If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
Please use this thread to report any issues you come across
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/forum/feedback-forums/billszone-q-a/6521455-upgrade-report-bugs-here
Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
if u can get some good draft picks for him and are confident you can find a capable LT why would you not trade him? Who is the left tackle for arizona? Oh yeah Mike Gandy. Who is the LT for Pittsburgh?
This brings up an interesting point. How many Super Bowl teams have had an All Pro LT? Is it really that important? Especially if you are talking about paying that LT over $10 million per year?
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
Do the Giants have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
Do the Patriots have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
Do the Colts have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
DID the Eagles have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
Did the Seahawks (when they went to the SB) have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
The answer is yes. Forget the Cardinals last year. Nothing they did fit in with the norm of getting to a Super Bowl. Do most teams get to the Super Bowl with no running game, a 37 year old quarterback who wasn't a starter in a few years, and a mediocre defense? No. They got hot at the right time.
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
I think there are arguments that support both sides... but what other elements were factors ??? I will say I think in more cases then not having a great LT makes a difference over an average one.
We don't have all-pros at the other OL positions, so that kind of puts us into a bind. Can we really afford to go back to average OL across the entire OL... Remember how piss poor our OL was before we over spent for Walker and Dockery, and the difference bringing those 2 in made...
Now Dockery is gone, as well as both of our C's do we even consider not having Peters when we've already dismantled 2 postions on the OL this year. ??
I think Peters demands will settle down, and they are just volleying offers right now.
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
Originally posted by Mudflap1
Do the Giants have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
Do the Patriots have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
Do the Colts have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
DID the Eagles have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
Did the Seahawks (when they went to the SB) have good linemen/tackles? Yes.
The answer is yes. Forget the Cardinals last year. Nothing they did fit in with the norm of getting to a Super Bowl. Do most teams get to the Super Bowl with no running game, a 37 year old quarterback who wasn't a starter in a few years, and a mediocre defense? No. They got hot at the right time.
Jon
I'm not saying good. I'm saying great. Did those teams pay their LTs over $10 million? Or at least make them the highest paid player on the team? None of those teams really had GREAT or All Pro LTs. They were good LTs or average LTs.
This brings up an interesting point. How many Super Bowl teams have had an All Pro LT? Is it really that important? Especially if you are talking about paying that LT over $10 million per year?
Those who didn't have probowl LT's made up for it in some other different ways like coaching. We don't have that.
Coaches can come up with gameplans to offset the lack of talent in some areas. We don't know how to make adjustments. Our plan A sucks to begin with which is why we have no plan B.
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
Originally posted by ddaryl
I think there are arguments that support both sides... but what other elements were factors ??? I will say I think in more cases then not having a great LT makes a difference over an average one.
We don't have all-pros at the other OL positions, so that kind of puts us into a bind. Can we really afford to go back to average OL across the entire OL... Remember how piss poor our OL was before we over spent for Walker and Dockery, and the difference bringing those 2 in made...
Now Dockery is gone, as well as both of our C's do we even consider not having Peters when we've already dismantled 2 postions on the OL this year. ??
I think Peters demands will settle down, and they are just volleying offers right now.
You do have a good point. Now that we currently have no starting LG and average RG and C, we could definitely use our star LT. But at what cost? I'm sorry, but he should not be the highest paid player on the team.
As for your last comment, I hope you are right. Hopefully his demands settle down and he shows up for the OTAs....
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
Pro bowl level? perhaps not. but the thing is the bills don't have an immediate step-in guy for the position if they let peters go.
Obviously having a probowl LT and then scrubs around the line doesn't work. We saw that last year.
We also saw that having the largest line isn't really the answer either. You got to get 5 guys who know how to work together and know how to run their blocking scheme. IF we want smaller guys who pull more, then we got to get those guys.
Peters has the leverage right now. He knows that if he isn't there, then the line really has no one on it. And i'm sure the FO doesn't want a peterless line and no one in the wings. If the bills had a decent line and peters was a part of it, perhaps they'd balk at the gigantic expense and plug someone else in there.
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
There certainly are arguments that fit both sides. However, I think the conclusion is that teams who go to the Super Bowl generally have very good, but underrated LT's. That or they have a solid OL-man at each of the 5 positions on the line, but no superstars on the line.
"Misguided political correctness tethers our intellects."
- Nicholas Cummings
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
I believe if he shows up for the OTA's managment will pay him closer to what he wants than what we want. I just don't see us getting rid of him with TO here, it's clear there trying to make a run.
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
Originally posted by trapezeus
Peters has the leverage right now.
Sorry, but I disagree. They have him for another couple years and if he wants to continue to be a dick and hold out again, they know that he will come back with his tail between his legs eventually.
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
Do the Giants have good linemen/tackles? Yes. David Diehl is a strong LT, they have a great line since they lead the league in rushing.
Do the Patriots have good linemen/tackles? Yes. Matt Light is a Pro Bowler.
Do the Colts have good linemen/tackles? Yes. Tony Ugoh is strong, has he made the Pro Bowl?
DID the Eagles have good linemen/tackles? Yes. Tra Thomas has been very good/Pro Bowler.
Did the Seahawks (when they went to the SB) have good linemen/tackles? Yes. Walter Jones is awesome.
90s Bills teams? Yes. Wolford and Ballard were awesome.
90s Dallas teams? Yes. Erik Williams was awesome.
80s/90s 49ers teams? Yes. Bubba Paris was really good.
90s Packers teams? Yes. John Michels was very good in his day.
90s Broncos teams? Yes. Gary Zimmerman was awesome.
Mikey, it all starts in the trenches. Let's not forget what cost Arizona the Super Bowl. I'm paraphrasing Kurt Warner, but he said something to the effect that right before halftime, he saw Harrison blitzing off of Mike Gandy, and knew he had to get rid of the ball quick because that's where they were getting pressure on him, and Harrison stepped back and picked off the pass, running for a touchdown. Gandy was unquestionably the weak link on that line.
Re: Are Pro Bowl LTs really that important for winning a Super Bowl?
The Bills could have locked up Peters last year for around 8 but instead held the line and all it got us was a long holdout from our best lineman and a $3 million increase in his demand this year.
The Bills and Sabres are starting to blend into one for me...This story is repeated every year but with a different player.
Tweet
Comment