OBD is preparing us to draft a RT 1st round via Chris Brown

[ghz in pittsburgh]

http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3/ON-THE-CLOCK-Rise-of-the-right-tackle/30cbf54d-12e1-46b7-9ae7-7115c5066dea

[DynaPaul]

Taylor Lewan? Greg Robinson? Jake Matthews? If either are a stalwart future 10 year starter it wouldn't be horrible. Just please don't let it be the next Mike Williams.

[better days]

I agree with Chris Brown.

I would love to see a tackle at #9.

[Uncle Jesse]

I'm gonna be sick. What a horrible decision that would be. Hey, it's the Bills though, I expect them to make stupid picks like this. That's why it's been 15 years without the playoffs.

[Albany,n.y.]

I'm gonna be sick. What a horrible decision that would be. Hey, it's the Bills though, I expect them to make stupid picks like this. That's why it's been 15 years without the playoffs.

Actually, one of the main reasons the Bills have missed the playoffs since the 20th century is because they haven't spent enough 1st round picks on the O-line. Instead they've taken too many RBs (3) & DBs (3) and lacked enough big men. When Levy was GM, they tried to make up for it by overpaying mediocre free agent O-linemen millions. Buddy Nix took a different approach-he took guys like Pears & Urbik off the scrap heap & told us they were great steals & then signed each to extensions worth millions. Now each of their status is up in the air because we have coaches who know bad line play when they see it.
The only 1st round O-line picks during the playoff drought are Eric Wood & the biggest gainer Mike Williams. That's what should make you sick of the 21st century of futility.

[Saratoga Slim]

To be fair, he's not literally saying they're going to take a RT. The article is simply explaining that they're now a much more important position than thy used to be. Could be trying to prep us fans for if they do take one, could be smokescreen, or it could be the usual situation wherein Chris Brown doesn't seem to have all that much insight as to what's happening.

[ghz in pittsburgh]

To be fair, he's not literally saying they're going to take a RT. The article is simply explaining that they're now a much more important position than thy used to be. Could be trying to prep us fans for if they do take one, could be smokescreen, or it could be the usual situation wherein Chris Brown doesn't seem to have all that much insight as to what's happening.

If they were going to draft a LT with the 9th pick, no one would question the value in terms of position. This article pretty much says RT is as valuable as LT in today's NFL. And that's from the mouth of Marrone, Bills director of Personnel etc.

[K-Gun]

To be fair, he's not literally saying they're going to take a RT. The article is simply explaining that they're now a much more important position than thy used to be. Could be trying to prep us fans for if they do take one, could be smokescreen, or it could be the usual situation wherein Chris Brown doesn't seem to have all that much insight as to what's happening.

Could be the Bills can pick up a 2nd round pick to move down maybe just 2 or 3 spots with a team that really needs a francise OT. Although, I wouldn't be upset at all if we ended up with one of the top 3 OT's.

[Saratoga Slim]

If they were going to draft a LT with the 9th pick, no one would question the value in terms of position. This article pretty much says RT is as valuable as LT in today's NFL. And that's from the mouth of Marrone, Bills director of Personnel etc.

No argument here. But you might want to talk to the poster above, who is preparing for illness if the bills pick an RT

[DraftBoy]

Perfect selection.

I'd love to get Lewan at #9. Play him at RT, play him at LT. Move Cordy to RT or hell move Cordy inside. Makes a lot of sense.

imo no way Robinson or Matthews fall to 9.

[ghz in pittsburgh]

No argument here. But you might want to talk to the poster above, who is preparing for illness if the bills pick an RT

I understand what others are saying -- and I believe Buddy Nix might be in that camp as well -- that at #9 or in top 10 in general, you should draft a playmaker (and LT is considered a playmaker by most accounts). Right now on offense, we have Spiller and that's about it. A Mike Evans, or Ebron, if the Bills grade them out to be playmakers, would fit that criteria. There are several on defensive side as well, but I doubt we go there because we already have several on that side of the ball.

It probably comes down to the grades they give to the players.

This draft is deep in tackles. But outside of the top 3, they are not as complete in terms of both abilities of run/pass blocking. I can see them going that route - the 49ers model -- given the fact that they run as much as they did last year and seem to intend to build on that. However, if Watkins falls to them or they really believe Mike Evans is another Plaxico Burress, then they just can't pass ...

