Bills O-Line...

[Yasgur's Farm]

Not as bad as the doom and gloomers would lead us to believe...

1) Addition of Incognito.
2) Addition of Miller.
3) Maturing of Henderson, Richardson, and Kujo... However insignificant that sounds.
4) Proper usage of Urbik... Better than the general fan's opinion.
5) Better health of Williams... Word is he can man the swing tackle back-up need (Fingers crossed).
6) Better O-line coaching.
7) Better OC... Utilizing talent properly.
8) Better head coaching... Not holding grudges.

vs

Losses... Pears and Hairston.

[swiper]

TE upgrades also.

[SpikedLemonade]

Don't worry if the OL sucks as I expect they might, most fans will blame the QB and the RBs.

[SpikedLemonade]

TE upgrades also.

None of the TEs are inline blockers. How does that help the OL? Losing the one inline TE we had to the Raiders would hurt the situation.

[OpIv37]

Not as bad as the doom and gloomers would lead us to believe...

1) Addition of Incognito.
2) Addition of Miller.
3) Maturing of Henderson, Richardson, and Kujo... However insignificant that sounds.
4) Proper usage of Urbik... Better than the general fan's opinion.
5) Better health of Williams... Word is he can man the swing tackle back-up need (Fingers crossed).
6) Better O-line coaching.
7) Better OC... Utilizing talent properly.
8) Better head coaching... Not holding grudges.

vs

Losses... Pears and Hairston.

1. Hasn't played in a year and a half- no one knows how good he will be.
2. A 3rd round rookie? Just like we relied on rookies to fix the OL last year? Ha
3. Every year people say we are going to get better because of "rookie improvement." Every year, it fails to happen. Not that no rookie ever improves, but they never improve enough to make a unit as a whole better. Also, essentially this comes down to counting on guys to play better than they have ever proven they can play.
4. Once again, assuming he can play better than he has proven.
5. Maybe
6 and 7- coaching can only go so far without talent.
8. huh?

Losses- agreed, no big deal.

[Mace]

None of the TEs are inline blockers. How does that help the OL? Losing the one inline TE we had to the Raiders would hurt the situation.

A defense can key on the obvious. Pass catching TE's prevent stacking and swarming the box, your OL has less people to worry about coming from everywhere if you have outlet threats. Lee Smith entering the game said "running play, stack and swarm the box, even if he catches it he's not going anywhere."

[Mace]

1. Hasn't played in a year and a half- no one knows how good he will be.
2. A 3rd round rookie? Just like we relied on rookies to fix the OL last year? Ha
3. Every year people say we are going to get better because of "rookie improvement." Every year, it fails to happen. Not that no rookie ever improves, but they never improve enough to make a unit as a whole better. Also, essentially this comes down to counting on guys to play better than they have ever proven they can play.
4. Once again, assuming he can play better than he has proven.
5. Maybe
6 and 7- coaching can only go so far without talent.
8. huh?

Losses- agreed, no big deal.

Huge changes just for scheme. Roman is not all about zone blocking, running his linemen all over the place to find their assignment. Run blocking is also easier for young linemen (and even old ones), is all about the obvious physicality. They really do have plenty of talent on the line, talent being potential, considering the above. We just won't be looking at complex long developing pass plays where zone blocking pass protection technique is essential.

Plows. They want plows, not zippy wee shriner cars driven by fat guys this year. Honestly they have to count on guys playing better than they have ever proven they can play, one is a rookie, 3 have exclusive experience under the terrible Marrone/Morris combo. Glenn, Woods and Urbik have been just fine at points in their careers.

Wait and see what happens, I don't think the OL will be the biggest issue though.

[cookie G]

Don't worry if the OL sucks as I expect they might, most fans will blame the QB and the RBs.

People like rattling off names as if it means something.

It was like a few years ago when talking about replacing Levitre, people would say..

"we have Colin Brown, Zach Chibane, Chris Scott, David Snow, Thomas Welch, Sam Young, don't act like we don't have any guards on the roster...one of those guys is bound to be a quality starter..I don't know what else people want!"

[YardRat]

Hopefully we get the five best guys out there and they gel real quickly. Not that I expect it to be worse, but the other sign of the coin is...

