OldTimer1960

I know that I am not a big optimist, but to get upset that the 3rd string QB of the Chargers may sign with another team and the Bills will "miss out" is way past me. Why would anyone think that Whitehurst is any better than Ed FitzBrohm?

Why do you say that? Is it just because it doesn't line up with other mock drafts that you've seen? How do you know which one is "right" or if ANY of them are close? I applaud them for going with their opinions on the players and team needs instead of just going with the popular "flow" from other prognosticators. Realistically, most of the mock drafts will be wrong A LOT, even in round 1.

He may get stronger, but I doubt that his arms will get any longer. Again, that doesn't mean that he can't be a good NFL LT, it just means that he will have to find a way to overcome not having ideal arm length.

I am a long-time draft fanatic and I find SportingNews' WarRoom to be one of the most credible scouting services around (I also like Pro Football Weekly's Nolan Nawrocki). WarRoom is run by Russ Lande who actually worked in the NFL as a scout for the Rams (and I think the Browns, too). Now, I know that there are good and bad scouts in the NFL, but Lande at least knows how to study tape, knows what NFL types are looking for in players and likely has some contacts in the league also. He also isn't afraid to express a bold opinion. For instance, he isn't down on board-favorite Rolando McClain, but he does go against the "common opinion" in thinking that he isn't a high number 1 pick. FWIW, Lande was not that high on Aaron Maybin last year when many others were touting him as the best pass rusher in the draft. To be fair, we can't write Maybin off after one year that would have been his Junior season in college, but so far Lande looks to have been spot-on. Another fwiw, Lande publishes his own draft guide (GMJr) in addition to working for SportingNews. Lande's guide is BY FAR the most detailed of any that I've seen over the past 25 years of following the draft. For $20 it is really worth-while if you are into the draft.

I think that they are doing their due-dilligence on all the players that they could consider at 9. He will not be around in the 2nd unless there is some medical issue/injury or drug issue that hasn't yet come out. I disagree that RB is "not a need" for the Bills. Yes, Fred Jackson had a special season, but he is about 30, when many RBs fall off a cliff and the Bills may also be trying to move Marshawn Lynch. I do agree that there are bigger needs for this team than RB, but let's say that the only LT candidate available at 9 is Anthony Davis (concerns about work ethic), QB Bradford is gone and they either don't like Clausen or he is gone and both Suh and McCoy are gone. I'd say they should be prepared to look at other positions including RB and LB. In this scenario, Spiller could be the best player available or maybe LB Sergio Kindle or a board-favorite like Rolando McClain. I'd be disappointed if they WEREN'T looking at all the top players coming out, regardless of position.

The knocks on Brennan coming out of college were the following: * small stature * suspiciously quick weight gain red-flag (from 185-207 between the Sr Bowl and combine) * marginal arm strength * does not throw a tight spiral * did not have to read defenses much in college due to the offense they ran Now, all that doesn't mean that he couldn't be a good NFL QB, but reasons like the above are why he was still around late in the draft.

I agree that Bulaga seems to be the "safer" pick. However, there are those that don't think Bulaga should be picked that high. The knocks on Bulaga from those with that point of view include: * doesn't have a powerful lower body to drive defenders off the line * has marginal arm length (this supposedly can let a defender with longer arms have an advantage) * is built more like a G than a LT However, those knocks seem less scary to me than Davis' reported lack of work ethic and maturity.

I wouldn't want to give up the Bills 2nd this year for an old D. McNabb. I think he is 34 and likely has only 1-2 years left in a good, but not great, career. If the Bills had the other pieces in place (OL, D), then maybe it would make sense to throw a 2nd round pick to Philly for a year or two of good QB play, but that is clearly not the case for this Bills team.