[Uncle Jesse]

Actually, one of the main reasons the Bills have missed the playoffs since the 20th century is because they haven't spent enough 1st round picks on the O-line. Instead they've taken too many RBs (3) & DBs (3) and lacked enough big men. When Levy was GM, they tried to make up for it by overpaying mediocre free agent O-linemen millions. Buddy Nix took a different approach-he took guys like Pears & Urbik off the scrap heap & told us they were great steals & then signed each to extensions worth millions. Now each of their status is up in the air because we have coaches who know bad line play when they see it.
The only 1st round O-line picks during the playoff drought are Eric Wood & the biggest gainer Mike Williams. That's what should make you sick of the 21st century of futility.

Right tackle at 9th overall when you have zero play makers on offense besides sometimes Spiller, and not real legit threats for your young QB to throw to is just plain stupid. Pass protection was not the issue for Manuel last year. Run blocking was not an issue for the Bills last year.

WHY THE **** ARE WE GONNA TAKE A RIGHT ****ING TACKLE AT 9TH OVERALL?

Get a RT in the 2nd or 3rd, I don't care. Not at 9. Get an impact player, one we desperately need because our entire rosters lacks them.

[alohabillsfan]

The main reason the bills have not are the playoffs is QB play. The closest they got was when Bledsoe was here. Now the bills can keep making excuses of the QB needs better
Weapons or protection when all they really need is a good QB.

[Meathead]

good tackles make every skill player better

[jimmifli]

Perfect selection.

I'd love to get Lewan at #9. Play him at RT, play him at LT. Move Cordy to RT or hell move Cordy inside. Makes a lot of sense.

imo no way Robinson or Matthews fall to 9.

I don't understand why everyone wants to move Cordy? He was really good last season and there are only a handful of better LTs in the league. There's a pretty good chance that this year's batch of tackles won't ever be better than him.

[gr8slayer]

Good!

[better days]

I don't understand why everyone wants to move Cordy? He was really good last season and there are only a handful of better LTs in the league. There's a pretty good chance that this year's batch of tackles won't ever be better than him.

I really doubt Marrone would move Glenn.

Marrone really praised Glenn after last season & said he would be in the Pro Bowl SOON.

[DesertFox24]

Perfect selection.

I'd love to get Lewan at #9. Play him at RT, play him at LT. Move Cordy to RT or hell move Cordy inside. Makes a lot of sense.

imo no way Robinson or Matthews fall to 9.

Why is everyone obessed with moving Glenn the guy played every game and only allowed 1 sack. He is good enough and will be a pro bowler if this team ever gets to the playoffs.

[DesertFox24]

Right tackle at 9th overall when you have zero play makers on offense besides sometimes Spiller, and not real legit threats for your young QB to throw to is just plain stupid. Pass protection was not the issue for Manuel last year. Run blocking was not an issue for the Bills last year.

WHY THE **** ARE WE GONNA TAKE A RIGHT ****ING TACKLE AT 9TH OVERALL?

Get a RT in the 2nd or 3rd, I don't care. Not at 9. Get an impact player, one we desperately need because our entire rosters lacks them.


We drafted skill position players last year.

What are you expecting out of a rookie skill position because very few do anything.

Tom Brady has all day to throw and if we could give EJ that time then he should take a gigantic leap in production, if he is a good QB.

Also a legit RT will be better for run blocking and allow us to have more 5 man protections allowing us to 5 guys out for pass routes etc...

[better days]

Right tackle at 9th overall when you have zero play makers on offense besides sometimes Spiller, and not real legit threats for your young QB to throw to is just plain stupid. Pass protection was not the issue for Manuel last year. Run blocking was not an issue for the Bills last year.

WHY THE **** ARE WE GONNA TAKE A RIGHT ****ING TACKLE AT 9TH OVERALL?

Get a RT in the 2nd or 3rd, I don't care. Not at 9. Get an impact player, one we desperately need because our entire rosters lacks them.

Pass protection & run protection were both issues for the Bills last year.

There were plays last year a defensive player was in the backfield before EJ or CJ knew it.

The Bills could draft an ELITE Tackle at #9 or someone like Pears later.

I would prefer an ELITE OT myself.

[Uncle Jesse]

Also a legit RT will be better for run blocking and allow us to have more 5 man protections allowing us to 5 guys out for pass routes etc...

When was pass protection a major issue last year? Manuel's accuracy and health were the main problems. Not going down-field as well, when he checked down. Run blocking was fine, and can STILL be upgraded after our 1st round pick.

