What's Best For EJ? Offensive Tackle or Wide Receiver/Tight End? [Archive] - BillsZone.com

BillsImpossible

01-25-2014, 05:16 PM

320 lbs of pure up front USDA Certified Angus Beef, or 230 lbs of Flank and Shank?

Which position will help EJ Manuel become a better, healthier quarterback?

I'm starting to think that the Bills are going to take the best offensive lineman on the board at 9.

The Bills like to run the ball a lot. Marrone is a former offensive lineman himself, and when is the last time a team won the Super Bowl with a bad offensive line?

The more I think about it, "Protect The Quarterback," MUST be the Bills number one priority heading into 2014.

If EJ Manuel gets hurt, they're toast. Doug Whaley, Coach Marrone and Nate Hackett went all in on EJ when they drafted him last year and now they've got to back their s$#t up.

Seriously, if Manuel gets hurt a single time all next season it's over. They have to protect the quarterback.

Manning and Brady get a lot of credit for helping pad their receivers stats, but none of it would be possible without a dominant offensive line giving them the time to make big plays.

The Bills can't make the gravy without the meat and potatoes. They have enough good wide receivers. Bill Belichick would have loved to have our wide receivers and tight ends against the Broncos.

The Bills need more meat up front.

Jake Matthews or Greg Robinson? I'll be happy with either one.

It's like choosing between this:

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRxHYCwub5OUfb_HDgMAde23iYu0yJjjiB4VZBAzo_GKavx19Gk

or this:

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSMJOj-UBKXyX097WaoQMLo20GFAV3BEmAdsYuiVyFbX_6VDk6fFw

We need more cow bell...

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ-TpGzef_9t9rNCKK25jcaCKAcqIVIDNI0BmLJs6yWSJyTO6sNMg

Time for dinner.

SpikedLemonade

01-25-2014, 05:35 PM

I think any young QB's best friend is a strong OL -- not just for pass protection but for a strong run game.

Goobylal

01-25-2014, 05:38 PM

Yes. Hopefully they shore-up several areas in FA and use the draft to get talented prospects.

BillsImpossible

01-25-2014, 05:56 PM

I think any young QB's best friend is a strong OL -- not just for pass protection but for a strong run game.

This reminds me of the Seahawks. Their offensive line can run the ball down a team's throat, give Wilson the time to make big plays, and Seattle's defense can stop the run...and pass.

And now they're in the Super Bowl.

BuffaloRedleg

01-25-2014, 09:02 PM

TacklingDummy

01-25-2014, 10:10 PM

QBs are suppose to make the people around them better, it's not the people around the QB that makes him better.

Beebe

01-25-2014, 10:31 PM

GUARD FIRST TE SECOND.

SpikedLemonade

01-25-2014, 10:45 PM

I don't like using a top 10 pick no a non-skill position.

How in your opinion has that worked for the Bills over the past 15 years?

BuffaloRedleg

01-26-2014, 01:49 AM

How in your opinion has that worked for the Bills over the past 15 years?

Fair, but I don't think we'd be much better with a better O-Line.

This team is a QB away from being a playoff contender, and has been since Jim Kelly.

If I had my choice we'd pick a QB with our first pick every year and have them compete. Yes it's crazy, but I can almost guaruntee we would have found one by now.

The #1 reason this team hasn't made the playoffs in so long hasn't been the O-Line. It's been QB play. And if we're going to be stuck with the QB we have now, we need to surround him with talented playmakers so we know for sure he is/isn't the droid we're looking for. I can already hear the excuses next summer about how he "didn't have enough WR/TE threats" for his subpar play, nobody will be able to make that argument if we find a serviceable guard in FA.

If guard is BPA by a long shot over WR/TE, then what the hell take him. I certainly wouldn't be mad about it. But it won't be a major differencemaker, I promise you that. Even when we had the beast that was Levitre we were still terrible.

kishoph

01-26-2014, 05:09 AM

QBs are suppose to make the people around them better, it's not the people around the QB that makes him better.

