Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

[OpIv37]

There are some inaccuracies that are constantly being repeated around here as though they are common knowledge, so it's time for a reality check.

1. The DL will be better with John McCargo

The truth is McCargo will probably improve over the course of the year. But he didn't have an impact as a rookie and then he missed most of the year with an injury. It's unrealistic to expect this guy to come in as anything better than what he was when he left. Will he improve? Probably, but don't expect much out of him in Week 1 (or even Week 8) of 2007.

2. Our D will be better because the rookies will improve, and Marv said that the biggest improvement is between years one and two.

This isn't really a homeristic statement. There is a lot of truth to it. It becomes homeristic when people think that the improvement of 5 guys from years 1-2 is enough to improve on the 28th ranked run D AND simultaneously compensate for the loss of 3 starters. That's simply not realistic.

3. We won't miss Nate Clements because "shut down" CB's aren't necessary in the Cover 2 and Nate is overrated.

Again, there is some basis to this statement- Clements is overrated and not worth the money he got. And the Cover 2 doesn't really require top-notch CB's. But Kiwaukee Thomas is a 7 year vet with ZERO career INT's, and Ashton Youboty has played 1 game at nickel. Clements, despite his flaws, is better than both of them. Could Youboty eventually be a viable starter and maybe even better than Clements? Of course it's possible, but it's unrealistic to expect this on Week 1 of 2007.

4. Fletcher was past is prime and Poz can easily replace him.

I was critical of Fletch last year and he does have a tendency to make a lot of tackles AFTER 5 yard gains, etc. So it's not unreasonable to expect a younger guy to be able to equal his production. However, Fletcher was the defensive leader of this team and that is a position that takes time to learn. This is not a knock on Poz, but it is unrealistic to expect him to come in and play that role as a rookie.

5. This one isn't so much about a specific statement as it is a general trend of defending mediocre or underachieving players. Don't believe me? Pick a player and start a thread bashing him- Price, Reed, Tripplett, Wire, Kelsay, Denney, Royal, Everett, Parrish, McGee etc, and at least 3 people will respond defending the player. Now, don't get me wrong- I'm not saying all these guys should be cut, but they're all guys who have underperformed yet continue to get support. Someone please explain this to me: If no one on our team sucks, why can't we win? I don't know why people continue to defend mediocrity then wonder why we always get mediocre results on the field.

[Devin]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Linemen, especially DT's, often take 3-4 years to develop. Anyone who thought McCargo was gonna be a difference maker this year much less his rookie season plays to much madden. I expect he will continue to improve and probably become a solid DT in a few years. Anything more/sooner is a bonus.

Our defense this year I do expect to be better then last year but id say middle of the road/average is about the best you can expect. And thats fine because our backfield and offense is being built to control the clock. Hopefully our O is on the field a lot more often then our D. I think we maybe at a "juuuuuust enough" defense.

The cover 2 requires different CB's, the statement that they dont require good cb's or that they can get by with average CB's is simply made by people who dont know the game. While they may not be the most important position on the field in this scheme if this theory is true then we should be absolutley 100% comfortable with anyone playing CB.

Agreed. Fletch didnt fit the scheme, and on the field I dont expect a huge dropoff from Poz. However in the lockeroom and on the field as a leader the Bills will really need someone to step up and fill the gap left by Fletch.

To me its not the bashing of a player thats irritating. Its guys like Pat who make a hobby of it. Ok I get it you dont like Ralph, you think Levy is a bad GM and you and only you are qualified to run the team. And your little blogs are pulitzer winning material. Super. Its been noted, 20 threads a week reiterating all this vomit is not needed. I cant speak for everyone but we are fans, and ragardless of our varying opinions at the end of the day we all want the Bills to win.

[OpIv37]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Linemen, especially DT's, often take 3-4 years to develop. Anyone who thought McCargo was gonna be a difference maker this year much less his rookie season plays to much madden. I expect he will continue to improve and probably become a solid DT in a few years.

Our defense this year I do expect to be better then last year but id say middle of the road/average is about the best you can expect. And thats fine because our backfield and offense is being built to control the clock. Hopefully our O is on the field a lot more often then our D.

