he has a lot to work on. ------------ Anyway, as for picks on O-line. It SEEMS in most cases that you do need a 1st or 2nd round pick on OT. But the other positions IF you have a good O-line coach you can get away with developing 3rd-7th rounders. Take a look at the Patriots/Colts/NO O-lines and they're mostly made up of 4th-7th rounders with the occasional 2nd and 1st thrown in. You just have to have good O-line coaching, and be good at finding talent in the later rounds and developing it. Of course, those are organizations that are fairly competent which doesn't speak for more than probably 10 teams in the league... so... maybe it doesn't apply. If you look at the last like 15+ superbowl winners there's only maybe 2-3 quarterbacks who weren't considered elite or very good who have won. So in general you do have to spend a 1st or 2nd on a good QB to try and hit the jackpot. The big problem right now is the draft system in which people like Stafford and Bradford get 40+ million guaranteed. So basically if they don't work out the organization is crippled for years because of the money invested in the pick. Which is really why they need to have a rookie pay scale. | ||
|
Southlight
United States11766 Posts
orz Yeah, OT seems to be mostly 1st/2nds (high picks), G/C it looks like people can make do with lower picks because they're not as highly regarded. Teams that strike gold often on lower picks (mainly the Pats and Colts, tbh, even other well-regarded pick teams like the Ravens and Steelers don't fare too well with offensive line at lower picks, ie. why the Steelers have such a bad o-line) can get around it but then again they do that with every position. | ||
|
SPYTE
United States289 Posts
The big problem right now is the draft system in which people like Stafford and Bradford get 40+ million guaranteed. So basically if they don't work out the organization is crippled for years because of the money invested in the pick. Which is really why they need to have a rookie pay scale. Definitely agree with this. There needs to be some sort of way that a org won't be crippled just because they want to try and change something up 1 season. (it's especially sad when that player doesnt even end up playing past that first year :O) | ||
|
InToTheWannaB
United States4770 Posts
 | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32044 Posts
On August 24 2010 00:39 eshlow wrote: Jason Campbell was not unfairly scapegoated. He couldn't get through all of his reads and always threw the check down pass which is why he had >60% completion percentage but we had a losing record of about 17-28 with him. On any 3rd and long (say 3rd and 10 for example) he would always throw a 7-9 yard pass, and we would have to punt. It was terrible. We were rejoicing this last game because McNabb actually converted some 3rd and longs. Last years O-line was abysmal... I'll give you that. However, before that in the '07 and '08 seasons he didn't fare much better. In fact, remember when we made the playoffs in '07? Yeah, that was when Campbell got hurt and Collins came in and took us on a 4 game winning streak. Campbell was 5-7 before that. Anyway, I'm glad Vinny is gone and we have a real GM and Coach. Real excited that we have an actual O-line now.. and that Trent actually got abused by Suggs in this last game so that he knows he has a lot to work on. ------------ Anyway, as for picks on O-line. It SEEMS in most cases that you do need a 1st or 2nd round pick on OT. But the other positions IF you have a good O-line coach you can get away with developing 3rd-7th rounders. Take a look at the Patriots/Colts/NO O-lines and they're mostly made up of 4th-7th rounders with the occasional 2nd and 1st thrown in. You just have to have good O-line coaching, and be good at finding talent in the later rounds and developing it. Of course, those are organizations that are fairly competent which doesn't speak for more than probably 10 teams in the league... so... maybe it doesn't apply. If you look at the last like 15+ superbowl winners there's only maybe 2-3 quarterbacks who weren't considered elite or very good who have won. So in general you do have to spend a 1st or 2nd on a good QB to try and hit the jackpot. The big problem right now is the draft system in which people like Stafford and Bradford get 40+ million guaranteed. So basically if they don't work out the organization is crippled for years because of the money invested in the pick. Which is really why they need to have a rookie pay scale. He's definitely not some kind of great player or anything, but Campbell is absolutely a starter in this league with decent enough support. That line was terrible, I always thought Santana Moss was overrated as shit and he was the only decent WR. Portis had been going downhill for a number of years. You gotta ask yourself: How many of those times did he check down because an end was in the backfield right away or because his WRs lacked the skill to get separation? Or why the hell the Skins consistently found themselves in 3rd and longs? Portis for Campbell's first couple years and then Cooley were the only weapons and those don't matter if he can't make it through his five step drop without pressure | ||
|
SolaR-
United States2685 Posts
