Carrington and Edwards at NT? REALLY!?!?!

[OpIv37]

When Lonnie Harvey left the morning practice with an injury he was replaced at nose tackle by rookie Alex Carrington. Harvey was the third team nose behind Kyle Williams and Torell Troup. In the afternoon however, it was veteran Dwan Edwards taking nose tackle reps.

http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3/Minicamp---Day-2---Wang-injured-more-defense-returners/0e0e70ef-93f9-47a8-afbd-0789936c47d9

I know it's just mini-camp, but I really hope the FO has something in mind for NT before the season starts. A starting rotation of Troup and Williams is pretty bad, and with Carrington and Edwards as the back-ups, it will go from "pretty bad" to "disastrous" with one injury.

[Italian Stallion]

I thought Carriker was on Washington?

[OpIv37]

I thought Carriker was on Washington?

Whoops. Fixed.

[hydro]

LOL, where did Carriker come from?

[OpIv37]

LOL, where did Carriker come from?

I have no friggin idea. I probably saw something about him in the local news and had the name in my mind.

[Italian Stallion]

Whoops. Fixed.

It's monday morning...understandable.

But yes I do agree with you on this....If Troup or Williams get injured during the regular season, we have to turn to Carrington as the reserve in the middle?

I actually like Carrington's talent and think he could provide some speed in the 5 technique on the OUTSIDE....but at 285 he would get destroyed taking on two blockers.

Not good.

[hydro]

Carrington at NT makes me violently ill. That just reeks desperation.

[WeAreArthurMoates]

People need the chillax. Harvey injury is minor and will be the third guy but Edwards at NT is no surprise. Last year for Baltimore Dwan played the NT at times.

[OpIv37]

People need the chillax. Harvey injury is minor and will be the third guy but Edwards at NT is no surprise. Last year for Baltimore Dwan played the NT at times.

First, Baltimore has a much more talented D than we do.

Second, forget about the 3rd guy. Kyle Williams and Terrell Troupe as 1 and 2 have me nervous as it is. Williams is simply not a 3-4 NT and at best, Troupe will require time to develop and adjust to the NFL. So the situation isn't good even with Harvey healthy. And this assuming Harvey makes the team. I said before that he'll make the team by default- we really have no other options. But they may cut him anyway- this team has done things equally dumb in the past (cutting Walker a week before the season starts, cutting Omon mid-season and leaving us with only 2 healthy RB's on the roster, etc).

Third, chillax? I didn't realize that you were a 14 year old girl in 2003. Did you get that issue of Tiger Beat with Justin Timberlake on the cover yet?

[theanswer74]

lol, if we have to use a 3rd sting NT we will be in trouble, which any team in that situation would be.

Bunch of whiners on here for real.

And if you dont think Kyle Williams can play NT, thats too bad because he is, and we will find out the hard way if he can do it or not.

My money is on that guy. One of the strongest players in the NFL, he wasnt moved last year and I doubt he will lose many battles.

[OpIv37]

lol, if we have to use a 3rd sting NT we will be in trouble, which any team in that situation would be.

Bunch of whiners on here for real.

These aren't 3rd string NT's. They're DE's moving over to NT's. If we had a 3rd string NT, that would at least be an improvement over what happened here. Remember the last 4 years when we were undersized at nearly every defensive position? How'd that work out?

The NT position is a mess from the starters on down and this situation just exemplifies it. If you don't see it now, you will once the games start.

[hydro]

Stroud would have made more sense to me.

[OpIv37]

Stroud would have made more sense to me.

Yeah, I don't really like Stroud at NT but I agree he would have been better than Edwards or Carrington.

[psubills62]

First, Baltimore has a much more talented D than we do.

Second, forget about the 3rd guy. Kyle Williams and Terrell Troupe as 1 and 2 have me nervous as it is. Williams is simply not a 3-4 NT and at best, Troupe will require time to develop and adjust to the NFL. So the situation isn't good even with Harvey healthy. And this assuming Harvey makes the team. I said before that he'll make the team by default- we really have no other options. But they may cut him anyway- this team has done things equally dumb in the past (cutting Walker a week before the season starts, cutting Omon mid-season and leaving us with only 2 healthy RB's on the roster, etc).

Third, chillax? I didn't realize that you were a 14 year old girl in 2003. Did you get that issue of Tiger Beat with Justin Timberlake on the cover yet?

Yes, Baltimore has a much more talented D than we do. So that should justify Edwards playing at NT. If he can do it for Baltimore on certain plays, then he can certainly play NT for us on some plays.

In general, why are you panicking? This is OTA's. Teams are looking to create versatility now for guys and try stuff out. If Carrington is playing NT (in 3-4 sets) come TC, I'll be worried. Now, not so much.

[justasportsfan]

If Carrington is playing NT (in 3-4 sets) come TC, I'll be worried. Now, not so much.
I'm worried with Kyle and Troup as our NT to begin with.

[psubills62]

Stroud would have made more sense to me.

Really? You and Op would prefer a 6'5" guy who has only shot gaps up until now in his career? Also, a guy who was pretty poor as a 4-3 DT last year? I'd MUCH rather have Edwards, a guy who has experience in a 3-4 and has played NT in a 3-4 before at NT than Stroud.

[psubills62]

I'm worried with Kyle and Troup as our NT to begin with.

Eh, it's not a huge deal to me. The Browns had a 5th round rookie last year quickly become dominant at NT (Ahtyba Rubin). I don't think Troup will be great, but he'll be good enough.

[theanswer74]

These aren't 3rd string NT's. They're DE's moving over to NT's. If we had a 3rd string NT, that would at least be an improvement over what happened here. Remember the last 4 years when we were undersized at nearly every defensive position? How'd that work out?

The NT position is a mess from the starters on down and this situation just exemplifies it. If you don't see it now, you will once the games start.
They will line up at NT on passing downs at times Im sure.

The only position we are undersized at is NT, but there are teams like Dallas and Baltimore that used an undersized NT like Jay Rattliff.

But if we are going to be undersized, I am glad its Kyle Williams who is the undersized player. The guy is a classic overachiever with incredible strength, balance, and technique. I just dot see him failing. He is not easily moved. At 6'0 306lbs of muscle and quickness, he has the leverage and powerful lower body to hold his ground. He also put on a few lbs according to WGR.

[OpIv37]

Yes, Baltimore has a much more talented D than we do. So that should justify Edwards playing at NT. If he can do it for Baltimore on certain plays, then he can certainly play NT for us on some plays.

In general, why are you panicking? This is OTA's. Teams are looking to create versatility now for guys and try stuff out. If Carrington is playing NT (in 3-4 sets) come TC, I'll be worried. Now, not so much.

Because it's highly unlikely that we're going to find a new NT between now and the start of the season. It doesn't even make sense to try sub-300 lb guys at 3-4 NT because it doesn't work. Occasionally you'll get a freak of nature like Ratliff in Dallas, but if Edwards or Carrington were that good, we'd know by now.

And as far as Edwards playing NT in Baltimore, well, there are a LOT of guys in Baltimore that the offense needs to worry about blocking. We don't have any proven pass rushers so the focal point of the offensive scheme will be the NT. Edwards won't have the talent around him to get away with that at NT in Buffalo.

[Jan Reimers]

I remember the good old days. That was when we fans didn't know every play that was going on every minute of every offseason practice session, and therefore didn't panic at every single position change, minor injury, or trial of a player at a different position.

[Philagape]

So, you think the Bills won't be all that good in 2010? Not really breaking new ground there ...

[OpIv37]

I remember the good old days. That was when we fans didn't know every play that was going on every minute of every offseason practice session, and therefore didn't panic at every every single position change, minor injury, or trial of a player at a different position.

hahahahaha, every year some thing like this happens, and every year someone accuses me of panicking. Yet, every year, that same position turns out to be a weak spot on the team.....

We are switching to the 3-4 D with the only NT's on the team being a rookie and an undersized converted 4-3 DT who doesn't fit the D. And we're one injury from using DE's as NT's. There is very good reason for the panic, and if you don't see it now, you will once the games start.

[psubills62]

Because it's highly unlikely that we're going to find a new NT between now and the start of the season. It doesn't even make sense to try sub-300 lb guys at 3-4 NT because it doesn't work. Occasionally you'll get a freak of nature like Ratliff in Dallas, but if Edwards or Carrington were that good, we'd know by now.

And as far as Edwards playing NT in Baltimore, well, there are a LOT of guys in Baltimore that the offense needs to worry about blocking. We don't have any proven pass rushers so the focal point of the offensive scheme will be the NT. Edwards won't have the talent around him to get away with that at NT in Buffalo.

Edwards is fine at NT. A lot of teams put guys who are lighter in at NT on passing downs.

Like I said, it's OTA's, not TC or preseason. It's not a big deal. The fact that they are trying Carrington out at NT tells me that he's learning enough to gain the coaches confidence.

[OpIv37]

So, you think the Bills won't be all that good in 2010? Not really breaking new ground there ...

You wouldn't think so, but there are quite a few people on this board who are unwilling to accept reality at this point.

[OpIv37]

Edwards is fine at NT. A lot of teams put guys who are lighter in at NT on passing downs.

