sllib olaffub

I disagree with many people here who always refer to our roster as "in need of talent at every position, because we don't have any real, quality, talent" or, "that none of our guys are good enough to start on -". I can see why they think that way - trying to be realistic. However, I look at our roster and think, with the right group of playmakers - say, four or five exceptional talents - then the rest of the guys around those playmakers begin looking better; and, that's not to mention some of the many young players on this team, many of whom might blossom into real stars in a year or two. So, I'm not so down on this squad to think it'll take us starting from scratch everywhere to get good. I think our recieving corps - especially with Easley coming back healthy - could be very good next year. I think our RB's also could be excellent. I think if you add the right player to either line they become pretty good, potentially. We need total upgrades, across the board, at TE and ILB. Our secondary will be thinned after F.A., but it still could look fine with a better front seven. This is just in response to those who say, "we need to improve everywhere, so it doesn't much matter who we draft, as long as they are stars". I agree, you can't get worse by adding a star, but, you can get much better, much quicker, if you add the right talent to the right places.

There should be two NT's in the draft we can go after in rounds 2-4, that I know of, maybe up to 4, depending on their size, that could be drafted between rounds 2-4 and be a starter for us. Probably they'd all need to rotate for a year. In F.A., Soliai is the only NT I'm aware of becoming available that I really like. I think we'll add that type of player, so I think the Bills should do their best to sign him if F.A. happens before the draft. If it doesn't, and we don't draft a NT, then signing him would be that much harder, since he'd have more leverage. Imagine if we drafted someone like Dareus in round one, and picked up Soliai in F.A. - we'd have K. Williams, Soliai, and Dareus lining up wreaking havoc on opposing RB's and QB's. That line would be hard to run on, and it'd still manage pressure. Mixing in D. Edwards, Carrington, and Troupe would give us one of the best D-lines in the game. Or, I'd like to see us grab Quinn, then Phil Taylor (if F.A. is after the draft) - and that would give us Williams, Taylor, Carrington/Edwards - I think Carrington will merit full time playing this year, so I'd be happy with that, too. It's hard for me not to spout frothy excitement over the upcoming draft - I really have a feeling we'll be able to grab three or four starters to our team this year - and I think we're going to have a lot more playmakers on Defense this year, enough to compliment our offense and give our team a chance, down the line, at making the playoffs.

I appreciate all the studying, film watching, internet browsing that people do to get to these conclusions about talent, but a few things always come right to mind when I read posts like this. One - the Bills very often tend to pick players no one had considered, so their pick might be way out of left field, and we can only hope it's a good one, especially early. Two - Some years it's easy to tell a great QB in the draft: Rivers, Bradford, Stafford are examples, but, last year's draft is an example of times when there are a number of QB's that are considered the top of the class, but there is a lot of disagreement as to how NFL capable they are. This year's draft reminds me of last year's, regarding QB's, only I think this year's QB class is much deeper. I beleive there will end up being 4 or 5 quality NFL QB's that come out of this draft - but, there are just as many that will probably never be that good, and the trouble this year is that it could end up being any of them. They all seem to have potential to be great or to bust, depending on where they end up and a lot of other factors. So, I think we will draft a QB this year, I just don't think it will be with our 1st pick. I think the Bills will have three or so QB's they'd like to get if they are available at a certain round. For instance - I think they'd take Locker if he were still there in the second, but, if he's gone I think they go NT or ILB with their 2nd, and then with their first 3rd they grab Ponder or Kaepernick if either is available, and if not, then they go something else and see if maybe Dalton is available with their second 3rd - that kind of thinking.

I have said before that it amazes me that until recently coaches weren't getting paid much at all compared to players - that a team would go out and spend tens of millions of dollars a year on players, but would balk at paying a H.C. more than 5 or 6 million (until recenlty). But, one player making 10 million a year (Larry Fitzgerald, for instance) makes far less impact than one of the few 10 million a year coaches would. Here is another perfect example - if I'm building a team, I go out and spend - even if it's millions - on a guy or a few excellent guys who know how to draft. Having consistent good drafts will keep a team always in contention - once they get good, anyway, it is usually a matter of only replacing 3 or 4 starters a year; you can do that in a good draft year in and out. All I'm really saying is, for the NFL to be as big as it is, it is surprising there isn't more emphasis paid to mastering the drafting process.

