All_Pro_Bills

What you're saying seems like a reasonable expectation. The guys what? 22 years old. I don't know squat about his upbringing or background or his experiences at Miami but there are a lot of 22 year old guys out there making stupid decisions. Most of them figure it out at some point. If everybody that made a mistake didn't get a second chance at things we'd run out of people pretty quick. So I'm willing to cut this guy some slack until he becomes a problem here. Maybe this kid will pull it together given a change of scenery and adopting a different perspective on life that being in college just doesn't give you. He's at the pro level now where talent alone won't cut it without a high level of effort and motivation. And having to work for a living has a way of changing your outlook real fast. Here's what draft insider had to say about Henderson. In general the player assessments on that site are pretty good: Positive: Two-year starter at right tackle. Suspended three times at Miami for violating team rules. Suffered back issues in the past. Massive lineman who flashes the ability to dominate opponents. Strong, explosive at the point, and easily drives defenders off the line. Athletic, adjusts to oncoming defenders, and knocks them from their angle of attack on the blitz. Possesses big, powerful hands and jolts opponents with violent punch. Effective when he bends his knees. Quick into blocks and flashes the ability to slide out in pass protection. Negative: Lacks balance and struggles finishing blocks. Gets tall as the play proceeds. Indecisive and does not show great awareness. Has made a lot of questionable decisions off the field. Analysis: Henderson looks the part and occasionally plays to it but really has not maintained the high level of consistency scouts thought possible. Underachieving on the field while showing immaturity off it, Henderson possesses the size and skill to start at the next level if the light ever goes on.

I think the 60% figure is a result of taking what the defense gives you. One possible explanation is that defenses were afraid to get beat deep so they played well off the line. Another factor might be that tackling proficiency at the pro level is a lot higher than at the college level. And on and on. My problem with most of these 'experts' is they take one or two data points, put a lot of untested assumptions around it, and then draw some speculative conclusion.

I can only sit here in wonder and awe at how these experts uncover so many positives and negatives about various players choosen in the draft that these woefully clueless 32 GMs and their scouting staffs are so unaware of when making their evaluations. I look at it this way. If you put the 32 teams into the 4th spot as the board fell the way it did how many of them are going to pick Watkins, or maybe Mack? More than likely all 32 with those looking for some offensive help selecting Watkins and those looking for defensive help taking Mack. The Bills picked the consensus best offensive player available in the draft and after 1,000's of hours of scouting, discussions, and evaluations, I am supposed to believe his game won't translate? The quick screen will not work in the NFL game? Really? This guy must be watching game tape from the 1970's. Give me a break already..

Genetics give you mental and physical potential. But without hard work you will not achieve your full potential. Hard work is the necessary ingredient that turns that potential into positive results. EJ's work ethic appears to be solid. I'm rooting for the guy.

Agreed, but given the body of work from his injury shortened 2013 season we are left with an incomplete assessment of EJ's capacity to handle the task. Given management's work to date to put the talent around him it appears they believe he's up to the task. I hope they're right. My concern is the Bills employed 3 inexperienced QB's during the 2013 NFL season and while I'm no expert on QB's or statistical performance metrics my observations through watching all 16 games was there wasn't much seperation between the results of the 3 individuals. I would have expected EJ, a 1st round choice from a top college program, to 'start' from a higher floor of performance than Tuel and Lewis. And clearly out-perform them which he didn't. I'm not saying EJ won't work out and I want him to but I am unclear what evidence there is from the work to date that clearly tells us the light is going to come on. Until we see some results its just wishful thinking and the big risk going into the season.

Your thinking is more or less aligned where I was going with this question. Bit I think the jury is still out whether or not EJ can get it done. But we can go around and around but it all boils down to one thing. The real question is - Can our quarterback take advantage of opportunities that present themselves during the game that result from an upgrade of talent at other offensive positions. In this example, Watkins being double-teamed which should result in the defense exposing a weakness somewhere else that can be exploited if the QB recognizes and executes on it. The team thinks he can based on what they have and have not done. Like in NASCAR, I can give you the best and fastest car, the best pit crew, plenty of financial support, anything and everything you need. But if you can't drive the car we ain't winning any races. That's what the QB does, metaphorically speaking he drives the car.