On August 24 2010 02:27 InToTheWannaB wrote: Mother fucking Giants are going to blow everyones ass out of the water this year. Everyone health again this year. We got even more D-linemen this season, and we are going to sack everyones ass this year. Bradshaws legs are back and he going to run all over everyone. Eli and the WR are going to be just as good or even better then last season!!! YEAH YOU ARE ALL FUCKED! GO GIANTS!!! GO BIG BLUE!!! GIANTS GIANTS GIANTS!!! BIG BLUE WRECKING CREW COMING FOR YOU!!! MONSTERS OF THE MEADOWLANDS!! THIS IS ARE YEAR BABY!! HERE WE GO GIANTS HERE WE GO!! ALSO, Lets hope this VICTOR CRUZ GUY IS the next PLAXICO. | ||
|
dim2thesum
United States65 Posts
| ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On August 24 2010 00:43 Southlight wrote: I don't know if Campbell is any good, but for the better part of the past few years the general feeling I got from Redskins fans (until last year I guess, which was when people starting pointing fingers at Cerrato/Zorn/o-line) was that they were losing because of Campbell, despite their o-line having been dreadful for like 5 years and only getting worse. I mean ffs Stephon Heyer was considered the savior. Seriously??? orz Yeah, OT seems to be mostly 1st/2nds (high picks), G/C it looks like people can make do with lower picks because they're not as highly regarded. Teams that strike gold often on lower picks (mainly the Pats and Colts, tbh, even other well-regarded pick teams like the Ravens and Steelers don't fare too well with offensive line at lower picks, ie. why the Steelers have such a bad o-line) can get around it but then again they do that with every position. On August 24 2010 03:11 Hawk wrote: He's definitely not some kind of great player or anything, but Campbell is absolutely a starter in this league with decent enough support. That line was terrible, I always thought Santana Moss was overrated as shit and he was the only decent WR. Portis had been going downhill for a number of years. You gotta ask yourself: How many of those times did he check down because an end was in the backfield right away or because his WRs lacked the skill to get separation? Or why the hell the Skins consistently found themselves in 3rd and longs? Portis for Campbell's first couple years and then Cooley were the only weapons and those don't matter if he can't make it through his five step drop without pressure Trust me... I wanted to believe in Campbell, and I tried to over the past 3 years. But yeahhh. Not withstanding the poor O-line last year our O-line has been decent in '08, '07, '06... it was just last year it was abysmal. He has NEVER taken our team to a game winning drive. And he's had at least 15+ chances since every year we lose about 6-7 games by a touchdown or less. Yes, that's probably 15-20 times he's had a chance to take us to a game winning drive. He has delivered ZERO times. In '08 when we went 6-2 to start the season it was Portis carrying us there... not so much campbell who had 8 TDs in 8 games. Although he did have zero INTs. He's not a game changer. He is good enough to be a starter. He won't lose games for you. But he won't win them either. I am definitely more excited about us getting O-line than McNabb though. But I'm not at all upset about losing Campbell either. He's had a solid 2-3 years with us to show us something (I won't even count last year), and he hasn't shown us that he can be anything above mediocre. I can count on one finger in the past 20 years the last time a great defense led a team to a superbowl without a good QB... and that's the '00 Ravens. If you're in it to win the superbowl (and I hope all teams are) then Campbell is definitely not the answer. | ||
|
SweeTLemonS[TPR]
11739 Posts
To the guy that was saying he didn't like OL picks in round one, and thought you should build with trades/drafting... the way management works has changed a lot over... probably the last ten years would be good to start with. More and more teams are drafting stud LT's in the early rounds. Your case can be made for all of the other OL positions, EXCEPT LT (or RT for a left handed QB, but you need to be a tool to draft a left handed QB not named Steve Young). Great LT's do not come around very often, so if you have the opportunity to get one, you need to take it. The same exact thing can be said about a QB, and that's what makes certain #1 overall choices very hard to make (this year's was a great example. A lot of people asked whether or not the Rams would go with Bradford or that one LT whose name I can't recall, and try to get Colt McCoy, or Claussen later on). As to your point about QB's being able to change plays at the lines.. not all coaches or systems allow for that. That is entirely system dependent, and if your coach is a big enough dick, he may just pull you for not doing what you're told to do. From what I've skimmed, I agree with Hawk's POV on the Skins recent woes. I think Campbell would have been fine with Trent Williams blocking for him this year (assuming he's good, but Mike is good at LT picks, so it'd seem... he did draft Ryan Clady, and that guy is a straight BEAST, top 2 LT in the league right now, between him and Joe Thomas, imo). But, I can't say that I really think eshlow is wrong either. I don't think Campbell would have ever become more than a serviceable QB. I think he's like Trent Dilfer, or Brad Johnson. They'll be efficient, and not hurt the team, but you'll never really be able to put the game in their hands. He's far from an