2003Contenders

Actually, going back to last season's draft, the reason that Meredith fell as far as he did was a perceived notion that he was a troublemaker -- and potential locker room poison. There were rumors that his coaches at SC gave a not-so-glaring review of him when privately questioned by various NFL scouts heading into the draft. At least one publication referred to him as a "locker room lawyer". Now, I haven't heard anything from either Green Bay or Buffalo about him being anything but a stand-up guy. So, who knows? Perhaps he had a personal conflict with one of his coaches at SC that led to a lot of this. If so, maybe the character assassination helped allow the Bills to acquire a talented young player at a position of need.

Excellent points. Moreover, all of those teams were playoff teams as well.

I think the overall objective of this draft was to fortify the trenches on both sides of the ball. By taking Spiller with the #9 pick, it pretty much sealed that the Bills were going to go OL/DL with the next couple of picks. Had they taken an OL with that pick instead of Spiller, I believe that Clausen would have been a much more serious possibility at 41.

The one thing I will say is that one year's 2nd round pick, for example, doesn't necessarily compare to another year's. For whatever reason teams shied away from QBs this year, not just because this year's class was viewed as weak. For example, how much difference was there between Sanchez's rating when he came out last year versus Clausen's this year? No much. Yet Sanchez was a top 5 pick, and Clausen fell to the end of the 2nd round. FWIW, many draftniks had Levi Brown rated as a 3rd rounder. Is it a long shot for him to make the team -- let alone ever become a starter? Yes, of course. But you just never know.

Actually, the story I always heard was that Flutie only signed with the Generals AFTER the Bills made it clear to him and his agent that he wouldn't be drafted with the #1 overall pick. As for the reasoning behind the Bills doing what they did... compare it to this year with Tebow. Like Tebow, Flutie already had a fanatical following, so acquiring him would have generated additional ticket and jersey sales. However, the "football" people realized that Bruce was the correct choice. In the final analysis someone convinced Ralph to make the smart football decision.

I remember the alleged episode well. It was opening day 1994, when (in a precursor to the team's first losing season since 1987) the Bills surprisingly fell to the Jets at home. The offense couldn't get anything going against Pete Carrol's Jets, and Thurman was held in check all day long. As he was leaving the stadium he was approached by a little kid for an autograph, who asked Thurman why he had played so poorly. Thurman's alleged response was, "Because I was up f'ing your mother all night!"

With the sorry strength and conditioning staff that watched the Bills entire OL deplete last year, who's to say that Oher wouldn't have likewise fallen victim to the injury bug. That is about the best I can do in terms of playing devil's advocate, as Oher definitely should have been the choice. Sad that the Bills so often buck conventional wisdom and do things that baffle us all. By the same token, I don't want to dismiss Maybin just yet. After year one, the Redskins certainly look to be the winners in the Orakpo/Maybin sweepstakes. But that is after just a single year. Remember also that Maybin was a holdout, who missed virtually all of training camp last year. (Don't get me started on the need for slotting rookie salaries.) Maybin does have some skills -- as well as a freakish first step that can't be taught. The trouble is that last year, that quick jump was a non-factor as savvy offensive linemen just pushed him out of the play. It will be interesting to see how he performs this year given a full off-season and new coaching staff.

Before finally being handed the reigns in 2008, Aaron Rodgers had that same look. It takes some guys a few years to put it all together, especially in a somewhat complicated offense like the Packers run. Chan's offense figures to be far less complicated -- remember that he devised a system which boy genius Kordell Stewart actually ran effectively back in Pittsburgh.

I suspect that the question was presented more to gauge Bryant's emotional reaction rather than his actual verbal response. As has been said, his mom's background has little relevancy and Ireland was trying to see how Bryant would respond when provoked. The reaction you suggest certainly would have disqualified Bryant from being drafted by the Dolphins. I recall that Matt Stafford said last year that one of the teams he interviewed with kept pressing him about his parents' having divorced, trying to see if he would allow the questioning to get under his skin. The way these kids are dissected by the GMs and scouts is crazy, and I suspect that there are many other teams that use these same tactics.

