starrymessenger

Maybe the greatest vertical threat WR to ever play, but still not a "complete package WR" the way Rice was, even if we are talking just physical skills (and not attitude). I expect him to wind up with the Giants - and he can still play IMO.

Thanks, I guess. No, seriously thanks.

I say we offer two. How could they refuse.

Its not just make or break for Fitz but also for the Bills. If they sign him they will have to pay starter's money. Thats a lot. Six years maybe 45-55 big ones. For that to happen Fitz needs to prove that he is a franchise guy. That is a tall order for him (not saying it impossible, just that its unlikely). If he doesn't prove that, then the Bills are without a QB. Even if they get to draft a promising prospect at the position in 2012, he will be prematurely thrown into action. We have all seen what that can do to a young QB. Right now I don't feel good about this situation.

Not to mention the reward to him. Premier NFL NT vs just another fatboy who used to play football.

Frankly I am inclined to believe it. I don't think the Bill's are risk averse if they see a reasonable reward. Clearly Cam was in Buddy's gunsights and Cam at or near the top of the first is an extremely risky pick. Chan and Ponder go back a long ways, Chan having attempted to recruit him for GT and made no secret of his liking him (and with justification in my opinion). Ponder played in a pro type offence at FS and he's another guy who had a strong Senior Bowl week and game.

Hard to say for sure of course, so maybe not. But he was projected by many as a solid fourth round pick who could make it into the third. Some commentary has suggested that top of the 3rd was a bit of a reach but I acknowledge Buddy's view that if you really like a guy you just go ahead and draft him. Just saying what I would have done. Its clear that Buddy (and lots of other GM's)really did not like Mallett at all and was simply not going to draft him period. I disagree with the Bill's on this one (I'm allowed) and think Belichick saw great value even though he already has a HOF QB and a promising backup in Hoyer and even though he badly needs a pash rush. Time will tell if we did the right thing in passing on Mallett.

Entirely agree, esp with Mallett being in the running for TB's job some years down the road. I like Sheppard but he most likely would have been there at the top of the 4th. Mallett should have been our pick in the 3rd. Bill's not dumb.

Stuff happens I guess. When Jamarcus took it, he cleaned out a foodcourt.

Well that strategy worked out just fine for Schula and the Fish.

Can't believe the misconceptions surrounding this kid. He's a drug addict, except that he has been tested for drugs by the NCAA many times and the University of Arkansas has confirmed that he never tested positive for drugs. He's stupid, except he had a high grade point average and mastered Petrino's massive playbook. He's unathletic, well yes, but no more or less than any pocket passer, you know, Peyton, Troy Aikman - and BTW though not fast he throws well on the run: 5:0 TD to Int ratio in 2010. He has no leadership skills, except that he was twice voted captain by his teammates (a 100% player decision at Ark). Amazing what a hatchett job people with an agenda have laid on this kid. Truly pathetic. Incidentally, he's one of the best pure pocket passers on the planet, right now. If he's there at #34 I think he's a Bill whether people like it or not.

Sam Bradford also took snaps under centre in college. Don't know about Freeman.

Well if he has a chronic drug use problem the FOs and pro talent evaluators will get to the bottom of it. If its not true, then it just goes to show how scuzzy the national football media is.

Ok thanks. Sounds like a difference in degree, not so much in kind.

Don't understand "figuratively". A difference only in degree? Is football different than prizefighting? Is the answer to make player safety the main priority? Provide a more generous safety net and support system for former players?

The NFL is a creature of its fanbase, who ultimately finance it. So what does that make us when we file into the Ralph? The Roman blood mob in the colliseum?

