2020 Our Year For Sure

1. Losman has little reason to sign a new contract with any team. The free agent market is where the money is, even for mediocre players. 2. It makes little sense for any team to trade significant resources for the services of a backup quarterback for one season. Conclusion: Losman's value is probably about a 6th or 7th rounder.

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playernews.aspx?sport=NFL If you look at that link from the original poster, there's an updated story that indicates you're correct, and St. Louis can not negotiate with anyone as they aren't officially on the clock yet.

The guy's career consisted of 2 catches for 4 yards and 0 touchdowns. My condolences to him, but to say he was coming onto anything other than the free agent pool before his injury is a stretch.

Ridiculous. We have two perfectly good recievers on this team besides Evans. Neither is good at working on the outside or in the red zone, meaning we need to add someone...but adding 2 WRs would be pretty much a wasted pick, unless you're assuming Evans is leaving.

It seems foolish to me to draft a cornerback when you have one of the NFL's worst pass rushes. No secondary can make up for a lackluster pass rush. On the other hand, many a defensive line have been known to cover for less than ideal secondary personnel.

Quick question...why are DE and DT grouped into DL? Certainly teams would draft defensive line as a whole more frequently than they would recievers. DE and DT are two seperate positions, just as WR and TE are two seperate positions, just as QB and RB are two seperate positions. Its a good thing my prior experience tells me that AKC would never set parameters based on some kind of bias.

Are you counting both San Francisco and New England*? It should probably be either one or the other.

In all honesty, I think we'll have clinched the division by then. The track record for teams coming off of Superbowl losses is not an impressive one, and we've been steadily improving each year since Jauron came in. I truthfully believe the time has come.

That plan sounds picture perfect to me. At this point, thats what I'm both hoping and expecting they'll do.

So...to avoid drafting a bust, we surrender our pick. Got it.

I don't see a young corner replacing McGee or Greer anytime soon, and even if he did, the improvement would be modest at best. We go three deep at corner plus a youngster with upside, with 2 of those 4 having good size. I fail to see what we'll accomplish by drafting a corner at #11. I'd love to get a receiver, but in this draft we won't get value at receiver unless we wait for the 2nd round, or trade back up into the 1st. I don't know where we'll go, our options are open, but I'm hoping it isn't corner...as long as our corners are solid, which they are and more, we'll be sitting pretty if we can get the pass rush figured out.

Let this open the door to the player we should take. Derrick Harvey.It's all about pass rush and we ain't got one.

I'd love to know where the Myth of the Highly-Priced Ends came from...

There seems to be a few here on board with the idea of drafting 2 recievers early, and I can't understand it. If we just get one reciever in rounds 1 or 2, then we'll have Roscoe and Josh Reed in non-starting roles...thats a pretty deep group of recievers. Really can't see what drafting a new #5 reciever is going to do for this team. Seems like a waste of a draft pick.

I would say the difference was neither Simpson nor Clements. It was the pass rush, in my opinion.

Is it too much to ask for somebody whose willing to throw the ball on 1st down? PLEASE, Turk...even if you're still telegraphing plays, not using rollouts, not throwing to the running backs, not spreading the offense...at least be willing to throw on 1st down from time to time.

How ironic.

Yes, they were indeed the first above average defense to do those things. And go figure! They didn't have to carry 28 former first round defensive tackles to do it...

Its all about the pass rush and we ain't got one. Derrick Harvey!

A truly honest question. I need to be reminded why 80% of the board is so high on this guy. Not saying that its wrong, just that I find it difficult to evaluate the secondary and would love to have it spelled out for me.

I call the defense I saw above average because I don't value total yards as a measurement of how effective a unit is. Therefore, from my point of view, the Bills defense would appear from the stats to be the 18th best defense in the league, due to points allowed. Except that I feel the defense was hampered by an offense that went beyond being casually bad. If the offense would've gotten touchdowns instead of field goals once in awhile, the defense could have played from a position of strength rather than a position of desperation...and opposing offenses would've had to call their plays with more urgency. This line of thought leads me to believe that, with an offense you at least call close to average in terms of getting points on the board, the defense would have moved up at least three spots, meaning they'd pass into the top half of the league, and become (by definition) above average. You by no means have to agree with that assessment, and it seems like most here don't, but thats just the way I see things. I feel the defense was really hampered by the incompetence of the offense, and put into difficult positions.

Why would we draft two recievers when we'll have Roscoe and Reed in non-starting roles if we draft one?

Yeah, and if they based points on how many yards you accumulate, that might actually matter. Last year, I saw a defense that stayed in several games last year in which the offense could contribute next to nothing all day long. I'd say they were an above average defensive unit, and thats WITHOUT Poz, Simpson, Crowell for a time, Ellison for a time, Denney, Stroud and Kawika.

You're all perfectly correct, but you can't draft a first round pick just to keep your starter sharp at every position. Heading into a draft, you have to actually evaluate what you have, and decide where you need the help. You really have no choice but to answer the question, "Should Greer be starting, or shouldn't he?" There's no sitting on the fence here...