The cover 2 requires different CB's, the statement that they dont require good cb's or that they can get by with average CB's is simply made by people who dont know the game. While they may not be the most important position on the field in this scheme if this theory is true then we should be absolutley 100% comfortable with anyone playing CB.

Agreed. Fletch didnt fit the scheme, and on the field I dont expect a huge dropoff from Poz. However in the lockeroom and on the field as a leader the Bills will really need someone to step up and fill the gap left by Fletch.

To me its not the bashing of a player thats irritating. Its guys like Pat who make a hobby of it. Ok I get it you dont like Ralph, you think Levy is a bad GM and you and only you are qualified to run the team. And your little blogs are pulitzer winning material. Super. Its been noted, 20 threads a week reiterating all this vomit is not needed. I cant speak for everyone but we are fans, and ragardless of our varying opinions at the end of the day we all want the Bills to win.

I have to ask- why exactly do you think our D will be better with virtually the same DL, inexperienced LB's, questionable CB's and the same S's?

[Devin]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

I have to ask- why exactly do you think our D will be better with virtually the same DL, inexperienced LB's, questionable CB's and the same S's?

Firstly I think our safety duo will perform better, I think Youboty is gonna be average at best but he appears to fit the mold of the cover 2 CB. McGee to me is the wildcard. Hes undersize and his struggles last year I believe were directly tied to the system he played in. Hes small and not strong enough to jam WR's which often led to Ko being hung out to dry. Hopefully he rebounds this year.

Poz imo will be a better fit for us at LB then Fletch. I think he will have rookie struggles but he is such a smart, instinctual player he will not only catch on quick but I just have the feeling he will anchor the middle well. Crowell has steadily improved every year and I maybe alone on this but I truly think Ellison will evolve into a fine weakside guy.

As far as our line goes I can only hope Williams/McCargo have a better second year. Not that they played bad per say but just another year of experience...etc will hopefully improve their play even if it is only marginally. If this Walker mess gets sorted I think he is a decent penetrating DT who in a rotational system could very well thrive.

All in all we of course arent gonna be a top rated D, but I wouldnt say its unreasonable to think we could be ranked as high as the low teens or so.

Course anything could happen.

[feelthepain]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Firstly I think our safety duo will perform better, I think Youboty is gonna be average at best but he appears to fit the mold of the cover 2 CB. McGee to me is the wildcard. Hes undersize and his struggles last year I believe were directly tied to the system he played in. Hes small and not strong enough to jam WR's which often led to Ko being hung out to dry. Hopefully he rebounds this year.

Poz imo will be a better fit for us at LB then Fletch. I think he will have rookie struggles but he is such a smart, instinctual player he will not only catch on quick but I just have the feeling he will anchor the middle well. Crowell has steadily improved every year and I maybe alone on this but I truly think Ellison will evolve into a fine weakside guy.

As far as our line goes I can only hope Williams/McCargo have a better second year. Not that they played bad per say but just another year of experience...etc will hopefully improve their play even if it is only marginally. If this Walker mess gets sorted I think he is a decent penetrating DT who in a rotational system could very well thrive.

All in all we of course arent gonna be a top rated D, but I wouldnt say its unreasonable to think we could be ranked as high as the low teens or so.

Course anything could happen.

I think this is an extremely optimistic view, but as you say anything can happen.

[X-Era]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Comments in red

There are some inaccuracies that are constantly being repeated around here as though they are common knowledge, so it's time for a reality check.

1. The DL will be better with John McCargo

The truth is McCargo will probably improve over the course of the year. But he didn't have an impact as a rookie and then he missed most of the year with an injury. It's unrealistic to expect this guy to come in as anything better than what he was when he left. Will he improve? Probably, but don't expect much out of him in Week 1 (or even Week 8) of 2007.

Thats not whats at issue. Whats at issue is that McCargo is better than what we had before him, thats a true statement. Whether McCargo lived up to his billing in year one or not is also not at issue. McCargo should be better than last year and hopefully will stay injury free. Overall, its at least a push with a good possibility to be better.