Like I said, it's OTA's, not TC or preseason. It's not a big deal. The fact that they are trying Carrington out at NT tells me that he's learning enough to gain the coaches confidence.

It tells me that they're so desperate for NT's that they're willing to try rookie DE's at the position just to see what happens.

[hydro]

Really? You and Op would prefer a 6'5" guy who has only shot gaps up until now in his career? Also, a guy who was pretty poor as a 4-3 DT last year? I'd MUCH rather have Edwards, a guy who has experience in a 3-4 and has played NT in a 3-4 before at NT than Stroud.

I am not worked up about Edwards at all. It is more Carrington that makes me scratch my head.

[streetkings01]

These aren't 3rd string NT's. They're DE's moving over to NT's. If we had a 3rd string NT, that would at least be an improvement over what happened here. Remember the last 4 years when we were undersized at nearly every defensive position? How'd that work out?

The NT position is a mess from the starters on down and this situation just exemplifies it. If you don't see it now, you will once the games start.Dude stop crying! Your complaining about Gailey trying Edwards as the 3rd string NT???? Are you serious????

[theanswer74]

You wouldn't think so, but there are quite a few people on this board who are unwilling to accept reality at this point.
Only reality is no one knows.

The chances of the Bills being good are low, but there is a chance. How could anyone go around the entire offseason with no hope and not go insane?

Have some fun this offseason, think positive, when preseason hits we will have some stuff to talk about. Right now anything can happen. Jairus Byrd could be a one hit wonder, Aaron Maybin could break out and win MVP, who knows.

[theanswer74]

It tells me that they're so desperate for NT's that they're willing to try rookie DE's at the position just to see what happens.
Your talking about 4th and 5th string NT's.

My goodness. Are you trying to piss people off on purpose?

[Philagape]

You wouldn't think so, but there are quite a few people on this board who are unwilling to accept reality at this point.

Get em Op!!! Hunt down every last one!!


Find the 8 percent who predict a winning record:
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?p=3247500#post3247500

[streetkings01]

It tells me that they're so desperate for NT's that they're willing to try rookie DE's at the position just to see what happens.So what......it's OTAs! If there is a time to see how versatile players are now is the time to do it.......complaining about this is like complaining about trying a WR at FS/SS....oh wait!

[OpIv37]

So what......it's OTAs! If there is a time to see how versatile players are now is the time to do it.......complaining about this is like complaining about trying a WR at FS/SS....oh wait!

Regardless if it's OTAs- if the NT position was set, they wouldn't HAVE to experiment like this at any time of the year. And thanks for proving my point with Wilson-if our S position was set, we never would have tried him there. But we needed safeties at the time. And even then, Wilson is the prototypical size for S. I can't say the same for Carrington or Edwards at 3-4 NT.

[OpIv37]

Dude stop crying! Your complaining about Gailey trying Edwards as the 3rd string NT???? Are you serious????

Yup. 3rd string means one injury and he's in the rotation.

But what I'm really complaining about is a NT situation that's so desperate that Gailey would even try this in the first place.

[WeAreArthurMoates]

hahahahaha, every year some thing like this happens, and every year someone accuses me of panicking. Yet, every year, that same position turns out to be a weak spot on the team.....

We are switching to the 3-4 D with the only NT's on the team being a rookie and an undersized converted 4-3 DT who doesn't fit the D. And we're one injury from using DE's as NT's. There is very good reason for the panic, and if you don't see it now, you will once the games start.

The only way you find a NT is by drafting one. There's no other way around, they don't hit the open market just like this year.

[mayotm]

Dude stop crying! Your complaining about Gailey trying Edwards as the 3rd string NT???? Are you serious????It's not even really third string. Harvey, currently the third string NT, has been out injured. So Carrington and Edwards would be 4th and 5th string.

[justasportsfan]

It tells me that they're so desperate for NT's that they're willing to try rookie DE's at the position just to see what happens.


You're over reacting. Maybe they want him to be versatile too ya know.

[hydro]

This is like the complaining that was going on about Parrish being the #3 QB last for a while last season. Who cares? We didn't see him on the field.

[BillsWin]

It's just for OTAs. I'm sure Williams, Troup and to a lesser extent Harvey will be the only ones taking snaps at NT come the season.

It's not like they were going 100% on the D-line. It's OTAs in pads and shorts. Sometimes you just need to place a body somewhere.

[JCBills]

Stroud would have made more sense to me.

6'6'' 295-300 Lbs Vs. 6'3'' 310-315

Both weights are according to the players themselves, plus Dwan has kicked inside when Ngata lined up at end.

[better days]

hahahahaha, every year some thing like this happens, and every year someone accuses me of panicking. Yet, every year, that same position turns out to be a weak spot on the team.....

We are switching to the 3-4 D with the only NT's on the team being a rookie and an undersized converted 4-3 DT who doesn't fit the D. And we're one injury from using DE's as NT's. There is very good reason for the panic, and if you don't see it now, you will once the games start.

Chan has said that even though they are switching to the 3-4 that they would play the 4-3 part of the time.

If they suffer a number of injuries to 3-4 players, I would expect them to play 4-3 more than 3-4. That is what good coaches do.

[DraftBoy]

Yup. 3rd string means one injury and he's in the rotation.

But what I'm really complaining about is a NT situation that's so desperate that Gailey would even try this in the first place.

You dont pay attention much do you?

They were already in the rotation, look at the type of scheme Edwards runs. He's going to run a 3 DE line somethimes on 3rd and pass. Likely going to see Edwards and Carrington line at NT some this season on pass obvious plays. Its similar to how the NYG will go with a 4 DE line in their base 4-3. Its called a variation and is meant to keep teams on their toes. It allows for stunts, twists and confusion which will allow somebody (DE, or LB) to get a free lane to the QB.

Why the hell are you even surprised by this? This entire thread is dumb.

[WeAreArthurMoates]

You dont pay attention much do you?

They were already in the rotation, look at the type of scheme Edwards runs. He's going to run a 3 DE line somethimes on 3rd and pass. Likely going to see Edwards and Carrington line at NT some this season on pass obvious plays. Its similar to how the NYG will go with a 4 DE line in their base 4-3. Its called a variation and is meant to keep teams on their toes. It allows for stunts, twists and confusion which will allow somebody (DE, or LB) to get a free lane to the QB.

Why the hell are you even surprised by this? This entire thread is dumb.

Could not agree more.

[OpIv37]

You dont pay attention much do you?

They were already in the rotation, look at the type of scheme Edwards runs. He's going to run a 3 DE line somethimes on 3rd and pass. Likely going to see Edwards and Carrington line at NT some this season on pass obvious plays. Its similar to how the NYG will go with a 4 DE line in their base 4-3. Its called a variation and is meant to keep teams on their toes. It allows for stunts, twists and confusion which will allow somebody (DE, or LB) to get a free lane to the QB.

Why the hell are you even surprised by this? This entire thread is dumb.

The article didn't say anything about going to a 4-3 alignment. It said they lined up at NT. There is no NT in a 4-3 alignment. Everything you just said is conjecture based on what two different teams did last year.

And even if you're right, we don't have the talent to make that work.

[DraftBoy]

The article didn't say anything about going to a 4-3 alignment. It said they lined up at NT. There is no NT in a 4-3 alignment. Everything you just said is conjecture based on what two different teams did last year.

And even if you're right, we don't have the talent to make that work.

First off yes there is a NT is a 4-3 alignment, that is Pat Williams for the Vikings.

Secondly I didnt say anything about us doing a 4-3, I used a Giants example.

Yes conjecture based on actually knowing about our current DC and the type of scheme he wants, which is v. your conjecture on a three sentence report. Sorry Ill take mine all day long.

No disagreement about talent but whether its a traditional 3-4, 4-3, 3-3-5, or hybrid new D we don't have the talent, so that point is repetitive and pointless to start with.

[justasportsfan]

The article didn't say anything about going to a 4-3 alignment. It said they lined up at NT.
The article didn't state Edwards nor Carrington is there for good either yet you assume they're desperate.

[JCBills]

The article didn't say anything about going to a 4-3 alignment. It said they lined up at NT. There is no NT in a 4-3 alignment. Everything you just said is conjecture based on what two different teams did last year.

And even if you're right, we don't have the talent to make that work.

If you watch some of the camp footage, we've been using some 4 man fronts.

[OpIv37]

The article didn't state Edwards nor Carrington is there for good either yet you assume they're desperate.

If they weren't desperate, they wouldn't have even had to try. If they weren't desperate, they would have some idea who should be there instead of experimenting, or at least have someone who is the prototypical size to experiment with.

[justasportsfan]

If they weren't desperate, they wouldn't have even had to try. If they weren't desperate, they would have some idea who should be there instead of experimenting, or at least have someone who is the prototypical size to experiment with.


So if we line up Spiller at wr, we're desperate at wr?

[Ickybaluky]

This seems an over-reaction, even for you Op.

It is not uncommon to have guys working at different spots in the offseason. It creates position flexibility, which is valuable during the season.

One of the key things about running a 3-4 vs. a 4-3 is it makes it easier for the defense to disguise pre-snap. In a 4-3, you pretty much know the 4 DL are getting upfield and rushing the passer. In the 3-4, you don't know where the 4th rusher is coming from, because you can bring that 4th rusher from anywhere you want.

