K Gun Special

Sure you can. Theres no denying there were other great players on that team. But by your analysis Jim Kelly is not a hall of famer, he had HOF WRs, RB, DE, and possibly a few more yet to be inducted. Kelly was always near the top but never the best of his day..... but he was a winner outside the SBs, and that counts for a lot..... A LOT. The point is that Bradshaw put up great #s and won...despite having a great D, so many SB winners have great players around them. You cant tell me the QB on a team that won 4 super bowls in 6 years and had top 10 stats is not a HOF. As to the era thing, you cant compare.... For example - would the steel curtain defense or even the 85 bears be as good with todays PI rules and offense oriented officiating??? Numbers now are inflated, which is why you can have a guy in the bottom third of the NFL (fitz) have better numbers than a HOF 4 time super bowl champion. If you or anyone wants to translate that into meaning Fitz is as good as bradshaw than you know less than you let on.

Terry Bradshaw? he had top 10 numbers for his era and won a number of super bowls....tell me how that doesn't make you a HOFer???? Bc a QB over 30 years later in a different era and rules has better numbers? He was surrounded by greatness but give me some examples of HOF QBs who didnt have great players around them..... You should also realize that its not the hall of stats, which you clearly dont bc of your post, and many players with suspect stats are in the HOFs of all sports. This thread is reaching a new level of ridiculousness.

??? Ngata is a NT playing inside not a DE.

Gailey has never really said that. Nix just said :"We can't start over every year. You can not do that. We're a 3-4. We're scouting for a 3-4. And if we wind up with people we need to play in a four-man front some, we will. Now I think that's really what everybody [in a 3-4 scheme] does. But you gotta have a goal that this is what you're trying to get to defensively. That hasn't changed."http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/article323639.ece So they will run some 4 man fronts on occasion like every 3-4 D does.

Williams isnt a DE and is not suited for that position. And why do you move the one guy on D who had any impact last year? ?????

Wood is a long way from being a pro bowler at either G or C. He's a good player but not nearly at that level.

Yes, the offense only looked better bc it went from awful to bad. Yea KW. and maybe WR bc we have so many. But even RB should be considered, we have spiller and a 30yr old D3 back. LB should be a priority and so should TE.

Yes true. But a top flight/franchise QB is a more important piece than anyone you could get on D. The impact is greater. But without that player available, you will likely see the Bills address D. at #3. But really what position shouldnt they be upgrading? they arent really set at any position.

First, dont call it scoring defense, that generally refers to points scored BY the defense. Second, Funny how the Saints with the 20th best "scoring defense" won the Super Bowl with the BEST scoring offense. They even beat a team with a better scoring top 10 defense. Its not nearly as simple as you make it sound. Usually the teams that advance far into the playoffs are going to be in the top categories for Offense and/or Defense. Plenty of Offensive oriented teams have had success and won super bowls. They just usually have what are considered the best QBs around, regardless of stats. Ben is a good example, he does not put up the numbers but makes big plays -- there are quite a few players in the hall of fame with similar resumes.

Thanks, you've shown your intellectual prowess. He challenged him to a boxing match for charity not a fist fight.

He's another one of these local guys trying to be a poor mans nick mendola. The problem is these guys have no background in the sports in which they are commmenting. They also all have very poor grammar and routinely spell things wrong. Not the way to go about being "big time" now is it. Just yesterday you had mendola saying it was illegal to try and block a punt, and then saying therefore the NFL has stupid rules. (he's a huge soccer fan). Then you had Moran virtually picking a fight with Whitner. I dont like whitner's attitude very much but this guy provoked his ass.

yawn. They also are two of the top 10 QBs in the league. They also have 3 offenses in the top 10 for ball control. Part of that is having a good D that gets your O the ball,.... the other and more important part is that your O keeps the ball. Oh yea it also inflates your defensive stats!!! You have the NFLs #4 passing attack - GB You have the NFLs #4 rushing attack - NYJ Pitt is the #11 rushing attack. D is important, but you are on a kamikaze mission to disprove something that isnt true. There are so few teams that have long term success using the Ravens/Jets mold based on great D and decent O wherein you dont need a great QB but a game manager. The problem is keeping 11 + guys on D who can play at that high of a level. More teams have had success using the QB model which is find your franchise #1 guy, give him a few pieces and add a few playmakers on D. see pats, colts, GB. .. yea these teams havent had success this year. But you can bet they will all be in the playoffs again next year and compete for the super bowl.

who? florence is a FA, McGee is never healthy and then we have Mckelvin. Who are the other corners? This team is full of holes, CB is one of them.