2. Our D will be better because the rookies will improve, and Marv said that the biggest improvement is between years one and two.

This isn't really a homeristic statement. There is a lot of truth to it. It becomes homeristic when people think that the improvement of 5 guys from years 1-2 is enough to improve on the 28th ranked run D AND simultaneously compensate for the loss of 3 starters. That's simply not realistic.

On the surface you would appear to be right. However, we must look at the vets that left. Doing so means that you must consider what Fletcher, Spikes, and Clements were worth. Well, Fletcher was a tackling machine. But he was also dragged for extra yards due to his size limitations. He just wasnt able to make stops consistently at the line of scrimmage; most of his yards came after several yards were gained. I said from day one that without real run stuffing fat guys in front of him, hes a liability vs. the run. Adding a true MLB will make us a stronger run D IMO. Spikes was injured and never really came back, he simply wasnt 100%. We traded him and really we traded damaged goods IMO. To me Crowell was our best all around LB out of the three and now we get him back. Ellison played decent, certainly not all pro, but solid enough to start. Overall, I think our LB corp is better by subracting a run liability, and a damaged LB. The Clements issue I will address later.

3. We won't miss Nate Clements because "shut down" CB's aren't necessary in the Cover 2 and Nate is overrated.

Again, there is some basis to this statement- Clements is overrated and not worth the money he got. And the Cover 2 doesn't really require top-notch CB's. But Kiwaukee Thomas is a 7 year vet with ZERO career INT's, and Ashton Youboty has played 1 game at nickel. Clements, despite his flaws, is better than both of them. Could Youboty eventually be a viable starter and maybe even better than Clements? Of course it's possible, but it's unrealistic to expect this on Week 1 of 2007.

You will never catch me saying this. Clements on a good day was one of the best CB's if not the best to ever come through Buffalo. He is a loss, and that will have consequences for sure. However, if we can stop the run more effectively, I think we win more games than if we still had Clements. We will give up big plays, and it will hurt. But stopping the run is an age old way to win, and I feel strong we will be much better. Besides, does any team ever NOT have any significant losses during the offseason?

4. Fletcher was past is prime and Poz can easily replace him.

I was critical of Fletch last year and he does have a tendency to make a lot of tackles AFTER 5 yard gains, etc. So it's not unreasonable to expect a younger guy to be able to equal his production. However, Fletcher was the defensive leader of this team and that is a position that takes time to learn. This is not a knock on Poz, but it is unrealistic to expect him to come in and play that role as a rookie.

Fletch was not past his prime, what he was was an undersized LB who is a run liability when you have smaller faster D-linemen. The scheme change requires a change at MLB. Puz doesnt need to be the leader, Crowell can do that. Puz needs to come in and play solid at the line, I think he will do that.

5. This one isn't so much about a specific statement as it is a general trend of defending mediocre or underachieving players. Don't believe me? Pick a player and start a thread bashing him- Price, Reed, Tripplett, Wire, Kelsay, Denney, Royal, Everett, Parrish, McGee etc, and at least 3 people will respond defending the player. Now, don't get me wrong- I'm not saying all these guys should be cut, but they're all guys who have underperformed yet continue to get support. Someone please explain this to me: If no one on our team sucks, why can't we win? I don't know why people continue to defend mediocrity then wonder why we always get mediocre results on the field.

If your comment here is that we need a few stars, I agree for sure. We do. We have needed that for years. Most of the leagues best teams have at least one player in the top 10 in their stat field. We usually have none. Now, I truly think Lynch can become that type of player, and now that we have finally settled on a QB and that QB has a year under his belt, I expect to see even more from Evans. Marv and Co want to go the homegrown route. That leaves fans who want immediate gratification with a bad taste in their mouths.

[Jan Reimers]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Geez, I'll probably just give up my season tickets. I can see now that there is no hope.

Op, how the Hell do you come up with so much negative crap all the time?

[gr8slayer]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Linemen, especially DT's, often take 3-4 years to develop. Anyone who thought McCargo was gonna be a difference maker this year much less his rookie season plays to much madden. I expect he will continue to improve and probably become a solid DT in a few years. Anything more/sooner is a bonus.

Our defense this year I do expect to be better then last year but id say middle of the road/average is about the best you can expect. And thats fine because our backfield and offense is being built to control the clock. Hopefully our O is on the field a lot more often then our D. I think we maybe at a "juuuuuust enough" defense.

The cover 2 requires different CB's, the statement that they dont require good cb's or that they can get by with average CB's is simply made by people who dont know the game. While they may not be the most important position on the field in this scheme if this theory is true then we should be absolutley 100% comfortable with anyone playing CB.

Agreed. Fletch didnt fit the scheme, and on the field I dont expect a huge dropoff from Poz. However in the lockeroom and on the field as a leader the Bills will really need someone to step up and fill the gap left by Fletch.

To me its not the bashing of a player thats irritating. Its guys like Pat who make a hobby of it. Ok I get it you dont like Ralph, you think Levy is a bad GM and you and only you are qualified to run the team. And your little blogs are pulitzer winning material. Super. Its been noted, 20 threads a week reiterating all this vomit is not needed. I cant speak for everyone but we are fans, and ragardless of our varying opinions at the end of the day we all want the Bills to win.

I know the game just fine. I played in the same Defense we are playing now in college. It simply doesn't require an all-star CB. It's a fact.

[casdhf]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Op, you were pissing and moaning when we had these guys on the roster. Now that they're gone, you're still pissing and moaning. I think you're a reverse homer.

[The Spaz]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Why bother being a fan...

[OpIv37]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Geez, I'll probably just give up my season tickets. I can see now that there is no hope.

Op, how the Hell do you come up with so much negative crap all the time?

crap? Tell me what I said that wasn't true. People around here are grasping at straws for reasons to think that the D isn't going to suck, but those people do not have a realistic grasp of the situation.

[OpIv37]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Op, you were pissing and moaning when we had these guys on the roster. Now that they're gone, you're still pissing and moaning. I think you're a reverse homer.

Um, first, you're exaggerating about how much I "pissed and moaned" about these guys. I was pretty rough on Clements but mainly because I thought he was terrible value for the money he was going to get, and at times I criticized Fletch but I definitely never said anything bad about Spikes.

Second, you seem to be one of the many people around here suffering from the misconception that different is automatically better. Getting rid of underperforming players is half the equation- the other half is replacing them with BETTER players and we've failed miserably in this regard.

[OpIv37]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Comments in red


If your comment here is that we need a few stars, I agree for sure. We do. We have needed that for years. Most of the leagues best teams have at least one player in the top 10 in their stat field. We usually have none. Now, I truly think Lynch can become that type of player, and now that we have finally settled on a QB and that QB has a year under his belt, I expect to see even more from Evans. Marv and Co want to go the homegrown route. That leaves fans who want immediate gratification with a bad taste in their mouths.

two things- first, when you discussed Clements, you said we might be able to get by if we were better at stopping the run- how are we going to do that when the only changes are Darwin Walker and an inexperienced McCargo.

Second, there is an inherent problem with the homegrown route: contracts expire and players leave the team, or players get older and move past their prime. There aren't too many players on this team who will be past their prime anytime soon, but the contracts expiring is a huge deal. Hopefully the "cash to cap" philosophy is a short-term strategy to help us mitigate these situations, but at this pace, by the time enough of our holes are filled to be competitive, there will be a whole new set of holes holding us back.

[OpIv37]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Why bother being a fan...

If you're going to defend moves that don't lead to winning and stand up for players who don't help us win, why bother being a fan? The goal is WINS and fans shouldn't accept any moves that don't lead to wins.

[feelthepain]

Re: Refuting some homeristic misconceptions

Geez, I'll probably just give up my season tickets. I can see now that there is no hope.

Op, how the Hell do you come up with so much negative crap all the time?

Yeah OP what's your problem, can't you just act and post like the rest of the Bill fans here and never look at the Bills situation honestly?? I mean come on, don't you want to ignore the facts and post like there isn't a flaw to be found with your team like the rest here?? Geez!!