I know in NE, Belichick frequently uses alignments with only 2 true DL, bringing in extra LB or DBs. He does this against Indy a lot to match up in the passing game, knowing that he is going to concede some rushing yards. He even has alignments with Wilfork the only DL, with the rest all being LB and DBs. Granted, this is usually in passing situations or against spread teams, but it is done quite a bit.

You can't do that if you don't have guys working in the other positions. The time to familiarize guys and prepare them for that is the offseason and camp. You can't start doing something like that during the season if you haven't laid the groundwork in the offseason.

If you ask me, this is probably a good sign for the Bills defense. It shows they are trying to create position flexibility on their team, and may be more creative.

[justasportsfan]

If you ask me, this is probably a good sign for the Bills defense. It shows they are trying to create position flexibility on their team, and may be more creative.
Na , thats a positive way of looking at it. Op made his quota for the year.

[psubills62]

I know it has been mentioned previously that we'll be running both 3-4 and 4-3 looks, though at this point it's probably best to assume that when someone says "NT" they mean the 0-tech in the 3-4. Even though it's certainly possible that Carrington and Edwards will play NT in the 4-3 looks.

[WeAreArthurMoates]

This seems an over-reaction, even for you Op.

It is not uncommon to have guys working at different spots in the offseason. It creates position flexibility, which is valuable during the season.

One of the key things about running a 3-4 vs. a 4-3 is it makes it easier for the defense to disguise pre-snap. In a 4-3, you pretty much know the 4 DL are getting upfield and rushing the passer. In the 3-4, you don't know where the 4th rusher is coming from, because you can bring that 4th rusher from anywhere you want.

I know in NE, Belichick frequently uses alignments with only 2 true DL, bringing in extra LB or DBs. He does this against Indy a lot to match up in the passing game, knowing that he is going to concede some rushing yards. He even has alignments with Wilfork the only DL, with the rest all being LB and DBs. Granted, this is usually in passing situations or against spread teams, but it is done quite a bit.

You can't do that if you don't have guys working in the other positions. The time to familiarize guys and prepare them for that is the offseason and camp. You can't start doing something like that during the season if you haven't laid the groundwork in the offseason.

If you ask me, this is probably a good sign for the Bills defense. It shows they are trying to create position flexibility on their team, and may be more creative.

:rockout:

[OpIv37]

So if we line up Spiller at wr, we're desperate at wr?

We are desperate at WR regardless of what they do with Spiller.

[justasportsfan]

We are desperate at WR regardless of what they do with Spiller.
returner?

[blln4lyf]

Yup. 3rd string means one injury and he's in the rotation.

But what I'm really complaining about is a NT situation that's so desperate that Gailey would even try this in the first place.
Harvey has been the 3rd string, but he had a minor injury. They just needed someone to play there with the other 3rd stringers. It is nothing to panic, or whine about.

[OpIv37]

This seems an over-reaction, even for you Op.

It is not uncommon to have guys working at different spots in the offseason. It creates position flexibility, which is valuable during the season.

One of the key things about running a 3-4 vs. a 4-3 is it makes it easier for the defense to disguise pre-snap. In a 4-3, you pretty much know the 4 DL are getting upfield and rushing the passer. In the 3-4, you don't know where the 4th rusher is coming from, because you can bring that 4th rusher from anywhere you want.

I know in NE, Belichick frequently uses alignments with only 2 true DL, bringing in extra LB or DBs. He does this against Indy a lot to match up in the passing game, knowing that he is going to concede some rushing yards. He even has alignments with Wilfork the only DL, with the rest all being LB and DBs. Granted, this is usually in passing situations or against spread teams, but it is done quite a bit.

You can't do that if you don't have guys working in the other positions. The time to familiarize guys and prepare them for that is the offseason and camp. You can't start doing something like that during the season if you haven't laid the groundwork in the offseason.

If you ask me, this is probably a good sign for the Bills defense. It shows they are trying to create position flexibility on their team, and may be more creative.

The piece you are missing is that the Bills don't have that Wilfork- that one guy who can be the NT regardless of the formation (not to mention the shortage of 3-4 LB's, but that's a different issue). The Bills are basically trying to find that Wilfork guy, or at least the backup for that Wilfork guy, by screwing around like this.

[OpIv37]

Harvey has been the 3rd string, but he had a minor injury. They just needed someone to play there with the other 3rd stringers. It is nothing to panic, or whine about.

Tell me that in October when we have an injury and Carrington is in the middle getting bowled over.

[justasportsfan]

The Bills are basically trying to find that Wilfork guy, or at least the backup for that Wilfork guy, by screwing around like this.
they weren't trying to find Wilfork in Edwards or Carrington.


You're just *****ing for the sake of *****ing.

[OpIv37]

they weren't trying to find Wilfork in Edwards or Carrington.


You're just *****ing for the sake of *****ing.

Tell me that in October when we have an injury and Carrington is in the middle getting bowled over.

[justasportsfan]

you're birching about something about may or may not happen. Something thats neither here nor there.

[OpIv37]

you're birching about something about may or may not happen. Something thats neither here nor there.

the fact that it MAY happen is scary enough.

[Ickybaluky]

The piece you are missing is that the Bills don't have that Wilfork- that one guy who can be the NT regardless of the formation (not to mention the shortage of 3-4 LB's, but that's a different issue). The Bills are basically trying to find that Wilfork guy, or at least the backup for that Wilfork guy, by screwing around like this.

It is hardly "screwing around", it is building versatility and it is smart football. Besides, Wilfork only plays about 60% of the snaps so he isn't out there all the time.

The Pats backup NT last year was Mike Wright, a 6-4, 290# DE, because they didn't have anything better and Ron Brace wasn't ready to play as a rookie. Against Miami last year, the Pats moved Wilfork out to DE to play him over Jake Long, and started Wright in the middle. It was a move made to counter the wildcat originally, but they like how it worked and stayed with it.

You cant' just look at a guys size and pigeon-hole him. The more a player can do, the better it is for the team. In the offseason, teams move guys around and see how they hold up to build flexibility. You may find a guy can get the job done somewhere in a particular defense you are playing, and that flexibility allows teams to adjust on the field and match up. It is smart football.

The Pats have been working reserve LB/ST-er Thomas Williams at FB. They used Richard Seymour as their primary NT his rookie year, despite mostly using him as a 4-3 DT (they went 4-3 for most of that season), because it allowed them to be flexible. They have rookie WR Buddy Farnham working at both WR and CB, like they did with Troy Brown. They have done that with ST-er Matthew Slater as well, using him at both WR and S in games. You may recall back in the mid-2000's, when they were deep at LB, the Pats ran the all-LB front where they moved guys around before the snap to confuse teams. In that alignment they had Mike Vrabel lining up as the NT, believe it or not (we was a DE with the Steelers, remember).

Position flexibility is a valuable thing in the NFL. The more a guy can do, even if it is on a limited basis or in one particular defensive look, the tougher it is to figure out what the defense is doing. It also helps teams deal with injuries. It is a smart thing to do, and it is silly for you to think they are "screwing around" because they play a guy at more than one position.

I mean, I understand you are frustrated with the losing, but you can't criticize them for this.

[mayotm]

It is hardly "screwing around", it is building versatility and it is smart football. Besides, Wilfork only plays about 60% of the snaps so he isn't out there all the time.

The Pats backup NT last year was Mike Wright, a 6-4, 290# DE, because they didn't have anything better and Ron Brace wasn't ready to play as a rookie. Against Miami last year, the Pats moved Wilfork out to DE to play him over Jake Long, and started Wright in the middle. It was a move made to counter the wildcat originally, but they like how it worked and stayed with it.

You cant' just look at a guys size and pigeon-hole him. The more a player can do, the better it is for the team. In the offseason, teams move guys around and see how they hold up to build flexibility. You may find a guy can get the job done somewhere in a particular defense you are playing, and that flexibility allows teams to adjust on the field and match up. It is smart football.

The Pats have been working reserve LB/ST-er Thomas Williams at FB. They used Richard Seymour as their primary NT his rookie year, despite mostly using him as a 4-3 DT (they went 4-3 for most of that season), because it allowed them to be flexible. They have rookie WR Buddy Farnham working at both WR and CB, like they did with Troy Brown. They have done that with ST-er Matthew Slater as well, using him at both WR and S in games. You may recall back in the mid-2000's, when they were deep at LB, the Pats ran the all-LB front where they moved guys around before the snap to confuse teams. In that alignment they had Mike Vrabel lining up as the NT, believe it or not (we was a DE with the Steelers, remember).

Position flexibility is a valuable thing in the NFL. The more a guy can do, even if it is on a limited basis or in one particular defensive look, the tougher it is to figure out what the defense is doing. It also helps teams deal with injuries. It is a smart thing to do, and it is silly for you to think they are "screwing around" because they play a guy at more than one position.

I mean, I understand you are frustrated with the losing, but you can't criticize them for this.Thank you for this rational post. Although, I'm afraid you're wasting your time trying to convince Op.

[OpIv37]

It is hardly "screwing around", it is building versatility and it is smart football. Besides, Wilfork only plays about 60% of the snaps so he isn't out there all the time.