Regardless of when F.A. actually happens, I think it will happen, so I don't think we should alter our approach to the draft too much to compensate for a later F.A. period. I guess what I mean by this is that we know there will be, within a pretty clear range, X amount of F.A.'s at specific positions. We can look at this eventual group and say, if we need to upgrade this year at RT, TE, NT, DE, ILB, FS, CB and we know F.A. is strong in these areas, and we know the draft is heavy in these other areas, then we target the strenghts of each area. In this case, I'd say F.A. TE, RT, LB, and NT is either or - that is one position where knowing if you can land Miami's NT, for instance, might change your draft board - and the draft we go for DE, ILB, and secondary - mostly Defense, with a QB in there somewhere. Right after I read what I just wrote it occured to me - such a clear plan in the draft never happens just like you say; there will be some offensive guy fall, or some OLB, or some position that is just too good, talent wise, to pass up, and you just can't plan for that. My suggestion is just a general way to look at F.A. and the draft this year, with room to react/adapt.

There isn't just one way to build a team. I think, as has been discussed here thoroughly, that the better a team knows what it wants to look like, play like, then the better able it is to identify capable and potentially excellent players to fill it's roster. Whether we get Miami's young NT Solaia(?) in F.A., or draft Phil Taylor, makes little difference to me as I like them both. But, overall, the more spots we're able to fill via F.A. with more than stop-gap players (like last years poor excuse for a RT Green), then the more freedom we'll have in the draft - if F.A. comes first - and, the more F.A.'s of quality that we sign, the sooner we'll be able to compete for a playoff spot, as opposed to relying strictly on the draft.

If we managed those 3 picks first off, our defense would be shoot way up the rankings. We'd be set up very nicely for the 4-3 stints. Maybe one linebacker away from being terrific in the 3-4 stints, too. I'm hoping Batten turns out as nice as Moats did for us.

I think if we could get him for a third - then jump on it. Our second is practically a 1st - and even if they were asking for a first, they'd take that. Still, if our coaches thought he could be a franchise QB and come in this year and do great, then I guess our second would be fair value. But, I'd rather part with a 3rd and 4th, I think, or some combination of lower round picks. Our first 3 picks this year are golden. I really like Kolb's attitude/character - I read an article where he talked about hunting a boar with a knife - the guy is tough. I think no way on our 1st, and if we part with our 2nd for him then we should get something back - their 3rd or 4th.

I was thinking of this after I read an article over at BuffaloRumblings - they laid out the Packers and the Steelers rosters, separating them into three catagories each (the Bills were graded, too). One catagory was elite players, one was good players, and the last were interchangeable. http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2011/2/3/1972374/comparing-the-buffalo-bills-to-the-green-bay-packers The obvious difference between our squads is a lack of just three or four elite players. It got me thinking. It takes three to five players to take away the oppositions run game - a D-line or front seven. It takes four to five players to take away an oppositions pass game. I was thinking about having two excellent shut down cornerbacks, and I started wondering - if you had one shut down corner, then you take away one side of the field. Revis/Bailey do that. With a guy out there like that, you know where the ball is going to go, if it's a pass. As an example, cornerback has the potential to take away a big chunk of the field. That is impact. Is there any other position that can have that much of a total field influence? Maybe QB - as a good one can open up a bunch of field, and make a lot of things possible. Anyway, if Peterson can do that for us, that's something. I just really want to see a dominant front seven. I would rather us have a nasty D-line and linebacking corps, I think, that could take away the oppositions run game and terrorize their QB's, than have a better secondary. Maybe they can manage both?

