Virgil Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 I know that I've said I would like to get LeFevour in here, but here me out on this... This is a very deep draft in regards to OT's. From my understanding, there are guys that can be had in the 2nd-5th round that could very easily start. We are keeping Kelsay. Schobel pry won't retire. That gives us Mitchell and Poz in the middle, with those other guys, Ellison, Maybin, and Harris as OLB's. Not really the need many people think. Then, there is DT. Which, there isn't really a DT worthy of the number 9 pick. With all that being said, can you really pass on Clausen if he is there at 9? At the end of the day, we need a QB and he is a legit prospect. He is as legit as we are going to see. If he were to fall flat on his face, could you really blame the FO? If Clausen is there, I think we have to take him and have picks 2-4 be on OT and DT and use the rest of the pics for depth.
manbeast Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 I know that I've said I would like to get LeFevour in here, but here me out on this... This is a very deep draft in regards to OT's. From my understanding, there are guys that can be had in the 2nd-5th round that could very easily start. We are keeping Kelsay. Schobel pry won't retire. That gives us Mitchell and Poz in the middle, with those other guys, Ellison, Maybin, and Harris as OLB's. Not really the need many people think. Then, there is DT. Which, there isn't really a DT worthy of the number 9 pick. With all that being said, can you really pass on Clausen if he is there at 9? At the end of the day, we need a QB and he is a legit prospect. He is as legit as we are going to see. If he were to fall flat on his face, could you really blame the FO? If Clausen is there, I think we have to take him and have picks 2-4 be on OT and DT and use the rest of the pics for depth. I am not going to bother telling you how little you know about the 3-4. Google it but I will tell you your way off.
robertpaul49 Posted March 11, 2010 Posted March 11, 2010 Without a doubt, the Bills should draft Clausen if he's available. Even if Clausen is a bust, it is better that they draft him and draft another quarterback again next year, just like San Diego. The Bills need to keep drafting the highest rated quarterbacks that they can until they can find a franchise quarterback. (I'm not talking about reaching for a quarterback to just fill a hole, aka JP Losman). No other hole on the team matches this hole. If no quarterback is available then draft a tackle to protect the quarterback that the Bills should draft next year.
Simon Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 We are keeping Kelsay. Schobel pry won't retire. That gives us Mitchell and Poz in the middle, with those other guys, Ellison, Maybin, and Harris as OLB's. Not really the need many people think. I'm sorry but that's just horrifying. Only OT is in worse shape.
Virgil Posted March 12, 2010 Author Posted March 12, 2010 I am not going to bother telling you how little you know about the 3-4. Google it but I will tell you your way off. Awww, you're making me blush I'm sorry but that's just horrifying. Only OT is in worse shape. While I don't disagree, I just can't see us paying these guys the money they committed and putting them on the bench. They can't play DE in the 3-4, so they have to play OLB. I can't imagine Poz or Mitchell losing their starting jobs. The only thing I could see would be if they planned to move Mitchell to OLB, but I think I remember them saying they he would go to the inside. If they do plan on benching Schobel or Kelsay as backups, then that is pathetic the amount of money they are getting.
Homer Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Awww, you're making me blush While I don't disagree, I just can't see us paying these guys the money they committed and putting them on the bench. They can't play DE in the 3-4, so they have to play OLB. I can't imagine Poz or Mitchell losing their starting jobs. The only thing I could see would be if they planned to move Mitchell to OLB, but I think I remember them saying they he would go to the inside. If they do plan on benching Schobel or Kelsay as backups, then that is pathetic the amount of money they are getting. Kelsay, Maybin, and Schobel will all play OLB with Poz and Mitchel in the middle. Ellison will backup with maybe Harris but I really look for some trades for Ellison and Harris.
evilbuffalobob Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I'm sorry but that's just horrifying. Only OT is in worse shape. Don't forget Here me out... I'll hear this Twink out after winning a Spelling Bee. ...or should that be Whining a Spelling Bee?
bkc Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Selecting Clausen is starting to grow on me. Outside of Okung the tackle class is strarting to show some warts . Either way you look at it there are a to many holes to fix in one draft . If Claussen fall to 9 and it may happen lets take him . If the tackles drop we could always trade back into the first round and grab one .
Rockinon Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I'd rather see Tebow than Clausen. Or even the Raven's backup QB.
bkc Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I'd rather see Tebow than Clausen. Or even the Raven's backup QB. Clausen is supposed to be the most nfl ready qb in the draft.
LancasterSteve Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Clausen is supposed to be the most nfl ready qb in the draft. IMO doesn't mean squat. More that few draft pundits said the same thing about Ryan Leaf. With some even ranking Leaf over Peyton Manning for the top draft pick
Thoner7 Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 DL = Weak arm, not accurate. Way to make things up.