Neither pass protection or run blocking were glaring enough needs to justify a right tackle at 9 overall. Like, not at all.

- - - Updated - - -


Pass protection & run protection were both issues for the Bills last year.





I couldn't disagree more.

We were middle of the pack.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

[Saratoga Slim]

I understand what others are saying -- and I believe Buddy Nix might be in that camp as well -- that at #9 or in top 10 in general, you should draft a playmaker (and LT is considered a playmaker by most accounts). Right now on offense, we have Spiller and that's about it. A Mike Evans, or Ebron, if the Bills grade them out to be playmakers, would fit that criteria. There are several on defensive side as well, but I doubt we go there because we already have several on that side of the ball.

It probably comes down to the grades they give to the players.

This draft is deep in tackles. But outside of the top 3, they are not as complete in terms of both abilities of run/pass blocking. I can see them going that route - the 49ers model -- given the fact that they run as much as they did last year and seem to intend to build on that. However, if Watkins falls to them or they really believe Mike Evans is another Plaxico Burress, then they just can't pass ...

I'll be happy if they take either one of the top 3 tackles, or Watkins/Evans. Wouldn't even mind another LB, like Mack or Barr. But I think with our FA signings that's less likely.

Watkins would be the pick I'd get the most excited about, but no way he'll make it to us.

[GvilleBills]

We drafted skill position players last year.

What are you expecting out of a rookie skill position because very few do anything.

Tom Brady has all day to throw and if we could give EJ that time then he should take a gigantic leap in production, if he is a good QB.

Also a legit RT will be better for run blocking and allow us to have more 5 man protections allowing us to 5 guys out for pass routes etc...

There is no place for your logic and reason, good sir. Bring me more shiny toys!!!
;)

[cookie G]

When was pass protection a major issue last year? Manuel's accuracy and health were the main problems. Not going down-field as well, when he checked down. Run blocking was fine, and can STILL be upgraded after our 1st round pick.

Neither pass protection or run blocking were glaring enough needs to justify a right tackle at 9 overall. Like, not at all.

- - - Updated - - -



I couldn't disagree more.

We were middle of the pack.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

They gave up 48 sacks, among the worst in the league. They also were one of the worst in teh league in terms of QB pressures.

In terms of running the ball...per your link...

they were 22nd in the league in running behind RT, and 32nd in the league...dead last.. in running around Right End.

If anything...that screams for upgrading the RT position.

[better days]

When was pass protection a major issue last year? Manuel's accuracy and health were the main problems. Not going down-field as well, when he checked down. Run blocking was fine, and can STILL be upgraded after our 1st round pick.

Neither pass protection or run blocking were glaring enough needs to justify a right tackle at 9 overall. Like, not at all.

- - - Updated - - -



I couldn't disagree more.

We were middle of the pack.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

#28 in pass protection is NOT middle of the pack. It is 4th from the bottom.

And to be ranked #16 with Fred & CJ running the ball? With a better OL they both would have put up better numbers.

It is there in black & white for you to see. The Bills NEED a LG & RT.

With better OL play the Bills may have made the playoffs last year.

[Buffalogic]

You don't need a bunch of first round picks on the O-line to be successful, you just need some continuity. The skill level of the qb goes a long way when it comes to the effectiveness of the line. Denver and Seattle made the superbowl with a couple stars and some fill-ins. The Patriots have had one pro bowl lineman their entire dynasty. I'm not sure where Mankins was drafted, but rarely do the pats draft O-line in round one.

Going for the third best tackle within the first nine picks is just bad strategy. We need to wait on a tackle til at least round two. Just like we did with Cordy.

[stuckincincy]

Why is everyone obessed with moving Glenn the guy played every game and only allowed 1 sack. He is good enough and will be a pro bowler if this team ever gets to the playoffs.

Could it be that teams didn't bother with Glenn, preferring to bulldoze the right side of the OL?

[better days]

You don't need a bunch of first round picks on the O-line to be successful, you just need some continuity. The skill level of the qb goes a long way when it comes to the effectiveness of the line. Denver and Seattle made the superbowl with a couple stars and some fill-ins. The Patriots have had one pro bowl lineman their entire dynasty. I'm not sure where Mankins was drafted, but rarely do the pats draft O-line in round one.

Going for the third best tackle within the first nine picks is just bad strategy. We need to wait on a tackle til at least round two. Just like we did with Cordy.