The problem with that theory, the Bills will 'need' that 1st rounder to select a QB, is that there is no clear franchise Andrew Luck type QB waiting to come out next season. There are a few prospects but no clear cut sure things and certainly nobody rated high enough to use the 1st overall pick in the draft. So even if they kept next years 1st there is no guarantee that anybody better is going to be available via the draft in 2015. Dropping their grade because they 'gave up too much' is outside the process of evaluating the picks. First, you are looking at who they drafted not how they acquired those picks. That is more evaluating the GM's job than his picks. Second, how do these guys know how much is too much? Were they particpating in the trade discussions with the teams at the draft? Do they know the offers and counteroffers? Its just an uninformed opinion about the trade and an assumption that those future picks are going to derive some greater value than anyone can possibly evaluate until the picks are made next year. So if anything, they should lower the Bills grade next season, but this season, no because the trade did not cost anything of significance in 2014 while providing a greater benefit. The cost of that move will be borne next year because what the Bills did was borrow from the future for today. Here's the other thing. These draft evaluators are injected their expectation of the Bills 2014 seaon into their thinking. What they're saying is the Bills are going to have another losing season this year and end up with a top 10 pick in 2015 which they traded to Cleveland. EJ is not going to improve because we did not like that pick in 2013 and if we change our mind and say he's going to improve that would be an admission that our evalutation of that pick in 2013 was wrong and we will not admit our mistakes. And Watkins is not going to do anything to improve the Bills records. So they gave up 'too much'. But go to the exteme opposite and make the assumption the Bills make the playoffs and the pick is now a high 20's pick. How does the cost look now?

+1 Whaley is in good company when it comes to bucking the consensus opinion of the experts. In 1985 I recall that Bill Walsh's judgment was questioned for trading up in the 1st round and taking a little known receiver from a small college named Jerry RIce from Mississippi Valley State. Walsh had no 1st rounder in the 1986 draft as a result of the trade.

The elephant in the room is whether or not EJ shows a quantum leap in performance this coming season. If so, then the Watkins trade looks great and the draft picks surrendered in the process will be worth it. Personally, I just didn't see enough out of Manuel to have that kind of confidence. But what do I know? I'm not a professional coach or general manager, or scout or anything. Just a fan of the team. All I can bank on is that the evaluation done by the staff is correct and that they are right. In September we'll get to see. As for judging character flaws I think a team has got to be flexible. A guy gets suspended for smoking pot a few times is certainly a red flag, and getting nailed at the combine shows a potential lack of intelligence and understanding. But it all boils down to a game of risk vs. reward and your personal and organizational toleranace for either. Most teams will only put up with nonsense if a player is productive and if a player can be guided by the right environment he can become productive and stay out of trouble. Look at Lynch for example. The Bills decided (under their we only want character guys on the team philosophy at the time) they were not willing to tolerate his 'character flaws' and off the field actions so they traded him to Seattle which was willing to ignore and deal with the potential situation. Different risk vs. reward judgment. I didn't have a problem with that at the time. I believe he has an outstanding DUI case but regardless of that issue the team went on to win the SuperBowl with Lynch being a key part of the offense. The guy has some problems and I expect at some point it will not end well with the Seahawks but on the other hand, I don't expect to see an asterisk next to the 2013-2014 champions name in the history books saying "team had RB with character issues".

He gave the Bills a C- based on what we paid for him. As I pointed out earlier on this thread there's flaw in Kiper's logic. You are grading the picks, not the teams strategy or approach to making them. So if the Bills stayed at #9 and picked Beckham with all other picks and trades being made would he would have rated the Bills higher? I suspect he would be saying the Bills reached at #9 for Beckham and still gave them a C-. I was against the idea of moving up for Watkins before the draft (I admit it) because I did not want to potentially give up 2nd and/or 3rd picks in this deep draft. But the fact is the Bills gave up NOTHING this year to move up 5 spots for Watkins. They gave up a 1 and a 4 next year. So if Kiper holds true to form he'll diss the Bills again next year for not having a 1st round pick when using his logic that fact should be ignored because he already discounted their 2014 grade for the loss of those future picks. The guys thinking is flawed. If anybody should be upset here it should be the Browns fans. Their team traded out of the 4 spot back to 9 and got nothing in return this year. Wait until next year is the message from the team's management. They could have had Watkins and Manziel. What a buzz that would have created and the potential combination for years to come! For now they have to bank on the hope the Bills flounder this season and return them a top 10 pick and not one in the mid to high 20's range.