Yea, you hear a lot about QB's helping the linemen hold their blocks.

TacklingDummy

01-26-2014, 06:38 AM

Yea, you hear a lot about QB's helping the linemen hold their blocks.
Peyton Manning threw 659 passes and was sacked 18 times.
EJ Manuel threw 306 passes and was sacked 28 times.
One of the main reasons why?
Peyton gets rid of the ball quickly.

So yes the QB does make the line better.

YardRat

01-26-2014, 06:46 AM

OT all the way.

DynaPaul

01-26-2014, 06:54 AM

No lineman in the first. We should go for the BPA in the WR, TE, and LB positions in round one. You can get good linemen in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

YardRat

01-26-2014, 07:43 AM

No lineman in the first. We should go for the BPA in the WR, TE, and LB positions in round one. You can get good linemen in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

You can get good WR, TE and LB in those rounds also.

better days

01-26-2014, 09:14 AM

I think at OG you can find a serviceable FA. I don't like using a top 10 pick no a non-skill position. I think you go OL in the 2nd, WR in the 1st in general terms.

I don't think Watkins will be there when we pick however, and unless that TE whats-his-name is an outrageous talent maybe we do take OL in 1st.

It depends on what the board looks like at the time, we shouldn't pigeon hole ourselves out of going BPA-CB/RB.

I HATE serviceable. I want GOOD.

If the Bills can sign a GOOD RT, GOOD LG & LB like Spikes in FA, then they would have the luxury of taking a WR or TE early in the draft.

But I think those three needs need to be met for the Bills to make a big improvement next year.

alohabillsfan

01-26-2014, 09:30 AM

Dr James Andrews :)

Mr. Pink

01-26-2014, 09:44 AM

A seat on the bench.

The Jokeman

01-26-2014, 10:00 AM

I HATE serviceable. I want GOOD.

If the Bills can sign a GOOD RT, GOOD LG & LB like Spikes in FA, then they would have the luxury of taking a WR or TE early in the draft.

But I think those three needs need to be met for the Bills to make a big improvement next year.

Would you say that Robert Woods was good or serviceable last year? I think he had a good rookie season but as an NFL WR it only be ranked as serviceable. Personally as much as I agree we need to improve the talent in the skill positions doing so with rookie is sketchy as take the time to study what most rookie WRs and TEs do and it's far from great. Sure there's always a Randy Moss or AJ Green or even a Keenan Allen who has a great season but more than not the reason they had a great season but they aren't typical. The question asked at the start of this thread is a good one yet the question should also include if we want a veteran or rookie at said position. Personally I take the veteran WR and/or TE and the rookie offensive lineman.

Lone Stranger

01-26-2014, 10:48 AM

Yes. Hopefully they shore-up several areas in FA and use the draft to get talented prospects.

Perhaps true. Perhaps ideal. But there are a lot of teams with a lot of cap space. Look for the Bills to go for second tier FAs. I believe they have already expressed that position.

BuffaloRedleg

01-26-2014, 11:54 AM

I HATE serviceable. I want GOOD.

If the Bills can sign a GOOD RT, GOOD LG & LB like Spikes in FA, then they would have the luxury of taking a WR or TE early in the draft.

But I think those three needs need to be met for the Bills to make a big improvement next year.

I'm sorry but the LG position is just not that important. I have no idea why people keep losing their minds over it. The Bills had one one of the best LGs in the league and were still terrible.

Why? Because we had a poor QB with average threats to pass to. Because LG is just not that important.

I'm sick of serviceable too, namely at the QB and WR positions.

WagonCircler

01-26-2014, 12:13 PM

What's best for EJ?

A boxed lunch and a bus ticket.

IlluminatusUIUC

01-26-2014, 12:38 PM

This reminds me of the Seahawks. Their offensive line can run the ball down a team's throat, give Wilson the time to make big plays, and Seattle's defense can stop the run...and pass.

And now they're in the Super Bowl.