There is more than one way to get what you want. Sure, Buffalo might not be as high as #3 again for a decade or two - hopefully, if we're as high as #3 we should be lucky to go all the way with it and be #1 - but, if there is a draft again soon where there are 2 or 3 QB's without questions like the one's in this year's draft have, then we could always trade up to get one. Trading into the #1 spot might not be possible, but trading into the top 5, say, should be possible if your team is determined enough. As for F.A. - isn't Kolb available this year? He looks, in potential, to be similar to what Brees was like before he got rolling. I know, they aren't just alike, but they both had potential to be good, and had advocates, both got usurped, etc. So, you can find good QB's in trades - you just can't find one in his prime unless you take risk - like the Kolb trade has inherent in it. I believe if our scouts and personnel men said, this guy is good enough to be a Franchise QB, and we don't think he'll be there in the second round, then you go for him. But, the thought now is most of the QB's in this class are 2-4 rounders. If the Bills feel Gabbert is the next Roethlisberger, or Flacco, then I see no harm in drafting him. But they better be sure about it, because there look to be some very good defensive talent available at #3 that might be just as hard to find elsewhere.

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2011/2/2/1969897/2011-nfl-draft-will-labor-issue-lead-to-surprise-picks Sorry. After I read the article, I wasn't thinking long term - like 2-3 year projects, rather, if there were a slight difference in prospects that would make a few guys fall into the second that might otherwise get taken in the first... you know, after I read the responses on this post, though, it makes a lot of sense to stay away from players who cannot help us rather quickly, and without having to hope they reach that point. It is amazing, when I look at last year's draft in that light, how just about everyone was a project. Not that that isn't obvious. It seems that either our staff was drafting guys they thought would develop, eventually, better than the more obvious choices, or they thought they were smarter than all the other teams. It is disturbing to think we could have gotten these guys, maybe, a round later apiece. Then again, if they all turn out good we'll think back and say they were smarter than most - because the experts have given us a pretty bad grade on that draft.

I judge players by looking at their games played, and afterward I look at measurables. Usually it is a "gut" feel for how a player might look in our scheme. Anyway, I get the impression that Dareus might be one of the safest picks in this draft. He doesn't seem to be in danger of not being at least decent. I'd say a failure for him would be not playing great. But, I think he is big enough, strong enough, consistent enough, and played on a very good team, so that you can judge his talent by those around him and by his competition. He might not have the "highest ceiling" of the bunch, but I'd be happy if the Bills picked him.

I just read on BuffaloRumblings an article related to how the unsettled CBA could alter the normal tendencies in the draft. Basically, it said that if the CBA wasn't settled by then, not only would we be going into the draft prior to F.A. - which is backwards in itself, but we'd also be looking at, potentially, a reduced season, limited offseason workouts and practices. All of this points to an adapted approach - I think especially for the teams in contention, or on the cusp of the playoffs - by the teams to look for the most NFL ready players who'd need as little coaching as possible - thereby lowering the stock of some players who might be most athletically gifted, but who would, under normal circumstances need coaching up - like last years Pierre Paul to the Giants - and raise the stock of players who aren't as gifted, but who are fundamentally sound. What I though of when I read this was: if some of the more gifted athletes fall a little because of the short season - well, we weren't probably planning on going all the way this year, anyway (as much as I hate to think we'd ever not plan on a SB), so our team might see the value in picking up these rare sliders - in effect, giving us, maybe, the better talent at the expense of patience? Just a thought - hope, if the draft does change in this way, that we have the forsight to take advantage of it - my philosophy on the draft: draft it's strenghts, take what the universe gives you.

I'd like to see Kolb in Buffalo. I remember readin a piece about him hunting Boar with just a knife. I'm serious. The kid is tough. And he's got a strong enough arm. His accuracy isn't a problem. So, he's got the things I'm looking for: Arm Strength, Character/toughness, accuracy - and, I don't think he made a stink with Vick stepping in and playing this year. I would give up, depending on his contract situation, a second for him. But, this isn't a bad year for QB's. Just because there isn't a QB without some risk doesn't mean there isn't a QB to be had. I think there'll be 3 or 4 QB's to come out of this draft and end up starting and being decent within the next three years. So, if we can't get him for a second, then I think don't sweat it and go for someone like Kaepernick, Locker, Ponder, or Dalton - some of them should be available in the 3rd round.

