RuntheDamnBall

First, plenty of evaluators thought Mike Williams was suited to play LT - and a definite can't miss. That opinion (that a guy responsible for a lefty's blind side should be able to make the switch) has since changed. There are fewer constants in this game than you think. If he had been a great RT at #5, that would have been better than what actually resulted for the Bills. Going with the prognosticator boards makes you a winner in the way that it's made the Lions and Browns winners - in April, not in January. RE: Carimi: That's the mentality that gets you in trouble and has you picking guys like Maybin at #11 because you really NEED a DE and those are supposedly OK to take in the top-10/15. I'd take Nick Mangold with a top 10 pick and I don't think I'm alone. BTW Walter Football just blows. I can't believe how wrong they are. When they're right it's more of a blind squirrel situation than any proof of their genius.

OL needs time and good health to really click. I don't suspect we've got our five starters for the future on this roster, but Wood, Levitre, and possibly Bell are worth continuing to invest in, and I'd love to see one of Urbik or any of the other recent pickups work in the system over an offseason. If they can draft another 1-2 linemen and make some kind of savvy FA pickup, I think this line could have some good options for 2011. What they can't do is lack depth to the point where they have to dig through the scrap heap for starters like they did this year. Wang's injury didn't help, but they should have had some new vet help that improved upon the Kirk Chamberses of the world.

But you don't want to be de-vista'd, do you?

I'm sure. And the truth is, if Spiller was the very best player on anyone's board at that point, but if the teams looking at a RB didn't see too many differences between him and Best, they'd have to make the call: is Spiller so much better than Best that he's worth giving up at least a third-rounder? Think about it on those terms.

The draft prognosticators are wrong all the time. I repeat, ALL THE TIME. Besides, if Carimi ends up being a GREAT RT, he'll be worth a #9 pick, IMO.

I would love to have seen this board if they drafted a right tackle at #9. We're talking core meltdown. I am not saying I think it's a bad idea, and if they had to take Carimi at #9 and he projected at RT, I'd be totally fine with it presuming he provided a big boost to the run game. If you get a very good player, it really doesn't matter where he is projected or where the idiot talking heads say he should go. If you looked at Andre Reed's NFL stats and told me this was a guy who was drafted in the top 5/was top 5 talent, I wouldn't know the better and I'd say that his production lined up with that slot. That draft produced some great and very good ones, but surely Andre's career was one of the very best out of that class. That they got him in the fourth is a sign of the kind of deep drafting that you hope this team will continue to embrace in the future. Moats looks like he could be another pick like that, though I won't be voting him to the Pro Bowl yet.

If you're telling me that the players that the team continues to evaluate wouldn't benefit from a win, and that a coaching staff that needs more experience wouldn't benefit from a win, well, then I don't know what to tell you. There's no guarantee the Jets are playing backups; if we lose to their backups, the TSW crybaby brigade will be out there to inform you how the Bills suck because they can't even beat BACKUPS. I, for one, think the Bills could use players like Jerod Mayo (#10), Ryan Clady (#12), Patrick Willis (#11), Haloti Ngata (#12), DeMarcus Ware (#11), Roethlisberger (#11), Wilfork (#21)... Some of those players are better than a MAJORITY of those picked before them. Maybe it's about how you use the picks you have, and - just as importantly - about the environment you provide for that pick, instead of where you pick. But by all means, rail on about how the Bills' chances are dead in the water if they don't secure that #3 pick, and about how losing is good for all. Also, kudos Bob in STL.

LOL.

Losing is for losers. I don't care if the Jets suit up Jenn freaking Sterger out there. I want the Bills to punch them in the mouth and for them to have a hangover going into the playoffs, by virtue of the Bills. I want Jabba and Sanchpoise to lose in their first playoff game and wonder what happened to their momentum. Tanking for draft picks is as reprehensible as betting on your own game. If Gailey goes out there and tells the players it's OK to lose this Sunday, I want him fired the next day. You all should feel the same way. If the Bills really, really want a certain player more than anyone else, and feel that player can help them more than anyone else in this upcoming draft, then they should trade up for him. Otherwise, let the scouts do their jobs and let the team on the field do theirs.

Only if he learned how to not play musical QBs.

I sort of agree with you but would not be upset if we had Matt Ryan, Jake Long, Calvin Johnson, Sam Bradford, Joe Thomas, or some of those other dudes.

OK. Got the #1 pick? The Bills don't. Can you guarantee he'll come out? I can't. Probably the most intriguing name to me, but mobility is a major question and he'll no doubt have growing pains. Is the team, and more importantly, are the fans, ready for that? One-year wonders scare me. I hate to think we'll be getting a guy who hasn't had to face an offseason of defenses adjusting to him, and I further hate the way the guy has conducted himself prior to this year. The laptop incident etc may not mean much to others, but if we've got another guy like Vick who coasts on talent in his early years, comes in with a big head and a bigger contract, and thinks the world oughta be handed to him, it would sink this franchise further. You don't pick Newton unless you're 100% sure of the makeup, and I really would hesitate to pick him unless I really had a quality team in place around him a la Roethlisberger. Regardless, I see none of these guys, save for Luck (whom I think we have the worst chance of getting) coming in and starting on day one. So, you've got another #1 pick made "for the future" when there are way too many "NOW" needs. The team needs talent that will see the field almost immediately. "Upside" picks have been killing this franchise for a decade. Fitz is top-20 quality and you're not getting that kind of play from a rookie. Let's stock the cabinet before trying to make a good meal.

