machinegun12 Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Andre Reed was a 4th rounder, but who's counting? IIRC, that was the year the Bills had 2 picks in each of the first 4 rounds. Who can name the 8 guys they took? #1 Bruce Smith (I'd say I'm satisfied with this pick) #14 Derrick Burroughs (Jerry Rice taken at #16) #29 Mark Traynowicz (Randall Cunninqham taken #37...coulda been our punter!! ) #42 Chris Burkett (Simon Fletcher, 97.5 career sacks, taken at #54) #57 Frank Reich (one of the greatest backup QBs of all time) #63 Hal Garner (#68 Jack Del Rio) #86 Andre Reed (fantastic pick) #112 Dale Hellestrae (#113 Kevin Greene...whoops) The google age makes any question answerable. Just goes to show again that the NFL draft is mostly a crapshoot. I'd say any draft that produces Bruce Smith, Andre Reed, and Frank Reich in the first 4 rounds is still a pretty strong one though.
Dennis in NC Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 #1 Bruce Smith (I'd say I'm satisfied with this pick) #14 Derrick Burroughs (Jerry Rice taken at #16) #29 Mark Traynowicz (Randall Cunninqham taken #37...coulda been our punter!! ) #42 Chris Burkett (Simon Fletcher, 97.5 career sacks, taken at #54) #57 Frank Reich (one of the greatest backup QBs of all time) #63 Hal Garner (#68 Jack Del Rio) #86 Andre Reed (fantastic pick) #112 Dale Hellestrae (#113 Kevin Greene...whoops) The google age makes any question answerable. Just goes to show again that the NFL draft is mostly a crapshoot. I'd say any draft that produces Bruce Smith, Andre Reed, and Frank Reich in the first 4 rounds is still a pretty strong one though. Well, I was hoping someone would remember it, not Google it. I remembered Traynowicz, Reich, and Reed, but I had forgotten that was the Bruce Smith draft. Holy crap. Must have gotten Mike Cumby in the 5th or so. I remember he and Garner had played together in college.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 If your opinion is so meaningless, why does it take so long to form it? I think you're dead wrong.
1billsfan Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 This is getting ridiculous. So now we're becoming micro-critical and numbering specific poor Fitzpatrick passes in a game? Damn, these guys aren't robots. I'll bet Jim Kelly is so glad the internet wasn't around when he was playing. He was always good for a handfull of "WTF passes" a game. Especially earlier in his career. Bills fans need to start thanking their lucky stars Ryan Fitzpatrick is here, is the man, and is the QB who will bring the Bills all the way back to the glory days once again. In other words, get off his back until he really and truly DOES have a bad game.
BillsPhan Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 ...And so, the Bills get win #3. You happy?... Man oh man, that was some "meaningless opinion."! Please fill out an application to take over Modrak's job, you spent more time writing that game summary that Modrak spends reading his scouts' summaries on players he's drafted these past 9 years or so! Although your summary was very well written and accurate, I don't think this current group of Buffalo Bills is worth my time commenting on all of that, so I'm just answering your question above: Yeah, I'm always happy when the Bills win games. I really never care about getting a number one pick or even top 5 pick in the draft, because the draft is a big crap shoot anyway. Last year after Nix and Gailey came in, everyone said don't draft a QB this year, because next year there will be up to 5 great ones to choose from. Well, next year is almost here, and those same "experts" have reduced that number to just ONE great one, and none of those other 4 even first round-worthy. Let's face it, ever since the Pats stole Brady in the 6th round 10 years ago, all bets are off in picking QB's number 1 or number 196! It seems you can strike gold or strike out anywhere in the draft at QB these days. Who knows if Nix would pull the trigger on Luck even if he somehow ended up with the number one pick anyway? And now that is seems obvious he won't have the number one pick, he can relax and pick the very best OT or DT or rushing DE or OLB on the board and worry about QB later on in the draft. This is getting ridiculous....I'll bet Jim Kelly is so glad the internet wasn't around when he was playing. He was always good for a handfull of "WTF passes" a game. Especially earlier in his career.... Great point! We were just beginning to get on-line back in early 1997 when Jimbo hung 'em up, and during his glory days from 1988 through 1993, we still had to snail - mail our opinions into the Buffalo News and see if they printed them once a week, or call into the radio shows. I don't think the social networking of today would have changed Jimbo's Hall of Fame career, but all those guys who played before the late 90's are lucky they did not face today's 24 hour access!
Dan Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Easily the best post game write up out there (if we could get Lori's pregame write ups back, we'd have a perfect world of Bills analysis and breakdown). I look forward to your comments each week. It's posts and "meaningless" opinions such as these that make this the best and only place to get Bills info and discussion. Thanks for sharing your opinions.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Loving reading Rich's weekly opinion as well. And I was going to make this same point last week. The terrible trio is commonplace among most QBs, even the elite ones. Maybe Fitz's are more obvious? Weekly opinion, agree, great stuff. I love all the gouge on the OL. I think we're all watching Fitzy more closely because he's been around the league awhile without much expected of him, and we aren't persuaded he has the goods to start for us. And we won't be, until the team starts winning consistently. Some of Fitzy's muffs are more obvious. I think there are a couple reasons for this. First, he has a very inexperienced WR core and it's obvious sometimes they aren't on the same page with him. Second, even when he has the time to throw, he doesn't always have the size of pocket he needs. He's a small guy for an NFL QB. Give him just a couple seconds of a slightly bigger pocket to improve his view of the field and some of the Bull Durham stuff will go by the wayside, I think. Given a choice between tall and tough, I'll take tough. Third, though, a guy with a gun-slinger mentality is going to throw INTs. That's just how it is. Kelly threw fewer INTs when he had a great OL and totally on the same page with his WR (and had WR who pulled of some aMAZing catches, frankly). Kelly threw more when some of the pieces were gone. Manning, same thing. Decide whatcha want, a guy who is scared to throw unless all the DBs have fallen down, or a guy who is willing to sling it and sometimes he's wrong. If we had a strong D that could stop the run and get the other team's O off the field, it wouldn't be such a game killer and it wouldn't be so frustrating. Just my even more meaningless opinion of course.
Recommended Posts