CosmicBills

Agree 100%

Because you don't want to admit you're wrong. You're a fan. Not a player. You want to see your team win Super Bowls. They're all that matter. How they win it, doesn't matter. But in order to justify to the fan base picking a player who plays less than 50% of the snaps at #9 when your team has multiple holes and 2 Pro Bowl RBs already on the roster, Spiller HAS to win a Super Bowl in a Buffalo uniform. To think otherwise is just crazy talk.

Of course you are. As a fan of the Bills, what would you rather see? Jim Kelly and company go to four Super Bowls and not win one? Or a team with less star power go to a single Super Bowl and win it all?

Now you're just dodging.

Again, that's individual. What about you as a FAN. Would you rather have a great player on your team, or a team that wins Super Bowls?

I'm not saying they don't measure up as individuals or players. They all are/were great players. But in terms of achievement, winning a Super Bowl trumps all. Winning solves everything. And when a GM picks a player, he's not picking him so he can be a Hall of Famer and rush for 2,000 yards. He's picking them to help them win a title. Jim Kelly would trade every statistic he put up for a ring. So would Thurman. So would Bruce (well ... maybe not Bruce).

QBs are a different animal. But I'd say again that winning a championship is the only measuring stick to use. It's the only goal that matters in the NFL. To think otherwise is to accept mediocrity.

These types of posts circulated last year leading up to the draft, only the player mentioned was Spiller. At the time I thought it was just crazy fan talk. There's no way the Bills' front office would be that dense and that far out of touch with what it takes to build a team. Yet, as the draft grew closer, these posts grew more persistent and, surprisingly, grew more popular amongst the fan base. "Best player available!" ... "He can score from anywhere!" ... "Marshawn is one strike away from being banned!" ... "Freddie is old!" On and on it went. But then, the Bills actually picked Spiller and I was dumbfounded. Now, these posts are starting again (This is at least the third such post over the past few weeks). And again, I'm seeing people climb on board this band wagon. So that being said, it would not surprise me one bit if Peterson is the pick. But it would only serve to remind us once again what an utter abortion Nix has been as GM.

But the only end result that matters is wins. Not stats. To justify the pick, Spiller has to win a Super Bowl in a Buffalo uniform. If he puts up 2,000 yards and this team doesn't make the playoffs, that does not justify the pick. If anything, it would do the opposite.

No. Because we could have gotten the same production from cheaper player(s) already on the roster or ones gotten through other means other than a first round pick. And that's the point when I say it doesn't matter how good Spiller becomes it was still the wrong pick at the wrong spot at the wrong time for this franchise. They would have been better served either moving down and picking up more picks or taking any number of players that could have filled an immediate need.

Truth.

I hear ya', and like I said, applaud the creativity. Not trying to poo-poo it (yes, I just typed that ... I feel dirty now). I just have a feeling that part of Harbaugh's plan is to get Luck at all costs next season.

I like the creativity ... but then what do you do when Luck either doesn't declare again or pulls an Elway/Manning and refuses to play for anyone other than San Francisco?

Absolutely true.

Despite all that, you're still missing the point. Which makes it even more hilarious. It's about value. Economics. And how to build a championship team. Not a team that goes 8-8, 10-6 or even 12-4 and doesn't win a ring. You may think football isn't nuanced but that just shows how little you understand what it takes to build a championship team in any professional sport -- especially football. Look at the road blocks to your success: you're dealing with not only competing against the best 31 teams in the world, but also with a stifling salary cap, a league designed to promote parity, a draft that rewards failure and punishes success, average careers lasting less than 4 years -- you don't have time or room to approach it as anything but a complex and cerebral enterprise. You say the value of the RB will never diminish. But it already has. Just look at the facts. When is the last time a team won a Super Bowl with an elite RB carrying the bulk of the load and a "game management" type passing game? 2001? 10 years ago. Which correlates with some drastic rule changes regarding DBs ability to cover WRs ... but that's just a coincidence, right? Prior to that you see far more elite backs dominating the list of Super Bowl winning teams. What was once the rule is now the exception. And you're going to stand by your belief that the value of having a super star RB has remained constant? Put it another way. If everyone in the world was given a Porsche at birth worth $50,000, would you ever buy a Porsche for $100,000? How hard would you laugh at the sucker who buys a Porsche for 100k in that world? Now look at the Bills. They've spent 5 high draft picks over the past 10 years on elite RB prospects. Some of whom made Pro Bowls. Some of whom had potential to be super stars. They did this at the expense of upgrading the more important positions on the field in the modern NFL. Meanwhile, the best RBs to play during this playoff-less decade were found in the NFL scrap heaps. The result of these debacles and this failure to understand how to properly build a winning team is the mess that they currently find themselves in. And yes, the rest of the league is laughing at us too. And deservedly so. This team is so far astray and so poorly managed it's borderline criminal. But keep on clinging to your notion that the game isn't complex and ever evolving. Go on thinking that you can win a Super Bowl with one elite back that ties up a large percentage of your limited cap. I'm sure it'll all work out just fine. It is just a game of people running into each other after all. Any idiot can do it.