1-Incognito lost it in his absence.
2-Miller pulls a KuJo.
3-Henderson, Richardson and KuJo don't improve.
4-Urbik hit a wall and can't recover.
5-Williams can't stay healthy, and struggles as swing.
As Op pointed out, 6-7-8 would be moot if the first five come to fruition.

That being said, I'm rooting for a real uptick from this group...they've got the potential, they just need to go out and prove it. If the stars align and the young guys improve a lot and find their place, the only missing piece going into next year would be a dominant center.

[OpIv37]

Huge changes just for scheme. Roman is not all about zone blocking, running his linemen all over the place to find their assignment. Run blocking is also easier for young linemen (and even old ones), is all about the obvious physicality. They really do have plenty of talent on the line, talent being potential, considering the above. We just won't be looking at complex long developing pass plays where zone blocking pass protection technique is essential.

Plows. They want plows, not zippy wee shriner cars driven by fat guys this year. Honestly they have to count on guys playing better than they have ever proven they can play, one is a rookie, 3 have exclusive experience under the terrible Marrone/Morris combo. Glenn, Woods and Urbik have been just fine at points in their careers.

Wait and see what happens, I don't think the OL will be the biggest issue though.

So, they added scheme without adding players who fit that scheme? Huh?

And "potential" is just a sunshine-and-roses way of saying "hasn't done **** yet."

[Mace]

So, they added scheme without adding players who fit that scheme? Huh?

And "potential" is just a sunshine-and-roses way of saying "hasn't done **** yet."

Well no, they drafted players before who didn't fit the scheme and now added scheme to players who fit it.

No argument about your definition of potential, but I gave you reasons why their potential wasn't going anywhere. Makes no sense whatever to just shuck and replace them because they didn't do well under the legendary line guru Marrone and his handpicked master of OL Pat Morris. You know what Morris is doing right now....nothing. No one wants him.

So they added a more OL friendly scheme, better coaching (Roman/Kromer have some rep) for their trainees, and it's bad because they had a poorly thought out scheme and a worse set of coaches to influence your opinion, because it's the fault of the trainees ?

There are better flaws to watch down the road, like how we get points in high scoring games where we blitz too much to stop the run effectively with a marquee running back inclined to dance sideways and dazzling receivers hoping someone can throw to them while they are running around.

[Mace]

People like rattling off names as if it means something.

It was like a few years ago when talking about replacing Levitre, people would say..

"we have Colin Brown, Zach Chibane, Chris Scott, David Snow, Thomas Welch, Sam Young, don't act like we don't have any guards on the roster...one of those guys is bound to be a quality starter..I don't know what else people want!"

In this case I wasn't one of them. I thought it was dire back then and howled about it. I think it's workable now. So I guess I don't fit into an easily dismissed category. The names can mean something if you get rid of Marrone/Morris, not certainly but can.

Geez, those guys were all pretty well recognized questionable and not thriving on more potential than the coaching staff dreamed of. This is at the least a quality bunch of questionable, now in better circumstances. Give them a game at least, everything is new.

[Night Train]

I'll wait until camp and the pre-season for some actual evidence either way.

Maybe they'll receive some actual coaching this year and have a plan. The RB, WR and TE positions are significantly better on paper. ID a QB who gets rid of the ball quickly, get some run blocking and we got something here.

I'm in no hurry to start crying after a promising off-season.

[X-Era]

Hopefully we get the five best guys out there and they gel real quickly. Not that I expect it to be worse, but the other sign of the coin is...

1-Incognito lost it in his absence.
2-Miller pulls a KuJo.
3-Henderson, Richardson and KuJo don't improve.
4-Urbik hit a wall and can't recover.
5-Williams can't stay healthy, and struggles as swing.
As Op pointed out, 6-7-8 would be moot if the first five come to fruition.

That being said, I'm rooting for a real uptick from this group...they've got the potential, they just need to go out and prove it. If the stars align and the young guys improve a lot and find their place, the only missing piece going into next year would be a dominant center.

Who's your five best if you had to name them?

I'd go:
Wood
Glenn
Henderson
Incognito
Williams or Urbik

I fully think that a young guy will emerge this year. Probably Miller. Maybe Kujo.