MOST everyone thought Cordy was a GUARD, NOT a LT.

You will get an OT like Pears in rnd 2 or later. That is bad strategy.

The Bills have had continuity on the OL for 14 years, Continually BAD.

It makes all the sense in the World to draft a Tackle at 9 if his talent warrants it.

[Buffalogic]

^ No it doesn't. Recently, our best linemen have been taken in the second round with Cordy and Levitre. Wood is a good player. He was drafted with the 28th pick. Look at all the first round tackles that turn out to suck over the last ten years. It is a mistake to draft the third best OT that high no matter what your factless argument is.

[Ed]

But O-lineman don't score me points in fantasy football or produce stats that I can easily look at and compare, so they must all be equally unimportant!

[better days]

^ No it doesn't. Recently, our best linemen have been taken in the second round with Cordy and Levitre. Wood is a good player. He was drafted with the 28th pick. Look at all the first round tackles that turn out to suck over the last ten years. It is a mistake to draft the third best OT that high no matter what your factless argument is.

I already explained why Cordy was available in the 2nd rnd.

It was because teams thought he was a GUARD, NOT a LT.

Much like some people on this board that STILL want to move him even though he has played WELL at LT.

A Good Guard can be drafted in the 2nd rnd.............................but it is RARE for a Good Tackle to be drafted there.

[sukie]

Taylor Lewan? Greg Robinson? Jake Matthews? If either are a stalwart future 10 year starter it wouldn't be horrible. Just please don't let it be the next Mike Williams.


You mean a potential 4-5 year starter then when peaking... Exit stage left to a contender for monster hoards of cash.

[better days]

You mean a potential 4-5 year starter then when peaking... Exit stage left to a contender for monster hoards of cash.

Yeah, just like Eric Wood.

[Dr. Who]

You mean a potential 4-5 year starter then when peaking... Exit stage left to a contender for monster hoards of cash.

If you're going to play that card, why draft anyone? Or perhaps we should just try to draft bad players and mediocrities no one else will want.

[Meathead]

totally stoked if they take a stud t at nine. totally

[sukie]

If you're going to play that card, why draft anyone? Or perhaps we should just try to draft bad players and mediocrities no one else will want.

It's not a card. but thinking a stud is gonna play in Buffalo 10 years is wishful at best

[GvilleBills]

totally stoked if they take a stud t at nine. totally
Yep, absolutely cool with it. Lewan is the perfect RT, but could fill in for Cordy in a pinch. Get AS-J in the second as a complete TE who doesn't tip your hand when he's on the field.

[Mr. Pink]

Going for the third best tackle within the first nine picks is just bad strategy. We need to wait on a tackle til at least round two. Just like we did with Cordy.

This.

On a team with quite a few holes, selecting the third best tackle at 9th overall is asinine.

[better days]

This.

On a team with quite a few holes, selecting the third best tackle at 9th overall is asinine.

The 3rd best tackle in this draft could be better than the best tackle drafted last year.

[Dr. Who]

It's not a card. but thinking a stud is gonna play in Buffalo 10 years is wishful at best

Well, yes, it's a metaphor.

If the Bills start winning, they very well could keep talent for ten years. If one is convinced they're going to be perpetually bad, why bother following them?

[stuckincincy]

This.

On a team with quite a few holes, selecting the third best tackle at 9th overall is asinine.

One reason the team has quite a few holes is that but with a minor - and recent spurt - with Glenn, Woods, and the (departed) Levitre, they have ignored the foundation that comes with a solid OL corps and preferred to embark on a Quixotic quest for running back after running back. DB after DB. Paid through the nose for a couple of OL FAs - Dockery and that other one who I forget. Nice scouting.

Linebackers. In their 15 years and running wander in the playoff desert, they drafted Poz and Alonso, and had a Fletcher fall into their laps...Poz and Fletcher being drummed out of town.

[DraftBoy]

I don't understand why everyone wants to move Cordy? He was really good last season and there are only a handful of better LTs in the league. There's a pretty good chance that this year's batch of tackles won't ever be better than him.

I don't think its about moving him or not. I think its about adding ball players to the OL. You don't pass on Lewan because you're worried you may god forbid have to move Cordy. If Lewan is a better LT then we'll use Cordy at RT or LG. If Lewan is a better fit at RT then we leave Cordy at LT.

There really isn't a downside here.

[Uncle Jesse]

With better OL play the Bills may have made the playoffs last year.

