Geno Smith's Arm Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Not sure if this article has been posted before (probably has), but it is interesting. http://www.ourlads.com/dayone/default.aspx
Bill from NYC Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) Not sure if this article has been posted before (probably has), but it is interesting. http://www.ourlads.com/dayone/default.aspx This is probably the dumbest draft article I have ever seen. >>>>> Get talent at CB, RB, TE, and WR early or youll be waiting for them to develop into contributors.<<<<< If this philosophy was true, the Bills would have won every Superbowl for the last 15 or more years. Edited February 28, 2011 by Bill from NYC
ieatcrayonz Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 This is probably the dumbest drat article I have ever seen. >>>>> Get talent at CB, RB, TE, and WR early or you’ll be waiting for them to develop into contributors.<<<<< If this philosophy was true, the Bills would have won every Superbowl for the last 15 or more years. I agree about RB and TE to a degree but you must get CB and WR early in today's NFL. In days of yore OL was important; QB was and is still important but it is a speed league now and CB/WR are paramount. You have to draft them and keep them. The Bills have drafted them, but not kept them. Frittering away picks on positions like OL is laughable considering the patchwork rag tag band of misfits that won the AFC championship.
Bill from NYC Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I agree about RB and TE to a degree but you must get CB and WR early in today's NFL. In days of yore OL was important; QB was and is still important but it is a speed league now and CB/WR are paramount. You have to draft them and keep them. The Bills have drafted them, but not kept them. Frittering away picks on positions like OL is laughable considering the patchwork rag tag band of misfits that won the AFC championship. Good point; I stand corrected. The fact that Pitt had a shaky OL and made the superbowl IS in fact clear evidence that blocking no longer matters in the NFL. And, the fact that Bulaga, who the Bills could have traded way down and drafted, was instrumental to the Packers success this season is to be dismissed as irrelevant. The Bills blocking is just fine. They need to focus yet more on cornerbacks and receivers. This is the key to success, and I thank you for enlightening me and changing my mind!
Mr. WEO Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) By his own analysis, he should be encouraging the Lions to continue to pick WRs in the 1st 2 rounds--after all, that's where 45% of the "2 deep" spots are filled for that position. Crappy article. Check out the "stars" he mentions (Delhomme!, PArker!). Edited February 28, 2011 by Mr. WEO
ieatcrayonz Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Good point; I stand corrected. The fact that Pitt had a shaky OL and made the superbowl IS in fact clear evidence that blocking no longer matters in the NFL. And, the fact that Bulaga, who the Bills could have traded way down and drafted, was instrumental to the Packers success this season is to be dismissed as irrelevant. The Bills blocking is just fine. They need to focus yet more on cornerbacks and receivers. This is the key to success, and I thank you for enlightening me and changing my mind! It isn't a matter of the blocking being fine. The game is quick now. The QB needs to get the ball out. If the opposing QB does, you had better have some solid CBs. Screen passes are a big part of the game now too. They are run not just to RBs but WRs as well. We have all read that screen passes actually work better with a bad OL. It is a matter of planning. You simply can't be fixated on one position. In the 70s, CBs were important but OL was paramount. Today it is the opposite. As you type your reply think of it this way: Your computer is like a cornerback. It allows you to be nimble, make quick adjustments and change things up. The OL is like the US mail. It always arrives eventually but it can bog you down with its lack of speed. In the 70s, that philosophy was ok, but not today. I am not saying one system was better or worse, it is just an evolution. One day we may go back to OL being important. Things do run in cycles.
Green Lightning Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I agree about RB and TE to a degree but you must get CB and WR early in today's NFL. In days of yore OL was important; QB was and is still important but it is a speed league now and CB/WR are paramount. You have to draft them and keep them. The Bills have drafted them, but not kept them. Frittering away picks on positions like OL is laughable considering the patchwork rag tag band of misfits that won the AFC championship. Stevie Johnson, Jabari Greer, Terrance McGee, Wes Welker....I don't know, seems like WR and CB's come from all over and not always in the first round. This year we're going to be developing a nice group of recievers in which all but one came in the early rounds. At CB, the shakiest guy we have was a first rounder. You can lack a little up front on the OL if you have a top 5 QB, etc. Every team is different and I still beleive you have to run the ball and stop the run as a starting point to build a winner. Exceptions to the rule? You bet, but as a rule, that's the way I'd go.
Bill from NYC Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 It isn't a matter of the blocking being fine. The game is quick now. The QB needs to get the ball out. If the opposing QB does, you had better have some solid CBs. Screen passes are a big part of the game now too. They are run not just to RBs but WRs as well. We have all read that screen passes actually work better with a bad OL. It is a matter of planning. You simply can't be fixated on one position. In the 70s, CBs were important but OL was paramount. Today it is the opposite. As you type your reply think of it this way: Your computer is like a cornerback. It allows you to be nimble, make quick adjustments and change things up. The OL is like the US mail. It always arrives eventually but it can bog you down with its lack of speed. In the 70s, that philosophy was ok, but not today. I am not saying one system was better or worse, it is just an evolution. One day we may go back to OL being important. Things do run in cycles. Nice stuff!!!
ieatcrayonz Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Nice stuff!!! I think you're being sarcastic. Anyway, it is nice that we can all agree on one thing: Casey Matthews in the 4th.