[swiper]

Not sure who the best five will end up being. I'm sure there will end up being a surprise or two.

[YardRat]

Who's your five best if you had to name them?

I'd go:
Wood
Glenn
Henderson
Incognito
Williams or Urbik

I fully think that a young guy will emerge this year. Probably Miller. Maybe Kujo.

Right now I would say Glenn-Incognito-Wood-Urbik-Henderson. That means we're basically relying on coaching and Incognito to make the unit better, and those are the only real differences from the end of last year. Wood and Urbik are known commodities, Glenn may still have room to grow, and Henderson definitely needs to make a leap. I hope KuJo and Richardson can improve, and Miller can contribute, but wary of counting on that too much.Would be thrilled if the young guys show the ability to become Glenn and Henderson at tackle, two of Miller, Richardson and KuJo to develop enough to man the guard spots.

[Yasgur's Farm]

The line improved quite a bit after Marone let Urbik out of the doghouse last season... I'd expect solid play from him but would be more than happy if Miller (or Richardson/Kujo) beat him out of the starting spot.

[Strongman]

I'm expecting them to play better, but I really wish they would get more 1st round talent in the o-line. It needs more studs.

[SpikedLemonade]

What fans are forgetting is just how bad our OL was last year and therefore just how much they need to improve just to be average.

Here is an analysis someone did using PFF OL Grades:

Top 5 Worst OLs:


Rams: -86; -17.2
Bills: -63; -12.6
Dolphins: -62.7; -12.54
Chargers: -60.8; -12.16
Cardinals: -54.7; -10.94

Top 5 OLs:


Eagles: 87; 17.4
Cowboys: 76.5; 15.3
Ravens: 66.1; 13.22
Packers: 60.6; 12.12
Texans: 45.2; 9.04

http://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/35iyq0/i_used_pff_grades_to_grade_every_ol_in_every/

[SpikedLemonade]

For those who's memories may not be fresh, please watch the Bills @ Raiders game again from last year.

Henderson plus a couple other OLs were complete dog crap.

They were simply beat up.

[swiper]

The line improved quite a bit after Marone let Urbik out of the doghouse last season.

Yeah. I still don't get that - Urbik being in the doghouse. Even the casual observer could see the line tightened up somewhat when he was allowed back in.

What the heck was Marrone's issue with Urbik?

[Mace]

Yeah. I still don't get that - Urbik being in the doghouse. Even the casual observer could see the line tightened up somewhat when he was allowed back in.

What the heck was Marrone's issue with Urbik?

No idea, but Marrone did a lot of odd things. I'm unsure Ryan was the right hire, but I sure am glad Marrone is gone.

[SpikedLemonade]

If this coaching staff can get the Bills OL to merely average, it will mean 2 more wins over last year.

[Mace]

If this coaching staff can get the Bills OL to merely average, it will mean 2 more wins over last year.

That's sort of why it's hard to believe this will fail so bad at least from the start.

[Bill Cody]

I could see a scenario where the Bills O line improves to average this year, mainly if Miller comes in and snatches a starting role right out of the chute because he earns it. But let's be honest- this is a weakness of the team and we're an injury or two from this being an absolute train wreck. I'm keeping an open mind with a new staff but my sunglasses are a light brown not rose colored.

[SpikedLemonade]

I could see a scenario where the Bills O line improves to average this year, mainly if Miller comes in and snatches a starting role right out of the chute because he earns it. But let's be honest- this is a weakness of the team and we're an injury or two from this being an absolute train wreck. I'm keeping an open mind with a new staff but my sunglasses are a light brown not rose colored.

This year, if one can ever truly say that a team did or did not make the play-offs based on only one part of its team, our OL is the difference between making or not making the play-offs.

[Bill Cody]

This year, if one can ever truly say that a team did or did not make the play-offs based on only one part of its team, our OL is the difference between making or not making the play-offs.

I agree in part, the OL could definitely keep us out of the playoffs. But let's not put the pot hole of an OL ahead of the crater under center in terms of problems. Run that little wellness chart you did for QB and I think the over under is more than 2 games, no?