I will have to say that I am actually pretty excited about the team going into training camp with an open competition for the starting job. I agree with many on here's take of Fitz. He is the one guy whose fate is pretty much sealed as he's shown that he isn't a bad QB2 option. That would leave the real open competition for the starting job up to Edwards and Brohm. We will find out quickly whether Brohm's phase out in Green Bay was a maturity issue (a privileged kid not being able to handle competition, especially when the job he was fighting for was QB2 behind Rodgers) or if it was due to a lack of skill/talent. My money is on the former -- and, if so, I hope he welcomes the true open competition.

As an OC, Chan managed to get solid production from Kordell Stewart, Jay Fiedler and Tyler Thigpen. That's good news for Edwards/Fitz/Brohm/Brown.

Another point to be made is that it takes a minimum of 2-3 years to get a real assessment. After both the 2006 and 2007 seasons it really looked like the Bills had hit pay-dirt with each of those drafts. Whitner appeared promising, Ko was a 4th round starter, both Williams and Butler were 5th rounders that started as was 6th rounder Ellison. 2007 seemed ever so promising with a new starting QB, a 1000-yard rusher, and a new ILB all on board. If Lynch can behave and Trent gets his mojo back, that draft may still have been worthwhile.

Yea, you look toward him for "official" news, not inside tips, etc.

Excellent point, which is also affirmed by how quickly the Bills turned the card in with most of their picks. I think the strategy was simple: they probably only had a relatively modest list of draftable players with a draft-round projection for each of them. It would stand to reason that a player like, say, Clausen was never viewed as a viable option for whatever reason, which would explain why the team passed on him more than once.

Really? Call me crazy, but I would take Trent over Campbell.

The one caveat I keep reminding myself of is this: the offense has essentially been coached by goons for the past 3-4 years. I suspect that we may have more talent at some of the positions that we are are crying to be upgraded (QB, WR, OL) than we know. I think in addition to looking at areas where we need help and analyzing the BPA, I think you also have to look at how much BETTER is that BPA than the player he could potentially replace on the squad. Also, is that player more natural fit for the new system than the player(s) we have now. If the FO believes that Spiller is the best player available, well suited for the scheme(s) that Gailey wishes to institute -- and is a significant upgrade over Lynch (who they may be moving anyway), why WOULDN'T you be in favor of such a pick?

Probably not. If they go OT, fans will insist that they took the WRONG one (if 2 or fewer are drafted before 9) -- OR insist that they reached for a position of need, if 3 or more have already been drafted. Clausen is clearly polarizing, so fans will be split over that pick. If they address any defensive player at all, fans will whine about not addressing the offense, which is in more dire need of repair. If they take the BPA, which is probably Spiller (if he is there), fans will wonder why they drafted a RB when we already have 2 good ones on the roster. And lest we forget, there are 6 other rounds and 8 other picks in this year's draft, and recent history has shown that the team has performed considerably better in rounds 2-7 than they have in the first. That tells me that there was perhaps too much involvement from non-scouts (Jauron?) with the higher round picks -- whereas, the team was more liable to trust the scouts with the lesser known players in the later rounds. So, this year, I have resigned myself to just relax, trust the front office -- and let the chips fall where they may.