This was the OT I wanted in the 2nd and when they picked him I was more than happy. And Whaley traded back in the round, still got the guy he wanted and picked up another 5th in the process. But he gets a C-. Okay. Kouandjio, just by seeing his demeanor is a guy that is going to play with a mean and nasty attitude. And the dude looked pissed he dropped so far and when interviewed said something like 'I will make every team that passed on me pay'. This guy is going to be one bad $$s M F tackle. If he can overcome some inconsistency, and the other two guys can correct their shortcomings we should be in good shape on the o-line. I suspect the Bills staff thinks they can coach these guys up, along with some attitude and training changes, and that playing for pay will straighten out any problems they've had in the past. Kiper and McShay can play pocket pool with each other all they want and make themselves feel good by thinking they know better than professional general managers about how to evaluate football players and how their college experience translates to the NFL. And do all that knowing they have the luxury of never having to back up their picks and grades with real-life on the field performance and competition.

I also saw Kiper say the Bills COULD have stayed at 9 and picked Beckham instead of Watkins. But in doing this I think Mel strayed from the task of evaluating the picks and into the world of evaluating the teams strategy. Well who is the better prospect? And after all, the move surrendered zero 2014 picks but rather next year. So if you want to give the Bills a bad draft grade for the Watkins trade of picks then do it next year, not in 2014. And he stated that Kouandjio had injury questions with his knee. Well, the Bills staff along with Dr. Andrews checked out his knee and gave him the okay. Who am I going to believe concerning orthopedic problems like the knee? Draft guru Mel Kiper or world class doctor James Andrews? Overall, I thought it was a pretty could draft that addressed areas of need specifically the offensive line. If these big roadgraders can do the job then if anything it will make me happy to see 3 and 1 turn back to a running situation where the line pushes the defense back a couple yards rather than throwing an incomplete slant pattern and punting.

Definitely would like to see a ROT pick and Joel would be good, or Cyrus Kouandjio - Alabama, if his knee checked out okay, or Morgan Moses - Viriginia, or possibly Antonio Richardson - Tennessee. With the potential to field 5 WRs - Watkins, SJ, Woods, Goodwin, and Mike WIlliams, along with a backfield of FJ and CJ supporting EJ distributing the ball (hey - lots of J's we have here!) along with some serious ROT upgrade in the O-line and that could really jack up the expectations to put up some serious points on the board this season.

This made me laugh. Its exactly what I said to my wife this morning before even reading this thread as she told to stop rambling on about the worldwide conspiracy works against the Bills. Starting tonight with round 1, if the Bills pick a guy the commentators don't agree with they are 'reaching'. But if a team like the Patriots does it the panel of experts will state that its obvious NE is so much more astute than everyone else and they must know something everyone else doesn't.

I saw Mayock's mock last night and my first thought was thank the Lord the draft starts tonight and all the analysis and speculation will be over. Of course we'll get two months of expert anaylsis, grading, and breakdown of each teams selections in the league where the season never ends. I just can't get past the thought that taking the 4th ranked player at OT is the best option for the Bills at 9. Sure they need to upgrade the ROT spot but these high OT picks are typically made by teams looking for the LOT spot, not ROT. There are a few players that should be available in the 2nd round with grades and tools to fill that ROT spot. Why spend the 9 pick on a LOT prospect only to slide him over to ROT? No doubt it will make your line better but is it the best use of that first round pick. Why not Ebron or Mosley? And I'll throw it out there for the sake of discussion. Not that I advocate this but what if the Bills shocked everyone and selected Bortles at 9? I could make an argument for it. For one, I'm not sold on the idea that EJ ends our search for the franchise QB. He missed time in three stretches of time last season with injuries and that's a red flag. And while I've never met him in person so I have no firsthand knowledge here, from watching the games and assessing his performance I just don't feel he's got the 'IT' that makes a franchise QB. And Bortles looks to bring a better skill set and decision making to the table here. So you want to make a splash? Here it is, without trading up. Now take that ROT in round two and create some competition to drive both guys to become better at the QB spot and I don't have to bank on EJ to develop or go to plan B next year.

