Dibs

No they didn't.

As has become apparent in this thread, people should be clear and differentiate between carries(runs) and touches(runs + catches). Confusion abounds concerning peoples views. Ignoring injury games(can't be bothered to check), only 3 RBs rushed for an average of 20 carries per game this season. The highest being 351 rushes(22 average/game). Spiller does not need 25 nor even 20 carries per game to be considered a full time RB in the modern NFL. If we take the 8 games where Spiller rushed for 14 or more times we find his stats were.... (17.75 carries/game) 142 - 867 - 6.1ave (Extrapolated over a season that would equate to..... 284 - 1734) I would be happy enough if he averaged 17 carries/game...272 in the year(which would have placed him 11th in carries this season). With a 6.0 ave he would see 1632 yards in the season(2nd highest in league). (Though I would like to see him rush 22/game with a 6.0ave to beat Dickerson's rushing record ) Interestingly his stats for the 8 games where rushing under 14 times are.... 65 - 377 - 5.8ave (For those that argue he will/won't get better with more touches in a game....the average was pretty similar, with slight edge going to using him more). Only 10 RBs rushed for 17+ times/game this season. Spiller averaged 13/game 1st fish game: 22 - 91 - 4.1ave 2nd Fish game: 22 - 138 - 6.3ave Like I said.....in the 8 games where he averaged 17.75 rushes/game he averaged 6.1 yards/carry. He 100% can get the bulk of the carries.....as he showed this season.

Yeah....I never know what to do with the supplemental picks as they don't appear on standard draft lists. It's one of the many areas on which I don't know too much about. Are supplemental picks considered standard draft picks? Adding to your point about the value of QB....the much lower rookie salaries for high 1st round picks would also factor towards re-selecting a QB in the 1st being more likely than ever before. The investment obviously isn't as much meaning teams would be more likely to count their losses and start again. I tend to think the main reasons for not re-selecting a QB within a several year time span is that traditionally QBs would take several years to develop/mature on the NFL stage. It has only been in the last few years that it has been commonplace for rookie QBs to be competitive as starters. I don't know why this has been the case.....perhaps the Colleges(in general) have evolved and now operate systems which more closely resemble the NFL, thus having a greater number of QBs be "ready" when they hit the NFL. I really don't know as I don't follow any College football. If this is the case however.....it is yet another reason to suggest that a team would give up on their 1st round QB quicker than in times past and re-select one in the 1st round in a much shorter time. LOL....now that I've effectively argued against my original assertion to the point of defeat, I think I'll shut up.

Though there is always a chance, it has never happened(last 40 years analyzed) that a team drafting a QB in the 1st round has drafted another QB in the 1st round of the following draft......the only exception being Colts 1982 & 1983 with Art Schlichter(banned for gambling issues) & John Elway. Furthermore, only one team has selected a QB within 2 drafts of the previous 1st round selection....that being Seahawks 1991 & 1993 with Dan McGuire & Rick Mirer. With that being the case, it would be extraordinary for the Browns to select a QB in the 1st round this year after selecting Weeden(pick 22) in last years draft or for the Jaguars to do so, having selected Gabbert(pick 10) in the 2011 draft. I tend to think.... If one of the QB prospect's stock rises greatly the Chiefs may take a QB at the #1 position. And...again, if stock rises the Eagles may take a QB at #4. IMO Raiders & Cardinals likely won't select a QB.....Raiders due to Palmer.....and Cardinals due to the highly intelligent and well considered concept that they tend to stuff things up for themselves worse than the Bills do. Jaguars, Browns & Lions will not select a QB IMO. This means.... 0 to 4 of the 7 teams picking ahead of us will likely select a QB.....which means that possibly we may get our choice at QB.

Funny thing is, a friend of mine....a Rams fan....thinks pretty much the same thing....but has done so for longer.

Yes actually. Not saying that I don't think he deserves it because I do think he does. It's that he averaged under 10 carries a game for the first 10 weeks which keeps him out of national attention....and....he plays for the Bills which keeps him out of national attention. The Pro Bowl is largely a popularity contest having fans vote for a decent percent of the outcome(from week 12?).

No. Draft order tie-breaker is based upon strength of schedule.

I see things completely opposite to this. In the last 10 years the QB position has become even more sought after, thus reaching for them in the 1st round has become not only common place but a standard in the NFL. As a poster recently pointed out in another thread(sorry, I can't remember the poster's name).....previous to the last 10 years, the average number of QBs selected in the 1st round was typically 1-2....in the last 10 years the average has been 2-4. Essentially QBs are selected well above where their rating would typically set them. The removal of the ludicrously high salary figures for top draft picks only increases the likelihood that teams will take a chance on obtaining a QB of potential.

Nope.

Merde

Wouldn't it? 17 attempts for 106 yards this week will do the job! Go Bills!!!

There really can't be a hint of truth in a polarizing statement like the one given. Either the statement was correct or it was incorrect. I personally would give credit that the poster was both intelligent enough and educated enough to understand the difference between.... "...and is a #2 WR on any other team in the NFL" and "...and is a #2 WR on most other teams in the NFL" The definition of hyperbole is.... Obvious and intentional exaggeration. The statement was not an obvious exaggeration as SJ's abilities are highly debated.....nor was the statement obviously intentional as nobody knows if the poster actually believes that SJ would be a #2 on every other team in the NFL. Hyperbole would be to say "SJ is a #2 WR." To state that every #1 WR in the league is better than him is polarizing and inflammatory to those that believe his abilities are greater than his numbers. Perhaps....just perhaps...being inflammatory was the intent of the poster. EDIT: I chose not to use the term "Troll" out of respect to the poster.....however with only 11 posts on the forum it makes me wonder.

