Sorry, I don't like this

[Virgil]

What I'm concerned about here is the lack of consistentcy from Gailey. We bring in an offensive minded guy, but go all D in ge draft except the one position we are good at. Not great, but serviceable and good. Also, we take. Guy being compared to Reggie Bush, who didn't shown much of anything until he had more offensive talent around him.

 

We get our NT in round 2. Can't complain

 

But then in the third, we draft a guy who again is depth. Even if he turns out to be immediately great, we already have Stroud, Williams, and the guy we bought from Baltimore. Like Spiller, this may be a improvement and depth, but not a need.

 

Yes, I like our size against the run, but what does that mean? We lose games 3-0 cause we still can't score?

 

What bothers me is Nix saying that there isn't a Qb or OT worthy of their pick at the time. I'm sorry, but OT's are coming off the board all around us. Are you implying that they are all busts and those GM's are just throwing away their picks.

 

With that, if Spiller is so great, why did Washington, Seattle, and Cleveland pass on him? They all have expressed need at HB but went with other guys.

 

I agree with some of you out there that Nix and Gailey have tunnel vision. They have committed to a 3 year rebuilding process. Picked one aspect to fix now, and ignore all other options. And I'm not okay with that. We've been rebuilding for 10 years. Different picks could have been made to still rebuild, but make us more competitive on both sides of the ball, and simply strengthen each year.

 

I hope I'm wrong and they have some faith in some guys at OT and QB because there is no way you can sell me on the Trent Edwards and Demetrius Bell Kool-Aid this year.

[ajzepp]

What I'm concerned about here is the lack of consistentcy from Gailey. We bring in an offensive minded guy, but go all D in ge draft except the one position we are good at.

 

You know the draft isn't over yet, right?

[Virgil]

Yeah, and I would love to see two starting OT's and QB with picks 4, 5, and 6, but considering that it's pry never happened...ever before. I'm a tad pessimistic

[ajzepp]

Yeah, and I would love to see two starting OT's and QB with picks 4, 5, and 6, but considering that it's pry never happened...ever before. I'm a tad pessimistic

 

Look on the bright side,man....Dickballs Jauron isn't here anymore

[buffalo_bills]

I think we'll take Cambell in round 4, and Lefevour or Pike in round 5. I see us going offense the rest of the way. We still have six more picks, and you never know, after all Brady was selected in the 6th round

[bills_red]

Nix said he is like Budh and Harvin, he has that skill (fast, playmaker etc.) set not he is Bush.

[Cash]

Nix said he is like Buddha and Harvin, he has that skill (fast, playmaker etc.) set not he is Bush.

 

Fixed your typo. You're welcome.

[John from Riverside]

I think Nix explained himself pretty well.....

 

- He said the team was "void of playmakers" then he compared Spiller to Bush and Harvin (a RB and a WR) because he has so much speed and is a natural pass catcher. I think our first pick was made because they simply could not pass up that kind of talent....and it is pretty much a unanamous opinion from everyone that Spiller is a stud. I keep hearing people say they are reminded of Barry Sanders because of his moves......I say no because Sanders didn't have this guys "0 to 60" acelleration from a standstill.....its really sick. Just from this pick alone we are going to be able to manufacture points.

 

Then the bills tried to trade back into the 1st round for someone who was not Tebow.....i think the player was Bulaga....but they just didnt get him. It happens.

 

So they readjusted their board and went Troupe in the 2nd round. Now everyone was crying about taking him this high and not Code....BUT the fact is they did get their legit NT and so they filled a direct need. We ARE in fact switching to a 3-4 defense and need a 2 down plugger in the middle to make it work. Check off that need.

 

Then we went with a 3-4 DE.....I just loved this pick because he like Troupe have SIZE....you can tell that one of the first things NIX is trying to do is change this defense from a undersized team that gets blown off the ball and swarm tackles to bigger tougher guys that will own at the LOS instead of GETTING owned. One of the big problems our defense had last year to go along with not being able to stop the run was just a inability to get off the field. We WANT teams to not be able to run the ball and be forced to pass and play into what is truly a strength for this team in its secondary.

 

People are upset because we didnt take this player didnt take that player......I dont care about the NAME of the player I care about what need he feels on this team. We are biulding an identitty on our lines that actually started LAST year when the drafting of Levitre and Wood

 

Then

[mary owen]

What I'm concerned about here is the lack of consistentcy from Gailey. We bring in an offensive minded guy, but go all D in ge draft except the one position we are good at. Not great, but serviceable and good. Also, we take. Guy being compared to Reggie Bush, who didn't shown much of anything until he had more offensive talent around him.

 

We get our NT in round 2. Can't complain

 

But then in the third, we draft a guy who again is depth. Even if he turns out to be immediately great, we already have Stroud, Williams, and the guy we bought from Baltimore. Like Spiller, this may be a improvement and depth, but not a need.

 

Yes, I like our size against the run, but what does that mean? We lose games 3-0 cause we still can't score?

 

What bothers me is Nix saying that there isn't a Qb or OT worthy of their pick at the time. I'm sorry, but OT's are coming off the board all around us. Are you implying that they are all busts and those GM's are just throwing away their picks.

 

With that, if Spiller is so great, why did Washington, Seattle, and Cleveland pass on him? They all have expressed need at HB but went with other guys.

 

I agree with some of you out there that Nix and Gailey have tunnel vision. They have committed to a 3 year rebuilding process. Picked one aspect to fix now, and ignore all other options. And I'm not okay with that. We've been rebuilding for 10 years. Different picks could have been made to still rebuild, but make us more competitive on both sides of the ball, and simply strengthen each year.

 

I hope I'm wrong and they have some faith in some guys at OT and QB because there is no way you can sell me on the Trent Edwards and Demetrius Bell Kool-Aid this year.

 

in the league today, especially in a 3-4, this should not be viewed as "depth". These guys will be in a rotation. Schobel might retire, and even if he doesn't this year, he will soon. I really don't see Carrington as depth, but part of the rotation.

[Cash]

Taken together, a couple of Nix's quotes concern me. Actually, the first one doesn't need anything alongside it to concern me:

 

“We’ve got a lot of needs guys. We’ve got three quarterbacks that have got talent, that we don’t know. All the physical stuff you see, they can play. Now they’ve got to prove to us whether they can or not, not what they have done. We’ve got (0ther) positions where we don’t have three that we can count on."

 

First of all, is this English? Did Buddy get some eloquence pointers from George W. Bush right before this interview? I think he's trying to say that all 3 of our crappy QBs are talented enough to be really good, but haven't proven for sure how good they are. Is that right? It's very confusing. First it seems like he's saying he doesn't know how much talent the 3 QBs have. Then he's saying they can play (which is distressing - did he watch any games last year?). Then he says they've got to prove whether they can or not. Can or can't what? Play? But didn't he just say they can play? This isn't a bit, I'm legitimately confused here. Especially once Nix spins around again and implies with the last sentence that the Bills have 3 QBs they can count on. WOW! Talk about blowing smoke!

 

That line is just utter nonsense. If Nix even entertains the notion of believing it, that's proof enough that he's completely unqualified for his job and has no idea what he's talking about. I mean, I'll buy that Brohm is still a question mark at this point. He's really only played 1 game in his short career, and he barely knew the playbook for that game, so it was excusable that he sucked so bad. (I thought he also threw a bad ball for most of his throws, which is why I've written him off, but hey, it was a small sample size.) But Edwards and Fitzpatrick? How many starts do these guys need before we know what we've got? Fitzpatrick is an okay backup with very poor accuracy. He can fill in in a pinch and make some nice plays, but if he's starting more than a couple of games, you're in trouble. Edwards is fine if you're looking for an 8-12 game QB who doesn't need to attempt passes more than 7 yards past the line of scrimmage. Otherwise, you're in trouble. Edwards has poor accuracy on medium-range throws, especially when his receiver is not stationary (so-so on deep balls; he runs a ton of open WRs out of bounds on 30-yard gains that should be catch-and-run TDs), and tends to turn the ball over a lot when asked to make plays down the field. If your team can win games with handoffs, checkdowns, screens, and curls/hitches, Edwards is a good fit. But he'll probably get hurt and miss some time.

 

Ah, but I digress. The point is that Edwards & Fitzpatrick have shown that they're mediocre at best, but maybe worth keeping around as a decent backup. Brohm has shown nothing positive, but is too young and inexperienced to write off just yet. So there's certainly no way that our GM can claim that we have 3 QBs we can count on. I hope I'm mis-reading that quote, because it just strikes me as completely bat**** loco.

 

Okay, next up, a couple of quotes from separate post-draft interviews:

 

“In the draft you can only take one each pick. We’re in a position where they should give us about three, but they won’t do that."

 

“We’re not much about moving (up or down),” said Nix. ”To move just to be moving, some of those guys I don’t know how they know where the hell they draft. If we know we’re going to gain an advantage we’ll do it, but otherwise we’ll just stay there and get us a good player.”