If by OL you mean QB, then yes, we would have made the playoffs.

[better days]

If by OL you mean QB, then yes, we would have made the playoffs.

Either or. A GREAT QB can make a poor OL look better.

A GOOD OL can make an average QB look GOOD.

[DesertFox24]

I don't think its about moving him or not. I think its about adding ball players to the OL. You don't pass on Lewan because you're worried you may god forbid have to move Cordy. If Lewan is a better LT then we'll use Cordy at RT or LG. If Lewan is a better fit at RT then we leave Cordy at LT.

There really isn't a downside here.

Well I have no problem with drafting a RT at 9 given the importance of the position. That being said I would rather leave Glenn out LT and train the new guy at RT, there are some footwork differences and it could stunt both players development by trying to see who is better on which side.

I say leave Glenn at left until he fails which he has not done and train the new guy at RT, if by the end of this season Glenn has struggles then consider next offseason after the new RT has a year of experience.

[better days]

Well I have no problem with drafting a RT at 9 given the importance of the position. That being said I would rather leave Glenn out LT and train the new guy at RT, there are some footwork differences and it could stunt both players development by trying to see who is better on which side.

I say leave Glenn at left until he fails which he has not done and train the new guy at RT, if by the end of this season Glenn has struggles then consider next offseason after the new RT has a year of experience.

And Glenn has not struggled since he came into the NFL, that won't happen unless he gets injured.

In which case it's nice to have a RT that can slide over to LT for a while.

[DraftBoy]

Well I have no problem with drafting a RT at 9 given the importance of the position. That being said I would rather leave Glenn out LT and train the new guy at RT, there are some footwork differences and it could stunt both players development by trying to see who is better on which side.

I say leave Glenn at left until he fails which he has not done and train the new guy at RT, if by the end of this season Glenn has struggles then consider next offseason after the new RT has a year of experience.

What footwork difference are you specifically referring to?

There are some assignment differences, but I don't recall any footwork differences.

[THATHURMANATOR]

It is boring for sure but any tackle there at 9 is a steal and would be a solid pick

[mysticsoto]

Well I have no problem with drafting a RT at 9 given the importance of the position. That being said I would rather leave Glenn out LT and train the new guy at RT, there are some footwork differences and it could stunt both players development by trying to see who is better on which side.

I say leave Glenn at left until he fails which he has not done and train the new guy at RT, if by the end of this season Glenn has struggles then consider next offseason after the new RT has a year of experience.

I would let Training Camp decide who goes where...

[better days]

I would let Training Camp decide who goes where...

I think Glenn has EARNED the LT position.

If his play was sub par, I could understand the talk of moving him, but he has played WELL there from day one.

[DraftBoy]

I think Glenn has EARNED the LT position.

If his play was sub par, I could understand the talk of moving him, but he has played WELL there from day one.

Yes he earned it last year, but there is no issue in making him earn it again next year.

[alohabillsfan]

Yes he earned it last year, but there is no issue in making him earn it again next year.

The same should go for EJ even more (since he hasn't even earned it).

[coastal]

Let's kick him inside to guard... Let's draft a stud... Idiots.

[psubills62]

Sometimes it seems a bit tedious to argue specific positions. Just draft someone who is a good/great player.

RT is fine, it's clearly a position of impact - are people really going to argue it isn't?

I'm of the opinion that at every level (high school, college, NFL), the skill position players outside of QB are much easier to find than big men. We need OL, so I'd love to see multiple OL taken in this draft, personally, whether that's first round or otherwise.

[YardRat]

Or perhaps we should just try to draft bad players and mediocrities no one else will want.

Well, to be fair, that's the biggest reason we haven't made the playoffs in this century...fubaring the draft.

[Dr. Who]

Okay. I don't think anyone would argue with that. In this case, one poster asserted that drafting a tackle at nine would be a reasonable move if it yielded a ten year starter. Another poster cynically claimed that if we did draft someone capable of being a ten year starter, he would leave the team when his rookie contract ran out. My point was a reductio ad absurdam.

[DraftBoy]

The same should go for EJ even more (since he hasn't even earned it).

I don't think anybody is advocating handing anybody a job right now...

[Jan Reimers]

I'd still rather see a big, fast, nasty WR in the first round.

[better days]

I'd still rather see a big, fast, nasty WR in the first round.

If that WR is named Watkins, I would agree. Other than him I would rather have an OT at #9.