Do you actually watch Seattle play? Their offensive line was by far the weakest part of the team this year. Part of it was injuries and part of it was teams adjusting to Wilson's skillset, but they were pushed around a lot.

better days

01-26-2014, 12:48 PM

Peyton Manning threw 659 passes and was sacked 18 times.
EJ Manuel threw 306 passes and was sacked 28 times.
One of the main reasons why?
Peyton gets rid of the ball quickly.

So yes the QB does make the line better.

Part of that was Manning, but no doubt about it, part of it was a BETTER OL.

IlluminatusUIUC

01-26-2014, 12:50 PM

Part of that was Manning, but no doubt about it, part of it was a BETTER OL.

The only guy on Denver's OL I would say is definitively better is Clady, and he was hurt most of the year. Manning hasn't been sacked 28 times since 2001, and he certainly didn't have a good OL every season.

better days

01-26-2014, 01:00 PM

Would you say that Robert Woods was good or serviceable last year? I think he had a good rookie season but as an NFL WR it only be ranked as serviceable. Personally as much as I agree we need to improve the talent in the skill positions doing so with rookie is sketchy as take the time to study what most rookie WRs and TEs do and it's far from great. Sure there's always a Randy Moss or AJ Green or even a Keenan Allen who has a great season but more than not the reason they had a great season but they aren't typical. The question asked at the start of this thread is a good one yet the question should also include if we want a veteran or rookie at said position. Personally I take the veteran WR and/or TE and the rookie offensive lineman.

I don't care what position it is. Unless the FA is GOOD, I would rather have a rookie.

Jerry Hughes is not the norm. Most times when a vet is serviceable, he is nothing more than that ever.

A Rookie like Robert Woods may only have been serviceable last season, but I have no doubt he will only get better.

A vet like Greg Jennings is not going to get better, just older.

better days

01-26-2014, 01:02 PM

The only guy on Denver's OL I would say is definitively better is Clady, and he was hurt most of the year. Manning hasn't been sacked 28 times since 2001, and he certainly didn't have a good OL every season.

Did you watch the AFC Championship game?

Manning was UNTOUCHED in that game.

And he had all the time in the world to stand back there & pick out his receiver without even having to move at all.

IlluminatusUIUC

01-26-2014, 01:28 PM

Did you watch the AFC Championship game?

Manning was UNTOUCHED in that game.

And he had all the time in the world to stand back there & pick out his receiver without even having to move at all.

Yes I did watch that game. I also watched the San Diego game, where Manning baited their DL into five offsides penalties. That clearly had an effect on New England, because their DL was slow off the ball all day long to avoid the same mistake. Manning also calls out protections as well as any QB ever, and hits his hot reads incredibly fast. You never see him staring down a wideout or running around the backfield trying to avoid a sack. If the protection holds, he stands there it looks like his OL is amazing. If it doesn't, he throws it short or throws it away. It's a decent OL, but put Brock Osweiler behind it and you won't be crediting it with their success.

The Jokeman

01-26-2014, 02:09 PM

I don't care what position it is. Unless the FA is GOOD, I would rather have a rookie.

Jerry Hughes is not the norm. Most times when a vet is serviceable, he is nothing more than that ever.

A Rookie like Robert Woods may only have been serviceable last season, but I have no doubt he will only get better.

A vet like Greg Jennings is not going to get better, just older.

Yet if we want someone to be a contributor immediately that's why I say look for a vet to perform versus a rookie. Again if I want a guy to step in and get me 700-1000 yards receiving and 4-6 TDs I'd rather count on a veteran over a rookie. Those are the numbers I think would help the Bills take a step forward. As last offseason I was calling for us to sign Brandon Gibson and Dustin Keller. Ironically both went to Miami. Gibson performed well but did get hurt and Keller got hurt early so didn't contribute anything yet the Dolphins also added Mike Wallace. Toss in they had Brian Hartline and an Charles Clay stepped up which all helped Tannehill improve. Ultimately though the Dolphins lack of a running attack killed their chances at making the playoffs. Yet the Bills do have a running attack so feel if we can get a veteran WR (James Jones is my player of choice) to add to Stevie Johnson and an improving Robert Woods we could start to improve. I get that people think if we can improve other positions that a rookie is going to step in and have an impact and while some do most don't. As WR is a tough learning curve in the NFL and it takes most WRs about 3 years before they live up to their full potential.