Green would be a tough, tough sell for me. For one thing, we already have Evans, Parrish, Johnson, Nelson, Jones, Easley, and Roosevelt. That's seven. I think we'd be cutting one as is, to get to 53. And, who would that be? Roosevelt? Okay. So, I happen to be excited to see what Easley can do, because from what I recall he was getting higher praise in our training camp than Stevie Johnson or Parrish. I like Johnson enough, but I don't think he's quite a 1. He's a good 2. Easley, though, has the measurables to be a really solid 1, if he turns out legitimate. And, Nelson and Jones looked good. This reciever corps looks like a young Green Bay group. If we go D-line with 1, we can pretty much solidify that group for the next few years. Adding an ILB high, and bringing in another in F.A. or also high in the draft, and we could sure up our run defense. Fix a real problem. If we go reciever at 1, then I'd have to say we'd absolutely have to be sure our O-line was fixed, as well. It'd be a total waste to spend that pick and not give the QB enough time to get the ball out. I don't know... we'd be getting rid of a good WR or two in the final cuts. And, I just don't think we have enough strengths to be spending such a high pick on a guy who would be a real addition, but who would necessitate a subraction. It'd almost be like drafting a running back, only to have to cut one...

This is where I am of two minds. I can see Nix and Gailey looking over the team Gailey inherited and saying, we'll play out the year with these guys, see what we have. We'll draft the players we think will be perfect for the team we envision - one that will take a few years to materialize. So, maybe Gailey thinks, I'd like a super fast, agile RB who can also run up the middle, if need be, and can play catch when we need him; we need a mobile, accurate QB; we need a tall, fast WR to stretch the field; and maybe a multi faceted TE. Okay, they look at the defense and say, we'll need a powerful DE who can both pressure the QB and hold up against the run; a stout NT who doesn't necessarily have to come off the field on passing downs. Linebackers, etc. Our secondary was, more or less, good in either 3-4 or 4-3, so they left it be. And, of course, depending on who fell in the draft, they grabbed who they could that fit their image of the team they wanted. Spiller, in this view, wasn't drafted for a breakout year in 2010, rather he was drafted to be a part of a type of offense - like Faulk was integral to the Rams exciting offense. And, I'd say Troupe and Carrington look like they have the potential to be long time starters, if they continue to improve. Easley sounded like he might end up being really ideal. According to this view, they should be looking to add the QB this year, and the linebackers, and maybe the TE, and DE. That is one view. The other is that Wilson said, "We need to put a spark into that offense. That Spiller kid looks like the next Barry Sanders. Go get him. He'll sell some tickets..." You could say, especially if you look at the overall picks in the last ten years or more, that we've had that kind of owner-meddling, undisciplined drafts that are shortsighted and have ruined us. And, if this is the truth, then who can we look to be picking up with this year's 1st? Cam Newton? I want to believe Nix has convinced Wilson to hand over the reigns, and to leave the football stuff to Nix - including all draft picks. I think we'll know more how to judge it after this year's offseason.

There was a good point on here made about D. Edwards. He hasn't been healthy the last three years, really. So, if we can't count on him, and if Stroud continues to be mediocre, then what do we have if you take away those two? Currently, I'd say our D-line would look like: K.Williams, T. Troupe, Carrington. Now, if Troupe adds some muscle and can become more of a true NT, and Carrington turns into a B. Smith prototype, then we'd be fine with that. But... maybe, in that light, our D-line is just as leaky as our linebacking corps. Given that D-linemen typically go fast, we probably should secure a Dareus or Fairley type in the 1st, get our linebackers in the next few, and hope to add a truer NT in F.A., if we can't get that Taylor kid in the 2nd. I also don't believe our O-line is quite near the comfort zone yet. I think if all our O-linemen go into 2011 healthy then we have a pretty good group in the middle, with two capable C's and 3 capable G's, with our backup C also G capable. So, I think one very good Tackle would make our line better able to handle the certain injuries we'll see throughout a season.

I would absolutely love Soliai? - Miami's NT. A good NT that can clog the middle would do us wonders. And linebackers - I think we've got 4 that could be good out of Batten, Moats, Merriman, Poz, Davis, Kelsay, Coleman - I'd like to see us add a real beast of an ILB, and then draft another good one. Also, with Gailey talking about being ahead of the wave - as he calls it - with the QB's, it's funny he's not mentioned too much about the need for getting a killer T.E. like Green Bay's, for instance. That guy has DE size, and WR moves. A guy like that could really change our offense. Imagine adding that kind of a weapon to our middle, not to mention the red zone. I don't know if there is that kind of a mold out there in F.A. or the Draft. Maybe Mercedes Lewis?