The Pats backup NT last year was Mike Wright, a 6-4, 290# DE, because they didn't have anything better and Ron Brace wasn't ready to play as a rookie. Against Miami last year, the Pats moved Wilfork out to DE to play him over Jake Long, and started Wright in the middle. It was a move made to counter the wildcat originally, but they like how it worked and stayed with it.

You cant' just look at a guys size and pigeon-hole him. The more a player can do, the better it is for the team. In the offseason, teams move guys around and see how they hold up to build flexibility. You may find a guy can get the job done somewhere in a particular defense you are playing, and that flexibility allows teams to adjust on the field and match up. It is smart football.

The Pats have been working reserve LB/ST-er Thomas Williams at FB. They used Richard Seymour as their primary NT his rookie year, despite mostly using him as a 4-3 DT (they went 4-3 for most of that season), because it allowed them to be flexible. They have rookie WR Buddy Farnham working at both WR and CB, like they did with Troy Brown. They have done that with ST-er Matthew Slater as well, using him at both WR and S in games. You may recall back in the mid-2000's, when they were deep at LB, the Pats ran the all-LB front where they moved guys around before the snap to confuse teams. In that alignment they had Mike Vrabel lining up as the NT, believe it or not (we was a DE with the Steelers, remember).

Position flexibility is a valuable thing in the NFL. The more a guy can do, even if it is on a limited basis or in one particular defensive look, the tougher it is to figure out what the defense is doing. It also helps teams deal with injuries. It is a smart thing to do, and it is silly for you to think they are "screwing around" because they play a guy at more than one position.

I mean, I understand you are frustrated with the losing, but you can't criticize them for this.

I doubt the Bills are practicing countering the Wildcat at this point in the off-season, when they don't even have their base D established yet.

Putting guys who are undersized and inexperienced in a position is not position flexibility. It's desperation.

[OpIv37]

Thank you for this rational post. Although, I'm afraid you're wasting your time trying to convince Op.

Once again, when it's October and Carrington is getting bowled over at NT on the field, don't say I didn't warn you.

Oh, and the Pats have something the Bills don't: Talent. They move guys around because the guys are talented enough to handle it. Our guys can barely handle their main position, let alone an extra one.

[mayotm]

Once again, when it's October and Carrington is getting bowled over at NT on the field, don't say I didn't warn you.

Oh, and the Pats have something the Bills don't: Talent. They move guys around because the guys are talented enough to handle it. Our guys can barely handle their main position, let alone an extra one.Thanks for the warning. It's amazing that I somehow was a Bills fan long before having your guidance and wisdom at my disposal.

[justasportsfan]

Once again, when it's October and Carrington is getting bowled over at NT on the field, don't say I didn't warn you.


Is Carrington playing NT on October? Whose your source?

[madness]

Patti... is that you?

[theanswer74]

Let me just make sure Im understanding this thread, its about our 4th string and 5th string emergency NT's right?

[DraftBoy]

I doubt the Bills are practicing countering the Wildcat at this point in the off-season, when they don't even have their base D established yet.

Putting guys who are undersized and inexperienced in a position is not position flexibility. It's desperation.

What size is Jay Ratliff?

You're just trying to cover you're own ass now.

[YardRat]

Did I sleep through the summer? Is it September already? How many games have we lost?

[DraftBoy]

Did I sleep through the summer? Is it September already? How many games have we lost?

Its December, we are currently 15-0

[YardRat]

Its December, we are currently 15-0

Whew...Good thing we've got that Carriker kid at NT.

[OpIv37]

Let me just make sure Im understanding this thread, its about our 4th string and 5th string emergency NT's right?

No- it's about DE's playing 3rd string NT, meaning one injury and they're in the NT rotation.

[OpIv37]

Did I sleep through the summer? Is it September already? How many games have we lost?

hahahaha this again?

[DraftBoy]

No- it's about DE's playing 3rd string NT, meaning one injury and they're in the NT rotation.

Why do you think they are not already in the rotation? We've been over this how many times now?

[OpIv37]

What size is Jay Ratliff?

You're just trying to cover you're own ass now.

I already mentioned Jay Ratliff but CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!!! You get today's "Use the exception to prove the rule" Award!!!!!!!!!

You successfully found the ONE example in the modern NFL where a guy that small excelled at 3-4 NT!

If Steve Smith can play WR at 5'6" so can Roscoe Parrish! If Dwight Freeney can play DE at 240 then so can Aaron Maybin! If Bellicheck won in NE after losing in Cleveland then Jauron can win in Buffalo after losing in Chicago! We all know how well this logic worked in the past so let's keep using it!

[DraftBoy]

I already mentioned Jay Ratliff but CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!!! You get today's "Use the exception to prove the rule" Award!!!!!!!!!

You successfully found the ONE example in the modern NFL where a guy that small excelled at 3-4 NT!

If Steve Smith can play WR at 5'6" so can Roscoe Parrish! If Dwight Freeney can play DE at 240 then so can Aaron Maybin! If Bellicheck won in NE after losing in Cleveland then Jauron can win in Buffalo after losing in Chicago! We all know how well this logic worked in the past so let's keep using it!

Im going to need you to go back and refer to your earlier notes about what kind of schemes and variations our DC likes to run. You know that whole thing about facts and such that you're not always a huge fan of.

[OpIv37]

Im going to need you to go back and refer to your earlier notes about what kind of schemes and variations our DC likes to run. You know that whole thing about facts and such that you're not always a huge fan of.

what you think our DC "likes" to do and what he's actually doing may be two different things.

What you think our DC "likes" to do and what our DC actually has the talent to do are two different things.

[DraftBoy]

what you think our DC "likes" to do and what he's actually doing may be two different things.

What you think our DC "likes" to do and what our DC actually has the talent to do are two different things.

Not what he likes, what he's done in the past. Hence the use of facts, not assumptions.

What you think the Bills are doing, and what they are actually doing are two totally different things.

You're being overly dramatic about a friggin mini camp workout, when you full well know we are going to run various looks on the D front. Are we thing at NT? Yes but you carrying on like a prepubescent girl who is boy band crazy, isn't proving ****.

[billz83]

the bills are just proving to fans we have no REAL NT..no suprise we pretty much ignored all the positions we needed during this offseason anyway..

[Griff]

lol OP threads.

[Griff]

the bills are just proving to fans we have no REAL NT..no suprise we pretty much ignored all the positions we needed during this offseason anyway..

What do you think Troup is?

Yeah we ignored 3-4 DEs, OLB, and MLB, WR and LT, oh wait we drafted those positions.

[Night Train]

Talk about Much Ado About Nothing :wtf:

[OpIv37]

What do you think Troup is?

Yeah we ignored 3-4 DEs, OLB, and MLB, WR and LT, oh wait we drafted those positions.

hahahahahahaha.

Troup is a 3-4 NT- a rookie who's not ready, at the most important position in the 3-4 D. And the ONLY thing we did about those positions was draft, mostly late-round picks- so all we have is a bunch of guys who at best will need time to develop and at worst will never amount to anything.

That is NOT sufficiently addressing major holes, as you will see on the field when the game starts.

And BTW, in case you didn't notice, our division opponents- who were already BETTER than us- got to draft too. We need to CLOSE the talent gap. When they're drafting and we're drafting, that doesn't close the talent gap. At best it allows us to break even, especially when they've drafted so much better than we have.

[WeAreArthurMoates]

hahahahahahaha.

Troup is a 3-4 NT- a rookie who's not ready, at the most important position in the 3-4 D. And the ONLY thing we did about those positions was draft, mostly late-round picks- so all we have is a bunch of guys who at best will need time to develop and at worst will never amount to anything.

That is NOT sufficiently addressing major holes, as you will see on the field when the game starts.

And BTW, in case you didn't notice, our division opponents- who were already BETTER than us- got to draft too. We need to CLOSE the talent gap. When they're drafting and we're drafting, that doesn't close the talent gap. At best it allows us to break even, especially when they've drafted so much better than we have.

You do not know this, just like I think he is ready and will contribute big time we just don't know this. Don't state this as fact, he played 4 years in college, is incredible strong, extremely wide and hustles. There's two sides of the story and your's is clearly the one thinking he will fail. Not buying chief.

[OpIv37]

You do not know this, just like I think he is ready and will contribute big time we just don't know this. Don't state this as fact, he played 4 years in college, is incredible strong, extremely wide and hustles. There's two sides of the story and your's is clearly the one thinking he will fail. Not buying chief.

go back and read the pre-draft reports. Pretty much every single one said he would need time to develop. So, while no one knows this for a fact, such a strong consensus is generally correct. Also, DT's/NT's typically take time to develop the muscle necessary to play in the NFL. So, again, while we don't know for sure, consensus and history are on the side of "not ready."

[WeAreArthurMoates]

go back and read the pre-draft reports. Pretty much every single one said he would need time to develop. So, while no one knows this for a fact, such a strong consensus is generally correct. Also, DT's/NT's typically take time to develop the muscle necessary to play in the NFL. So, again, while we don't know for sure, consensus and history are on the side of "not ready."

I have, not one of those reports mentions that he needs to get stronger. Those reports talk about his great arm length and strenght our his positives. Every report out there talks of how he will need to be a 2 down NT to start focusing in the run. Guess what, that's what he is going to do here. Being a rotational NT doesn't mean that they can't contribute.