better days

01-26-2014, 07:47 PM

Yes I did watch that game. I also watched the San Diego game, where Manning baited their DL into five offsides penalties. That clearly had an effect on New England, because their DL was slow off the ball all day long to avoid the same mistake. Manning also calls out protections as well as any QB ever, and hits his hot reads incredibly fast. You never see him staring down a wideout or running around the backfield trying to avoid a sack. If the protection holds, he stands there it looks like his OL is amazing. If it doesn't, he throws it short or throws it away. It's a decent OL, but put Brock Osweiler behind it and you won't be crediting it with their success.

I already gave Manning his share of credit for not being sacked, BUT a big part of that is because Denver has a GOOD OL, NOT Decent, GOOD!

Manning does not even have to move around in the pocket. He just stands in one place & WAITS for a receiver to come open.

On some plays in that game Manning had enough time to sit down & eat a 3 course meal and then throw the ball.

That is NOT all due to Mannings ability, but the OL.

better days

01-26-2014, 07:54 PM

Yet if we want someone to be a contributor immediately that's why I say look for a vet to perform versus a rookie. Again if I want a guy to step in and get me 700-1000 yards receiving and 4-6 TDs I'd rather count on a veteran over a rookie. Those are the numbers I think would help the Bills take a step forward. As last offseason I was calling for us to sign Brandon Gibson and Dustin Keller. Ironically both went to Miami. Gibson performed well but did get hurt and Keller got hurt early so didn't contribute anything yet the Dolphins also added Mike Wallace. Toss in they had Brian Hartline and an Charles Clay stepped up which all helped Tannehill improve. Ultimately though the Dolphins lack of a running attack killed their chances at making the playoffs. Yet the Bills do have a running attack so feel if we can get a veteran WR (James Jones is my player of choice) to add to Stevie Johnson and an improving Robert Woods we could start to improve. I get that people think if we can improve other positions that a rookie is going to step in and have an impact and while some do most don't. As WR is a tough learning curve in the NFL and it takes most WRs about 3 years before they live up to their full potential.

Don't get me wrong. If the Bills could sign a WR at the right price, I would be for it.

But many times FA's are overpaid like Mario was by the Bills & Greg Jennings was for the Vikings.

And Wallace said he was disappointed with the season he had & blames the Fins for not going to him enough times on deep routes.

The Jokeman

01-26-2014, 08:03 PM

Don't get me wrong. If the Bills could sign a WR at the right price, I would be for it.

But many times FA's are overpaid like Mario was by the Bills & Greg Jennings was for the Vikings.

And Wallace said he was disappointed with the season he had & blames the Fins for not going to him enough times on deep routes.
I wasn't asking us to sign Wallace I was asking us to sign Brandon Gibson who earned a three-year, $9.755 million contract which to me is doable considering we were $20M under the cap last year. Gibson played in three less games than Goodwin but had the same amount of TDs, thirteen more catches and 83 yards more on offense.

better days

01-26-2014, 08:12 PM

I wasn't asking us to sign Wallace I was asking us to sign Brandon Gibson who earned a three-year, $9.755 million contract which to me is doable considering we were $20M under the cap last year. Gibson played in three less games than Goodwin but had the same amount of TDs, thirteen more catches and 83 yards more on offense.

In other words, for a little over $3 Million for the year, the Bills could have signed a guy that put up similar numbers to Goodwin.

As I said before, if Stevie didn't get injured, there would not be a need for a receiver.

Because Stevie was injured, the Bills could have used another WR, but that is hindsite.

If the Bills want to move Stevie, they will have to replace him.

But if Stevie is on the team next year, I would be fine with another rookie they can develop.