I am not known to be one of the more optimistic guys on this board, but "a bunch of solid role players" IS a foundation. I agree that finding a QB and OTs are very very important (and difficult), but this team is not completely devoid of talent. I believe that the lack of FA signings is more a case of there not being much available and a (refreshing) unwillingness to over-pay for mediocre players (like Langston Walker and Derrick Dockery). There were maybe a few outstanding players available in FA (Julius Peppers), but the Bills really could not compete $-wise for the top end guys - especially this year with supply far far short of demand (price goes up and up). Beyond that, there might be some decent starters/good backups available as unrestricted FAs. Not rushing to over-pay those guys is reasonable, especially considering that none of them are going to turn this team around immediately. Heck, I might argue that if the Bills signed any 5 of the remaining unrestricted FAs today, that might not translate into two more wins - that is how weak the UFA market is. I do expect that the Bills will pick up a few depth guys during FA and that is fine. I don't think that there are any difference-makers left. The team will need to build through the draft.

If Jamal Williams is health and has much left, then SD would very likely not have released him. Unless the Chargers are in trouble financially (I don't think they are), you have to consider that Williams may be a shell of his former self. He may still be better than the alternatives the Bills have, but you can't justify paying him the amount that he used to make when he was dominant if he no longer is. For all we know, the Bills may have contacted his agent and found out that he is looking for $ that is too high compared to what the Bills believe he has left. Just because a guy used to be an outstanding player doesn't mean that he still is. Injuries and age take their toll in the NFL.

Problem is, moving from 9 to 2 almost certainly would cost their 2nd and possibly 3rd this year and maybe next year's first also. If so, I think that is too steep for either Bradford or Clausen.

After Bradford and Clausen, the talent level DOES drop off precipitously at QB.

I am not sold on any of the QBs in this year's draft and, even if I were, I'd rather shore up the OL as NOBODY is going to be successful without decent OTs. I foresee disaster if the Bills pick Bradford or Clausen (or any other rookie) and throw him in behind Demtrius Bell and Jamon Meredith at OTs. Whomever is back there will get killed.

Not really. He is at best a long-shot to ever become a decent starting QB in the NFL. I think that you can get better odds on a future starter/contributor at another position in round 3. Just my opinion, but I'd be looking at the other positions and pick the guy that I thought would have the best chance of contributing. I don't think that is Tebow or Snead. When you are talking QB after early in round 1, then it means that most of the 32 NFL teams have significant reservations about the guy, because if not the guy would have been snatched up early due to the demand for and importance of good QBs. Now, I am clearly not saying that there are never QBs that are drafted later than round 1 that find success. However, I am saying that if a QB makes it past round 1, then most/all the NFL teams have concerns about the guy.

While the Bills may be way under the cap, the reality is that they are one of the low-revenue teams and they have a budget that they can/are willing to spend. Letting some older higher-paid players go frees up money that they can spend elsewhere. Just because the Bills are allowed to spend up to the cap, doesn't mean that they have the money to actually be able to afford that much. That being said, the FA crop is very weak this year (IMHO) due to many many players being restricted who would have been unrestricted had there been a collective bargaining agreement reached. I do not expect the Bills to be able to compete for the very few high-end FAs. Given what is available as unrestricted FAs, I wouldn't count on the Bills being able to find much besides hopefully serviceable players - no stars in FA this year. While I am at it, I thought that Ryan Denney was a pretty good backup DE. He certainly didn't embarrass himself when he was on the field. However, he is 33 and this is probably the end of the line for him.

Wasn't Larsen somewhere around a 5th round pick? It isn't unexpected for 5th rounders to have undistinguished careers. Larsen was big and strong, but not athletic enough to use the strength he had. He got out-leveraged by guys who weren't as strong because he wasn't quick or flexible enough to be in good position. Still, hard to knock Phillips for having picked a guy late in the draft who didn't pan out.

As weak as the Bills' current group of QBs is, Whitehurst is even worse - or at least more unproven. I wouldn't consider giving up much of anything beyond maybe a 5th round pick for a 4 year 3rd string QB who has never thrown and NFL pass. He is NOT the answer.