The notion of draft grades in and of itself is silly. Going back to 2006, shortly after the draft most experts ranked that draft as a bad one for the Bills, given that they had "reached" for both Whitner and McCargo. However, by the end of the season, Whitner, Simpson, Williams, Butler, and Ellison were all starters -- which meant that the draft was a very good one, right? Four years later, Kyle Williams is the only one of those players that I wouldn't list as a fringe starter. Taking a player earlier than some draftnik like McShay thinks he should go to me is NOT necessarily a reach. A good example is the Patriots, who seemingly take guys a bit "early" every year. However, the Patriots trust their scouts, and they know how to pinpoint the right guys for their team. Compare that to the Lions over the years. I don't recall looking back and calling very many of Millen's picks "reaches". Still, the results weren't good (no players left on the team from the 2002-2006 drafts). Maybe Millen was basing his picks on draft magazines rather than what the scouts were telling him? With all of that said, the real key is not only having a grade on your players -- but also knowing what the other teams' grade is on the same players. For example, going back to 2006 again, the Whitner pick probably was a "reach" because Marv was duped into thinking that both the Lions and Ravens had an interest in Whitner which would have precluded the Bills from trading down to the 14th (with the Eagles) or 15th (with the Broncos) spot. I believe that Marv could have made the deal to move down, picked up an extra 2nd round pick AND STILL taken Whitner. And, even if Whitner did happen to go to the Lions or Ravens, he wasn't such an indispensable selection that the Bills couldn't have taken someone else instead. (I think that is what Nix was trying to say last week when he said that when you pick at 9, you need to be prepared for at least 10 players in that slot.)

Here's what could potentially hold a trade of this sort up, assuming that the Bills do actually see Campbell as an improvement over Edwards/Fitzpatrick/Brohm: the contract situation. I have little doubt that the Bills could get Campbell with a 4th or 5th round draft pick, given that it is clear that Washington is ready to move on. The problem is that Campbell just signed a one-year tender, which means that he becomes a free agent next year. Even if the Bills like him enough to make the trade, I doubt that they would be sold on him enough to sign him to a long-term extension. That begs the question: do the Bills want to trade a pick (even a relatively low one) for a player who may only be on the team for a single season? And is that player significantly better than what they already have to warrant this sort of investment? Given that the new regime seems to really place a high premium on their existing draft picks, I would guess that the answer is no.

Amongst all the smoke screens that Nix and Modrak put up yesterday, this is the one thing I do NOT think you have to worry about. Modrak was pretty clear that there were only 2 QBs at the top of this draft, Bradford and Clausen. He said there was significant drop-off after that but wouldn't go into detail about how significant the drop-off is. So, while they may be interested in Tebow with pick 41, you can safely cross him off the list at 9.

I still wouldn't bet against LT at 9 -- at least not based on Nix's comments. While Nix did say that the scouts only have 2 guys graded as top 9, we do not know who those guys are. Assuming one of them is Okung and he is gone, we have no idea who the Bills have as the 2nd best OT. It could be Davis. It could be Williams. It could be Bulaga. This may be smoke on the part of Nix too -- as if they do wind up taking a tackle there, look for him to say that (whomever it is is) -- that is the guy that they had ranked as the #2 OT in this draft. Remember back in 2007, when they traded up for Poz and claimed that they had him ranked ahead of Willis?

Well, that settles it. The Bills will NOT be taking Bulaga if Chris Brown says that is the pick. He is NEVER right. Not sure if the Bills purposely feed him bad information, but his predictions are ALWAYS wrong.

Schouman was actually a pleasant surprise early last season before he got hurt. He was Trent's favorite receiver.

1. Marc Bulger was a product of the Mike Martz offensive system. Once Martz left, his decline kicked in right away. (I wouldn't be surprised to see Bulger sign with Chicago to work again with Martz as Cutler's backup.) 2. The younger version of Bulger got by with his quick release. In fact, his ability to get rid of the ball quickly masked some of the Rams' offensive line's deficiencies that were highlighted when Warner couldn't stay healthy behind that line. Eventually, of course, Bulger succumbed to the same problems: his release has slowed tremendously, and he hasn't managed to stay healthy the last few years. 3. Bulger never really had a top notch arm. He played well enough in the dome, but it would be interesting to compare his stats when he played in more frigid conditions. Honestly, I do not see that the current version of Marc Bulger is really any better than what the team has now.

He is Aaron Rodgers' backup in Green Bay. You may better know him as the 7th round draft pick that everyone keeps pointing to that beat out 2nd rounder Brian Brohm for the #2 job (and eventually a roster spot). My guess is that the poster meant Matt "Ryan".