Goobylal

01-26-2014, 10:14 PM

better days

01-26-2014, 10:20 PM

LOL! So we're comparing EJ's injury and scheme-marred rookie season to an all-time great like Manning? Seriously?

Obviously a great QB will make his OL look better. But if anyone can say they'd rather have the other 10 players on the Bills' offense over the other 10 players on the Broncos' offense, you need your head examined. Brady proved this year that a WR's stats are dependent on a large degree to quality of his receiving corps.

NOBODY is comparing Peyton Manning to EJ Manuel.

I was comparing the Broncos OL to the Bills OL.

The better the OL, the better a QB will be able to play.

And the worse the QB is the better the OL needs to be to get any production out of the QB position.

TacklingDummy

01-26-2014, 10:20 PM

Swap Manning for Manuel.
The Bills are in the Playoffs and the Broncos are not.

better days

01-26-2014, 10:24 PM

Swap Manning for Manuel.
The Bills are in the Playoffs and the Broncos are not.

Agreed, if only we could.

BuffaloRedleg

01-26-2014, 10:59 PM

Swap Manning for Manuel.
The Bills are in the Playoffs and the Broncos are not.

Hey remember that one time when people argued that making Manning was "too much of a risk" for the Bills to make a play at? That we'd have to make him the highest paid person in NFL history to come here?

Seems worth it to me now, and it was absolutely worth it then. Shoulda gave him more money than he could possibly refuse.

If you are right you are a Superbowl contender. If you are wrong, well you still suck. There was a better than 50% chance that he would return to form, yet that was too much risk. Yet putting all our eggs into the EJ basket next year, who has a <50% chance of being successful, is a reasonable risk. Drafting a backup plan is a "waste of a pick".

People will never learn.

Mouldsie

01-26-2014, 11:15 PM

This reminds me of the Seahawks. Their offensive line can run the ball down a team's throat, give Wilson the time to make big plays, and Seattle's defense can stop the run...and pass.

And now they're in the Super Bowl.
Seattle has one of the worst offensive lines in the NFL. So does Denver ATM

- - - Updated - - -

What's best for the Bills is to get a franchise QB

Mouldsie

01-26-2014, 11:17 PM

I already gave Manning his share of credit for not being sacked, BUT a big part of that is because Denver has a GOOD OL, NOT Decent, GOOD!

Manning does not even have to move around in the pocket. He just stands in one place & WAITS for a receiver to come open.

On some plays in that game Manning had enough time to sit down & eat a 3 course meal and then throw the ball.

That is NOT all due to Mannings ability, but the OL.
Manning gets the ball out of his hands faster than any QB in the game and always makes the right protection calls, the talent on his line is marginal at best right now

better days

01-27-2014, 07:37 AM

Manning gets the ball out of his hands faster than any QB in the game and always makes the right protection calls, the talent on his line is marginal at best right now

Manning does get the ball out fast when he has to.

But he does not really have to get the ball out fast behind that Broncos OL because he has all the time in the World to throw behind that GOOD OL.

Did you not watch the AFC Championship game?

Peyton just stood there for a long time waiting for a receiver to come open & the Pats* never touched him, let alone sack him.

That is the sign of a GOOD OL.

pmoon6

01-27-2014, 08:20 AM

Peyton Manning threw 659 passes and was sacked 18 times.
EJ Manuel threw 306 passes and was sacked 28 times.
One of the main reasons why?
Peyton gets rid of the ball quickly.

So yes the QB does make the line better.The main reason is the league (officials) protect Manning by allowing the Broncos O-Line to blatantly hold on every play.

Mouldsie

01-27-2014, 05:01 PM

Manning does get the ball out fast when he has to.

But he does not really have to get the ball out fast behind that Broncos OL because he has all the time in the World to throw behind that GOOD OL.

Did you not watch the AFC Championship game?

Peyton just stood there for a long time waiting for a receiver to come open & the Pats* never touched him, let alone sack him.