This team was 6-10 last season. I just don't believe its 1 superstar player away, a WR at that, from turning that to 10-6 and challenging the Patriots for the AFC East. If Bills management believes that there's a serious disconnect from reality. Also, we need to factor in the moves the other 3 teams have made. Just like the Bills, they've added some players via free agency so from that perspective I suspect they all feel they've improved their rosters. So the target is always moving. Lets say for the sake of discussion the Bills move up and take Watkins, give up some choices, and for the 2 games they play New England Revis covers Watkins and takes him out of the gameplan. Now what? What's your new superstar WR doing for your offense? And no upgrade at ROT or TE because you've surrendered those picks to move up. I just think there are so many examples where a team gave away lots of picks and assets to move up and hindsight shows it to be the team trading down that benefited most. Sure there might be situations where moving up and giving up a lot of assets worked and I'm sure somebody can think of a couple. Some poor moves I can think of: Atlanta traded up to take Julio Jones. Sure he's a dynamic receiver but it didn't get them to the SuperBowl DItka bet the farm on Ricky WIlliams with the Saints. That move didn't do much for the Saints and got Mike fired. Minnesota trades picks and players to Dallas for Herchel Walker. Worked out great for the Cowboys but not so much for the Vikings. Washington moves up to pick RG3. Cost the Redskins the 2nd overall pick this year along with a few other picks and they are now a team with a new coach with lots of questions about the 'franchise' guy they moved up to get.

I like Watkins too and I see the value of adding a potential 'star' player but I don't share the level of optimism with the idea of trading up held by a lot of proponents of the idea. I pray they don't move up and either stay where they are or trade down a couple spots and pick up a few more picks. I think its a severe miscalculation to believe adding Watkins to the Bills offense (which is probably a 100% sure thing to be a big upgrade) at the cost of possibly surrendering a 2nd and 3rd rounder (depending on how far up you need to move) is going to put the Bills over the top and in a position to challenge New England for the division title. And in my view that's got to be the goal, to knock the Pats out of the top spot in the division. Adding one WR at the expense of not addressing other needs with 2/3 round picks will more or less guarantee a 3rd or 4th place finish. This team needs to hit on finding starters with their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd picks or if possible trading back and getting another 2nd or 3rd in the process. Trading up to get that one guy is a mistake a lot of teams make every year. Believing they are one player away from becoming very competitive when in reality they are many players short. The only position I would even contemplate doing this for would be to get a franchise QB and I don't see the Bills moving up to get a QB here.

Absolutely. You look at championship teams and with few exceptions they have depth and in most cases veteran depth. Guys get hurt, you need somebody to step in. You move a guy like SJ and one or two of your receivers goes down for a couple weeks and you're in big trouble, maybe the entire season goes down in flames because you've got some rookie street free agent starting because you got rid of a guy like SJ? For the Bills, I would prefer Evans or Ebron in the 1st and an OT like Moses or Kouandjio in the 2nd if either is there. I think most if not all of these stories and tweets about the 'Bills love' this guy or that guy or they're looking to trade up are smokescreens and misinformation. Teams are gaming the draft board and potential picks with each other in order to create some uncertainty. Maybe somebody jumps up in front up you and picks a player they think you like and now the guy you actually want falls in your lap because a couple teams made moves as a result of the bogus storyline you put out?

In the case of Detroit having no interest in a QB, for the Bills to have the necessary leverage at 9 (assuming another team could deal with Detroit and give up slightly less) there would need to be at least 2 suitors for the #9 pick. But I agree with previous comments that Manziel should be gone by the time the Bills are picking but just how many QBs go before our pick could range from 1 to maybe 4 if things get crazy.

Manziel carries a lot of risk because its not clear his game will translate to the NFL level. I suspect somebody will 'reach' for him at some point in the first round but I pray its not the Bills. I think that would be a wasted pick. I'd prefer to see Evans or Ebron (I don't think Mathews is going to be the at 9) in the 1st, an OT Moses or Kouandjio in the 2nd, and if your thinking of a QB prospect Mettenberger in the 3rd would be interesting if he's there.

