We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

[Mitchell55]

Since camp started, Ive heard alot of good stuff about Bell and McCaskill. McCaskill in team drills and Bell 1 on 1. With Peters out Bell and McCaskill should get a shot. If Bell gets it and does realy well, we could maybe put him at RG and Butler at center.

[yordad]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

Since camp started, Ive heard alot of good stuff about Bell and McCaskill. McCaskill in team drills and Bell 1 on 1. With Peters out Bell and McCaskill should get a shot. If Bell gets it and does realy well, we could maybe put him at RG and Butler at center.

Bell is a tackle. And, with Peters out, your scenario leaves us with no LT.

:drama:

[Mitchell55]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

Bell is a tackle. And, with Peters out, your scenario leaves us with no LT.

:drama:

1st off. On the bills depth chart, Bell is a Guard. Also, this senerio includes Peters in it. Right now, it would be the same but with Bell as LT.

[TigerJ]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

When I looked (just now) Bell is listed #4 at left tackle. McKaskill is listed #3 at left guard. Patrick Estes, another reserve is listed as the #3 right tackle. Murphy, the other (than Peters) converted tight end is listed as the #3 left tackle.

[Mitchell55]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

When I looked (just now) Bell is listed #4 at left tackle. McKaskill is listed #3 at left guard. Patrick Estes, another reserve is listed as the #3 right tackle. Murphy, the other (than Peters) converted tight end is listed as the #3 left tackle.

On the ESPN one, it has bell as G. He might be able to play both. But, Bell seems to getting alot of playing time in practice and is doing well. He would be my vote as starting tackle with Peters out.

[yordad]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

1st off. On the bills depth chart, Bell is a Guard. Also, this senerio includes Peters in it. Right now, it would be the same but with Bell as LT.

First off, "fistoffs" are generally followed by "second offs".

Second off, you should take the "first off" approach with someone who has been more then nice to you.

Third off, those charts are changed all the time. And, no matter where he is "listed", Bell is a tackle.

Fourth off, you said "With Peters [LT] out....put him [Bell] at RG and Butler at center." That still scenario leaves us with no LT.

Fifth off, being that Bell is a tackle, IF he excells at tackle, and IF he can over take Chambers (at tackle) then it is a no-brainer. That would make him one of our top two tackles (again, assuming Peters is out per your scenario); and, as you know, teams start 2 tackles.

Sixth off, this is all a bit premature. Bell will likely not even make the team. And, Peters will likely not miss a game. Considering that is the most likely scenario, you don't want to go shuffling guys around too much, giving them snaps at positions they will likely never play. It doesn't hurt to have a backup plan, but you shouldn't prepare your backup plan before your up front plan is prepared.

[SABURZFAN]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

First off, "fistoffs" are generally followed by "second offs".

Second off, you should take the "first off" approach with someone who has been more then nice to you.

Third off, those charts are changed all the time. And, no matter where he is "listed", Bell is a tackle.

Fourth off, you said "With Peters [LT] out....put him [Bell] at RG and Butler at center." That still scenario leaves us with no LT.

Fifth off, being that Bell is a tackle, IF he excess at tackle, and IF he can over take Chambers (at tackle) then it is a no-brainer. That would make him one of our top two tackles (again, assuming Peters is out per your scenario); and, as you know, teams start 2 tackles.

Sixth off, this is all a bit premature. Bell will likely not even make the team. And, Peters will likely not miss a game. Considering that is the most likely scenario, you don't want to go shuffling guys around too much, giving them snaps at positions they will likely never play. It doesn't hurt to have a backup plan, but you shouldn't prepare your backup plan before your up front plan is prepared.

[TigerJ]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

On the ESPN one, it has bell as G. He might be able to play both. But, Bell seems to getting alot of playing time in practice and is doing well. He would be my vote as starting tackle with Peters out.

I checked BuffaloBills.com.

[John Doe]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

If Bell nad/or McCaskill play well, they will create their own shot. There is no use putting them in there if someone else is playing better.

Two years ago the team was forced to play Terrence Pennington, an 7th round pick, at tackle due to injuries and a general shake-up on the line. The Bills just did not have anyone better. The next year he was replaced by Chambers, a player with considerably more experiece (and Pennington was terrible in pre-season).

The point is that it is going to be difficult for a raw 7th rounder like Bell to play better than a journeyman with a lot of experience. He will really have to show something to get his shot.

I am not saying that it is impossible for him to do so, but it will be difficult and they are not going to hand him the job and let him grow into it. The team needs to play well early in the season.

[TigerJ]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

Yeah, Bell is a longshot to do anything this year. He's not only raw from a technique standpoint, he's not nearly strong enough. He needs a year in the Bills strength program. I think Murphy might have a shot, but it won't happen until closer to the regular season.

[coastal]

Re: We should give McCaskill or Bell a shot

let's call Jerry Crafts while were at it.