Again if the Bills could trade down, I would be on board with an Evans or Ebron a little later in the rnd.

[better days]

Yes he earned it last year, but there is no issue in making him earn it again next year.

Well, except it would be a huge waste of time. The Bills need to give as many snaps to the new RT as possible to get maximum cohesion from the OL.

[DraftBoy]

Well, except it would be a huge waste of time. The Bills need to give as many snaps to the new RT as possible to get maximum cohesion from the OL.

Asking guys to compete for their spot is now a waste of time?

Little wonder why the Bills have sat in mediocrity for so long.

[better days]

Asking guys to compete for their spot is now a waste of time?

Little wonder why the Bills have sat in mediocrity for so long.

BS. Do you want to ask Tom Brady to compete? Or Aaron Rodgers? Or Eric Wood?

If a guy has proven himself & Cordy Glenn has, there is no need to make him compete.

CONTINUITY is very important on the OL. That time is BETTER SPENT on CONTINUITY than on having Glenn compete for a job he is sure to win.

And Marrone has been talking about Glenn going to the Pro Bowl SOON. You can bet there will be no NONSENSE about moving him.

YOU wanted him moved from the day he was drafted & you were WRONG!

[YardRat]

I'm certainly not against competition in camp, and agree you make the moves necessary to put the best 11 men on the field at the same time, but monkeying around with an area that is already established as somewhat successful isn't necessarily the best utilization of developing talent. Should somebody other than Glenn be getting reps at LT during camp? Absolutely. If we do draft an RT at #9, should that player get some reps at LT? Absolutely. But, the vast majority of practice reps, mostly because Glenn has succeeded at LT from the beginning, should be Glenn at LT and Player X at RT (especially if Player X is a rookie expected to fill that spot). I didn't necessarily agree at the time when Gailey and Co plugged Glenn into the LT spot from Day 1, but realistically having Cordy concentrate on one position probably was a pretty big factor in his ability to develop at that spot, and may be the smartest move Chan made in his tenure here.

Continuity and familiarity are extremely important in line play, and one should really be cautious about how much they mess with it.

[stuckincincy]

Continuity and familiarity are extremely important in line play, and one should really be cautious about how much they mess with it.

So is versatility.

[swiper]

BS. Do you want to ask Tom Brady to compete? Or Aaron Rodgers? Or Eric Wood?

If a guy has proven himself & Cordy Glenn has, there is no need to make him compete.

CONTINUITY is very important on the OL. That time is BETTER SPENT on CONTINUITY than on having Glenn compete for a job he is sure to win.

And Marrone has been talking about Glenn going to the Pro Bowl SOON. You can bet there will be no NONSENSE about moving him.

YOU wanted him moved from the day he was drafted & you were WRONG!

One of the most ******ed posts of all time.

[YardRat]

So is versatility.

I agree, to a point, but I'm more in the camp that is against doing too much shuffling on the oline, i.e. when a starter goes down. I like to have versatility in the back-ups (C-G ability, OT-G ability). Shuffling guys just weakens the line even more. If LT gets injured, and RT or LG is moved to LT then BackUp RT or LG is plugged in, you basically have back-ups at two positions instead of just one. That just doubles the chances of making a mistake because a starter is not in their original position.

[stuckincincy]

BS. Do you want to ask Tom Brady to compete? Or Aaron Rodgers? Or Eric Wood?

If a guy has proven himself & Cordy Glenn has, there is no need to make him compete.

CONTINUITY is very important on the OL. That time is BETTER SPENT on CONTINUITY than on having Glenn compete for a job he is sure to win.

And Marrone has been talking about Glenn going to the Pro Bowl SOON. You can bet there will be no NONSENSE about moving him.

YOU wanted him moved from the day he was drafted & you were WRONG!

No disagreement with continuity, but not to a fault. I can't imagine that the BUF coaching staff doesn't jumble positions in practice. That's the norm, because injuries happen.

Example: Mid-season, CIN lost starting guard Boling for the season. Then lost RG Zeitler for 3 games. They kicked LT Whitworth inside, put back-up Anthony Collins at LT (who just signed a fat contract with TB). In something like 7 starts Collins was credited with giving up 1 sack and a very low number of qb pressures. FA acquisition Mike Pollack acquisition manned the rg spot.

If BUF gets a FA, a draftee that looks good at LT, it makes no sense to be hidebound and insist that Glenn is a LT and that's that. And we have to consider the possibility that Glenn looked statistically good because the opposition knew that the right side and the interior was beatable, so why bother trying to beat Glenn?