Again, you're missing the main point. It's subtle, and complex which is why it goes over a lot of heads. And why the best GMs in the league have learned to master it and the likes of the Bills have not. The point is not that the running game is obsolete. I've never once said that. It's not even that a running game is not important. It's that the value of a RB to a team has lessened due to the financial constraints facing a modern franchise, a RB's inherent short shelf life, and the abundance of talent at the position. It used to be that you run to establish the pass. This was the rule as recently as 2000. It's now more and more that you pass to set up the run. Meaning that teams are no longer reliant upon a workhorse RB to pave the way for the offense. In fact, it's financially irresponsible for owners and coaches to build their teams in such a manner. Why? Because of the cost and cap space. You cannot win with just an elite running game. You have to have a franchise QB and a passing game to match. You will no longer see a "game manager" winning a Super Bowl. Even in the last 10 years that has been the rare exception, not the rule. RBs have the shortest careers of any position by and large in the NFL. The wheels tend to fall off after 30, or even sooner depending on the mileage built up in college and their pro career. The smart teams started moving away from drafting first round RBs this past decade and opting for the cheaper 2 back approach which they discovered was not only just as effective as one stud back, but also more cost efficient. Allowing them to spend the money where it's needed in today's NFL. Namely: QB, LT, DE, and DB. Those are the money positions now. RB is not. What this did is have a ripple effect, meaning that since RBs weren't valued as highly as they once were, there were more talented RBs available through other means OTHER than the first round. Look at MJD. You can argue he's up there with AP in terms of numbers and talent -- and yet they found him in the 2nd round. Jackson was found in the NFL Europe stock pile. With teams valuing RBs less, the best course of action is to follow suit NOT to buck the trend. The only teams who take a first round RB are the ones who are one player away from a Super Bowl. Sometimes not even then. Again, look at Peterson. Peterson is as skilled as any of those backs you mention. He is, undoubtedly, the best RB in the game (sorry Chris Johnson). Yet even he is not capable of leading the Vikings to a Super Bowl. It took a QB to do that. Does that mean Minnesota was wrong to draft him? Maybe not. But look at the mess they're in now. They have no QB, they have a suspect line. Their window is closing. And AP is not getting younger. By the time they reload, he could well be past his prime (and also far more expensive to keep). Again, this isn't a philosophy. This isn't even new. This is how the league is run. The fans who don't see this are the ones who aren't paying attention or who think the game is the same as it was even 5 years ago. It ain't. And when your brand new GM comes in and inherits a team with multiple gaping holes, the last thing he can afford to do is waste a valuable draft pick. I said it at the draft and I'll say it again. No matter HOW good CJ becomes, even if he becomes a Hall of Famer, it was the wrong pick because the cost benefit of it won't match the production. I'll put it to you another way. In the past decade or so, the Bills have spent 5 high draft picks on RBs: Smith, Henry (2nd round), Willis, Lynch and now Spiller. During that same span, how many times have the Bills made the playoffs? It's not a coincidence. This team doesn't seem to realize what the best teams in the league do -- the game has changed.

Peterson is a great example. How many Super Bowls have the Vikings won with him? How many playoff games? Peterson took the Vikings (who had a great O-Line) and made them respectable. But it wasn't until Favre got there that they became a Super Bowl contender. It's the best possible example of how much the league has changed in the past ten years. It's NOT a running back league anymore. They have the shortest career span, they're costly, and their importance on the field have been diminished thanks to the rule changes that are designed to up scoring and passing numbers. Holding on to the belief that the way teams used to win in the 70s, 80s, 90s or even 2001, is failure to see the big picture. And THAT is why the Spiller pick was so alarming from our 70 year old GM. It shows he is out of touch with how the game is won today. And his moves subsequent to that have only added more logs to that fire.

This line of thinking sums up exactly the problem with Nix. That is the old school method. What you fail to realize is the game has changed. The very rules of the game itself have changed. Gone are the days where an elite RB could carry a team with a good defense to a title. Gone are the days of teams putting the full rushing load on one RB. You're living in the past.

The Spiller pick isn't about him being a bust. It's about the philosophy behind the pick. You don't take a RB in round one. And you certainly don't take a RB in round one when you have 2 1,000 yard rushers already on the roster. And despite all your defenses, you haven't pointed to one personnel move that was good ... give me specifics. Give me a player besides Edwards who you feel was an impact player in 2010 that Nix signed.

This is true I guess. I doubt they go offense though with a defensive HC coming on. He's going to want to get his foundation in place. But of course, this is all assumption on my part.

Just heard on the radio it's official. Still looking for confirmation. But assuming it's true, that probably means Fairley will be his #1 pick. Just a hunch. Bummer.

With RR taking the Carolina Head Coaching job I'll be shocked if he doesn't take Fairley #1. That sucks.

This is very true. Everyone is so gunshy -- and with good reason. The Bills fans are like the abused spouse who can't trust their new partner.

Okay, then explain to me, personnel wise, what moves Nix has made in his first 12 months (roughly) on the job that makes you feel he's anything but an inside hire? Was it Green? Maybe it was the new Kelsay contract. Or maybe it was the bumbling of the Trent Edwards fiasco. Or perhaps it was the sheer failure to properly shop Marshawn before trading him? Was it the stellar drafting of Spiller at 9? Or maybe the total and complete failure to address the TE position. Or maybe it was the signing of an over the hill Davis. Or the drafting of Troup who looks more lost on the field more often than not. Maybe it was the fact that this team had more undrafted free agents make the team than any other in the NFL. Oh, I got it. It was the four win season. That must be it. You may call that a knee jerk reaction, I call that a solid foundation of evidence that he is in over his head in this job. I should note that I don't agree with the OP's stance that this team is doomed regardless of who it picks in the first round. But I do agree that Buddy Nix's first year on the job was a clusterf*&k of epic proportions.