Forked Thread: Is Poz first team yet?

[OpIv37]

Forked from: Is Poz first team yet? (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showpost.php?postid=2071714)


The coaches know more about the situation between Poz and DiG based on camp and preseason. I will leave it up to them to decide who starts. I like what I've seen from DiG but if Poz outperforms DiG , the better. It only makes our team better.

(Alright, I'm forking this so I don't piss everyone off by turning a thread that's going well into another debate).

wait a second.

Earlier you said that if DiG is better than Poz and can start, then it adds depth and it makes the team better. Now you're saying that if Poz is better, it makes the team better.

If DiG is better than Poz, the team is better.
If Poz is better than Dig, the team is.... still better.

Huh? No matter what happens, you think it makes us better. It makes no sense.

[justasportsfan]

Forked from: Is Poz first team yet? (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showpost.php?postid=2071714)



(Alright, I'm forking this so I don't piss everyone off by turning a thread that's going well into another debate).
. I wasn't trying to debate with you. In other worde I put trust in the coaches

You're the one trying to turn it into a debate.

wait a second.

Earlier you said that if DiG is better than Poz and can start, then it adds depth and it makes the team better. Now you're saying that if Poz is better, it makes the team better... THis means we have a very high potential - raw draft pick waiting in the sidelines as depth until he's ready to take the job away.


If DiG is better than Poz, the team is better..WRONG, WRONG WRONG. Out of context




If Poz is better than Dig, the team is.... still better.

Huh? No matter what happens, you think it makes us better. It makes no sense.

I liked what I saw from DiG, if POz ends up playing better than what I see from DiG , even better. IN the meantime, we have DiG as depth which isn't a bad thing based on what I've seen from him.

Let me know if I have to dumb it further.

[OpIv37]

I know I was the one starting the debate here- I wasn't trying to accuse you of that.

It's not out of context. When I was criticizing DiG, you told me that DiG being able to start was good because it meant we had some depth and I was essentially complaining about a good thing.

But then now you're saying the team is better even if DiG isn't good enough to start, which doesn't make any sense. The reason we drafted Poz is because the coaches didn't think DiG could start, so how does him not starting make us better?

It still doesn't add up.

[justasportsfan]

I know I was the one starting the debate here- I wasn't trying to accuse you of that.

It's not out of context. When I was criticizing DiG, you told me that DiG being able to start was good because it meant we had some depth and I was essentially complaining about a good thing.. That's because you see DiG as someone who sucks while I see him as someone stepping up just like Fletcher and some other undrafted players inn this league. It means we found (it looks like it so far but jury still out ) a diamond in the rough. How is that a bad thing again?


But then now you're saying the team is better even if DiG isn't good enough to start, which doesn't make any sense. . because you are replacing my words with ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH..

Where did I say that?



Let me make it easier, here's an example:

LOsman = DiG , POZ = Edwards


I like Losman and what I've seen from him but if Edwards eventually outplays JP, then the best player starts.

Having JP as a back up isn't bad.


Understand now?



The reason we drafted Poz is because the coaches didn't think DiG could start, so how does him not starting make us better?

It still doesn't add up. they drafted POZ because of his POTENTIAL not because DiG can't start.

[OpIv37]

you don't spend two first day draft picks on a team with so many needs on a player with "potential." The guy either better be damn good, or it better be a position of need for that price.

[justasportsfan]

you don't spend two first day draft picks on a team with so many needs on a player with "potential." The guy either better be damn good, or it better be a position of need for that price.


you're moving away from the original thread subject now. :rolleyes:

Let me rephrase, they like DiG but still wasn't sure how far he'll go so they drafted POZ who has potential coming out of college. NOt because DiG can't start they don't know that for sure..


They don't know who's gonna step up. That's what camp is for.

Now if DIG turns out to be a diamond in the rough and POZ lives up to his potential, we have great depth. That's what I've been saying.

[eyedog]

Don't be ridiculous. Poz will be starting by Sept. 9th.

[jamze132]

Don't be ridiculous. Poz will be starting by Sept. 9th.
I have to agree with that.

IMO, I don't think Dig will ever be better than Poz. Poz looked real good last week and I hope that he can replicate that this week.