Shuffle the deck - at least in practice - and see if you can build depth, overall strength. Dividends are paid if the injury bug hits.

BTW: Blurb on CIN's 20 year tenure OL coach (there's continuity for ya), Paul Alexander, who is also a concert pianist and singer:

http://prod.www.bengals.clubs.nfl.com/news/article-1/Alexander-to-take-baton/09ed756c-e61d-48d8-b90a-24d8e91e3a43


:kid:

[DraftBoy]

BS. Do you want to ask Tom Brady to compete? Or Aaron Rodgers? Or Eric Wood?

If a guy has proven himself & Cordy Glenn has, there is no need to make him compete.

CONTINUITY is very important on the OL. That time is BETTER SPENT on CONTINUITY than on having Glenn compete for a job he is sure to win.

And Marrone has been talking about Glenn going to the Pro Bowl SOON. You can bet there will be no NONSENSE about moving him.

YOU wanted him moved from the day he was drafted & you were WRONG!

Yes, why would you not?

I've admitted he's been a better LT than I anticipated. This has nothing to with wanting to move him or not, its simply about getting more talent on the OL. Which you are apparently against.

[DraftBoy]

I agree, to a point, but I'm more in the camp that is against doing too much shuffling on the oline, i.e. when a starter goes down. I like to have versatility in the back-ups (C-G ability, OT-G ability). Shuffling guys just weakens the line even more. If LT gets injured, and RT or LG is moved to LT then BackUp RT or LG is plugged in, you basically have back-ups at two positions instead of just one. That just doubles the chances of making a mistake because a starter is not in their original position.

But that's not the argument being made if they choose to move Glenn. You wouldn't be replacing your former starting LT with a backup who couldn't beat him out in camp.

[YardRat]

But that's not the argument being made if they choose to move Glenn. You wouldn't be replacing your former starting LT with a backup who couldn't beat him out in camp.

That comment was made in response to cincy's 'versatility' post...I addressed your argument earlier.

[Buffalo Billy Bison]

In as much as I would love to have K. Mack or CJ Mosley for our linebackers, I would also love to have Evans or Ebron catching the ball. Our right side of the line did a mediocre job at protecting our QB's last season so it's my opinion that we draft the best tackle available with the 9th pick or trade down grabbing a good one while picking up another draft pick in the process! Just imagine if you could find a tackle equal to or greater than Glenn to play LT and Glenn on the right side, would that be the cats meow! This draft has quality WR's well into the 3rd round so that shouldn't be much of an issue. With us getting a couple of quality LB'ers in FA I don't feel that's a priority right now. A quality TE could be had in the 2nd round! We can pick up a quality guard in the 3rd round in case Chris Williams doesn't work out as we hope. I must admit, if Kalill Mack is available at 9 I might have to eat crow and take him. At least we have choices!

- - - Updated - - -

[better days]

So is versatility.

Versatility is GREAT for a BACKUP.

A GOOD OL starter is NEVER moved except because of injuries.

[YardRat]

Versatility is GREAT for a BACKUP.

A GOOD OL starter is NEVER moved except because of injuries.

I wouldn't even move them because of injuries, as I stated earlier. That's why you have back-ups to begin with.

[jimmifli]

Glenn was a top10 tackle last season playing next to a scrub that shouldn't have started a single game. He got no help and played really well.

If we draft a tackle in the first, it's unlikely he'll be better than Cordy. If he is better, we'll have three OL that are near the top of the NFL at their position - that would be super ****ing awesome!
http://i.imgur.com/Z6qGXXM.gif
So sure, if the guy we draft is a rookie probowler, I'm fine with kicking Glenn to RT.

[scartown]

Smoke screen

[better days]

One of the most ******ed posts of all time.

EXPLAIN WHY.

[stuckincincy]

Versatility is GREAT for a BACKUP.

A GOOD OL starter is NEVER moved except because of injuries.

You haven't grasped my point. I did not advocate moving starters - as a rule - during a game. What I did advocate is using practice to evaluate and familiarize them with different line positions.

It's not common, but teams do jumble their starters for a time during games, as it becomes apparent that the defense has out-matched a player at a particular position. If you've done your work on this during practice, you will be more successful at it. What is not uncommon, is bringing in the back-up and seeing snap count problems...it takes a bit of time for the substitute to get into a game "groove", so to speak.