I guess if two prospects are similar in arm strength and accuracy coming out of college, then I'd say if the major difference between them was one ran a 4.7 and the other a 4.4 40, you'd probably go for the latter. Does it ever hurt you to have speed at the position? I'd say only if the QB was too quick to run. But, in my opinion there are a few other attributes that a QB needs to have that are very important. He's absolutely got to be accurate. Fist and foremost. And, perhaps almost as important, he's got to be able to read the defense, see the field, and know where to throw it. That kind of football intelligence is so critical. Either of the above attributes without the other leads to average and unrelaible QB play. If he can read the defense and has the accuracy to throw it where he wants, then the next factor is arm strength. In our case, we absolutely need a strong armed QB. I would say he also needs to be tough - he needs to have the grit necessary to stand in front of five or six enormous linemen and make them bust their butts to protect him; he needs to be able to stand before his teammates and say, "we're not giving up - we can win this". Speed and durability are the other components that make up a good QB. I just can't imagine a coach wanting a QB with speed if he didn't first possess those other traits. So, who might possess those characteristics out of the QB's in this year's draft class? Locker is inaccurate. Mallett is immobile and not the brightest. I simply don't know enough about Newton and Gabbert to say. Kaepernick seems like he's got a lot on the list. Dalton, too.

It's hard to be objective about my team. There are times when I think with the right decisions and some luck we could have a playoff/wildcard caliber team in 2011; but, we'd probably need to add 6 starters between F.A. and the draft. And then there are times when I feel like our team is running on a treadmill, and we're never getting closer to the good teams. Is our O-line a good RT away from being good, or is still a second rate group? Are our RB's posed to make a real impact this coming season, or are they limited? Harvey Lives made some comments that really sink my spirits with this team, not because I don't think they can be good - as I said, with the right moves I think they can - but, because I don't have faith in them yet to believe they'll make the sensible moves. I guess we'll have to trust (we've got no option there)that Nix finally is a guy who has a real master plan and has the authority to make the calls. As for last year's draft, I think they picked Spiller with the intention of his impact being felt in the years to come - maybe 2 or 3 years after the draft. Some might say, They needed to pick an immediate impact player. Well, they admitted that the rebuild wasn't going to happen immediately, that they would do it over a period of seasons, adding through the draft mostly. So, they weren't fooling themselves about the team last year. They knew they weren't going to be contenders until they assembled the right pieces. And, in that light, Troupe and Carrington look like they, too, will really come on in the next few years. Not to mention Moats looked good, Easley was getting rave reviews, and Batten might still be as good as Moats - which would be great. Adding the URFA's, and our 2010 draft was, perhaps, pretty good. Still, I think this year's draft and F.A. will say a lot about how our F.O. makes decisions, about what kind of a team they want to build, and, ultimately, what their Philosophy, or Identity is to be. No excuses - if we don't see a progression from 4-12, to, say, 7-9/8-8, and on to 10-6 or 11-5 in year 3, then they are no better than any of the rest of the coaches we've seen in the last 15 years. As it stands right now, I can see the potential of this team, it's youth, the way they played hard last year and almost beat some very good teams. If Nix continues to add talent and depth, then I think we should disregard what the talking heads say and Billieve, so to speak. I mean, look at what we heard coming out of the Senior Bowl practices about Gailey - and then they go on and whoop the other team. Who cares what the "experts" say, as long as the Bills just show improvement over the next few years and regain the respect of the rest of the league. Teams like San Diego and New England are good examples - and even Seattle and New Orleans, that you don't need the absolute best group of athletes to win in the NFL. You need the best team, the best systems, the right plans and some luck.

