OldTimer1960

I think that this is one of the most credible and professional services around. The main guy behind Sporting News War Room is Russ Lande who is a former NFL scout for the Browns and Rams. At least that gives them some credibility. You can tell from the very very detailed write-ups on each player that they spend considerable time watching tape and have knowledge of what they are looking at. I have been a satisfied customer of the War Room and of Lande's GM Jr draft guide for many years. GM Jr is incredible in its detail on hundreds of players. Where with other places you might get a paragraph or two about a top prospect, in GM Jr, you get an amazingly detailed analysis of player strengths and weaknesses. Now that the War Room is free, you should all check it out. I think that you will be very impressed. You might not always agree with their ratings (they stick their neck out and will rate someone significantly higher or lower than most others if that is what they believe they see in their analysis).

This notion that 2nd round pick (even first round picks), must have an "instant impact" is not realistic. Most rookies do not dominate and many show significant improvement in year 2 or 3. For example, Hall of Famer Bruce Smith had 6.5 sacks his rookie year - good, but not special. As a 2nd year player he recorded 15 sacks - more than 2x his rookie season. The draft is nowhere near the certain thing that many here want to make it out to be. There are lots of 1st round busts - even top 10 busts. There are also lots of rookies who do MUCH better in their 2nd year. Go check the players chosen in the second round the past 5 years. Not a lot of "instant impact" guys, but a good number of guys who developed into good players.

I am sorry, but I don't see the similarity between Miller and Maybin. Maybin wasn't slated to start the in college the year he came out (was behind a DE who was suspended for drug use). He hadn't played much as a red-shirt freshman. He was 225lbs in their bowl game and feasted on weak opponents and didn't have the same impact against top competition. Von Miller has produced at a high level for 2 years. He is 6'2+ 240+ (according to what I've read). He is reported to have an excellent motor and be a good kid. I don't see where he is considerably undersized and he has shown excellent pass rush potential. Is he worth the 3rd overall pick? I am not sure this early in the process, but his production says he is a top 10-15 player and he isn't grossly undersized like Maybin was. Further, from what I've read, Miller is a 4.5-4.6 40 guy. Maybin was never that fast (4.7 and ran closer to 4.8 after bulking up for the combine). I wouldn't write this guy off just yet.

I like what I have seen and read about Ponder, especially his intelligence, leadership and work ethic. I don't know if he might go in round 1 and I don't know that there still might be better prospects on D or at RT at the top of round 2, but based on what I know of him right now, I couldn't be disappointed with him in round 2.

Thank you. The Bills' are not "stocked" at WR. They have a good(not great) #1 WR in Evans. They have an OK 2nd WR in Stevie Johnson - he is not near what he is hyped to be. Roscoe Parrish might be an adequate 3rd WR in Gailey's system - he hasn't been for the previous 4 yrs. David Nelson was a pleasant surprise as an undrafted rookie and *might* get better. I don't see where that line-up is so set that a tremendous prospect couldn't help. On the other hand, WR is surely not as big of a need as DL and LB.

I don't think Spiller is dumb at all. I believe that he graduated in 4 years (not just stayed, but got a degree). That doesn't say dumb to me, especially with the time demands placed on NCAA Div 1 athletes. Hmmm, I'll bet that you never tried to pick up a blitz at the NFL level... Do you suppose that *maybe* the defense does a good job of disguising its blitzes? One or more players fake that they are blitzing drawing the back's attention then another guy comes from a different position... How about line stunts or multiple blitzers, knowing which guy to pick up? Then add in that he has to process all of that in 1-1.5 seconds and decide who to block and get there or whether to run his route... I am sure that it isn't as simple as you make it out to be. This is a common lament from coaches regarding rookie RBs.

Well, I disagree partially. I agree that you should be able to find ways to use talented players whether they "fit" your preferred scheme or not and that you shouldn't significantly reach for someone to fit your scheme over a much more talented player who might not be a perfect fit. On the other hand, that there are different positions on offense and defense is to some extent a "scheme". Nobody would advocate drafting all DBs or DLs right? Of course not, but that in and of itself indicates that there is some scheme in place. If your team is going to be predominantly a 3-4 defense, then a smaller DT is probably not going to make it for you where they might be fine in an attacking 1-gap 4-3 defense. Likewise, the big NT you draft for a 3-4 might not be a good fit in the 4-3. I think it is too simplistic to say "just draft great players regardless of scheme fit", but I do agree somewhat with the sentiment.

I don't put much stock in the report that the Saints said they'd have traded a 3rd round pick for Lynch. First, how do we (or the reporter) know that is true? Why would a Saints' "insider" now reveal such a thing? Would it have been a "conditional" 3rd and, if so, what were the conditions? Even if you believe that the Bills front office is totally incompetent (which I don't happen to believe), it is hard for me to imagine them deciding "Hey, let's trade Marshawn and we'll only offer him to Seattle - heck, we don't want to maximize the compensation that we might get" There is no tie that I know of to Seattle's front office - what possible motivation could the Bills' front office have had for not shopping him to all the teams? Sounds kinda suspicious to me, but I know lots of folks here want to believe stuff like this. Of course, I can't prove that this wasn't the case, it just makes no sense at all to me.

Jake Locker just accepted the invitation to play in the Sr Bowl (He'll play for the North). I know that Locker has had an awful Senior year and many have big questions about him (me too), but this is an opportunity for him to show that with some talent around him instead of his weak Washington teammates, maybe he can show he is a pro-prospect.

Most big-men need a couple of years of NFL strength training and technique improvement to become good starting players. It is actually pretty rare for DL to make a big impact as rookies. Those that do are the truly exceptional players and I'd venture to say probably rely on speed and quickness as their main weapon, whereas Troup and Carrington are built to be power players. Further, it is just totally unrealistic to think that every 2nd round draft choice is ready to come in and play at a high level as a rookie. You can wish and hope it, but check the last 10 drafts. It is more the exception than the rule where 2nd round picks show up and play like seasoned vets.

I would love to see them be able to trade down 5-10 spots for an extra 2nd rounder, but I don't see anyone wanting to trade up for any of the available QBs. Mallett, Newton and Gabbert are guys that will get picked in round 1, but the teams will have to convince themselve to take them rather than being excited to do so. Who among those 3 is worth a top 10 pick? Is there any difference among them even? Still would love the Bills to trade down, but I don't see the trade involving someone moving up for one of those QBs. Barring a trade, I would also like to see the Bills pass on QB in round 1 - again because none of the QBs strike me as can't miss prospects. I could be wrong of course, but that's how I see it.

Excellent post. I do believe that they are trying to build a winning team, especially Buddy Nix and Gailey. I know that Russ Brandon (the Marketing guy and VP) wields a lot of power, or has in the past, but I really believe that Gailey and Nix are going to take tough solid football players in the draft and augment that with some mid-level tough FAs to shore up the D. I don't like any of the first round QBs at #3 (at least from what I've read and seen them play), but I am confident that if Nix picks one early then it is because he thinks he is going to be a good pro QB, not to sell tickets. How many tickets do you think the selection of NT Torrell Troup and DE Alex Carrington sold in rounds 2 & 3? Not many, but they played reasonably well as rookies and given an offseason of NFL weight training will hopefully be better next year. I concede that you could look at the Spiller pick as splash, but as the previous poster pointed out, had they really wanted splash they could have taken Tebow or Clausen or Dez Bryant and made BIG headlines. Spiller didn't generate as much buzz as any of those 3 would have.

I think that Jeff Fisher in Tennessee was a pretty firm hand and that didn't work out so well for Young. I don't want Young brought in other than on a low contract try-out basis. The ONLY thing this team has going for it is teamwork and chemistry and Young could destroy that in a short time if he was brought in and handed anything. He might destroy it even if he has to compete for a spot.