[OpIv37]

you're moving away from the original thread subject now. :rolleyes:

Let me rephrase, they though DiG started playing better when he was put in there but still wasn't gonna risk it so they drafted POZ who has potential coming out of college. NOt because DiG can't start. They don't know who's gonna step up.

The key difference is that Edwards was drafted as depth and Poz was drafted to start. Even if Edwards does eventually overtake Losman, NO ONE (not even the Losman haters) expected it to happen this off-season.

However, what I think you're saying- and what would make more sense than what you said in the original thread- is that you think DiG is a decent player and having him is a good thing regardless of whether or not he starts. Fair enough.

And I know it's a separate issue, but if the coaches had any inkling that DiG could start, why would they draft Poz? Don't get me wrong- I like Poz and from what I've seen so far, he seems better than DiG. But why spend two first day draft picks on a position where we already have a starter when we have so many other glaring weaknesses?

[justasportsfan]

However, what I think you're saying- and what would make more sense than what you said in the original thread- is that you think DiG is a decent player and having him is a good thing regardless of whether or not he starts. Fair enough.

you're the only one who had a problem with that post.



And I know it's a separate issue, but if the coaches had any inkling that DiG could start, why would they draft Poz? Don't get me wrong- I like Poz and from what I've seen so far, he seems better than DiG. But why spend two first day draft picks on a position where we already have a starter when we have so many other glaring weaknesses?

because you cannot gauge a player after only one year. Diamonds in the rough don't always pop up in their first year. I don't have a problem with them drafting POZ in case DiG doesn't pan out.

CROWELL is a perfect example. You can't tell me that the coaches knew he couldn't start after his first year.

Thing is, DiG has been stepping up after OTA's and camp. The coaches didn't know that during the draft.

So now we could have two good MLB's. Question is who's gonna be better preapared ? That's when I said "let the coaches decide"

[OpIv37]

you and I can't evaluate a player after one year- I would hope football professionals can. Otherwise, how would anyone ever know what their needs are? Our D is full of 2nd year guys starting. If it's impossible to judge players based on one year, then our coaches were basically guessing at our off-season needs.

[justasportsfan]

Don't be ridiculous. Poz will be starting by Sept. 9th.

I'm not disagreeing with that.

[Scumbag College]

The Bills have a really young defense, and even if right this second DiGiorgio is better at MLB, i would have to think that you start Poz. The more he plays in the NFL, the faster he will improve. Judging by the first preseason game, Poz can make alot more plays and although he might be out of position more that DiGiorgio, he can make up for being out of position with his abilities. I don't think anyone will argue the fact that five years from now, we want Poz starting at MLB vs. DiGiorgio, and starting DiGiorgio will only impede Poz's progress.

[justasportsfan]

. If it's impossible to judge players based on one year, then our coaches were basically guessing at our off-season needs.

So we should've cut Moulds, Crowell, Peters, etc. for not doing anything in their first year?

[OpIv37]

So we should've cut Moulds, Crowell, Peters, etc. for not doing anything in their first year?

I never said anything about cutting anyone.

But you're saying it takes more than a year to evaluate a player.

Well, if that's the case, how do we know if we have a team full of Jason Peters' or a team full of Mike Williams'? How do the coaches know? And if they don't know because it takes more than one year, how do they know what to address in the off-season?

If there are as many variables as you make it sound, then putting a winning team together is basically a shot in the dark.

[justasportsfan]

The Bills have a really young defense, and even if right this second DiGiorgio is better at MLB, i would have to think that you start Poz. .
is this year for developing players or win now? Win now, you start the best players.




The more he plays in the NFL, the faster he will improve. .the same goes for every player.



Judging by the first preseason game, Poz can make alot more plays and although he might be out of position more that DiGiorgio, he can make up for being out of position with his abilities. .
against scrubs ? Nothing was clear in the first preseason game. No one here knows what calls the caoches called with the first unit therefore none of us can grade the players.

Like I said , based on the first preseason Lynch sucked.




I don't think anyone will argue the fact that five years from now, we want Poz starting at MLB vs. DiGiorgio, and starting DiGiorgio will only impede Poz's progress.

I don't know that and neither do you. Who would've thought years ago that Crowell would be better than Posey. What about Mike Williams?

[justasportsfan]

I never said anything about cutting anyone.. fair enough but by your logic,since Moulds , Crowell didn't do squat in their first year.... what then?