You argue that there will be "make-a-difference" WRs into the 5th round? This must be an exceptional year for WRs then, because if that were true every year, then no team would spend high picks on WRs and there would be such an abundance of WRs in the league that no team would be without. While I don't disagree that OT, QB (and NT) are more important positions to fill for the Bills this year, I do disagree that they can count on finding a good contributing WR in the 3rd round, much less 5th round. Note that I didn't say it couldn't be done, just that it is unlikely - no more or less likely (IMHO) than finding a decent contributing OT, QB or NT in those later rounds.

I think the switch to a 3-4 is an ugly scenario for a team with this many needs. Realistically, they need to find a starter AND a backup NT this offseason along with at least another viable starting LB (and 2 of those if Schobel leaves/retires). I would have rather seen them stick with the 4-3 this year and work on fixing the OL and get another LB for the 4-3. I guess, either way, they have more holes to fill than they can be expected to plug in one offseason, so maybe it is OK to just bite the bullet and change schemes. Just seems to me that a NT is hard to come by and is extremely important to the 3-4

There is no conceivable scenario (at least to me) that would justify the Bills giving up at least their 2nd and probably 3rd picks this year to move up and take ANY player in this draft. Go back a couple of years and change Suh's name for Glenn Dorsey and you'll get an idea. Dorsey was touted as a dominant DT and he has done nothing for a bad KC team in 2 years. None of these guys are sure things and the Bills have so many holes that they can't afford to give up picks.

Motivation most often must come from inside a person. External motivation won't help much if the kid is lazy and is handed millions (or even hundreds of thousands) of dollars. I say STAY away from fat, unmotivated underachievers with high picks. Now, if he were around in, say, the 4th, then the risk/reward ratio might be about right. I have seen at least some places who project Cody as a late pick due to the weight issue.

The answer to this question is never black & white. There are always gray areas. Of course, you never want to take a player just because he plays a position of need unless he is truly better than what you already have. No team, especially the Bills, has only 1 glaring need, so this is a matter of gradations. Perhaps it is the best player at one of your positions of need. For example, the Bills need OTs, NT, LBs, WRs, QB and some other lesser needs. You can prioritize those needs based on how important the position is and how bad your current players are at each position. However, let's say the Bills think that NT is the #1 need given their move to 3-4. That wouldn't justify passing over a higher rated OT, LB or QB to fill a need with a questionable prospect. Overall, I favor best player available, but it is with caveats. All needs being equal, I'd say an equivalent player at QB, LT, NT, or LB would be more important than one at S, RB, WR, TE or C/G. However, if the player at the "less important or less needed" position is clearly superior to any QB, LT, NT or LB, then I think that there is an argument to be made for the lesser position - to a point. I guess I didn't answer definitively, but I think that is because there is no real definitive answer.

The Bills will never get enough value for Evans to offset his loss (ie, the trade would be lopsided against the Bills). I say this assuming that Evans might get the Bills a 2nd round pick in return. I don't think any team would pony up a #1 pick for him. If someone does, then *maybe* consider it, but remember a #1 pick is not a sure-thing. In this case a bird (Evans) in the hand is worth more than the 2 in the bush.

I am with you on not addressing QB in the draft this year. I wouldn't spend a 3rd on one of the weak left-overs at QB. What's the point in that? They don't need another guy that can hopefully develop into a long-term backup. They have a stable of those guys already in Fitz, Edwards and probably Brohm. A 3rd in this year's draft should net you a pretty good player that has the potential to be a long-term starter at some position, provided that you don't reach for a weak prospect to fill a need. I'd anticipate that there will be much better LB, WR, RB and maybe DL prospects available at that point than any of the QBs will be. My only nit with your post is that you included Derek Anderson in the list of potential veteran stop-gaps. Man, he might be worse than Edwards and Fitzpatrick. Do you remember the Browns-Bills game? Anderson was AWFUL in that game.

I like Levitre at G. I would not like to see them move him to LT as he is, at best, a compromise at that spot. Putting Levitre at LT would take Levitre out of his best position and put him where he will be a marginal player due to lack of height and elite athleticism.