all-star caliber QB, and if you can't build one of the most dominant defenses ever to carry your offense... he's probably not the guy you want. In any case, the Skins are still a couple years away from a legit playoff run, imo. I also think that Campbell suffered from the lack of real coaching. The system was as bad as Chicago's has been under Ron Turner. I wanted Zorn to succeed, but it wasn't going to happen. The good news for Skins fans is that Snyder finally recognized he doesn't know how to run a team, and brought a guy in to do it for him. On August 24 2010 00:09 Hawk wrote: He is saying that it wouldn't matter if Peyton Manning was the Bills' QB because their line is terrible. He's not disagreeing that Spiller was a terrible luxury pick by a shit team, but he is disagreeing that a QB is what the team really needed. Look around the league. You can't find a good team with a crappy line. They don't exist. Even though I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with Cutler's skill level, I think he's the perfect example of this. The guy was considered to be a budding top 5 QB, if he could get some things under control, and they kept the team together. Fast forward through a feud and a trade, and you have a bottom of the barrel QB the VERY NEXT YEAR. Now, he didn't suddenly get that much worse, and you still saw flashes of great play from him, but he was on his back all the time last year. Yes, he made many, many inexcusable mistakes, and I'm not trying to absolve him from those, but with a better OLine and a WR that could separate from coverage, I feel that his stats would have been far better, and the team would have been better. I think this year we're going to see some major improvement in the Chicago Bears as a whole. Hopefully, if Lovie gets dropped, the next HC will keep Martz as OC, because constantly changing OC's is just bad. | ||
|
SweeTLemonS[TPR]
11739 Posts
On August 23 2010 23:38 SPYTE wrote: My girlfriends family are huge bills fans, and they have become my second favorite team to follow (I still love my packers too much. Either way, I was really upset at the draft choices for the Bills when they CLEARLY needed a change in the quarterback position. I would rather see them bring back JP Losman then use Edwards or Fitzpatrick since he actually takes some chances with long balls (but maybe that's just me). I was at the preseason opener against the redskins and I was upset at how bad they looked in the QB position as always (and I was pissed at how obnoxious redskins fans are because they are looking like they may actually do well this season). Hopefully this will just be a season to rebuild and get some draft choices for next season -.-'' Now on to mai packers! I don't think we will be able to win the division as easily now that the vikings got favre back, but I'm sure we will be having a great season! We easily have the one of the top 5 quarterbacks in the league right now (imo), and every aspect of our team is looking the better than they have in awhile  CANT WAIT!!!! I may have said this in other threads, but I honestly believe that GB was the second most overrated team last year. Weak division, and an incredibly weak schedule in the second half led to a long win streak for them. The only more overrated team, imo, was the Chargers, who had the luxury of playing in the NFL's worst division, and a soft schedule after week 4. Not surprisingly, both teams found early exits in the playoffs. | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On August 24 2010 05:46 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: I may have said this in other threads, but I honestly believe that GB was the second most overrated team last year. Weak division, and an incredibly weak schedule in the second half led to a long win streak for them. The only more overrated team, imo, was the Chargers, who had the luxury of playing in the NFL's worst division, and a soft schedule after week 4. Not surprisingly, both teams found early exits in the playoffs. First, WTF insulting my Redskins in the other post. GB's pass defense pretty much crumpled after losing Al Harris to ACL last year. They were actually I think #2 in scoring defense at the end of the regular season, but then got exposed once a good passing team (Zona with Warner + Fitz, Boldin, Breaston, etc.) got ahold of them. If their corners perform well this year, they should at least be a wildcard team (depending on how they go head to head with teh Vikings). Aaron Rodgers is the real deal... they just need the defense to step it up. | ||
|
SPYTE
United States289 Posts
Point understood, but the overall context of what I was trying to say at first was I disliked the decision to get a 3rd running back when that was one of the few strongest positions for the Bills. I assume you were commenting on my sentence about trading/waiting for 2nd round choices, and yes that initial topic was brought up dealing with the Bills and not the Redskins  Regardless I agree/understand the necessity of OL picks wherever you find a good choice, because that makes sense compared to what the bills chose. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
PiGosaur Monday
Bellum Gens Elite
The PondCast
Bellum Gens Elite
Replay Cast
Bellum Gens Elite
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
SC Evo League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