I
But you're saying it takes more than a year to evaluate a player.. yes unless one of them blows it up like Colston who is like you say, exception to the rule.


Well, if that's the case, how do we know if we have a team full of Jason Peters' or a team full of Mike Williams'? How do the coaches know? And if they don't know because it takes more than one year, how do they know what to address in the off-season?.TIME !!!! OTA's camp, preseason, regular games . 2nd year OTA's , camp, preseason, regular games......................


You yourself said , the draft is a crapshoot.

You can't tell me we knew Mike Williams was a bust after one year. We didn't know that Moulds would step up in his 3rd year. We didn't know Crowell would be solid in his (3rd) year.



I hope you understand what you questioned in the begining of the thread.

Anything else ,debates we've already gone through in the past.

No need for me to go further.

[Scumbag College]

is this year for developing players or win now? Win now, you start the best players.



the same goes for every player.



against scrubs ? Nothing was clear in the first preseason game. No one here knows what calls the caoches called with the first unit therefore none of us can grade the players.

Like I said , based on the first preseason Lynch sucked.




I don't know that and neother do you. Who would thought years ago that Crowell would be better than Posey. What about Mike Williams?

1. I think Poz is the better player already. Although he did play against NO's second team, he was around the ball alot and made several tackles, including one of the Bills' two sacks. What would have happened if Poz played against the first team and DiGiorgio played against the second team? I don't know, and no one else really knows. But, when he was on the field, Poz was consistently around the ball, more than we can say for DiGiorgio.

2. If it's win now vs. playing the younger players and developing them doesn't matter. DiGiorgio isn't an aging star, he is a very pleasant surprise whom can contribute on special teams and as a decent backup.

3. No one can predict what a player is going to be in a couple of years. Posey vs. Crowell was a different situation, Posey was brought in to play one defense. The scheme changed, and Crowell was the better fit. Mike Williams was an outright bust of a player, and although with only one preseason game under his belt, Poz has shown he could make plays and gave no indication of being a bust.

4. Lynch was held out of real work for whatever reason, I don't know if the coaching staff said why or not.

[justasportsfan]

1. I think Poz is the better player already. Although he did play against NO's second team, he was around the ball alot and made several tackles, including one of the Bills' two sacks. What would have happened if Poz played against the first team and DiGiorgio played against the second team? I don't know, and no one else really knows. But, when he was on the field, Poz was consistently around the ball, more than we can say for DiGiorgio. .
No offense. I respect your opinion but trust the coaches know better than we do. I happen to think that POZ will eventually outplay DiG but to say he's already better , well....


2. If it's win now vs. playing the younger players and developing them doesn't matter. DiGiorgio isn't an aging star, he is a very pleasant surprise whom can contribute on special teams and as a decent backup. . POz may bust or he may not. Makes you wonder that if POZ is all that , why did he last til' the 2nd rd.

You have to give every player a chance to step up including DiG. That's how guys like Fletcher, Crowell, etc. became who they are.


3. No one can predict what a player is going to be in a couple of years. Posey vs. Crowell was a different situation, Posey was brought in to play one defense. The scheme changed, and Crowell was the better fit. Mike Williams was an outright bust of a player, and although with only one preseason game under his belt, Poz has shown he could make plays and gave no indication of being a bust.. I'm almost sure that after 1 preseason game, you would've said thesame thing about Mike Williams. That 5 years down the road you'd want Mike WIlliams to be starting. You can't tell me off the bat the you knew he was a bust after 1 preseason game.

Again, POZ played camp fodders.


4. Lynch was held out of real work for whatever reason, I don't know if the coaching staff said why or not.

this is why I'd rather wait for the coaches to decide if DiG is better . Nobody knows what were in the coaches minds.

[BidsJr]

Forked from: Is Poz first team yet? (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showpost.php?postid=2071714)



(Alright, I'm forking this so I don't piss everyone off by turning a thread that's going well into another debate).

wait a second.

Earlier you said that if DiG is better than Poz and can start, then it adds depth and it makes the team better. Now you're saying that if Poz is better, it makes the team better.

If DiG is better than Poz, the team is better.
If Poz is better than Dig, the team is.... still better.

Huh? No matter what happens, you think it makes us better. It makes no sense.

:spam: