Rockinon Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 Tebow just went to Denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted April 23, 2010 Author Share Posted April 23, 2010 I'm not talking about making the playoffs. I'm talking about winning super bowls. You can't win one without a franchise QB in today's league. which one did we pass on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 But the Bills cannot get a talent at QB that would make that kind of difference this year. Unfortunately they are rebuilding yet again this year. You can't get everything all at once, even if they traded back and got picks. They have to start somewhere, and while RB isn't as big as QB, at least now we have a kid with tremendous talent to build on. If you trust your Scouting Dept a Trade down is almost always a good idea...More premium Picks and you can start your rebuilding with more quality Football players...If you Pick well, 2 or 3 guys is ALWAYS going to be better than one situational/hybrid HB...That's why Spiller needs to be MUCH more than that...He's going to get Top 10 money... We'll see I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 Tgregg, what is your batting average for intelligent posts? I think you're heading to the plate with like a .065 dude. I'm not saying you are wrong if you think Clausen should have been the pick. I understand that point of view. I still like Spiller, but I think Clausen is going to be good. Despite that...you are making some ridiculous arguments. First of all it's tgreg. One G. Second of all, if that's my average I'm fine with it. But I think most people would disagree on here. And if that was supposed to be a funny dig. Step your game up. It was pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 which one did we pass on? None that I know of. That answer was in response to Dave saying RBs are just as important as QBs in today's NFL. They're not. I wasn't saying they should have taken Clausen or Tebow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted April 23, 2010 Author Share Posted April 23, 2010 None that I know of. That answer was in response to Dave saying RBs are just as important as QBs in today's NFL. They're not. I wasn't saying they should have taken Clausen or Tebow. who said that? 'cause that is just silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 who said that? 'cause that is just silly. It's back in there somewhere ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I told you yesterday, I don't know much about the big men at all in this draft. I'm not a draft gurur at all. I really didn't care who they picked here as long as it wasn't a RB or DB because it flat out makes no sense. Oh, my bad.I thought you said you liked Williams as the pick if it wasnt one of the top OTs. There is no question we need a LT, a NT, and a QB, and we probably need several other better starters. We will have to see who they draft, sign, and coach at those three positions in the next two years, as well as how good Spiller is to see if this was criminally stupid, brilliant, or somewhere in between. I probably would not have made that pick myself, but for the first time in over five years I have some confidence in the football guys making the personnel decisions. They undeniably LOVE this guy. We shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I have to admit, I was way off on Clausen. I've been insisting for weeks now that all the negatives we've been hearing about him were just smokescreens but apparently teams do have some concerns about him, at least enough to not make him a top 25 (and counting) pick and enough to have him fall behind Tebow even. I'd been hoping for Clausen at #9 but apparently he would've been overvalued at that spot. Looking at the list of players drafted after #9, Spiller does appear to be BPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 Oh, my bad.I thought you said you liked Williams as the pick if it wasnt one of the top OTs. There is no question we need a LT, a NT, and a QB, and we probably need several other better starters. We will have to see who they draft, sign, and coach at those three positions in the next two years, as well as how good Spiller is to see if this was criminally stupid, brilliant, or somewhere in between. I probably would not have made that pick myself, but for the first time in over five years I have some confidence in the football guys making the personnel decisions. They undeniably LOVE this guy. We shall see. My mistake, I DID say I like Williams yesterday (and earlier today) but I also said that I don't really care (and don't) who they picked. I'm sure I'll love Spiller. My passion here has nothing to do with his skill or him. It's just about how to properly build a super bowl winning franchise. And, in my opinion, this pick is indicative of a franchise that has sunk to Oakland's level of ineptitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 ... for the first time in over five years I have some confidence in the football guys making the personnel decisions. They undeniably LOVE this guy. We shall see. This is why I'm so upset by this pick. I wanted to believe in the front office and was giving them the benefit of the doubt during this whole coaching search, free agency etc. But the fact that they picked Spiller TO ME shows that this will be the same as the old regimes. And that's what's so painful. Because if I'm right, we're locked into 3 more years of blundering on the sidelines and in the front office .... then they'll have to clean house and rebuild AGAIN. That's what is at the root of all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 My mistake, I DID say I like Williams yesterday (and earlier today) but I also said that I don't really care (and don't) who they picked. I'm sure I'll love Spiller. My passion here has nothing to do with his skill or him. It's just about how to properly build a super bowl winning franchise. And, in my opinion, this pick is indicative of a franchise that has sunk to Oakland's level of ineptitude. I mostly agree on your QB assessment and totally agree it's a passing league. But frankly, you need to do both, and if you took AD off the Vikings they would suck on offense, but if you took Favre off they would be very good, and a playoff team, just not likely capable of winning it all. You have to run and you have to pass. And I think you're grossly underestimating both the effect and the intention of the Bills brass in selecting Spiller to help the passing game. Dump off passes to Jackson and Marshawn who usually made the first guy miss and yet still only got seven yards may very well now be threats to go for huge chunks if not TDs. Other years there were probably QBs available we would have taken. This year TWO DTS were taken in the top three, so we're already down to the third best. If this were last year, when three LTs were rated in the top ten, we likely would have taken one instead of Spiller. I don't at all think they went into the draft wanting a RB. But when two DTs are gone, the only two worthy LTS are gone, and no QB close to being worth it, they went studly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I still haven't heard who you would have picked. Well you say I'm a moron, so what do you care? And if you could read you'd see I've said who I would have taken several times already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 And the ACC is not even the SEC...Not even close... What's the point? Prioritizing RB in the NFL of 2010 is a backward mentality. RB's aren't winning games for any team in the entire league. Heck, Chris Johnson runs for 2k yards and the team started off 0-8 last season. Peterson puts up huge numbers, but his team's couldn't get past the first round of the playoffs until Favre showed up and made Sidney Rice a player. Who else? Pittsburgh won a SB with a below-average running game in 2008. Indianapolis and New Orleans went to the SB with below average to average running games. Supporting the Spiller pick is like saying Gailey can re-invent offenses in direct contrast with the nearly the rest of the NFL. And he doesn't have an OL either. I'm more trying more to dispel the notion that Spiller can't get yards because he plays behind a horrible O-line, when Jackson averaged 4.5 YPC (or even 4.2, if you prefer) in that abortion of an offense. Jackson is a good player, but Spiller reportedly has great vision and great hands, to go along with his world class speed. Meaning he could play RB, WR, and be a returnman. That fills several needs. As for the other needs, the Bills weren't finding a franchise QB in Clausen or Tebow. WR is weak and Bryant has a lot of issues. At OT, I wanted Trent Williams because I felt they had a shot at him, but he went 4th overall. I didn't like any of the NT's after the top-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 This is why I'm so upset by this pick. I wanted to believe in the front office and was giving them the benefit of the doubt during this whole coaching search, free agency etc. But the fact that they picked Spiller TO ME shows that this will be the same as the old regimes. And that's what's so painful. Because if I'm right, we're locked into 3 more years of blundering on the sidelines and in the front office .... then they'll have to clean house and rebuild AGAIN. That's what is at the root of all of this. So whom could they have selected at 9 to convince you that the FO is different? Just be Nix for a minute and tell me who you would have taken right then and there? GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I mostly agree on your QB assessment and totally agree it's a passing league. But frankly, you need to do both, and if you took AD off the Vikings they would suck on offense, but if you took Favre off they would be very good, and a playoff team, just not likely capable of winning it all. You have to run and you have to pass. And I think you're grossly underestimating both the effect and the intention of the Bills brass in selecting Spiller to help the passing game. Dump off passes to Jackson and Marshawn who usually made the first guy miss and yet still only got seven yards may very well now be threats to go for huge chunks if not TDs. Other years there were probably QBs available we would have taken. This year TWO DTS were taken in the top three, so we're already down to the third best. If this were last year, when three LTs were rated in the top ten, we likely would have taken one instead of Spiller. I don't at all think they went into the draft wanting a RB. But when two DTs are gone, the only two worthy LTS are gone, and no QB close to being worth it, they went studly. But to me, that's when you trade back and get more picks because this draft is far deeper than next year's draft. I think, based on the speed of their pick, Spiller was their man from day one. Which is scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRW Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 Well you say I'm a moron, so what do you care? And if you could read you'd see I've said who I would have taken several times already. I've only seen you say who you wouldn't take, and you've said repeatedly that you didn't know if any of the players at need positions were worth it. So if you did in fact say who you would've taken, I missed it too. For the record, I would've looked for a trade down, but I'll hope for the best with this pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 But to me, that's when you trade back and get more picks because this draft is far deeper than next year's draft. I think, based on the speed of their pick, Spiller was their man from day one. Which is scary. Huh? Spiller was going to be gone within the next several picks, at least gone by 12 (either Miami or SD). I like the fact that the Bills got who they targeted, aside from a couple guys who went in the top-8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I've only seen you say who you wouldn't take, and you've said repeatedly that you didn't know if any of the players at need positions were worth it. So if you did in fact say who you would've taken, I missed it too. For the record, I would've looked for a trade down, but I'll hope for the best with this pick. Where would you have looked to trade down and who would you have taken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I've only seen you say who you wouldn't take, and you've said repeatedly that you didn't know if any of the players at need positions were worth it. So if you did in fact say who you would've taken, I missed it too. For the record, I would've looked for a trade down, but I'll hope for the best with this pick. Ah, hope. The last refuge of the Bills fan. "Well, they tooke the 'best player available.' I'm sure he'll make some really big plays for us!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts