Lindell not as deep a K as thought?

[WG]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/bills/home.htm

"At 6-foot-3, 237 pounds, Rian Lindell looks more like a linebacker or tight end than a place-kicker.
But any Bills fan expecting to see Lindell pound the ball into the end zone kickoff after kickoff should re-adjust his or her radar.

The Bills signed Lindell, a restricted free agent of the Seattle Seahawks, partly because they felt he had a stronger kickoff leg than the diminutive Mike Hollis. He does, but he's no Sebastian Janikowski, the coaching staff has discovered.

In drills this spring, special teams coach Danny Smith has had to make adjustments to Lindell's kickoff style in order to improve his consistency in getting the ball inside the 10-yard line.

"His consistency wasn't very good on his kickoffs," Smith said. "We've changed his approach and we're kicking off better right now."

But is it good enough to have Lindell, who signed a four-year, $4.25 million deal, kick away as far as he can as a strategy?

"To be honest, I don't think so," Smith said. "There's only a handful of guys in the league who can do it and he's not one of them. He's a good kicker, but we're going to have to move the ball around."

Smith is helping Lindell work on his form/style. Does this concern anyone else. LOL

[Schobel94]

Not really, the MOST important thing is the field goals, and from the way that sounded he's been doing very well on those. The kickoff length is important, but it's not like he's terrible, not worse than Hollis. He has the strength just not the technique to boot em in the end zone. As long as coverage improves, it wont be a problem.

[BillsNYC]

I'd like a guy who can kick it from 55 yards...but i'd prefer a guy who can hit 85% inside 45 yards...

[Doc]

The article said he was kicking well and while his kickoffs aren't great, they're better than Hollis' and he has room for improvement.

[Jan Reimers]

If his kickoffs aren't a significant improvement over Hollis, we've probably taken a step backwards.

[WG]

All I know is that field position has been instrumental in our losing games. Coupled w/ the "more than occasional" INT by Drew to set the other team up well into our territory or near midfield to reciprocate the FP advantage that we have, part of our problem was that other teams often had very short fields from which to work from.

If we give up 2-3 INTs/game and can't prevent teams from starting outside their own 30, then the game becomes that much more difficult to win.

I just threw this out to generate some discussion, but part of the reason that I thought we picked up Lindell was for his "deep ability." No?

As to the FGs, we can't judge them by what happens now, w/o pressure, in nice weather. We'll see how well he hits them during the season. I'm very hopeful of his doing well on FGs. But for the love of Pete, , we've gotta generate at least some consistency on our K-ing team. With Smith as the STs coach, we're clearly not gonna do much via our strategizing.

Oh, to bring back DeHaven...

[WG]

Originally posted by Jan Reimers
If his kickoffs aren't a significant improvement over Hollis, we've probably taken a step backwards.

Yeah, I agree JR!!

In our case, KOs are just as important as FGs.

Add in the fact that our coverage teams haven't exactly lighted up the NFL, and it's problematic.

[JefftheBillsfan]

maybe, just maybe an NFL coach is attempting to decieve?

[Turf]

Yeah, it bothers me.

[Schobel94]

You have to remember that he wasnt signed to be an improvement like say Spikes was, Hollis was our first choice, and when he wanted too much we turned to Lindell. I'm not gonna judge him until the season starts, or at least preseason. You cant get a good idea until then.

[Voltron]

Schobel94 hit the nail on the head. He was our second choice. Hollis would have been better at Field Goals I think too but he wanted WAY too much for some one with his leg. We would of had to bring in a kickoff specilist and that eats up another roster spot and $$$. We did the best we could I think.

[Mr. Miyagi]

But the guy can tackle.

[WG]

Originally posted by JefftheBillsfan
maybe, just maybe an NFL coach is attempting to decieve?

Or..., maybe..., since our KOs and STs coverage units have sucked so bad in the past, it's really true...

[WG]

Originally posted by Voltron
Schobel94 hit the nail on the head. He was our second choice. Hollis would have been better at Field Goals I think too but he wanted WAY too much for some one with his leg. We would of had to bring in a kickoff specilist and that eats up another roster spot and $$$. We did the best we could I think.

Indeed. I'm not criticizing the choice, simply commenting on Lindell's skills/capabilities.

The K market wasn't the best this year.

[TigerJ]

Yeah the market wasn't terriffic for kickers this offseason. Regarding Lindell, I remember seeing that he had no touchbacks last year. I said when Buffalo signed him that in theory his leg should be stronger, but it didn't show in his stats. Buffalo's special teams coach, Danny Smith, confirmed my thoughst, suggesting that Lindell's technique needs work, that he isn't using the leverage he should have. The good news is that Lindell should have some upside, and if Danny Smith is worth the title of coach, maybe he can help Lindell fix what he's doing wrong. At worst, signing Lindell versus Hollis looks like a sideways move though at a lower cost to the Bills. At best, maybe with good coaching Lindell may eventually discover that deep leg to go with some accuracy in FG kicking.