That is the sign of a GOOD OL.
Do you have facts or is that just a "feeling" you have? Because of the 4 QB's who played 8 days ago he got the ball out of his hand the fastest according to actual data

BillsImpossible

01-27-2014, 05:54 PM

Forget Manning, what about Brady? In 2001, the Patriots were a running team. In 15 games Brady had only 413 passing attempts, the fewest in his career.

I like that philosophy for developing a young quarterback. Give him a good running game, don't let him pass too much, and build an offensive line around him and the pass will come if the offensive line is able to protect the quarterback.

Divas catch touchdowns because of the big guys up front winning battles in the trenches.

How many times have we heard coaches say, "The game is won and lost at the line of scrimmage?"

It's an old cliche, but it's true.

better days

01-28-2014, 12:22 AM

Do you have facts or is that just a "feeling" you have? Because of the 4 QB's who played 8 days ago he got the ball out of his hand the fastest according to actual data

Well, if you watched the game, the announcers commented on the fact Manning had so much time to throw the ball without any real pressure from the Pats*

k-oneputt

01-28-2014, 07:36 AM

Robinson in the 1st, S-Jenkins in the 2nd, best guard available in the 3rd.

EJ will need all the help he can get,

sukie

01-28-2014, 07:46 AM

Trade down if you are going to draft OLINE. a top ten should be a franchise changer. A Cornerstone. (Maybe I am jaded over Jake Long and that disaster pick - not the player but the spot.)

better days

01-28-2014, 07:49 AM

Trade down if you are going to draft OLINE. a top ten should be a franchise changer. A Cornerstone. (Maybe I am jaded over Jake Long and that disaster pick - not the player but the spot.)

If the Bills can find a partner, I think a trade down would be great.

So many Jrs. came out this year, the draft is deep.

Goobylal

01-28-2014, 08:26 AM

Swap Manning for Manuel.
The Bills are in the Playoffs and the Broncos are not.
What if we swapped EJ for Manning in his rookie year? Still think the Bills make the playoffs?

Hey remember that one time when people argued that making Manning was "too much of a risk" for the Bills to make a play at? That we'd have to make him the highest paid person in NFL history to come here?

Seems worth it to me now, and it was absolutely worth it then. Shoulda gave him more money than he could possibly refuse.

If you are right you are a Superbowl contender. If you are wrong, well you still suck. There was a better than 50% chance that he would return to form, yet that was too much risk. Yet putting all our eggs into the EJ basket next year, who has a <50% chance of being successful, is a reasonable risk. Drafting a backup plan is a "waste of a pick".

People will never learn.
Manning was never coming to Buffalo so it's moot. And if you want to play 20/20 hindsight, they should have gone for Bree's back in 2006.

Seattle has one of the worst offensive lines in the NFL. So does Denver ATM

- - - Updated - - -

What's best for the Bills is to get a franchise QB
Seattle and Denver have very good OL.

better days

01-28-2014, 08:48 AM

What if we swapped EJ for Manning in his rookie year? Still think the Bills make the playoffs?

Manning was never coming to Buffalo so it's moot. And if you want to play 20/20 hindsight, they should have gone for Bree's back in 2006.

Seattle and Denver have very good OL.

Mouldsie thanked GingerP when Ginger said the Lions had the worst 3rd down record last year when in fact they had the best 3rd down record.

It is obvious Moudsie does not get his facts straight or knows what the hell he is talking about.

ICRockets

01-28-2014, 09:15 AM

Part of that was Manning, but no doubt about it, part of it was a BETTER OL.

Yeah, couldn't possibly be the WR/TE talent they have in Denver. It's ALL on Manning that they had 5 players with double digit TDs right? Julius Thomas, Demaryius Thomas, Wes Welker....without that kind of talent to throw to, you still think Peyton is as successful as he was?

justasportsfan

01-28-2014, 11:24 AM

Swap Manning for Manuel.
The Bills are in the Playoffs and the Broncos are not.
I agree but I doubt he breaks. NFL records. People forget how teams killed us last year because we werent getting any pressure because of Wanny. We need a dominant OL to give our qbs time.