[OpIv37]

I have, not one of those reports mentions that he needs to get stronger. Those reports talk about his great arm length and strenght our his positives. Every report out there talks of how he will need to be a 2 down NT to start focusing in the run. Guess what, that's what he is going to do here. Being a rotational NT doesn't mean that they can't contribute.

So, if he's a 2 down NT, who is the 3rd down NT?

See the problem here? Even if he turns out to be a good 2 down NT, we still haven't sufficiently addressed the position. And if he or Kyle Williams gets injured, then we end up with someone who is an even worse fit for the position playing NT, like Stroud, Carrington or Edwards.

[WeAreArthurMoates]

So, if he's a 2 down NT, who is the 3rd down NT?

See the problem here? Even if he turns out to be a good 2 down NT, we still haven't sufficiently addressed the position. And if he or Kyle Williams gets injured, then we end up with someone who is an even worse fit for the position playing NT, like Stroud, Carrington or Edwards.

Kyle will be the 3rd down NT and will be effective at it rushing the passer. Vs. the run, yes, he will get murdered. Lonnie Harvey will man the 3rd spot, do I like it, not really but I also don't hate it.

[methos4ever]

Kyle will be the 3rd down NT and will be effective at it rushing the passer. Vs. the run, yes, he will get murdered. Lonnie Harvey will man the 3rd spot, do I like it, not really but I also don't hate it.
Or on 3rd down, they can go to a one gap 4-3 and try to hit every gap with a pass rusher. Nothing that cries KW cannot do it.

[psubills62]

I thought this little nugget on rotoworld was interesting:


Ricky Jean-Francois took 75-80 percent of the snaps at nose tackle during 49ers OTAs.

Jean-Francois is transitioning from end to nose tackle. With unsigned franchise player Aubrayo Franklin staying away all spring, Jean-Francois got a ton of much-needed reps. He's in line to be Franklin's backup this season.

The actual 2nd stringer at NT for San Francisco is 295 pounds. Not just their 4th and 5th string guys (which Edwards/Carrington are currently).

[John Doe]

For any of those interested in what our competition is doing, the Dolphins plan to convert one of their starting defensive ends, Randy Starks (6'3" 305 lbs) to be their full time starting nose tackle.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/06/01/1657432_move-from-end-to-nose-tackle-is.html


Starks used Cowboys nose tackle Jay Ratliff as an example. Ratliff (6-4, 303 pounds) is nearly the same size as Starks (6-3, 305), and he has managed to pile up 13 ½ sacks in the past two seasons.
``It's not going to give me many sacks or big numbers, but I can still be effective in there,'' Starks said. ``Ratliff from Dallas does it, so it's not impossible.''
Whether Starks' move to nose tackle becomes a full-time switch for the rest of his career is likely to be dictated by his success this season, but the Dolphins are not going into this project with any hesitation.

[OpIv37]

Ratliff is the exception to the rule and both the Bills and Dolphins are dumb to attempt to emulate that with inferior talent.

[DraftBoy]

Ratliff is the exception to the rule and both the Bills and Dolphins are dumb to attempt to emulate that with inferior talent.

Yea that Mike Nolan guy has no idea how to run the 3-4, I mean look how bad Denver's D was last year...

And Mike Singletary too, he's an idiot who doesnt know the first thing about defense...

[OpIv37]

Yea that Mike Nolan guy has no idea how to run the 3-4, I mean look how bad Denver's D was last year...

And Mike Singletary too, he's an idiot who doesnt know the first thing about defense...

So, because they did something good in the past means they get a pass on any stupid thing they do from here on out? Ok...... solid logic there.

[YardRat]

So, because they did something good in the past means they get a pass on any stupid thing they do from here on out? Ok...... solid logic there.

Almost as solid as dismissing something as stupid and a failure before seeing how it actually works.

[OpIv37]

Almost as solid as dismissing something as stupid and a failure before seeing how it actually works.

Yeah, I mean, it's not like anyone's ever made a negative prediction about this team that turned out to be extremely accurate or anything....

This organization hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt. If they're doing something that looks like a bad idea, chances are it is. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt when they earn it. Right now, I see defenders being put in a position where they are less than the prototypical size, i.e., same ****, different day.

[YardRat]

Yeah, I mean, it's not like anyone's ever made a negative prediction about this team that turned out to be extremely accurate or anything....

Or extremely wrong.


This organization hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt. If they're doing something that looks like a bad idea, chances are it is. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt when they earn it. Right now, I see defenders being put in a position where they are less than the prototypical size, i.e., same ****, different day.

This organization is completely different, save for a couple of coaches that were retained, so they haven't had enough time on the job to earn anything, neither the benefit of the doubt nor unfounded criticism.

Are there other positions that you are also concerned with, where we have guys that are 'less than prototypical size', or is NT the only one?

[OpIv37]

Or extremely wrong.



This organization is completely different, save for a couple of coaches that were retained, so they haven't had enough time on the job to earn anything, neither the benefit of the doubt nor unfounded criticism.

Are there other positions that you are also concerned with, where we have guys that are 'less than prototypical size', or is NT the only one?

Yeah? Ralph, Overdorf, Modrak, Brandon- all still here. This org is NOT completely different. People like to think it is because it gives them hope, but in reality not much as changed.

At the very least, the guys picking the players and the coaches are the same, and they've proven themselves to be complete morons. Right now, the guys they brought in are pulling the same **** as the guys they fired. So, the criticism is hardly unfounded, as you will see on the field come September.

I think the front 7 is a mess right now because we had guys who were undersized for the 4-3 trying to make the transition to the 3-4.

[better days]

Yeah? Ralph, Overdorf, Modrak, Brandon- all still here. This org is NOT completely different. People like to think it is because it gives them hope, but in reality not much as changed.

At the very least, the guys picking the players and the coaches are the same, and they've proven themselves to be complete morons. Right now, the guys they brought in are pulling the same **** as the guys they fired. So, the criticism is hardly unfounded, as you will see on the field come September.

I think the front 7 is a mess right now because we had guys who were undersized for the 4-3 trying to make the transition to the 3-4.

Aside from Ellison, the guys that were undersized in the 4-3 are being moved to DIFFERENT positions (also a complaint of yours) in the 3-4 & are no longer undersized.

[YardRat]

Yeah? Ralph, Overdorf, Modrak, Brandon- all still here. This org is NOT completely different. People like to think it is because it gives them hope, but in reality not much as changed.

Ralph's been here from the beginning, obviously, through all the highs and lows, and that's a different argument anyway. Brandon's been moved out of the football side of the organization, and that should be a plus. Overdorf is a money guy, not football, so that's kind of moot, and Modrak obviously hasn't ever had (and still doesn't have) final say on acquisitions. Nix and Gailey, plus Whaley (the guys really in charge of football), = as new as you can get without doing a complete overhaul including parts of the operation that really have nothing to do with the team itself. If that's not good enough, well too bad for you.


At the very least, the guys picking the players and the coaches are the same,

Completely false. Totally wrong.


and they've proven themselves to be complete morons.

Really? Already? Complete morons? Have you been expecting a Super Bowl trophy or any results at all before the first game is even played?


Right now, the guys they brought in are pulling the same **** as the guys they fired. So, the criticism is hardly unfounded, as you will see on the field come September.

Once again, to emphasize the point, completely unfounded until we see some results on the field.


I think the front 7 is a mess right now because we had guys who were undersized for the 4-3 trying to make the transition to the 3-4.

Wow...Think about that again...Reeeaaaal hard.

[BertSquirtgum]

finally had the time to read this entire thread. a number of people have put op's foot in his mouth at least 5 times in this thread. yet, he still keeps spewing the same bullsh**. it's fu**ing hilarious.

[Beebe's Kid]

finally had the time to read this entire thread. a number of people have put op's foot in his mouth at least 5 times in this thread. yet, he still keeps spewing the same bullsh**. it's fu**ing hilarious.

It was nice to see it come full circle to Ralph, and that this organization hasn't earned blah blah blah...

Epic thread.

[DraftBoy]

So, because they did something good in the past means they get a pass on any stupid thing they do from here on out? Ok...... solid logic there.

Way a second, you love to throw the definition of insanity around, but you completely deny that two coaches who have coached on multiple, I repeat m-u-l-t-i-p-l-e (meaning more than one), good D's and have been proven to be very good defensive minded coaches could actually know what they are doing?

My logic is completely sound, your bias is what is out of whack here. Saying Mike Nolan or Mike Singletary don't know what they are doing is laughable and ridiculous.

[OpIv37]

finally had the time to read this entire thread. a number of people have put op's foot in his mouth at least 5 times in this thread. yet, he still keeps spewing the same bullsh**. it's fu**ing hilarious.

hahahahaha whatever.

People believe what they want. They want to believe that there's change in the FO. They want to believe that this is an emergency only situation. But it's not, as you will see on the field come September. Every year, a discussion like this happens and every year the team sucks ass on the field.

So, go ahead and laugh now. You won't be laughing on Sunday afternoons.

[OpIv37]

Way a second, you love to throw the definition of insanity around, but you completely deny that two coaches who have coached on multiple, I repeat m-u-l-t-i-p-l-e (meaning more than one), good D's and have been proven to be very good defensive minded coaches could actually know what they are doing?

My logic is completely sound, your bias is what is out of whack here. Saying Mike Nolan or Mike Singletary don't know what they are doing is laughable and ridiculous.

How do you know that they're doing it because they know what they're doing and not because their hand is forced by the ****ty personnel situation they've been given? Your logic is only "completely sound" if you make an assumption that you have no way of knowing.

[DraftBoy]

How do you know that they're doing it because they know what they're doing and not because their hand is forced by the ****ty personnel situation they've been given? Your logic is only "completely sound" if you make an assumption that you have no way of knowing.

Because I dont have to jump to horribly based conclusions off of assumptions and not fact?

[OpIv37]

Because I dont have to jump to horribly based conclusions off of assumptions and not fact?

But you just did. You assumed that the defensive line juggling was due to some superior knowledge on the part of our coaches and not due to a lack of alternatives. You have no way of knowing that any more than I do, yet you have no problems drawing conclusions from it.

[psubills62]

How do you know that they're doing it because they know what they're doing and not because their hand is forced by the ****ty personnel situation they've been given? Your logic is only "completely sound" if you make an assumption that you have no way of knowing.

Singletary has been in charge of that defense for at least the last two drafts. Yet they can't get anything better than a 295-pound 7th round draft pick to be their 2nd string NT?

The lightest of our first through third string NT's is Kyle Williams, who is listed at 306 on nfl.com, and probably weighs at least that much, if not 310 by now.

It's pretty obvious to me and everyone else that using Edwards and Carrington as our 4th and 5th string guys at NT is not a huge deal.

[OpIv37]

Singletary has been in charge of that defense for at least the last two drafts. Yet they can't get anything better than a 295-pound 7th round draft pick to be their 2nd string NT?

The lightest of our first through third string NT's is Kyle Williams, who is listed at 306 on nfl.com, and probably weighs at least that much, if not 310 by now.

It's pretty obvious to me and everyone else that using Edwards and Carrington as our 4th and 5th string guys at NT is not a huge deal.

One injury and one of those guys will be in the rotation.

[psubills62]

One injury and one of those guys will be in the rotation.

Actually, two injuries. Harvey currently has a minor injury and should easily be ready for TC and the regular season.

You're missing the point. San Fran already has a guy in the rotation the size of Edwards. Second string. Edwards is 4th/5th string. Carrington is 4th/5th string. It's still mini-camp season. This is not an issue.

[OpIv37]

Actually, two injuries. Harvey currently has a minor injury and should easily be ready for TC and the regular season.

You're missing the point. San Fran already has a guy in the rotation the size of Edwards. Second string. Edwards is 4th/5th string. Carrington is 4th/5th string. It's still mini-camp season. This is not an issue.

We play SF once every 4 years. I don't care what they're doing. I watched the Bills try to get by with undersized players at nearly every position in the defensive front 7 for four years, with disastrous results. The one or two guys that can play 3-4 NT at 295 are the exception, and we don't have any exceptional players at the moment.

[DraftBoy]

But you just did. You assumed that the defensive line juggling was due to some superior knowledge on the part of our coaches and not due to a lack of alternatives. You have no way of knowing that any more than I do, yet you have no problems drawing conclusions from it.

No I didn't, you see unlike you (and thank you for proving this in an above post) I actually follow more than just the Bills so I know who SF and Miami have on their rosters, what options they have in place, and what kind of philosophy their coaches tend to run. You have no idea and are aimlessly accusing everybody of being and idiot, because it doesnt fit your perfect world scenario.

[justasportsfan]

Die thread die!!!

[OpIv37]

No I didn't, you see unlike you (and thank you for proving this in an above post) I actually follow more than just the Bills so I know who SF and Miami have on their rosters, what options they have in place, and what kind of philosophy their coaches tend to run. You have no idea and are aimlessly accusing everybody of being and idiot, because it doesnt fit your perfect world scenario.

I'm accusing them of being idiots because they're pulling the exact same garbage that the previous coaches pulled. What was that line about doing the same thing and expecting different results?

Just because Miami and SF are doing it doesn't make it a good idea.

[DraftBoy]

I'm accusing them of being idiots because they're pulling the exact same garbage that the previous coaches pulled. What was that line about doing the same thing and expecting different results?

Just because Miami and SF are doing it doesn't make it a good idea.

I didnt say just because they are it makes it a good idea you accused two well known, and highly respected defensive minds of being stupid for doing something similar to what Buffalo is trying. My point is that you make yourself look like an idiot when you make those broad accusations against guys who have proved over and over again they know what they are doing on defense.

[OpIv37]

I didnt say just because they are it makes it a good idea you accused two well known, and highly respected defensive minds of being stupid for doing something similar to what Buffalo is trying. My point is that you make yourself look like an idiot when you make those broad accusations against guys who have proved over and over again they know what they are doing on defense.

Just because they knew what they were doing in the past doesn't mean they can't do something stupid in the future. On paper, this looks like a bad idea because, with one notable exception, it hasn't worked in the past. So, despite their past records, the onus is still on them to prove why this isn't a really bad idea.

[DraftBoy]

Just because they knew what they were doing in the past doesn't mean they can't do something stupid in the future. On paper, this looks like a bad idea because, with one notable exception, it hasn't worked in the past. So, despite their past records, the onus is still on them to prove why this isn't a really bad idea.

Flip this now and see if you believe.

"Just because they were doing something stupid in the past, doesn't mean they can't do something right in the future."

Are you even buying the stuff you are selling?

[OpIv37]

Flip this now and see if you believe.

"Just because they were doing something stupid in the past, doesn't mean they can't do something right in the future."

Are you even buying the stuff you are selling?

They are trying something that has generally NOT worked in the past. You are assuming it will work because they've been successful doing OTHER THINGS in the past. The logical fallacy is yours, not mine.

[justasportsfan]

Just because they knew what they were doing in the past doesn't mean they can't do something stupid in the future. .Now, you're reaching trying to look for loopholes based on that statement just to try and win an argument.

Should I dare say that the opposite applies? Just because Ralphy didn't know what he's doing doesn't mean he won't do something smart in the future?

you're whole argument of being "relistic " is based on, expectations based on the past.

[OpIv37]

Now, you're reaching trying to look for loopholes based on that statement just to try and win an argument.

Should I dare say that the opposite applies? Just because Ralphy didn't know what he's doing doesn't mean he won't do something smart in the future?

you're whole argument of being "relistic " is based on, expectations based on the past.

A second ago you wanted this thread to die.

Now you're throwing fuel on the fire.

Make up your mind already.

[justasportsfan]

Make up your mind already.
It isn't going to die when you're contradicting yourself just to keep the thread alive.

[OpIv37]

It isn't going to die when you're contradicting yourself just to keep the thread alive.

you saying that I contradicted myself doesn't make it so.

[DraftBoy]

They are trying something that has generally NOT worked in the past. You are assuming it will work because they've been successful doing OTHER THINGS in the past. The logical fallacy is yours, not mine.

Again I didnt say or assume anything. I simply asked that if you flip your own statement do you believe it to be true?

[justasportsfan]

you saying that I contradicted myself doesn't make it so.
and you're saying that the bills are desperate just because they are trying other things doesn't make it so.

[BertSquirtgum]

Flip this now and see if you believe.

"Just because they were doing something stupid in the past, doesn't mean they can't do something right in the future."

Are you even buying the stuff you are selling?

i'm not. it's horse****.

[OpIv37]

and you're saying that the bills are desperate just because they are trying other things doesn't make it so.

It comes down to this: Carrington and Edwards are too small to be traditional 3-4 NT's. Using guys their size at NT typically does not work. We had ONE injury in CAMP and these guys were in the rotation.

I am not satisfied with that situation.

If you want to pass it off as "5th stringers" or "camp experiments," fine- just don't be surprised when Troupe or Williams gets injured and we're giving up 200 rush yards a game because all we have left to fill out the rotation are 295 lb "nose tackles."

[OpIv37]

i'm not. it's horse****.

yeah? Go back and check my prediction record over the last couple of years. It's a lot more accurate than most of the people who argue with me all day long. You will see come September.

[justasportsfan]

It comes down to this: Carrington and Edwards are too small to be traditional 3-4 NT's. Using guys their size at NT typically does not work. We had ONE injury in CAMP and these guys were in the rotation.

I am not satisfied with that situation.

If you want to pass it off as "5th stringers" or "camp experiments," fine- just don't be surprised when Troupe or Williams gets injured and we're giving up 200 rush yards a game because all we have left to fill out the rotation are 295 lb "nose tackles."

just because you say so doesn't make it so.

[OpIv37]

Again I didnt say or assume anything. I simply asked that if you flip your own statement do you believe it to be true?

So let me get this straight.

I said something, you flipped it so it said the opposite, and now you're asking me if I believe the opposite of what I wrote?

No, I don't.

And I know what you are going to say. "Well you always say you won't give the Bills the benefit of the doubt because they haven't proven themselves in the past. These guys have proven themselves and you still won't give them the benefit of the doubt."

The difference is that by playing undersized nose tackles, they are doing something that generally hasn't worked in the past. So, you have two competing predictors: the lack of success of undersized nose tackles vs the defensive success that these coaches have had in the past.