Not really, especially when they were the top scoring offenses those few years. A good D will stop the other team from scoring, ie ravens in 2001 ; but a good offense gets you points obviously. The 01 ravens were an average offense propelled by a great D, that was a defense first team. The numbers back this up, those broncos and GB teams were top in the league in getting first downs. That means the offense was controlling the ball and dictating the flow of the game. It also keeps the defense off the field and inflates their stats. Kinda like the Pats D this year gave up very few points. No one would argue they were a great D or a team first D; its their offense that has carried them and always will.

wouldnt a FQ help the offense move the chains, score more points........and keep the defense off the field thereby preventing the other team from scoring as much?

Who are these guys you are talking about? Trent Dilfer ? cmon man he was signed as a backup Franchise QBs are hardly available. Brees was only available because he suffered a serious shoulder injury and the Chargers didnt want to take the risk. Cutler - yea he was available for two 1st round picks, a QB and a 3rd round pick. And he wasnt even an elite qb. So no, you really cant reasonably expect to get your franchise QB by waiting around for him to fail somewhere else. Since 1989 there have been only a few QBs to win the super bowl who didn't start with the team they won it with. Johnson, young (who was acquired as a backup to montana), and trent dilfer. so yea, its possible to win a super bowl with a castoff, but you wont sustain long term success. Take a look at the top QBs from the pst few years and tell me which one is a castoff thats had sustained success?

what site is that from?

So do NFL GMs. THis team is too awful to not take BPA at #3. We also have a decent amount of players who are FAs and could very well not be back. Too many holes, not enough picks. And lets stop with the .... well lets just trade down... crap. I cant recall a team ever trading out of a top 5 pick. Can someone show me an example of that? im serious, im not sure its happened.

Thats the same Brian Brohm who sucked with Green Bay too. Stick any bad QB back there and the Oline will look bad. Put Aaron rodgers back there and the Bills win more games with the same line. Its a strawman argument and not fair whatsoever. Brohm would suck with any O line. You cant pass up a franchise QB just bc youre worried the Oline might need a better RT. its absurd. The point is that GMs dont have the luxury of building a team like a step by step process like set forth on this board. At #3, they arent gonna pass on a QB if they think the next big one is there, nor are they gonna take a QB just to fill a need.

how many times has a top 5 pick been traded? has it ever happened? i cant seem to find it anywhere.

So all those QBs who are without a doubt better than fitz but took more sacks and had fewer rushing yards FAILEd to make their respective lines look better? Please, Fitz is a worse than average QB with a avg to below avg line who gave him better protection than ....for example Aaron Rodgers. Youre telling me that after watching Rodgers running for his life all game this past weekend that his Oline is so much better? Not really, but he's a hell of a lot better than our QB. QB makes alllll the difference, but whether that guy is at #3 i dont know.

Really? and why is that? Fitz was sacked less than any QB who made the playoffs. The Bills had more rushing yards than the packers, bears, saints, colts, and seahawks. So the bills line gave up less sacks, and produced more rushing yards than all these playoff teams but a rookie QB would be wasted? How?

BEsides, accuracy isnt quite the same thing as completion percentage. I know there is some connection, obviously, but Fitz can improve his % without really improving his accuracy by simply feeling the system better. When a player knows the system, on O or D you dont think, you feel and react. Fitz is not and has never been a accuracy thrower, he needs to wind up too much to put any mustard on a pass and it affects his accuracy. This whole debate is silly anyway, Chan has said it, if there's a franchise type QB they will take him but they like Fitz for now. I dont know how much clearer he can get..... Fitz isnt the answer.

WHAT? Bradford threw for 3500 yards, completed 60% of his passes and threw the same amount of INTs despite playing more games.......as a rookie!!! He also threw for 30 more 1st downs. I would take bradford over Fitz any day of the week. For some more perspective, Fitz had a worse QB rating than perennial pro bowlers jason campbell, shaun hill,and alex smith This might be the end all post for this discussion. There really is no better way to state the Bills QB situation as it is now, and moving forward. To anyone who reads the above post and says "yea but...." you will never get it, and god have mercy on your soul. EA, prepare to be flamed by nonsense.

Jauron thinking is taking a player who doesnt fit the scheme you are running. you dont pick a DT at 3 when you want to play the 3-4 and need a NT. They only played 4 man front bc they didnt have the players. They are transitioning to a 3-4 and that will be their primary defense. If Fairley doesnt fit that scheme you dont take him.