[SpikedLemonade]

I agree in part, the OL could definitely keep us out of the playoffs. But let's not put the pot hole of an OL ahead of the crater under center in terms of problems. Run that little wellness chart you did for QB and I think the over under is more than 2 games, no?

I agree QB is a big problem, but it was not solvable this off-season. OL was.

A true power run game should minimize the reliance on good QB play. It is enough for our QBs to once in a while hit our WRs in single coverage on the outside or a TE 10 yards wide open in the middle. Crap, a good screen game may be enough alone.

Getting constantly stuffed on first down run plays will put any team behind the eight ball and increase their dependency on good QB play.

[Zoneblitser]

I will reserve judgement on the Oline until we can get a feel for the new coaches and what they can do to get the most out of the oline. No matter what they do we probably won't see the line come together and play their best football until midseason.

[Bill Cody]

I agree QB is a big problem, but it was not solvable this off-season. OL was.

A true power run game should minimize the reliance on good QB play. It is enough for our QBs to once in a while hit our WRs in single coverage on the outside or a TE 10 yards wide open in the middle. Crap, a good screen game may be enough alone.

Getting constantly stuffed on first down run plays will put any team behind the eight ball and increase their dependency on good QB play.

Sure I'm in, it's the way you have to go and it makes all the sense in the world with our D, Buffalo weather, Rex as coach. Seattle's offense would be the model. But to make that work you need a QB that can convert 60% or better on 3rd down. If not good luck.

[better days]

Sure I'm in, it's the way you have to go and it makes all the sense in the world with our D, Buffalo weather, Rex as coach. Seattle's offense would be the model. But to make that work you need a QB that can convert 60% or better on 3rd down. If not good luck.

The ideal would be to avoid third & long.

The RB's can convert third & short.

[EDS]

I agree QB is a big problem, but it was not solvable this off-season. OL was.

A true power run game should minimize the reliance on good QB play. It is enough for our QBs to once in a while hit our WRs in single coverage on the outside or a TE 10 yards wide open in the middle. Crap, a good screen game may be enough alone.

Getting constantly stuffed on first down run plays will put any team behind the eight ball and increase their dependency on good QB play.

Are the Bills running a true power running game with McCoy as the featured back?

[Bill Cody]

The ideal would be to avoid third & long.

The RB's can convert third & short.

3rd and 3 will happen a lot in a power running offense. Sure you can mix it up and run sometimes on 3rd and 3. But in today's NFL mostly that's not a RB call. It could be a QB run or QB pass but either way it's on the QB. If the QB is Matt Cassell it's not going to be a scramble too often. EJ is a better fit for this style IF he can hit the broadside of a barn. You want to play ball control 3rd down is key.

[better days]

3rd and 3 will happen a lot in a power running offense. Sure you can mix it up and run sometimes on 3rd and 3. But in today's NFL mostly that's not a RB call. It could be a QB run or QB pass but either way it's on the QB. If the QB is Matt Cassell it's not going to be a scramble too often. EJ is a better fit for this style IF he can hit the broadside of a barn. You want to play ball control 3rd down is key.

3rd & 3 could be a run or a pass.

If it is a pass, most likely to a TE. I think Cassell could do that.

And Roman has said his offense will be like rex's defense in that the other team won't know what is coming or where it is coming from.

Players are saying already that there is a lot of movement, motion, misdirection in the Roman offense. I like that.

[tomz]

I agree QB is a big problem, but it was not solvable this off-season. OL was.

A true power run game should minimize the reliance on good QB play. It is enough for our QBs to once in a while hit our WRs in single coverage on the outside or a TE 10 yards wide open in the middle. Crap, a good screen game may be enough alone.

Getting constantly stuffed on first down run plays will put any team behind the eight ball and increase their dependency on good QB play.

This is a solid analysis. However, one thing that people overlook in their analysis of the O-line is how strong an influence the predictability of the play-calling had under Marrone. in particular, last year it seemed that defenses knew that when Spiller came in it was almost always a run and they were waiting for him. Yes, the O-line never 'imposed their will' and limited penetration in such cases but the utter awfulness of play calling was a significant contributor, IMHO.

[SpikedLemonade]

This is a solid analysis. However, one thing that people overlook in their analysis of the O-line is how strong an influence the predictability of the play-calling had under Marrone. in particular, last year it seemed that defenses knew that when Spiller came in it was almost always a run and they were waiting for him. Yes, the O-line never 'imposed their will' and limited penetration in such cases but the utter awfulness of play calling was a significant contributor, IMHO.

There is no question Hackett's play calling sucked. He did not belong in the NFL. Probably one of the biggest frustrations of last year as a fan was watching his play calling.

However, there were many many many times where our OL was just manhandled regardless of the play calling. Running for short yardage on 3rd down was mostly impossible. One on one pass blocking often broke down against less than elite pass rushers.

I agree that play calling had a major impact on how poor our OL looked but it does not explain the whole story. Hackett was also frustrated with the poor execution of the OL so he adjusted the play calling to further simplify it. It led to a spiral to the bottom where the plays were so predictable. Sort of a chicken and an egg scenario it terms of what came first --- the poor OL play or the predictable play calling.

What last year's play calling does not explain is how little the Bills have invested in 1st/2nd round picks and salary into our OL. I don't expect us to be the Dallas Cowboys in that regard, but when the OL is not a priority during Free Agency or on the 1st or 2nd Draft Day, it shows in their play. You can't make chicken pie out of chicken crap.

[better days]

The OL played like crap last year.

I don't think anyone can dispute that.

But I blame that on Coaching & scheme for the most part.

With better Coaching, Scheme, play calling, along with a few new players & improvement of players that were rookies last year, I expect the OL to be much improved this year.

[ghz in pittsburgh]

I agree QB is a big problem, but it was not solvable this off-season. OL was.



I disagree. I suppose short of signing 2 all pro Guards, people will say O-Line is a problem.

The fact is O-Line play is about 50% talent, 50% about coordination, everyone in sync. The best O-Lines in NFL were never 5 pro-ball players on one single line. The Bills made a lot of investments on O-Line last year. It didn't pan out year 1, but it does not mean it would never pan out.

[SpikedLemonade]

I disagree. I suppose short of signing 2 all pro Guards, people will say O-Line is a problem.

The fact is O-Line play is about 50% talent, 50% about coordination, everyone in sync. The best O-Lines in NFL were never 5 pro-ball players on one single line. The Bills made a lot of investments on O-Line last year. It didn't pan out year 1, but it does not mean it would never pan out.

When was the last time the Bills had one Pro-Ball OL let alone 2?

The Bills after years of neglecting the OL drafted OL in the 2nd, 5th and 7th rounds. You consider that investing a lot?

The Bills have invested a lot in their DL, CBs and RBs, but not in their OL.

The history of the Bills is that they have let their top OL walk or traded them over the years.

[ghz in pittsburgh]

3 of 7 draft picks on O-Line in a single draft is a lot. They also signed an expensive FA as well.

I will agree the argument that they are not as good evaluating their O-Line investment as they made on defense. To say ignoring is not true.

[SpikedLemonade]

3 of 7 draft picks on O-Line in a single draft is a lot. They also signed an expensive FA as well.

I will agree the argument that they are not as good evaluating their O-Line investment as they made on defense. To say ignoring is not true.

Chris Williams was not expensive (4 yrs. $13.5M. $5.5M guaranteed). There is a 50-50 chance he is cut before Opening Day since there is very little of a cap hit after June 1st.

Using a 2nd, 5th and 7th round picks is not much when 5th and 7th round picks rarely start and are typically gone in 2 years.

Look around at what other successful NFL teams have invested in their OLs in terms of salary and early draft picks. Compare that to the Bills.

[ghz in pittsburgh]

Go ahead look at draft history. Average about 15 O-Line players drafted in the 1st 3 round every year. The Bills done it 2 years in a row.

[SpikedLemonade]

Go ahead look at draft history. Average about 15 O-Line players drafted in the 1st 3 round every year. The Bills done it 2 years in a row.

You just wouldn't draft a fat guy in the 1st round ever right?

Oh well, just blame the QB and the RBs if the O struggles like most Bills fans do.

[SpikedLemonade]

@viccarucci: Rex Ryan on Chris Williams' absence from #Bills OTAs: I dont know if hes going to be planning on coming back or what; I haven't seen him.