 

Someone should tell Buddy that if you really want more picks, you can trade down to get some more. For example, the Patriots turned 8 picks into 10 picks today. It's not that hard to understand, but Buddy doesn't seem to get it. We picked Troup at #41, and then the Patriots traded up from #44 to #42 to select Gronkowski. It seems likely that the Patriots would've made an offer to move up to #41, since they were clearly hot after Gronkowski. What were the odds that Troup got drafted at #42 or #43? Probably pretty low. So there's one scenario where the Bills probably could've traded down, picked up an extra pick, and still got the guy they wanted at their original spot. I think this really shows how the Bills lock in on specific guys and get tunnel vision. They probably got a call from New England at #41, but quickly hung up because they were terrified of Troup getting picked at #42 or #43. I also like how Nix is trying to mock teams like NE and Philly for trading so much. Yeah, what buffoons. Too bad they make the playoffs every year.

 

I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with staying put. It does put a little more burden on you to nail your picks as opposed to trading down (and trading up puts way more pressure on you to nail that pick). But clearly, the optimal way to draft players would be to get all the guys you want, all at the lowest possible pick. The more you trade, the closer you can come to that ideal - but only if you're smart. Buddy himself says he's never been accused of being the smartest guy in the room, so it's probably for the best that we don't do much trading.

 

Okay, last quote:

 

"You say 'well we haven’t addressed the offensive line yet,' but again we want to take a guy we know can come in and help us and if he can’t then we’re going to go to another guy. If you take a guy that can’t play then you’ve compounded the problem because now you’ve got two that can’t play.”

 

Nix is really overselling his point here. Because if you take this quote at face value, what he's really saying is that none of the tackles we passed over could help us at all; that picking any of these guys would've compounded the problem. That seems rather dubious. Plus, what does that say about whatever OT we wind up drafting in the 6th round? Does that mean he can't help us, or that he can help us, and is therefore better than Anthony Davis or Bryan Bulago or Charles Brown or Bruce Campbell or whoever? Again, I hope Nix is just blowing smoke with this quote, because if he believes what he's saying, it's kind of crazy. There's no sane way he can think that there were only 2 OTs in this draft who could contribute positively to the Bills either next year or down the road.

[BuffOrange]

What I'm concerned about here is the lack of consistentcy from Gailey. We bring in an offensive minded guy, but go all D in ge draft except the one position we are good at. Not great, but serviceable and good. Also, we take. Guy being compared to Reggie Bush, who didn't shown much of anything until he had more offensive talent around him.

 

We get our NT in round 2. Can't complain

 

But then in the third, we draft a guy who again is depth. Even if he turns out to be immediately great, we already have Stroud, Williams, and the guy we bought from Baltimore. Like Spiller, this may be a improvement and depth, but not a need.

 

Yes, I like our size against the run, but what does that mean? We lose games 3-0 cause we still can't score?

 

What bothers me is Nix saying that there isn't a Qb or OT worthy of their pick at the time. I'm sorry, but OT's are coming off the board all around us. Are you implying that they are all busts and those GM's are just throwing away their picks.

 

With that, if Spiller is so great, why did Washington, Seattle, and Cleveland pass on him? They all have expressed need at HB but went with other guys.

 

I agree with some of you out there that Nix and Gailey have tunnel vision. They have committed to a 3 year rebuilding process. Picked one aspect to fix now, and ignore all other options. And I'm not okay with that. We've been rebuilding for 10 years. Different picks could have been made to still rebuild, but make us more competitive on both sides of the ball, and simply strengthen each year.

 

I hope I'm wrong and they have some faith in some guys at OT and QB because there is no way you can sell me on the Trent Edwards and Demetrius Bell Kool-Aid this year.

 

I think this is a fair criticism. As much as I would've liked a new QB, I can accept that they just don't think Clausen or McCoy will be that good. I didn't watch hours of film afterall. If the value is that much better at the DL spots, then ok. But yah, it is hard to believe that none of these OLmen can play and that we're just so much smarter than these other teams.

[Russ 'Em]

Value people value.

[Omar Little]

I think Nix explained himself pretty well.....

 

- He said the team was "void of playmakers" then he compared Spiller to Bush and Harvin (a RB and a WR) because he has so much speed and is a natural pass catcher. I think our first pick was made because they simply could not pass up that kind of talent....and it is pretty much a unanamous opinion from everyone that Spiller is a stud. I keep hearing people say they are reminded of Barry Sanders because of his moves......I say no because Sanders didn't have this guys "0 to 60" acelleration from a standstill.....its really sick. Just from this pick alone we are going to be able to manufacture points.

 

Then the bills tried to trade back into the 1st round for someone who was not Tebow.....i think the player was Bulaga....but they just didnt get him. It happens.

 

So they readjusted their board and went Troupe in the 2nd round. Now everyone was crying about taking him this high and not Code....BUT the fact is they did get their legit NT and so they filled a direct need. We ARE in fact switching to a 3-4 defense and need a 2 down plugger in the middle to make it work. Check off that need.

 

Then we went with a 3-4 DE.....I just loved this pick because he like Troupe have SIZE....you can tell that one of the first things NIX is trying to do is change this defense from a undersized team that gets blown off the ball and swarm tackles to bigger tougher guys that will own at the LOS instead of GETTING owned. One of the big problems our defense had last year to go along with not being able to stop the run was just a inability to get off the field. We WANT teams to not be able to run the ball and be forced to pass and play into what is truly a strength for this team in its secondary.

 

People are upset because we didnt take this player didnt take that player......I dont care about the NAME of the player I care about what need he feels on this team. We are biulding an identitty on our lines that actually started LAST year when the drafting of Levitre and Wood

 

Then

 

This is all dead on. Anyone who might come in this thread and disagree with you isn't worth arguing with, anyway. Everyone wants the players they've heard of, and they all throw fits when it doesn't work out that way. The Bills are doing a hell of a job this draft.

 

Spiller is the best playmaker in this draft. To get a guy like that with superstar potential was a no-brainer. Screw Bulaga, who fell to the mid-20s. Screw Dan Williams, who also plummeted. Spiller was an undisputed top 10 talent. Some would argue top five. Buddy Nix further proved his intelligence by adding a home run hitter on a team that, aside from maybe Lee Evans, previously had none. Spiller is one, clearly.

 

As for Day 2, when you combine the Troup and Carrington picks with the veteran additions of Dwan Edwards and Andra Davis, not only is this defense much bigger and much better equipped for a 3-4 than it was, but it also stands a chance of being stout vs. the run.

 

On Day 3 I'm hoping for an OT, OLB and maybe a QB.

[Nanker]

All three of these picks will be starters by week 4.

What do the Bulaga lovers on this board say when their guy was taken at 23 AFTER Iupati at 17 and Davis at 11 when they wanted The Bills to take him at 9?

I'll leave the talent evaluation to Buddy, Chan et al.

It's THEIR vision of what kind of team they want to build and the kind of players that they feel BEST fit the needs of the squad that are important.

 

There are a LOT of players taken in the first three rounds that won't get much playing time all year, yet alone become starters.

 

Even the worst detractors have to admit that Gailey is the best Offensive mind at OBD in more than the last decade. How many games did we lose by 10 points or less in that time span? I think given the bag of doughnuts talent we've had on Offense, that he would have produced a much more potent attack than the string of jerk-of-the-year offensive coordinators who were learning (how to fail) on the job. Chan + Spiller = 6-10 more points a game, IMHO. A better, stronger DLine = -3 points a game.

 

I remain optimistic about the team to whom I am addicted.

[uforesircher]

What I'm concerned about here is the lack of consistentcy from Gailey. We bring in an offensive minded guy, but go all D in ge draft except the one position we are good at. Not great, but serviceable and good. Also, we take. Guy being compared to Reggie Bush, who didn't shown much of anything until he had more offensive talent around him.

 

We get our NT in round 2. Can't complain

 

But then in the third, we draft a guy who again is depth. Even if he turns out to be immediately great, we already have Stroud, Williams, and the guy we bought from Baltimore. Like Spiller, this may be a improvement and depth, but not a need.

 

Yes, I like our size against the run, but what does that mean? We lose games 3-0 cause we still can't score?

 

What bothers me is Nix saying that there isn't a Qb or OT worthy of their pick at the time. I'm sorry, but OT's are coming off the board all around us. Are you implying that they are all busts and those GM's are just throwing away their picks.

 

With that, if Spiller is so great, why did Washington, Seattle, and Cleveland pass on him? They all have expressed need at HB but went with other guys.

 

I agree with some of you out there that Nix and Gailey have tunnel vision. They have committed to a 3 year rebuilding process. Picked one aspect to fix now, and ignore all other options. And I'm not okay with that. We've been rebuilding for 10 years. Different picks could have been made to still rebuild, but make us more competitive on both sides of the ball, and simply strengthen each year.

 

I hope I'm wrong and they have some faith in some guys at OT and QB because there is no way you can sell me on the Trent Edwards and Demetrius Bell Kool-Aid this year.

 

well i like what we have done so far - our run d is the worst part of this team (30th i think in the nfl last year) - cant win like that no matter who is playing lt or who the qb is

 

also getting the most exciting offensive player on the board is very good for me - now if bradford was still there or 1 of the top 2 ot's were there then i'd be concerned with the 1st selection but they weren't

 

i don't see how this looks like a 3 yr rebuilding process either - 2 yrs yeah - but not three - but with that said we will be better each year. it is not gm nix's or coach gailey's fault that they were given a cupboard that is so bare - it will take time - gm nix said this the first presser he had.