I agree with building this team from the lines outward. I think we did a great job last year of adding O-linemen who are young, talented, mean, and capable of starting when needed. We fortified our interior O-line. Now, all we need, barring terrible injury, is a solid RT - which, I believe, we should target in F.A. - because there are a few very good options out there. TE can also be addressed in F.A. That, more or less, solidifies our offense for the season, with the exception of adding a QB - and, I think we do that in the draft. So, going into the draft we are able to concentrate on QB and D. I see the QB field as being very level - with 6 or 7 QB's having the potential to be franchise types; only, the guys like Ponder, Locker, Kaepernick might end up being the NFL stars, and the Newton, Gabbert, Mallet might end up being the busts - I don't know, I hope our F.O. can see through it all. Anyway, I think, due to that amount of near equal talent, we can wait on QB to our 3 or (2)4 picks. Therefore, I'd say, go D front seven in the first 2 rounds, add QB in the 3-4 along with best linebackers and TE - if he's good enough to start for us. I think using the draft and F.A. would enable us, cards falling in our favor, to put together a very balanced team that will be a core, from which we here out fine tune to get to, and stay in, the playoff picture. Our team is young enough now that if we can get it together quickly, we can stay good for a stretch - and if Nix is capable, and after him Whaley, to follow the San Diego/Pittsburgh model, we can soon start to keep the team perpetually good, instead of perpetually bad. The funny thing is, if done right, it'll take less energy to stay good than it has to blow up the organization every 3-4 years for the past two decades.

After reading the recaps of the Senior Bowl, and the scouting for the week, and thinking about our team, I believe the best move in this year's draft would be: 1. Quinn, (some other OLB candidate that will be able to get pressure on QB's - a trade down a few spots to land one of these guys would be even better). 2. Phil Taylor - is there an alternative with equal talent who can clog the middle? I think Edwards has now seen what his schemes can look like (sure, vanilla and all things considered) but, it is still so, so, so much easier to run a defense when the NT (3-4) or DT's (4-3) are stopping the running game up the middle all by themselves. In fact, almost all the great Defenses have this quality, and, as much as K. Williams is great, he'll never be able to do this - and we'll have to compensate somehow for that without the big guy. Rounds 3-4's QB, LB, TE After that, BPA Who knows how it will turn out, but, I think if we could stop the run with the big fella, and add some more pressure - then our secondary will be fine - those great secondaries are nice to have, but I think you work out to them from the lines. And, I think we can fix most of our offensive problems in F.A. - like a RT and even a TE. So, go QB in the draft and all D.

I don't know that thos players will be available in the rounds you have listed... it would be a great offseason if all of that happened, though.

I wouldn't be surprised with the Ponder pick, either. Gailey seemed enamored with him, and he ran the offense well enough. This is one of those years where there could end up being 3-4 quality NFL QB's coming out of this draft, and a few of them might very well be franchise QB's. Locker, Mallet, Newton, Kaepernick, Ponder, Gabbert and a few others that are getting good reviews - Dalton? - he sounded like he possessed many of the same qualities Brady had coming out of college. So, as I see it, the hard part is recognizing which of the bunch will ultimately have "it" - and, I think part of that equation is knowing with a certainty what type of scheme you'll be putting him in and expecting him to run. Obviously, most of these guys are better fit in one system over another. I don't care if we draft a QB in Rd 1 or Rd 4, as long as it is the QB the coaches feel the strongest about - because, given our draft position this year, we should get first shot at the best QB. As for the type of sytem Gailey will implement. I just hope we can run it when we want to run it, and we can pass it when we need to pass it. Gimmicky offenses - when I hear that I'm reminded of Mularky's pathetic play calling. I think there will always be popular fashions in the NFL, that will come and go to neutralize what the college is putting out, and what the NFL is trying to do to counter the best schemes - ala Tampa 2 for a while - it worked, and then was no good shortly after as teams built offenses that could run right through it. Anyway, a good team, with a very good O-line and D-line will be able to run it and, consequently, will be able to have success with a pocket QB. I'm still waiting to see a real Identity with this team, but I think it is forming and we'll begin to see consistency this year and next.

I agree about taking that QB after Rd 1. It seems to me that you could consider 4 or 5 QB's in this draft, of the top seven QB's, to be running QB's, or QB's that can be dangerous as runners. Cam Newton is the first to come to most people's mind, but Locker is fast, and Kaepernick is very similar in size and speed as is Newton, and Gabbert and Dalton aren't slow. So, from my perspective it looks like this year's crop of QB's is perhaps a more mobile group than ever before, which means if we are targeting a "before the wave" kind of QB, it could be any of the five, not necessarily Newton. I would prefer Locker or Kaepernick - especially Kaepernick, in the second.