Geno Smith's Arm

Compared to McKelvin, he seems eloquent. I hope he falls to the Bills. The Bills will have a better gauge of how sharp he is from interviewing him themselves.

I think so too. Thanks

So he is changing their offense based on the chance that they might face the Giants in the Super Bowl this year?

Haha. April Fools Day! Yeah, all those guys are usually right about QB's (Joey Harrington, Akili Smith, Ryan Leaf, JP Losman, Heath Shuler..I doubt there is enough room for all the names). Just step back everyone, if one of the 32 GM's thinks a has something special, he does!

How many other QB's did he have to draft? Those guys (and Kelly) pretty much cover his whole GM career.

It was clear to me too. So clear in fact, that I assumed that my post would be understood as me agreeing with him, then expanding upon it. Please forgive me for any confusion.

People have to get over judging entertainment by whether or not it comes off as "pro-Buffalo". It's so "small", petty, and defensive. It's not the primary focus of ANY of these shows to "bash Buffalo". Whether or not they like to say good things about Buffalo isn't a good way to gauge someone's talent.

Ha. The guy is to sports radio what Johnny Carson was to late night TV. You may not like it, but if there were so many guys that could do it better....well, they would. BUT THEY DON'T. The "Triple U", is another great concept. Better than Letterman's "Top 10" lists. Lot's of Triple U's on this message board...

I used to loath him too. Same situation, repeated listening at work brought me onto Rome's wavelength. Now I see that the show verges on genius. Tears of laughter...the Favre banjo/"I told Percy I'd do this" bit is as good as any radio show I've ever heard. They would just keep adding a little bit as the playoffs unfolded, until it was just perfection. I couldn't stand the Everett showdown, and thought Rome was a weasel, until he explained that he didn't want to do the interview in the first place, but was basically ordered to do it.

That sounds like forced positivity to me! That's repression. He said he was "excited" 43 times.

I kinda like him, and the "lying" that people are getting excited about (lol), is really nothing. But this highlight's one of the things that bothers me about him. This forced "positivism" is not healthy. It's not realistic, and not a "good example to the kids", or any of that crap. I don't know how long he can sustain this false face, but it can't be healthy for his own psyche. Eventually it will devalue and undermine his message. "Everything's great" isn't an effective answer for every situation.

i hate when a player pushes away teammates so he can celebrate. I cringe whenever I see it, and can't believe a player doesn't realize how bad it looks.

gee, call it a handicap, but Buddy has known he was going to be working the draft much longer than I've known. He has a pretty good head start. I'm not buying an iphone for the draft, I have a child to take care of, and it will be years before the draft can be evaluated anyway.

I'm pretty into the draft, but I can't sit around tracking the draft for 2 days. I think it would be just as fair to submit a draft after the fact (before training camp, at least).

I totally agree, and acknowledged that is where boards diverge. The thing is, as as the draft gets to the bottom rounds, it becomes more and more of a crapshoot. Certainly some GM's have been better than others in the later rounds *, but the players that a GM really likes must often get picked by other teams before he gets a chance to make the selection. So much luck involved, even just to have the opportunity to select guys that you have applied your scouting talent to find. I really think the draft is just step one, and that it's after a player gets into the organization that the real work begins, especially for the lower round guys. Equally talented guys, drafted into different situations can have radically different careers. The coaching, who they have to compete with for a job, how much time they are given to develop, what kind of risks a player is willing to take** ...on and on. Most guys just don't make it, and others are in the wrong situation. One team's trash, is another team's decent back up etc. I think Buddy Nix is doing a great job, and I would never claim to know more about football, but I do believe I could do a reasonably comparable draft. The 2010 draft isn't very impressive. Really, look at it. I believe I could have drafted comparably well, even if it's wasn't all Buddy Nix's draft. * I would guess that stable, consistent organizations like Pittsburgh, that have had a consistent drafting philosophy, and style of play (regardless of GM or coach) across many seasons, do better in the later rounds. The emphasis is on certain types of players, year in and year out, as opposed to just talent. I think that is a little different. ** Not sure people like to hear it, but I think PED's can have a big effect on players careers. Are they willing to take them? Are they willing to take larger amounts? Will they play through injury with a little help? All kinds of "commitments" that can effect a career. These aren't necessarily "scout-able".