Initially I wasn't sold on the idea of picking a TE at #9 but I've warmed up to Ebron after doing some thinking on the impact of guys like Gronkowski, Graham, and Davis. I can't see trading up when the 'grade' between picks is so small and the draft is pretty deep. More importantly is the goal, not to accumulate talent but to take the division title away from New England. So do you think the moves in free agency and adding Watkins, while surrendering some other picks that can be used to address other needs is enough to knock NE off the mountain in the AFC East? I don't think so because you need to set and achieve goals to win and to me the goals should be these below: Goal #1 - Improve the run defense. Because NE has not beaten the Bills recently as a result of Brady's outstanding play but rather through running the ball with outstanding results. Stopping their stretch play and draws. Forcing more 3rd and longs needs to happen. They added Spikes and Rivers. Do they need to do more via the draft? Goal #2 - Get the defense off the field on 3rd down. For all the sacks this defense gave up two many big plays of 20+ yards on the ground and through the air. Added the 2 LBs and Graham but lost Byrd. Do they need to do more via the draft? Goal #3 - Get more out of the QB position. Manuel showed some flashes of great play but was inconsistent and bad at times missing time with injuries. Draft isn't going to help here unless we look at a project for the long term and back up for now. Goal #4 - Protect the QB and increase running backs yards BEFORE contact rushing. Statistically the BIlls ranked high in the rushing attack but this was helped by a high number of carries and the running backs themselves gaining a lot of yardage after contact. You could probably count on one hand how many times FJ or CJ didn't get hit in the backfield on running plays. The QB played the part of a tackling dummy for most of the season. Its hard to believe any other team had their QBs hit more. They added Chris Williams to the O-line. Is that enough? Here a definite no. You'd think they'd be targeting an OT in round 2 if they go Ebron in round 1. But if you trade up that might mean no number 2 or maybe number 3 pick. Goal #5 - Add some offensive weapons. Here you might want to consider trading up for Watkins. But looking at the whole team from a perspective of 22 starters would his contribution be so much greater than that gained from Ebron and keeping those additional picks to address other areas? Moving up doesn't make sense to me.

If you think adding an 'impact' player on either side of the ball is going to put your team over the top to become a contender for the championship then you should definitely considering moving up to take him. Giving up some assets in the current or future draft seems like a reasonable trade off for a championship shot. But I don't see the Bills as being that one guy away. They have fewer holes than in past years but still have several needs. I think somebody said it earlier if you're trying to land a QB then it might make sense because they are so hard to find and acquire. Also, while I don't have any data to back up my view I suspect that you won't find most of the consistent winning franchises trading up too often but more times trading back to get more picks and more chances to find impact guys to fill out the roster and improve several areas in one draft rahter than just adding one guy.

Assuming the Cowboys have any real interest in Manziel I think a better questions is if Manziel is on the board at #9 would you trade out of the 9th spot with Dallas for their 1st at 16 and maybe a 2 and a 4 picks this year? As for Romo I would pass on that. We've already had our share of late game meltdowns and we don't need to add any more to the list.

The Bills are in a position to take a BPA approach with their pick at #9 and I expect they've 'gamed' the draft process and developed multiple scenarios based on many posisble ways it might play out. Just who's available at the 9 spot is going to be dependent on how many QB's get taken in the first 8 picks. 2, or 3, a stretch to think 4 but anything seems possible this year. So we will get immediate starter and impact player regardless of the position but I don't see Martin as the selection in any scenario. Trading back is always a possibility but you need the board to fall in the right way for someone to want to jump up along with having your contingencies in place if that happens. Finally, the draft is next week! Moving it back 3 weeks does nothing except make it unnecessarily later in the year and takes 3 weeks away from teams in offseason prep with rookies.

From a legal standpoint any agreement or contract can be amended or modified with the consent of all the parties involved. So if moving to a new facility either in Buffalo or the Falls presented itself earlier the current agreement could be changed to allow the move. That aside, I think the legal hurdles this agreement presents would be enough to discourage any party intent on moving the team from bidding. So from us Bills fans I say, goodbye LA, goodbye Toronto.