Thurman#1 Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I know that I've said I would like to get LeFevour in here, but here me out on this... This is a very deep draft in regards to OT's. From my understanding, there are guys that can be had in the 2nd-5th round that could very easily start. We are keeping Kelsay. Schobel pry won't retire. That gives us Mitchell and Poz in the middle, with those other guys, Ellison, Maybin, and Harris as OLB's. Not really the need many people think. Then, there is DT. Which, there isn't really a DT worthy of the number 9 pick. With all that being said, can you really pass on Clausen if he is there at 9? At the end of the day, we need a QB and he is a legit prospect. He is as legit as we are going to see. If he were to fall flat on his face, could you really blame the FO? If Clausen is there, I think we have to take him and have picks 2-4 be on OT and DT and use the rest of the pics for depth. I agree that we should draft Clausen if he's there, or Bradford for that matter. But I disagree with you on our LB situation. Just because you have a bunch of guys who have LB in front of their names on the roster doesn't mean you actually have good LBs. IMHO we have two legit 3 - 4 LBs, Poz and Mitchell. After that, they're either too small to play strongside OLB and not fast enough to play weakside rush LB (Ellison and Harris), or totally inexperienced and unproven at the position and may simply not be able to play it (Schobel, if he doesn't retire, and Kelsay and Maybin). We need help there. But Nix and the gang know it.
Astrobot Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Clausen is supposed to be the most nfl ready qb in the draft. That would be Bradford, actually.
VADC Bills Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I know that I've said I would like to get LeFevour in here, but here me out on this... This is a very deep draft in regards to OT's. From my understanding, there are guys that can be had in the 2nd-5th round that could very easily start. We are keeping Kelsay. Schobel pry won't retire. That gives us Mitchell and Poz in the middle, with those other guys, Ellison, Maybin, and Harris as OLB's. Not really the need many people think. Then, there is DT. Which, there isn't really a DT worthy of the number 9 pick. With all that being said, can you really pass on Clausen if he is there at 9? At the end of the day, we need a QB and he is a legit prospect. He is as legit as we are going to see. If he were to fall flat on his face, could you really blame the FO? If Clausen is there, I think we have to take him and have picks 2-4 be on OT and DT and use the rest of the pics for depth. Based on your depth analysis it would make since to trade down and pick up extra picks and draft a skill position. Something tells me that what Nix is thinking which could be why you see them interviewing CJ Spiller. We have so many needs that we need to generate more picks. This would be the perfect time to move down.
tennesseeboy Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 The OT group is truly remarkable this year. Four maybe even five close to blue chip first rounders and there will be some very impressive tackles in rounds two and three. I see us drafting an OT with our #9 pick and probably picking up a second tackle in round 3 or 4. If LeFevour is there in round 2 we MIGHT take a flyer on him, but I think many on this board would be more inclined to grab a DT or OLB with that pick.
purple haze Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Based on your depth analysis it would make since to trade down and pick up extra picks and draft a skill position.Something tells me that what Nix is thinking which could be why you see them interviewing CJ Spiller. We have so many needs that we need to generate more picks. This would be the perfect time to move down. Agree that Nix will be looking to pick up more picks. I think they should trade down out of 9 if possible and pick up an extra 2nd rounder. Do that and a skill guy is definitely in play be it a Spiller or Best or QB. Then DT and LT in round 2.
BillsfaninFl Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Agree that Nix will be looking to pick up more picks. I think they should trade down out of 9 if possible and pick up anextra 2nd rounder. Do that and a skill guy is definitely in play be it a Spiller or Best or QB. Then DT and LT in round 2. Trading down in the first round is a good idea, with the strategy to gain more picks on the first day. The Bills have been in a youth movement for years now, and have lost some games because of too many stupid mistakes made by young players, compounded by having too many of them in the game. With a draft class that has very few potential superstars but several very good players (according to the experts), we should forego the #9 spot and trade away some of our second day draft picks to get more in the second or third round. We do not need 10 new draftees on the team. We need four or five that will actually be contributors, along with the several young guys already on the squad. Assuming the team drafts well, they will be better served with around #20 in the first and two each in the second and third rounds. After that its throwing darts hoping to get lucky. There's never any guaranteed picks, but five on the first day would be a chance to dramtically improve the roster.
Virgil Posted March 12, 2010 Author Posted March 12, 2010 Again, I agree that neither Kelsay nor Schobel would by my answer at OLB, but they seem to be what Nix plans on using. I would much rather have a rookie made for the spot than converted DE's. All I'm saying is, I can't imagine them not starting with the money we've committed to paying them. If i'm in charge, they are both gone, and hopefully for picks. Then I would pry trade back and get McClain and a DT with my first 2 picks, then OT's.
Recommended Posts