You are trying to use justa's tactic of taking a statement I made and applying it to two dissimilar situations.

I've watched the Bills fail miserably with undersized defenders for the last 4 seasons, so in my opinion, the lack of success of undersized defenders trumps the past success of those coaches. If you disagree with me, fine, but let's have that conversation instead of these semantic arguments and attempts at logical gymnastics.

[OpIv37]

just because you say so doesn't make it so.

Nope. The results on the field come September will make it so.

[justasportsfan]

Nope. The results on the field come September will make it so.
Aight Mc.Cleo

[DraftBoy]

So let me get this straight.

I said something, you flipped it so it said the opposite, and now you're asking me if I believe the opposite of what I wrote?

No, I don't.



So just so we are clear, people doing smart things are capable of doing dumb things but people doing dumb things aren't capable of doing smart things. Got it. I didn't bother quoting the rest because honestly, it doesnt matter anymore. You're honestly too jaded and bias to even both arguing with anymore.

[OpIv37]

So just so we are clear, people doing smart things are capable of doing dumb things but people doing dumb things aren't capable of doing smart things. Got it. I didn't bother quoting the rest because honestly, it doesnt matter anymore. You're honestly too jaded and bias to even both arguing with anymore.

You dismissed the important part of my post because you'd rather attack me then address the issue at hand.

In the case of using undersized NTs, you have two coaches who were smart in the past doing something that hasn't worked in the past. Yet, you are still willing to defer to their judgment. Explain that one.

[BertSquirtgum]

Nope. The results on the field come September will make it so.

what happens to you when the bills to become a force to reckon with? will you crawl back into your hole and shut the **** up?

[psubills62]

It comes down to this: Carrington and Edwards are too small to be traditional 3-4 NT's. Using guys their size at NT typically does not work. We had ONE injury in CAMP and these guys were in the rotation.

I am not satisfied with that situation.

If you want to pass it off as "5th stringers" or "camp experiments," fine- just don't be surprised when Troupe or Williams gets injured and we're giving up 200 rush yards a game because all we have left to fill out the rotation are 295 lb "nose tackles."

Let me tell you this one more time. The mini-camp rotation DOES NOT MATTER. They're in the rotation when we still have 80 guys in camp. We need guys to play against our third-string offense. Doesn't mean anything come regular season.

It's not a big deal. The Bills have these guys as last-ditch scenarios. Do you really expect them to carry 340-pound guys on our roster specifically to be 4th and 5th-string NT's? That's useless. Might as well just put Edwards and Carrington in there so they are ready in case of an emergency. You don't even know that they would play if we had 2 injuries come regular season. Maybe they'd just put one of the injured players on IR and sign someone.

You can say stuff like "the 49ers and Dolphins don't affect us, they can make dumb decisions if they want," but their decisions are magnified by the fact that the guys they're using are first and second-string guys. Ours are 4th and 5th string. You don't seem to understand this. And the fact that the Dolphins and 49ers (and other teams, I'm sure) are doing this means it ISN'T just the "same old Bills" making bad personnel decisions.

[OpIv37]

what happens to you when the bills to become a force to reckon with? will you crawl back into your hole and shut the **** up?

I'm a realist. If they ever get good again, I'll say that they're good. But it's not about me- I don't know why so many people insist on making it about me rather than discussing the team.

[OpIv37]

Let me tell you this one more time. The mini-camp rotation DOES NOT MATTER. They're in the rotation when we still have 80 guys in camp. We need guys to play against our third-string offense. Doesn't mean anything come regular season.

It's not a big deal. The Bills have these guys as last-ditch scenarios. Do you really expect them to carry 340-pound guys on our roster specifically to be 4th and 5th-string NT's? That's useless. Might as well just put Edwards and Carrington in there so they are ready in case of an emergency. You don't even know that they would play if we had 2 injuries come regular season. Maybe they'd just put one of the injured players on IR and sign someone.

You can say stuff like "the 49ers and Dolphins don't affect us, they can make dumb decisions if they want," but their decisions are magnified by the fact that the guys they're using are first and second-string guys. Ours are 4th and 5th string. You don't seem to understand this. And the fact that the Dolphins and 49ers (and other teams, I'm sure) are doing this means it ISN'T just the "same old Bills" making bad personnel decisions.

The mini camp rotation DOES matter because the guys in the rotation are the guys who will likely still be on the team when the regular season starts.

[psubills62]

The mini camp rotation DOES matter because the guys in the rotation are the guys who will likely still be on the team when the regular season starts.

:doh: No, it doesn't matter. They'll be on the roster as DE's, and only play NT in a dire emergency. The Bills are not going to keep 5 320+ pound NT's on the 53-man roster just so you don't freak out about it.

[OpIv37]

:doh: No, it doesn't matter. They'll be on the roster as DE's, and only play NT in a dire emergency. The Bills are not going to keep 5 320+ pound NT's on the 53-man roster just so you don't freak out about it.

Not 5.

1.

1 injury and this is what happened to the rotation. You pulled 5 out of your ass.

[better days]

Not 5.

1.

1 injury and this is what happened to the rotation. You pulled 5 out of your ass.

If an injury happend during the SEASON where they did not have a viable NT, I think the Coaching Staff is smart enough to go back to the 4-3.

[psubills62]

Not 5.

1.

1 injury and this is what happened to the rotation. You pulled 5 out of your ass.

No I didn't. They should have at least 2, probably 3 NT's on the roster in Williams, Troup and Harvey as a 3rd-stringer. Do you really want them to use 2 more roster spots on NT's, or put other guys like Edwards/Carrington in there to get them some experience in case of an extreme emergency?

[OpIv37]

No I didn't. They should have at least 2, probably 3 NT's on the roster in Williams, Troup and Harvey as a 3rd-stringer. Do you really want them to use 2 more roster spots on NT's, or put other guys like Edwards/Carrington in there to get them some experience in case of an extreme emergency?

If that's the case, then where were Williams and Troupe? Why did they go to Edwards and Carrington? Troupe is a rookie and Williams has never played 3-4 NT before- they could use the extra reps.

[psubills62]

If that's the case, then where were Williams and Troupe? Why did they go to Edwards and Carrington? Troupe is a rookie and Williams has never played 3-4 NT before- they could use the extra reps.

They were probably out there taking the first and second team reps, just like they have been. If you noticed in the article that YOU posted, it says:


When Lonnie Harvey left the morning practice with an injury he was replaced at nose tackle by rookie Alex Carrington. Harvey was the third team nose behind Kyle Williams and Torrell Troup. In the afternoon however, it was veteran Dwan Edwards taking nose tackle reps.

Does it say Edwards and Carrington were the ONLY guys taking reps? No. Edwards and Carrington were replacing Harvey as the third-team NT. Edwards took Harvey's reps, not Williams' and Troup's reps.

There aren't even pads in these OTA's, last I checked. How important can these reps possibly be for the linemen?

[OpIv37]

when you're a rookie or new to the most important position on D, EVERY rep is important. BTW, there is a rotation at NT- they don't use the same one for the whole game. So, ONE injury means that Harvey's in the rotation and Edwards/Carrington are 2nd string, if not already in the rotation.

[psubills62]

when you're a rookie or new to the most important position on D, EVERY rep is important. BTW, there is a rotation at NT- they don't use the same one for the whole game. So, ONE injury means that Harvey's in the rotation and Edwards/Carrington are 2nd string, if not already in the rotation.

Yes, one injury means Harvey is in the rotation, which would then make Edwards/Carrington 3rd and 4th string, actually, not 2nd string.

Not to mention the Bills have said they'll be using both 3-4 and 4-3 looks. So it's not a big deal to use a combination of Williams/Troup/Harvey in the 3-4 looks, then go to a 4-3 with Edwards/Carrington at DT possibly. If they have major injuries at NT, I wouldn't be surprised to see them go to the 4-3 for the most part.

Yes, reps are important, but it's pretty obvious that preseason game reps >> TC reps >> mini-camp reps/OTA reps. They'll get PLENTY when it comes time for TC and preseason.

Again, your entire position is based on "IF at least 2 injuries happen." ANY team would have difficulties with 2 injuries at NT.

[YardRat]

LOL....let's keep three to five guys 'prototypically fit' to play NT, so that when one of our DE's gets injured they can slide over and give some another thing to ***** about. "OMG...Dumbass coaches are playing guys out of position again!!"

[YardRat]

what happens to you when the bills to become a force to reckon with? will you crawl back into your hole and shut the **** up?

No. If the team falls short of anything other than a Super Bowl victory, he will ***** about that. Even if they win the whole thing, it won't be dominating enough, or it will be because the other team ****ed up, or we got lucky, etc etc.

[OpIv37]

Yes, one injury means Harvey is in the rotation, which would then make Edwards/Carrington 3rd and 4th string, actually, not 2nd string.

Not to mention the Bills have said they'll be using both 3-4 and 4-3 looks. So it's not a big deal to use a combination of Williams/Troup/Harvey in the 3-4 looks, then go to a 4-3 with Edwards/Carrington at DT possibly. If they have major injuries at NT, I wouldn't be surprised to see them go to the 4-3 for the most part.