I am in the camp that don't believe that Fitzpatrick is a top-level starting QB, but I also think that he can be pretty good. I acknowledge that he doesn't have the strongest arm and that some of his passes are flat awful, but there is more to playing QB in the NFL than arm strenght and pretty passes. He is very good at directing the offense, getting the OL blocking scheme set, checking out of bad plays, moving in the pocket and making some plays on the run. I don't know if he can continue to improve - I don't think he is that old, but he might have reached the limit of his physical skills - I don't know. On the flip-side, he played behind a weak to awful OL which he made look considerably better than it is with his movement skills, running and quick decision making. Just look how much worse the OL looked with Brohm at QB. He played with maybe the weakest (at least the least experienced) WR group in the league. Evans is a very good NFL WR who is consistently double covered, but for all of Stevie Johnson's success this year I don't think other teams feared him. With Parrish out and then Evans too, Fitzpatrick had only Johnson (7th round pick), David Nelson, Naaman Roosevelt, Donald Jones and Paul Hubbard (all undrafted) to throw to. He was also handicapped by having no decent TE receiving threat. Other QBs routinely have 2, 3 or 4 completions a game to a TE who also opens the field up for other receivers. The Bills don't have any such weapon. I agree that it would be great to draft a true "franchise" QB that could be at the level of Manning, Brady, Brees and Rivers, BUT I also know that just drafting one in the first round doesn't guarantee that the QB will develop to that level. There are as many or more misses as their are hits when drafting QBs high. I REALLY hope that if the Bills take a QB in round 1 this year that they know what they are doing. I am not an NFL scout, but I've watched a lot of football over 50 years and I've seen a lot of good college QBs fail in the NFL. I wasn't that impressed with what I saw of Ryan Mallett and while it is hard not to be impressed with Cam Newton's play at Auburn the fact is that he has done it only one year, has relied more on running than passing (which won't translate as successfully to the NFL) and hasn't had to learn to read a defense. Anyway, while it would be wonderful to be able to pick the next Manning or Brady this year, I could easily live with trying to improve the D and OL and watch Fitzpatrick again next year. If I were convinced that Mallett, Newton, Gabbert or someone else was the next top level NFL QB, I would certainly advocate using the #3 pick on them - BUT they HAVE to be damn sure...

I am no Fitzpatrick apologist, but I just don't see where the desire for a better QB means that there IS a better QB to take at #3. No question, Andrew Luck would be great to have, but he will surely be gone and I don't feel that this team can afford to trade away a ton of picks to move up for him. I really don't want to over-spend on a "consolation prize" QB at 3. The gap between Luck and the rest of the pretenders at QB is huge. Luck is smart, talented and a leader groomed by an NFL QB father and played in a pro-style offense. None of the other guys fits that profile at all. Newton's main weapon is his running ability which won't translate to success in the NFL - at least not at the Brady, Manning, Brees level that we are wanting. Newton has only 1 year of Div 1 experience and played in a run-based spread offense so his NFL learning curve is HUGE. Add in the questionable judgement off-field and I am not interested until round 2 where he won't be available. Mallet is big and has a really outstanding arm, but can he read a defense? Is he a leader? Is he smart enough? I don't know, but I'd rather not gamble that high of a pick on him. I don't know a lot about Blaine Gabbert yet, but I haven't read much that suggests that he'd be worth the 3rd overall pick. As for the argument of having Fitzpatrick "groom" one of these guys for a year or two - does that really ever pan out? How did that work out for the guy Jim Kelly, Dan Marino or John Elway "groomed"? I can't think of many (any?) QBs that benefitted significantly from "learning" under a mentor. I think that they either "have" or "don't" the ability to play at the NFL level. They have to be born leaders and be able to visually process information very quickly to make quick decisions. They have to be tough and dedicated and smart. Again, just because there are a bunch of touted QBs a 2 tiers below Luck doesn't make it a good idea to draft one of them when better prospects at other positions will be available. Just my opinion.

I think Locker would be a reach at the top of the 2nd. I know that his team was bad around him, but he failed to elevate them at all and he was flat out horrible in some games. In two games against Nebraska (a regular season and a bowl game) he was a combined *get this* 9-36 1TD and 2INTs That is just BAD. Now, also let's put to rest his "great athleticism". Not that very many running QBs excel in the NFL, but Locker wasn't a great runner either - at least he didn't put up great rushing totals (except for a 110 yard game against a poor USC team). Cam Newton doesn't excite me much at the 3rd pick. He had a decent completion percentage, but he did most of his damage running - and that rarely translates to success in the NFL. I know that Mike Vick has had a very good year and he is a "runner", but he miraculously learned to be a good passer this year. Before Vick, the last really good "running" QB that I can remember having success in the NFL was Steve Young. Look at Vince Young. I am not saying that Newton will necessarily lack the leadership skills that Young is missing (though we don't know), but Young was also a GREAT runner in college and NFL teams have really stifled that.

Word brother! Newton has done a great job in one year at Division 1. He played JuCo the previous year and before that couldn't beat out Tim Tebow at Fla. I know that Newton has shown a good arm and throws a pretty ball, but he hasn't done ANYTHING that an NFL QB needs to be proficient in. Now, I don't know that he can't do those things, BUT with the 3rd pick in the draft, I want a guy who has shown over multiple seasons that he can excell at the college level doing mostly what an NFL player has to do. I think Newton is too much of a gamble for the Bills.

You are correct, sir!

Yes, that's true, but the Bills don't get a chance to draft Sam Bradford and the only other QB worth a crap (if he comes out) is Andrew Luck and he'll be gone before the Bills pick. I have no interest in ANY of the other QBs in this draft in round 1. I don't want project QBs like Newton , Gabbert or Locker. Those guys are 2-3 years away from being decent NFL starters, if they ever make it.

All that I can say to this topic is that I'd rather watch Fitz and the current offense TRY to move the ball next year than watch that PATHETIC, POS, Pile of Cr*P defense give up huge chunks of yard to mediocre RBs every week. NOTHING could be more frustrating than watching backup RBs run for 150 yards against a horrible defense. That's just my bias, but it's the way I see it.

I haven't seen an arm like Mallet's since JP Losman (yes, he had a great arm).

While I agree that the Bills should take a top QB if one is available, I don't think that they have the margin of error to take Cam Newton in round 1. Yes, he is a tremendous athlete. No, I am not terribly worried about the fact that he or his father tried to make financial gains during his recruitment. What has me concerned with Newton is the following: 1. He has only played 1 year of Division 1 football. Is he a one-year wonder who would not have played as well next year when NCAA defenses devise better ways to handle him? With the one-year wonder bust of Aaron Maybin fresh in our minds, I'd just as soon stay clear of Newton in round 1. 2. He plays in a non-traditional spread offense and rarely took a snap under center. Does he have the foot-work and ability to read NFL defenses that will be needed to excell? I know that he does not have that today, and I am not sure that he can develop it. Too much of a gamble (IMHO) in round 1 for this team. 3. NCAA QBs who make their living primarily as runners don't often pan out in the NFL. I look at Newton and see Vince Young, if the team that drafts Newton is lucky. How much of a running threat is Young in the NFL? Not much of one. Teams take away his running ability through scheme and dare him to beat them passing which he hasn't yet shown he can do. (And Young has a GREAT RB playing with him). I'd much rather see them take someone who has produced for several seasons at a high level in college. I also would LOVE to see defensive help first. I can take watching a bad offense much more easily than I can watch a defense that can't stop the run at all. This defense is world-class bad and is painful to watch.

I am not a C.J. Spiller "hater", but I am concerned by his inability to earn playing time. His ball security has been poor and he has shown little as the receiving threat that he supposedly is. Does that mean he is a bust? No, but it is a concern. I like what I've read about his attitude and effort, so I think that there is hope and he certainly has physical tools, so I'll try to remain optimistic.

First, Ngata will be franchised by Baltimore if they have any sense at all. The ONLY hope the Bills have of getting Ngata is calling "the Doc" from Back To The Future and going back in time and taking Ngata instead of Whitner in that draft.

I think to do as suggested risks undoing a lot of good that Chan Gailey has done this year. This team is seriously lacking in talent, yet has been surprisingly competitive in most games. I believe that this is due to one big thing that Gailey has done: He has played veterans ahead of rookies until the rookies are better RIGHT NOW than the vets. This has kept the vets engaged knowing that they'll play as long as they are the best option and teaches the rookies that they must EARN their playing tim - a valuable lesson that they would have to learn sooner or later anyway. I think the above also does some other important things such as: 1. teaching that the expectation is to win NOW, not suffer through growing pains where possible. 2. shows the team who is in charge (Gailey). With regard to the young players mentioned: * I wonder how many fumbles Spiller would have if he had 20 carries. Only being partially sarcastic there, but he hasn't earned the touches and it would undermine what I described above. * I don't think Troup has played that poorly and he is getting a fair number of snaps. Playing more snaps this week won't help him as much as a full offseason of weight training and more coaching on the nuances of leverage and cheating in the NFL trenches. * I think Carrington has earned his playing time and also had it defaulted to him by injuries. * Wang was injured for a long time early this year and may still lack the conditioning from that time. At least, we should hope that is the case. It DOES typically take OL longer to "get it" than most other positions, so there is still hope. * Too bad David Nelson and Shawn Nelson are too injured to play. David surely earned more playing time and I don't know about Shawn. I was disappointed that he missed a lot of time this year to injury and suspension - he never really recovered from that (and his fumble late against (?). * Regarding Brohm, I don't think that you can consider sitting Fitzpatrick after that disasterous game unles you have ZERO thought of him being your starter next year. If there is any doubt at all that they will take a QB at #1, then Fitz HAS to start this game to try to rebuild some confidence (for him and his teammates). * Maybin and McCargo aren't even worth discussing other than hoping that the scouts who advocated drafting them are riding out of town on the same bus as them.