Dibs

Great post. It makes a change to read a post saying both positives & negatives about us with reasonable explanations given for the them. For those of us who can't get to see the game, this sort of assessment is greatly appreciated.

Yeah, blocks as good as an extra lineman.....if the lineman is Bennie

FANTASTIC!!! I can't wait. Honestly.

Maybe they feel he'll be much better at guard.....esp. considering the trouble(& age) of CV. For now he might provide a good backup & when CV is done he steps up into the starters spot. Just a thought.

Noted. Note I said "we could be good" not "Super Bowl-bound." I'm sorry if I misinterpreted what "halfway decent" was implying. I figured you meant at least average.....but not super bowl level.

That's right(& supports my point). Before him, the team was (on average) in need of someone at that OL position. Not only is that position filled successfully in your scenarios but filled successfully with 1st day talent so (on average) one can expect a higher upside to the player. Now we have a (on average?) close to pro bowl player where previously there was a (on average) player you really wanted to replace. All you are proving is the equivalent of 'guys like lots of sex'. Do the same comparisons with other positions & I'm sure you will find basically the same conclusions. Just quickly, take the QB position. Manning, Palmer, Rothlesburger, McNabb, Culpepper...& going back...Elway, Marino, Kelly, Montana. These guys(and all the others I can't be bothered to list) will logically show that if you succeed in getting a starting caliber QB in the 1st day of the draft, your team (on average) will win more games than before......& guys like sex a lot. If you only take successful 1st day draft picks & plot how those teams improved, you are simply saying..... "When teams draft well in the 1st day of the draft, they (on average) improve on the field."

I'm definitely interested. If I can play when you run a game, I will. Just in case people didn't know..... Party Poker has a pretend money section where you can practice against other schmucks to gain experience at no cost. Also, if anyone wants to join, PM me...or another person who is already joined to sponsor you & you (& the member who sponsors you) will get bonus money in the account.

I agree totally. re: this thread... I find human reaction interesting. Another way of wording what you wrote is.... "We have quite a lot of talent on this team & if we can stop the penalties etc, etc. we could be good." Had you posted that way I think you would have gotten slammed. Apparently it is not 'realistic' to think this team has 'average or above' talent.

That would be very doubtful since the action of AFL players kicking is just as a punter would kick(give or take)....rugby place kicking or even soccer would fit but not AFL kickers. It has me baffled.

I think a lot of people were assuming you were trying to prove more than you were here.... IMO the obvious answer(which I posted earlier) is "Der...of course it is a yes." And the answer will obviously be yes for the following questions. "Do teams which build their starting defensive lines through first day picks tend to win more games than teams that don't?" "Do teams which build their starting offensive skills players through first day picks tend to win more games than teams that don't?" "Do teams which build their starting secondaries through first day picks tend to win more games than teams that don't?" Actually, upon second thought, your question appears to be.... "Do teams which build their starting offensive lines through first day picks tend to win more games than before they had those first day picks as starters?" To quote myself from the earlier post.... "Teams usually draft a position high because they are sorely lacking in that area. It is only logical that if the draftee succeeds, the upgrade for the team is noticeable. Add to that the fact that a higher percent of early picks(that succeed) will be 'very' good & the upgrade will be very noticeable to the team." The only useful thing that you might be able to show from using this sort of data that I can see is whether 1st day picks have a higher upside on average than later picks.

Bills 41 Patriots 7 I was going to predict a shutout for the Pats but you have to remain realistic in these things or what's the point.

Yep, 2 weeks after he does something miraculous against us to win the game for Miami.

OMG that is one long post. What an odd way of interpreting the data. Let's for the sake of argument assume what you wrote is correct & 4000 people meditating reduced crime that day by 25%. To interpret by that that the 4000 people altered reality so therefore we can alter how the Bills play by 'wishing' is stretch after stretch. Firstly, I would think that the crime was lowered because fewer people decided to commit crime that day than other days. This suggests that by meditating, one can influence how others think(or emote). Running on that basis, if we all meditated(not simply thought strongly or wished) on the Bills playing with confidence, aggression & focus(as example) the players might increase in those areas. Scientists have known for decades that positive thinking staves off illness, increases productivity & extends average life-spans.....try & get a pessimist to believe it though.

I was just hearing this on the TV late news & had a double take. "The Buffalo Bills" haven't been mentioned in the Australian media since our last super bowl loss. I wonder if Rocca knows he is headed for a team which already has the best punter in the league.

Flowers was 7 years ago....so that would mean 3rd round x2 2nd round x3 1st round x2 in 7 years....cool.

Excellent post....especially this bit.

754937[/snapback] Yes, but if we look at the other 10(I'm ignoring FBs) super bowl starters from both teams we find another 5 1st round picks, 1 2nd & 3 3rds...& a 6th.

I don't agree as fervently as you posted...there are always exeptions IMO, but I agree with your concepts, esp. DL over OL in drafting. I'm not sure if people realize but over the last 6 drafts, we have drafted DL quite high, quite regularly. 3rd round x2 2nd round x3 1st round x1

Well put.

Are you even a Bills fan? There seems to be absolutely nothing about the Bills that you don't aggressively knock. Is there anything about us you like? Owner/GM/HC/Coaches/Players/Offense/Defense???? I'd bet you even think we are stuffing up the ST.

Even if Peters becomes a probowler & Reyes, Fowler, Gandy & Preston become very good, I'd still want us to use at least a 3rd round pick on the OLine. Our depth is not good....weakest unit depthwise on the team. I'm starting to think the rest of you guys are to blame for RJOSEPHs blow-up in his WM threads. He asks a question here about the OLINE & everyone seems intent on saying how bad(or good) WM is. LABillz....What's with the obssesive anti-Willis posts? Did he steal your carpark or something? I hope you're not going to do a 'Haha Told you so' thread if you are proven right this season like Lv-Bills did with Nance.

I don't know how I feel about our OLine being a bunch of pullers.

IMO this(bold) point virtually kills the usefulness of the statistics. My interpretation of it is..... When a team drafts a player in the the first round who pans out well, it reflects in the win/loss record. Well....at the sake of sounding rude....no shiit Sherlock Teams usually draft a position high because they are sorely lacking in that area. It is only logical that if the draftee succeeds, the upgrade for the team is noticeable. Add to that the fact that a higher percent of early picks(that succeed) will be 'very' good & the upgrade will be very noticeable to the team. I would bet that your criteria would pan out for pretty much all positions, not just the OL.