Yes, reps are important, but it's pretty obvious that preseason game reps >> TC reps >> mini-camp reps/OTA reps. They'll get PLENTY when it comes time for TC and preseason.

Again, your entire position is based on "IF at least 2 injuries happen." ANY team would have difficulties with 2 injuries at NT.

do you understand what ROTATION means? It means 2 players take turns at the spot. If Troupe or Williams get injured, Harvey is the 2nd guy in the rotation. If they go with a 3 man rotation, then Edwards or Carrington are already in the rotation. If it's still a 2 man rotation, then one of them becomes a primary back-up. It could only be one injury.

And given this team's history, 2 injuries are not out of the question.

[OpIv37]

No. If the team falls short of anything other than a Super Bowl victory, he will ***** about that. Even if they win the whole thing, it won't be dominating enough, or it will be because the other team ****ed up, or we got lucky, etc etc.

do NOT put words in my mouth.

This team hasn't been anywhere close to good since this website existed, so do not pretend you know how would react if they actually were.

[OpIv37]

LOL....let's keep three to five guys 'prototypically fit' to play NT, so that when one of our DE's gets injured they can slide over and give some another thing to ***** about. "OMG...Dumbass coaches are playing guys out of position again!!"

5? Let's start with 2. We have at most 1 guy who's a prototypical nose tackle and it goes downhill fast from there.

[psubills62]

do you understand what ROTATION means? It means 2 players take turns at the spot. If Troupe or Williams get injured, Harvey is the 2nd guy in the rotation. If they go with a 3 man rotation, then Edwards or Carrington are already in the rotation. If it's still a 2 man rotation, then one of them becomes a primary back-up. It could only be one injury.

And given this team's history, 2 injuries are not out of the question.

I understand exactly what a rotation is. It means the first guy gets most of the snaps, the second guy gets a good amount, and possibly the third guy gets a tiny number of snaps. Even if they have a 3-man rotation, the third guy through will get such a small number of snaps, it's easily dismissed. So pretty much we'd need two injuries to get either of those guys on the field at NT. And if there were 2 injuries, they could easily go to a 4-3.

Two injuries isn't out of the question, sure. But to base your entire argument on "IF we get two injuries" is foolish. Like I said, you can say the same thing about any team.

[psubills62]

5? Let's start with 2. We have at most 1 guy who's a prototypical nose tackle and it goes downhill fast from there.

Harvey and Troup make 2, actually. Harvey may not have much talent, but he's the size of a prototypical NT. So is Troup.

[YardRat]

Duncan is still on the squad also, isn't he? That would make three.

[YardRat]

do NOT put words in my mouth.

This team hasn't been anywhere close to good since this website existed, so do not pretend you know how would react if they actually were.

:rofl:

You make your predictions, I'll make mine...your finding something to ***** about regardless of the circumstances is as close to a lock as anybody will get.

[YardRat]

Oh looky....here's a golden nugget from years past....

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?t=88749&highlight=victory


If the Jets lose, there's a good chance they'll end up with the number 1 draft pick. Please explain to me why one regular season win in a 5-10 season is worth the headache of playing Reggie Bush twice a season for the next decade.

When he shreds us for 250 yards and 3 TD's in his first game against us next season, what will you think about that glorious victory then?


If we win, we'll relish the victory for a few days then it will be meaningless, but the Reggie Bush headaches could last a decade or more.


Why is a victory in a lame-duck season worth playing Reggie Bush twice a year for the forseeable future?

*****, *****, ***** about a victory and use something that never happened to support your argument.

[Turf]

Let me sum up this arguement. We don't have enough good nose tackles. I don't think anyone would disagree.

[OpIv37]

Oh looky....here's a golden nugget from years past....

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?t=88749&highlight=victory







*****, *****, ***** about a victory and use something that never happened to support your argument.
First, that has NOTHING to do with how I would react when the team wins. We were 5-10 when I made that post. So, it does absolutely nothing to support your ridiculous assertion that Id ***** even if we won.

Second, this is selective memory. When we hired Jauron, I was one of the few who said he'd be a failure and we'd be rebuilding again in 4 years. After the almost-playoff run at the end of 04, I was one of the few who predicted a bad season in 05, and I got torn apart for it. When we were 5-2 in 08, I got torn apart on this board for being able to see that we had a bad team.

Why don you go pull those posts or any of the dozens of other of legit complaints that I've posted on here? Oh wait, you'd rather go back 5 years and find a rare miss so I don't ruin your delusions about the team.

Oh well, same old story. I can't make you accept it now but you'll be forced to accept it in Sept.

[YardRat]

When the admins get the archives completely updated, I'll get more.

[OpIv37]

When the admins get the archives completely updated, I'll get more.

I have 52,000 posts on this board. There are going to be some duds. However, my overall track record is far better than most of the people arguing with me right now.

[YardRat]

When we hired Jauron, I was one of the few who said he'd be a failure and we'd be rebuilding again in 4 years.

Horse****.

The boards went ape-**** over the Jauron hiring, and you certainly weren't the only one disappointed in the move. Many were pissed...many took the 'not thrilled, but let's see how it works out before judging' route...very few were ecstatic over the hire, and I can probably count those on one hand.

One team wins the Super Bowl, 31 don't. Congratulations...you've got a 96.875% chance of being 'right' every season.

Doom and gloom, depression and despair. At least patti's posts are somewhat entertaining to read.

[Zero]

One team wins the Super Bowl, 31 don't. Congratulations...you've got a 96.875% chance of being 'right' every season.

Doom and gloom, depression and despair. At least patti's posts are somewhat entertaining to read.


I don't think the skeptics/pessimists/doom & gloomers would wine so much if the Bills showed SOME semblance of a being professional football organization, let alone GETTING to the playoffs. No need to mention the superbowl. If one must learn to crawl before running, the Bills have yet to sprout legs.

I definately think some of us take the pessimism too far and I'm sure it gets old after a while , but after 10 years of bad football its to be expected. However, I'm sure a winning season or a trip to the playoffs would go a long way in changing the attitude of most posters here. But I still doubt you woukd eliminate all "negative nancy's". Look at a Yankees forum. People bytch all the time despite the team having had all types of success....You cant please 'em all....

[BertSquirtgum]

I don't think the skeptics/pessimists/doom & gloomers would wine so much if the Bills showed SOME semblance of a being professional football organization, let alone GETTING to the playoffs.

you're wrong. they would. it's inevitable.

[theanswer74]

I have 52,000 posts on this board. There are going to be some duds. However, my overall track record is far better than most of the people arguing with me right now.
Track record? Who cares about track record.

I think that's the problem with these fan boards now a days, everyone wants to be a football writer and thinks their opinion means something.

[OpIv37]

Track record? Who cares about track record.

I think that's the problem with these fan boards now a days, everyone wants to be a football writer and thinks their opinion means something.
so, if we are not supposed to share opinions, what exactly is the point of a message board? Lock everyone's account and make it just another news site.

[OpIv37]

Horse****.

The boards went ape-**** over the Jauron hiring, and you certainly weren't the only one disappointed in the move. Many were pissed...many took the 'not thrilled, but let's see how it works out before judging' route...very few were ecstatic over the hire, and I can probably count those on one hand.

One team wins the Super Bowl, 31 don't. Congratulations...you've got a 96.875% chance of being 'right' every season.

Doom and gloom, depression and despair. At least patti's posts are somewhat entertaining to read.

Such ignorance.

Yes, there were some people who weren't happy, yet I still got trashed for saying we'd be rebuilding again in 3-4 years- not because people necessarily thought I was wrong but because they didn't want to think about that reality.

As far as one team winning the SB, so? People predict a lot more things than winning the SB vs not winning the SB. That's an absolute red herring argument.

Doom and gloom, depression and despair? Right now, that's the reality for the Buffalo Bills. It has been for a decade. Instead of criticizing me for discussing it, why don't you criticize the asshats in the FO, in the coaching staff and on the field who created that reality?

[BertSquirtgum]

op, if this was last year, you could say that. the organization has been rebuilt from top to bottom. like i said before you keep spewing the same bull****. no one is buying it. give it up.

[OpIv37]

op, if this was last year, you could say that. the organization has been rebuilt from top to bottom. like i said before you keep spewing the same bull****. no one is buying it. give it up.

No one is buying it NOW.

Wait til November- every thread will look like it was started by me because they're all *****ing and complaining about how awful this team is. It happens every year.

And I've said it before but some people don't want to hear it:

Ralph
Modrak
Brandon
Overdorf

ALL still here. ALL were part of the Donahoe regime and all had a hand in the "Lost Decade." Yet, somehow they've managed to stay employed through 4 coaching changes, 3 GM changes and 10 years of mediocrity (or worse) on the field.

It really comes down to Ralph. Look at the history of this organization. Other than some AFL success before the merger and most of the 90's, this team has been mediocre at best. In their 50 year existence, they've had 10 good seasons, give or take a couple. Ralph doesn't know how to build a winner. He's failed far more often than he's succeeded. And since free agency changed the game, Ralph hasn't even demonstrated a sliver of competency as far as winning in this new era. Nothing will change as long as he's in charge.

Look, I choose to accept reality now. I can't force you or anyone else to do the same, but you will be forced to accept it when it kicks you in the balls come September. Enjoy your blissful ignorance while it lasts.