John Mallett is good at moving around and in the pocket between the tackles to buy time. He also appears to have that mental time clock that permits good QBs to feel the pressure and buy time. He is also capable of throwing on the run, mechanically speaking I mean, although those opportunities are not likely to be many for him in the pros given his admitted limitations re mobility. But Peyton isn't all that mobile either. Mallett has very good football IQ. Petrino has a poor record of graduating QBs to the bigs, but Mallett is no Stefan Lafors, who can't even play in Canada, and no Brohm either. Although Louisville's offence was allegedly pro style (actually not, two thirds spread, one third power 1)it was a one read scheme when Brohm was there because thats all he was capable of. Mallett is the only QB prospect in this draft that was trusted with audibilizing at the LOS based on the coverages he saw. He also routinely went through 2,3,4 read progressions. He has made bad i.e. ill advised throws from time to time, but the thing to remember is that its not as a result of a lack of vision. He actually knows that the free safety is coming over to help in coverage, its just that he thinks he can beat the guy with arm strength. Well when your playing a highly ranked D like Ohio State with a particularly strong secondary you can get burned yourself. His pro coaches will presumably beat that out of him And Mallett was also victimized more than any other SEC QB by receiver drops. The other thing to bear in mind in my opinion, is not that he is the best passer in this draft. He is one of the best pure passers on the planet today, right now, and hes just a kid (flame away ladies and gentleman). Just as Newton may be in a class by himself athletically, there is no one in this draft that can reasonably be compared with Mallett as a passer. I don't think he will be a Bill unless Buddy trades back into the first to get him. IMO the pro talent evaluators will know better than the mock draft experts and he will be gone by the mid first. Having said that, if he is there at #34 I think Buddy jumps. I think he will see Philip Rivers, someone he knows and likes. Having Mallett drafted in the second and sit behind Fitz for a couple of years as we get better is ideal for the player. He wont have the pressure of being a mid round first, will likely have a chip on his shoulder and will benefit from the instruction of good coaches and a very, very smart starter. Don't see it happening though.

Disagree. I honestly think (hope) we have a credible FO now. Figure not even we can get it wrong this time.

Don't buy the "character" concerns surrounding Cam Newton. All of the top prospects get mud thrown at them by their detractors this time of year. I say this even if Cam actually stole a computor or knew or should have known it was stolen when he bought it. We're not talking Lawrence Philips here. I did some things as a kid I wouldn't be proud of today. He's not a one year wonder. I have no doubt that if he stayed in school he'd likely be even more dominant in 2011 than he was in 2010. My problem with Cam is the offence he played in at Auburn. If he had played the last three years in the O that Mallett did I think we'd all be a lot further ahead in terms of knowing what we need to know about him footballwise. Maybe he is the cutting edge of a new wave of pro QB (Galliford and others seem to think so) and Gailey has said that the college game may be starting to change the game at the pro level. Its possible and of course its happened before. The game was ready for a different direction at DE when Deacon Jones came into the league and he was the right guy to show the way. Maybe Cam will be the same. As for now though I don't think so. With all due respect for the differing opinion (I mean you Dr.) I don't think his game translates well to the pros. He's still a one read spread option QB. They have basically always come up short in the pro ranks. Manning and Brady are athletic enuf for my liking and it looks like their teams are bending over backwards to lock them in for the rest of their careers. Have they failed to notice the bold new wave? If Chan and Buddy pick him at #3 I will defer to their judgement and fully support Cam. I will however also hold my breath and cross my fingers. A possible alternative would be to pick a blue chip DT at #3 and if he is still there at 34, draft Mallett. His ceiling is pretty high too. Think Philip Rivers.

For those who say MD is not athletic, go back and look again at his pick six in the 2010 BCS National Championship game. Tyson was very much a surprise pick and generally considered a reach at #3. MD will not be a surprise at #3 when the Bills take him.

Agree. IMO I think we will wind up with Dareus or Fairley at #3. Prefer Dareus but would be very happy with Fairley.

Disagree Billsfan. Don't deny your stats but I have seen MDs sack totals variously reported for 2010 as 5 and 6. In any case, as you say, MD accumulated those numbers having missed two games. Also have to bear in mind that Bama uses a rotational system (just a philosophical thing, not a knock on their DL players) and so Dareus saw less of the field than Fairly. He will see more of it in the pros. I might have a slight preference for Fairley in a 4/3 but the Bills will apparently run a hybrid and MD is scheme flexible, unlike Fairley. MD will do much more to bolster our run D. Tell Colt McCoy he can't get after the QB. I like Fairley's aggression too, but unless he cleans up his act he will get into trouble in the pros. They are both blue chip, and I agree MD is the safer pick, but I also think he is the better pick for the Bills.

You're right. Maybe thats why Warren doesn't like him.

Ryan Mallet. Routinely lined up under centre and was trusted to audiblize at the LOS (BTW I would not pick kim #3 either). And I disagree with the notion that you can coach vision into a QB. There are plenty of first round QBs who are/were physically gifted and who were willing to learn but could not. The reason? - You don't learn this. It is inate, it is either there or it is not, and unfortunately it is 50% of the successful QB equation. If it was just a matter of coaching/learning don't you think a bright boy like Trent would have figured it out a long time ago? Joe Montana was not 1/10th the athlete Cam Newton is but he was a decent athlete with fabulous vision an an inate understanding of how live action on a football field is likely to develop.

If they believe we are interested in Cam, they will speak to Denver, who could also use more picks. Buddy is not that dumb.