I think you have taken the poster out of context. He was replying to this comment.......... "....and is a #2 WR on any other team in the NFL" His list was to show that the statement was incorrect....and he did this by showing several teams where this would not be the case.

1963 Jim Brown 291 - 1863 - 6.4

I will never forget that day. I live in Australia and was camping in the bush with a group of friends. Most of us happened to be American Football fans so we went into the nearest town and hijacked the local bar's TV(which had cable). The game wasn't live at the time but since we avoided any media prior it had that live feel. In hindsight, that game was a mirror opposite of what it feels generally to be a Bills fan. Instead of giving hope and then dashing them in the worst possible way and at the worst possible time.....it spiraled any Bills fan watching into the pits of despair....and then vaulted them into the elation. That game truly is a highlight life memory for me.

Unfortunately you are correct. With 1000 yards minimum in a season: (This seems to be the modern standard) 1. 1934 Beattie Feathers 119 - 1004 - 8.4 2. 2012* CJ Siller 183 - 1185 - 6.5 With 100 carries minimum in a season: 1. 1934 Beattie Feathers 119 - 1004 - 8.4 2. 1949 Joe Perry 115 - 718 - 6.8 3. 1951 Dan Towler 126 - 854 - 6.8 4. 2012* CJ Siller 183 - 1185 - 6.5 With 90 carries minimum in a season: (This seems to be the older standard) 1. 1934 Beattie Feathers 119 - 1004 - 8.4 2. 1953 Skeet Quinlan 97 - 705 - 7.3 3. 1961 Lenny Moore 92 - 648 - 7.0 4. 1952 Hugh McHlhenny 98 - 684 - 7.0 5. 1949 Joe Perry 115 - 718 - 6.8 6. 1951 Dan Towler 126 - 854 - 6.8 7. 1954 Tank Younger 91 - 610 - 6.7 8. 1948 Johnny Strykalski 141 - 915 - 6.5 9. 2012* CJ Siller 183 - 1185 - 6.5 As an added curio....Lenny Moore must have been a super star for his day. #. 1956 Lenny Moore 86 - 649 - 7.9 #. 1958 Lenny Moore 82 - 598 - 7.3 Modern Era(1975+) the only players to come close to what Spiller has achieved(6.1 ave or better in a season) are: 2010 Jamaal Charles 230 - 1467 - 6.4 1997 Barry Sanders 335 - 2053 - 6.1

The Lynch of 2009 wasn't the Lynch we are seeing in 2012. He started 6 games in 2009 losing his starting job to Fred Jackson.

I understand what you are saying....it's one of the reasons I am very happy we have Spiller. Give him the ball a little more & at least if we lose we have something exciting to watch while we are losing.

Excitement isn't typically the benchmark criteria for evaluating success.

Excitement isn't typically the benchmark criteria for evaluating success. Jauron may have been one of the walking dead.....but he got to eat more brains than Gailey has.

That was *bleep*ing fantastic! Vocally he reminded me of Bill Murray's Carl Spackler from Caddyshack.

Because he's a celebrity. Celebrities don't have to pay for their smack.

Realistically, how many years of rebuilding do we have left? Realistically a few good moves(QB, HC, LBs, WR) and a bit of luck(staying healthy, potential talent developing) could see us in the Super Bowl in 2 years time. Conversely, a few bad moves...and then some more unwise moves....could see us make the playoffs in 2020. This really is a glass is half full/empty sort of question. There is reason to believe that the FO, since they have stuffed things up for so long, will continue to stuff things up.....but there is also reason to believe, with the drive to acquire a big name FA(Mario Williams) & the push for a legit QB that the FO may well have changed philosophy somewhat in recent times. IMO this question will be more easily speculated upon once we know if we are retaining Chan Gailey or not.

IMO the roster is better.....but not by much. QB = chop 2009: Fitz 2012: Fitz RBs = 2012(slight edge) 2009: FJ & Lynch 2012: FJ & CJ WRs = 2009 2009: SJ, Evans, Reed, Owens 2012: SJ, Jones, Graham, Smith OL = 2012 2009: Wood(rookie), Levitre(rookie), Kirk Chambers, Jonathon Scott, Hangartner 2012: Wood, Levitre, Cordy Glenn, Erik Pears(Hairston), Urbik TE = 2012 2009: Nelson 2012: Chandler DL = 2012 2009: Schobel, Kelsay, Denney, Kyle Williams, Marcus Stroud, Spencer Johnson 2012: Mario Williams, Anderson, Moore, Kyle Williams, Marcel Darius, Carrington LBs = chop 2009: Posluszny & a bunch of other scrubs 2012: Bradham, Sheppard, Barnett DBs = 2009 2009: Florence, McGee, Corner, Whitner, Byrd(rookie), Wilson 2012: Gilmore, Williams, Rogers, Byrd, Wilson, Searcy

I was being facetious....but....I don't know about you but I want us to be able to win a SB.