Puh-LEEEZE put this argument to rest. It's meaningless. Fred Jackson was not worse than A-Train, but couldn't even get playing time over him. Fitz was not worse than Edwards, but couldn't even get playing time over him. Pennington was not worse than Testaverde, but couldn't get playing time over him. They all did, eventually, and they all proved eventually that they should be on the field.

Dude, it was the home fans' last chance to show any appreciation for a guy who for all intents and purposes gave us his best and made this season bearable. I understand the context and it came during an awful, awful game. That doesn't change the fact that Fitz gives this team more hope for the future, whether it's as caretaker and mentor as the next young QB arrives, or if he matures even further into the role of leader of this team. Maintain some perspective. This game is for fun, even if the Bills do their level best to contradict that cause at times.

I'd rather have Brohm than Henne right now.

You're (Klingler) right (Couch), top (Akili Smith) picks (Druckenmiller) do (Leaf) succeed (David Carr) more (JP Losman) often (Alex Smith) than (Joey Harrington) not (Kyle Boller). Just some perspective. Both of us left out a lot of names that prove or disprove the case, too. Basically, I see what you're doing here, but Freeman, Cutler, Stafford and Eli aren't yet elite QBs. They have had elite seasons, but so have players who have taken the less traditional path to starting QB jobs. Also, Rodgers, Freeman, Flacco, Favre, and Cutler weren't top-5 picks, and none of them were thrown into the fire from day one. That usually happens with a top-5 pick, and even with Bradford's success, he hasn't yet led a team to a winning record. I think it's paramount that the Bills identify and groom their next franchise QB, but the truth is that there are many paths to that result. You'd love a can't miss guy - even if you have to pay him - but few exist. Therein lies the challenge. I do hope Nix hits on his next QB, and at the very least he was involved in the scouting that led to the trade for Rivers, so that is promising. They need to draft a QB instead of a gimmick RB to start, though. I'd add Vick to your list, also.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Fitz's accuracy can be a concern, but it's played up more than it should be because his misses can be SO dreadful. The stats amp up our perceptions despite the fact that the stats don't show us everything. Is anyone doing better advanced metrics a la baseball to account for individual QB performance (hitting receivers in stride but dropped, etc)? I think there are way too many variables for this to really be accomplished - far more than in baseball where there's really just one center of primary action at any given moment - but I'd love to see it tried. Still, I can't see it working. There are some times a receiver makes a great play on the ball and that that's the object of the play - to get it where no one else can pull it down. There are other times where the pass is exactly where it should be, and a smart DB anticipates the play. The truth is somewhere in-between "Fitz is inaccurate," and "Fitz can make all the throws." The fact that he has improved this season leads me to believe that with an offseason of reps with the ones and some committed practice and self-study, he can be a serviceable #1. I agree with those who see improving the team around him as the best course of action, unless the FO feels they have the opportunity to get a guy the caliber of Peyton or Brady. RT needs to be stabilized, and until other teams can't run at will on the Bills, I think that will always be their #1 problem.

You think the defense sucks but that two of our first three picks should be offense?

This is a foolish reply to a dumb original post. Brohm shouldn't be starting right now, but your logic fails when we take a look at who was first on the depth chart to start the season. This is not only because Trent sucked, but also because that depth chart was no proof that Fitz was an inferior quarterback - and the truth ended up being quite the contrary.

This crazy plan actually sounds OK until you look at the TEs on the roster.

Why would you cut Brohm unless you really have something better? By all accounts Brohm has at the very least grown in the system. He hasn't played well because he hasn't played. Would you have cut Frank Reich if you never saw him play? McCargo has definitely run his course here. Time to let him go. I'm willing to give Maybin more time since he already has gotten a ton of guaranteed money from the Bills. Might as well see if the light will ever come on as long as he's not wasting a roster spot. And if McCargo's gone, at least one waste of a roster spot is gone, too. I like Wilson. That's not very insightful, I just think he's a good guy to have on the team.

*bows in a show of respect*

Surprised to see no mention of Basil Hayden's here. Now that's smooth.

there's an, uh, interesting word choice.

It's easy to feel that way, but tell me this: Marques Colston or Reggie Bush? Those picks were made in the same year by a Saints franchise that was to be a champion someday, but wasn't yet. It'd have been easy to say, sure they can identify a gem like Colston but missed on Bush. Spiller might end up being useful, but not a star. He might be a star, who knows? But you help yourself by doing well with those picks that are made when few are watching.