The Jokeman

01-29-2014, 08:57 PM

I'm always in favor of trading down because to me the draft about collecting talent and because we have more than 1 need rather collect a bunch more of players in Rounds 1-3 then just three. As we saw last year having two 2nd Rounders benefitted us immensely.

alohabillsfan

01-30-2014, 04:18 AM

Well, if you watched the game, the announcers commented on the fact Manning had so much time to throw the ball without any real pressure from the Pats*
Rofl yes listen to those idiots! You just disproved your own point! I counted on most passing plays and manning got rid of the ball in 3 secs or under. Next time watch the game, and pay attention. It helps :)

better days

01-30-2014, 05:22 AM

Rofl yes listen to those idiots! You just disproved your own point! I counted on most passing plays and manning got rid of the ball in 3 secs or under. Next time watch the game, and pay attention. It helps :)

Yeah right, I paid attention to the game.

I already said Peyton was capable of getting the ball out fast if he had to.

The fact is in that game he didn't have to. And in the NFL, 3 seconds is an eternity.

Most sacks happen in UNDER 3 seconds.

Mike

01-31-2014, 09:34 PM

Yea, you hear a lot about QB's helping the linemen hold their blocks.

YES! by not holding onto the ball for 6 seconds.... QBs make a huge difference

Mike

01-31-2014, 09:37 PM

Yeah right, I paid attention to the game.

I already said Peyton was capable of getting the ball out fast if he had to.

The fact is in that game he didn't have to. And in the NFL, 3 seconds is an eternity.

Most sacks happen in UNDER 3 seconds.

Better Days your constantly wrong about everything..

Manning on average held the ball for 2.4 seconds! Thats incredible. Now look at EJ and notice the difference, its huge! Most NFL QBs hold the ball for well over 3.5 seconds. EJ is probably closer to 4!

Put Manning on the Bills and we have a top ranked offense. Put EJ on that Broncos Team and they miss the playoffs.

better days

01-31-2014, 10:29 PM

Better Days your constantly wrong about everything..

Manning on average held the ball for 2.4 seconds! Thats incredible. Now look at EJ and notice the difference, its huge! Most NFL QBs hold the ball for well over 3.5 seconds. EJ is probably closer to 4!

Put Manning on the Bills and we have a top ranked offense. Put EJ on that Broncos Team and they miss the playoffs.

Are you saying Peyton held the ball 2.4 seconds in the AFC Championship game?

Or the fact Manning can get the ball out in 2.4 seconds on average over all?

As I said before, if he has to, Manning can do that. But he did not have to in the AFC Championship game & that is the point.

On a few plays the Pats* blitzed & Peyton had to get rid of the ball in a hurry which he did.

But on most plays, Peyton had so much time he could have picked his nose, ate a 3 course meal & still completed the pass.

At about the 12:05 mark in the first qtr, Manning botched the snap in the shotgun. It took him a long time to gather that ball in, but he still had time to make a completion.

As I said the announcers commented on the time Manning had & the lack of pressure he faced from the Pats*

If a QB is not as decisive as Peyton & needs more time, then a GOOD OL is all the more important.

And the Bronco's OL is MUCH better than the Bills OL. That is a FACT.

And I may be wrong at times, NOBODY is perfect. But I am right more often than wrong.

alohabillsfan

02-01-2014, 05:10 AM

Dr James Andrews :)

Guess I called that one right :)

alohabillsfan

02-01-2014, 05:14 AM

IlluminatusUIUC

02-02-2014, 06:30 PM

Manning does get the ball out fast when he has to.

But he does not really have to get the ball out fast behind that Broncos OL because he has all the time in the World to throw behind that GOOD OL.

Did you not watch the AFC Championship game?

Peyton just stood there for a long time waiting for a receiver to come open & the Pats* never touched him, let alone sack him.

That is the sign of a GOOD OL.

Do you want to revisit the Denver OL after this half? Jesus.