Brandon

I would make one note on what some have perceived as a lack of a burst: he was playing this past season with two minor ankle sprains. How much it hampered him, I don't know, but its reasonable to expect it did slow him down a bit.

That's true, but offhand I can't remember another 1st round RB prospect in one of his offenses. Its been mostly 2nd-4th round types, which, contrary to popular belief, have a pretty crappy overall success rate in the NFL regardless of where they played. In the end, even if this were a QB, I think its still a secondary consideration. You still have to consider each player on their own individual merits.

I'm not going to deny that I may be reading too much into it, and again, its dependent upon them actually being truthful, which is a dubious assumption to begin with. I do think its an interesting statement by Modrak, at any rate.

Does Lynch play QB?

My first post really isn't worded properly. Its not that I think they wouldn't be interested in Leonard, but that perhaps they aren't particularly high on him. They probably would select him, but maybe not with a 2nd round pick.

If they're being truthful, I'm not sure they're that interested in Leonard. Modrak concluded his statement by saying that Leonard is a player who makes the 45 man roster every week due to his versatility. That's nice, but to sum up a player with that statement doesn't seem to lend support to the idea that he's a player the Bills feel they can feature in an offense, but more of a guy who is used in a secondary role.

That's what I saw when reviewing the Senior Bowl game as well and posted such a few weeks back. His speed and athleticism allowed him to make a lot of tackles in that game, but he did not strike me as a particularly good interior run defender. He got tied up with blockers too often, overran some plays, and chose to stand his ground rather than attack and drop the ballcarrier for a loss on more than one occasion. Granted, its just an all-star game and perhaps he wasn't comfortable in the defense being ran, but I did not like the game he played that day. If that game is indicative of his style of play, I consider him a deluxe version of London Fletcher. That's not a bad thing, but a dominating run defender is something he does not seem to be. BTW, one thing I haven't seen mentioned is that Ole Miss finished 94th in the country against the run this past season. Clearly, for whatever reason, he was not a difference-maker for that defense, unless maybe they would've given up 300 yards per game on the ground without him. Ole Miss is not an elite SEC team, but they're not Vandy or Kentucky, either.

I take it his e-mail feedback from those previous statements wasn't kind.

Honestly, I don't believe that either one are serious threats to select a RB in R1. Norwood had an excellent rookie season with stats comparable to the much hyped Michael Turner, while Chester Taylor posted over 1,400 total yards for the Vikings last year. Perhaps neither one are great, but you don't need a great RB, or so I am told.

The Bannister and Scobey visits were on the ticker on NFL Network a few days ago.

I actually really wanted to put one of those three offensive positions in the last 2 rounds. In the end, however, I think its more likely that the OLB contributes this year. At WR, in particular, think its a case of either selecting one early (probably R1 or 2) or not picking one at all. A later round pick at that position is going to have an extremely difficult time finding a roster spot. The first mock I put together and decided not to post was very similar, except that it had Jason Hill going to the Bills in R2, with Durant, MLB Anthony Waters and Michael Coe going to the Bills in R3-4.

1) RB Marshawn Lynch, California 2) MLB David Harris, Michigan 3) OLB Justin Durant, Hampton 3) CB Michael Coe, Alabama State 6) OLB Zach Catanese, Arizona State 7) CB Anthony Arline, Baylor 7) DT Ola Dagunduro, Nebraska This isn't my final prediction, but its close. In years past, one could often read the tea leaves in the final week leading up to the draft and have a very accurate idea of what they'd do in round 1, but this staff appears more unpredictable. Still, I'll wait until Thursday or Friday next week to see what happens before posting a final prediction. That said, at this point, I'm about 75% sure that Lynch is their pick at 12, and about 50% sure they're going to trade up from 43 for a LB. Here, I have them giving up a 4th to move ahead of the 49ers to select David Harris, who I feel is easily the 2nd best MLB in the draft and worth a late 1st round pick. The remaining picks address needs for competition and depth defensively. One note: Catanese is a collegiate S, but will likely play WLB in the NFL. The Bills have one major need offensively, yet several defensively. The approach I've taken, and the one I feel the Bills will also take, is one of quality-vs-quantity. From an overall standpoint, the team is equally weak on both sides of the ball, yet is hampered by only one major weakness offensively, while there are several defensively. It seems logical that a quality RB would make more of an impact on the offense for that reason. Even if the Bills select a LB or CB #1, there will still be significant weaknesses defensively and they probably still finish in the bottom third of the league. Add a top tier RB and this definitely appears to be a top 15 offense. They still need a better #2 WR and TE, but neither is critical. Additionally, it stands to reason that if the Bills are only going to add one first day player (or just one player, as I have here) for the offense, they need to make it count. Unless they have Lynch rated as a late 1st, or unless they are much higher on the 2nd tier guys than it seems, I feel that Marshawn Lynch is the most likely pick at 12.

Such a trade could normally be expected to cost at least a 2nd round pick.

I agree. If the Bills select a RB in R1, there's very little reason to select a LB in R2, unless David Harris is still available. I think Harris is probably the most underrated LB prospect by fans at the moment (he goes 50-75 in a lot of mock drafts on the internet), but I believe he'll go 25th-35th overall next weekend. If they select Lynch at 12 as I expect them to, I don't think it would be a bad idea at all to move up for Harris. The top 2 needs would be filled with a couple of very strong prospects with no real weaknesses in their game. As a side note, one MLB who might end up being a major steal is Anthony Waters of Clemson. Normally, I do not like selecting players coming off major knee injuries, but it appears that he's progressing well in his recovery. He recently ran in the low 4.6s for 22 teams at a private workout in which he was said to be about 90%. So clearly, it looks like he's going to make it back and quite possibly play this season. In a weak LB draft, and a weak draft in general, I'd have no problems whatsoever taking a chance on him at 93 as the team's MLB prospect as long as the Bills also pick a solid OLB prospect at 74 or earlier.

I think you're reading WAY too much into it. There's really no reason for the Bills not to be rather honest in their assessments of these players. They aren't divulging any information that the rest of the league doesn't already know. Its not like the Bills took the media in to see the draftboard.

It is interesting, isn't it? An argument can be made that its a 'smokescreen', but in this case, it would almost seem to be TOO obvious for that to be the case. I think its most likely that the Bills are bringing in their top 3-4 guys for one final visit before finalizing the draft board this weekend.

I'd be concerned if they were RBs. The only guy you can point to there is JJ Arrington, who has been a bust in Arizona. Then again, its not like Edgerrin James is tearing up the league playing for the Cards, either.

The interesting thing is that Pittman was the only non-1st round Rb that really got a strong review from the Bills. Modrak basically seemed to indicate that the group consisted of good situational players better suited to a #2 role. That raises an interesting question: Do the Bills think Pittman will be there at 43, or do they view him as a player who has separated himself from that pack and now may be a borderline R1 type guy?

Tipster, some of the statements regarding the 2nd tier RBs as well as the update on the Turner situation have me believing now more than ever that Lynch is their guy at 12. IMO, he'd be an excellent addition with that pick. Dennis, I merely tossed in that note about the non-mention of the supposed injury for those that keep harping on it. I've never bought into it. I'm now all but certain that its BS, as I'm pretty sure Schefter was the one who first mentioned it a month ago. The fact that he didn't mention it now in this particular segment leads me to believe he no longer considers it credible, either.

He was asked for a reason why Lynch might slip and brought up the character issue, but Schefter also said that teams that have had meetings with Lynch have had no questions about it afterward. Additionally, it is interesting that he made no mentioned of the rumored back injury that Lynch may have, particularly in a segment concerning reasons Lynch might slip in the draft.

Maybe Marv would be suprised if this trade happens because he has decided to draft a RB instead? That may be one of the 'complexities' he speaks of. It wouldn't be the first time he has completely dropped his interest in a player upon learning the price tag (Titans FA RB Chris Brown is a good example).

I think that's probably true this year, but lets not forget the 2000 draft. Everyone remembers that draft for being terrible for the Bills, but that draft was a turd almost from start to finish. There were a few good players after the middle of R2, but they were few and far between. Those drafts happen about once every decade or so, and while I don't think that this draft sucks THAT bad, its probably the weakest since that time.

I think you also have to be careful taking it to the other extreme, however, by placing too much emphasis on one or two poor times. The shuttle and cone drills, in particular, are a little bit more technique-based than the others, and poor technique can adversely affect scores. As an example, a lot of fans try to use a poor short shuttle time to bash Marshawn Lynch, but his 10, 20, and 40 yard times, as well as his cone drill, broad jump and vertical jump are very comparable to those posted by Adrian Peterson (and Peterson in fact ran a somewhat weak shuttle time as well, 4.40). If I had to guess, neither Peterson or Lynch ran that short shuttle with good technique, perhaps over-running the mark or slipping, and it cost them time. Their other scores compare favorably to anyone at the combine and are not indicative of a player who is unathletic. So in this case, the outlier, the poor shuttle, probably should be discarded.

Yep. I also think that you really have to consider the ability to read the play quickly and react to it as well. That's extremely hard to judge, but it can easily make up for a LOT of speed deficiencies and is an important attribute in a LB, perhaps the most important. It can also completely negate any advantage a player might have in terms of speed and athleticism if he can't do it. Note that I'm not aiming that at Willis, but its just an observation about the LB position in general.

Its not just the weight loss. I think a lot of people don't realize that the scouts adjust these 40 times from Pro Days based upon the conditions and the track surface. So while a team may have officially clocked Patrick Willis at 4.38 at his Pro Day, it may have officially been recorded as a 4.45-4.50 based on the track surface combined with his weight loss. The 40 times don't mean jack, anyway. The 10 and 20 yard components of the 40 are FAR more relevant than the 40 overall. Posluszny's combine times there were 1.56 and 2.73, respectively. That, along with the overall time, tells me that he may not have great top end speed, but he hits that top speed very quickly. The shuttle, cone drill, vertical and broad jumps all seem to support the idea that he has a very good burst from a standstill. Willis scored well in both the 10 (1.53) and 20 (2.62) components, as expected from someone who posted a 4.51 at the combine.