I immediately thought of this site because it has archives of its "Big Board", I didn't cherry pick or anything. I'm not going to go through the draft to see how it unfolded, and which players were available, but I think it gives a fair idea of what a draft based on a sites board would look like. http://www.draftcountdown.com/archive/2010/2010-Top-Overall.php I used 2010 because that at least gives 2 seasons to evaluate, these are the Bills picks, and the player ranked at that pick on the sites board. Bills #1 (9th) Spiller * Draft Countdown- Brian Buluga Bills #2 (41st)Troup * DC-Ryan Matthews Bills #3 (7nd) Carrington * DC-John Jerry Bills #4 (107th) Easley * DC-Ben Tate Bills #5 (140th) Wang * DC-Walter Thurmond Bills #6 (178th) Moats * DC-Lindsey Witten Bills #7 (192nd) Batten* DC-Walter McFadden Bills #8 (209th) Levi Brown* DC-Adam Ulatoski Bills #9 (216th) Calloway * DC-Eric Olsen Do you really see a big difference in terms of talent? I know it's not perfect, because of other variables, but teams are all working with very similar boards

If you are going to quote me, don't add emoticons to my post. It completely changes the the intent of my post. The proper place for those (if there even is one) is with your own comments. The Bengals were better than the Bills last year...

I don't think I'm making an outrageous claim, and as I said, I think there are more than a few other posters here that could, given some time to prepare, put together a good draft board. The real point is I think most teams have pretty similar draft boards, particularly in the higher rounds. I'm not claiming to have some kind of advanced football mind. Being a GM, and building a team involves so many other decisions. I think people are underestimating the importance of the other aspects of GMing and developing the culture of the team (like coaching, the role of the owner, how much money, where to spend the money, etc,...so many things to consider), and just focusing on the draft. Probably because it is public event, easy for the fans to relate to and observe, and the draft results are usually easy to evaluate, after some time.

I never claimed that I would be a better GM than Nix. I think he is doing a great job, and there is way more to it than just drafting guys. I also don't think I am a better talent evaluator than Nix, just that I think I could draft comparably over say, a 5-year time span. I think many others here could too. The original question posed by Kelly the Dog is completely tied to his drafting (or what's the point of having the ability to scout college talent? This thread did not go off topic.) I think that with the amount of scouting coverage available these days, that it's not that difficult to put together a reasonable draft board. Anyway, if there is a weak point in my stance, it is that I don't know as much about the guys in the lower rounds, and undrafted guys. There are many draft sites that have knowledgeable scouts contributing.

Okay, then whoever is putting together the magazine boards will do. I'm pretty sure there are at least some magazines that are sourcing their information from professional scouts. For instance these guys http://ourlads.com/ I know, next you are gonna say "that's not a magazine! You said MAGAZINE!!!"

I also did NOT claim a better talent scout than Nix,, but that I could DRAFT as well. BIG DIFFERENCE. I would simply be using a a professional scouts magazine's "big board".

Sure, no problem. Of course, as I explained, one draft isn't really isn't gonna be a fair sample. As far as guys becoming starters? Well, yeah, the team has to start SOMEONE, and you gotta work with the guys you pick, huh? All those picks could just as easily come from a magazines mock draft.

I love what they are doing. What I am alluding to, is that a truly competent GM SHOULD have these kinds of drafts. The draft is designed to give teams with poor records an advantage. They aren't really finding an extraordinary number of gems, they are just getting value from their picks. I don't necessarily think that if they just followed a compilation of the draftniks big boards that the team would be any better or worse!

You're either really simplistic, or disingenuous. Obviously, it would be more than one or two drafts. I used "15 years" (would you prefer 5?), and over a reasonable time period (whats the length of a typical GM's career?), I think the "big board" would be better than what the Bills have put together.

Just because filthy rich people, are building playgrounds for other wealthy people, doesn't mean the economy is good.