Bill from NYC Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I think you're being sarcastic. Anyway, it is nice that we can all agree on one thing: Casey Matthews in the 4th. You will never top your thread in which you claimed that losing would "help the Bills playoff chances," but this was good. Way more subtle, but good!
Geno Smith's Arm Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 I don't think I have ever agreed with ieatcrayonz before, but I kinda think he is right this time. I posted the article without comment because I can see some of the variables that could be argued. But I think the chart has validity. This is probably the dumbest draft article I have ever seen. >>>>> Get talent at CB, RB, TE, and WR early or you’ll be waiting for them to develop into contributors.<<<<< If this philosophy was true, the Bills would have won every Superbowl for the last 15 or more years. Maybe they would have if they had gotten a hold of a good quarterback at some point. QB has been holding back this team for a decade. It has been the number one problem, and has kept the ship tied to the dock.
vincec Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 It isn't a matter of the blocking being fine. The game is quick now. The QB needs to get the ball out. If the opposing QB does, you had better have some solid CBs. Screen passes are a big part of the game now too. They are run not just to RBs but WRs as well. We have all read that screen passes actually work better with a bad OL. It is a matter of planning. You simply can't be fixated on one position. In the 70s, CBs were important but OL was paramount. Today it is the opposite. As you type your reply think of it this way: Your computer is like a cornerback. It allows you to be nimble, make quick adjustments and change things up. The OL is like the US mail. It always arrives eventually but it can bog you down with its lack of speed. In the 70s, that philosophy was ok, but not today. I am not saying one system was better or worse, it is just an evolution. One day we may go back to OL being important. Things do run in cycles. I agree that many things have changed in the NFL in the last 40 years, but one thing has not changed- football is first and foremost a physical game. That will never change. The Bills need to be looking for big, physical players. Quick and nimble is nice and all, but big and physical should be the goal. Not sure if this article has been posted before (probably has), but it is interesting. http://www.ourlads.com/dayone/default.aspx The only thing remotely surprising about this article is that so few LBs in a 3-4 league are high draft picks. Back in the 90s with Conlan, Bennett and Talley, the Bills had some high picks playing.
Geno Smith's Arm Posted March 1, 2011 Author Posted March 1, 2011 This is probably the dumbest draft article I have ever seen. >>>>> Get talent at CB, RB, TE, and WR early or you’ll be waiting for them to develop into contributors.<<<<< If this philosophy was true, the Bills would have won every Superbowl for the last 15 or more years. And another thing. The chart shows the FACTS. These stats show where the players are drafted (or not) for every team, not just the lowly Bills. It hasn't been the POSITION of the players that has been the problem, it's the PLAYERS that they have drafted. The players have been sub-par performers. Plus, they haven't had an elite QB since Jim Kelly, and that's a big part of their problems. The Bills are "off the charts" at sucking.
BuffaloBill Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 It isn't a matter of the blocking being fine. The game is quick now. The QB needs to get the ball out. If the opposing QB does, you had better have some solid CBs. Screen passes are a big part of the game now too. They are run not just to RBs but WRs as well. We have all read that screen passes actually work better with a bad OL. It is a matter of planning. You simply can't be fixated on one position. In the 70s, CBs were important but OL was paramount. Today it is the opposite. As you type your reply think of it this way: Your computer is like a cornerback. It allows you to be nimble, make quick adjustments and change things up. The OL is like the US mail. It always arrives eventually but it can bog you down with its lack of speed. In the 70s, that philosophy was ok, but not today. I am not saying one system was better or worse, it is just an evolution. One day we may go back to OL being important. Things do run in cycles. To suggest this years steelers team represents a change in how to build a team is crazy. They had an outstanding defense and a qb who can extend plays due to size. Run and stop the run still holds true.
Bill from NYC Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 And another thing. The chart shows the FACTS. These stats show where the players are drafted (or not) for every team, not just the lowly Bills. It hasn't been the POSITION of the players that has been the problem, it's the PLAYERS that they have drafted. The players have been sub-par performers. The Bills are "off the charts" at sucking. If you choose to invest in an article as stupid as this, I have no objections. I contend that if the Bills drafted good first round dbs and rbs they would still suck because they are small and weak at OT and the front 7. Fitz is a decent qb and they still are picking 3rd. The Bills and 2 of their divisional opponents play in the elements. We have forsaken our home field advantage by drafting 1st round shrimps who are irrelevant in the elements because they play behind suckass lines in situations where passing is sometimes not as important. If you want to argue this point, please tally up how many game Lil' Donte, McKelvin, Spiller, and an undersized Maybin have won us since 2006. I feel compelled to point out that NFL Football games are won by good quarterbacks and big, strong men. Weak sister Levy/Jauron style teams lose football games, in case you haven't noticed.
ieatcrayonz Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 I agree that many things have changed in the NFL in the last 40 years, but one thing has not changed- football is first and foremost a physical game. That will never change. The Bills need to be looking for big, physical players. Quick and nimble is nice and all, but big and physical should be the goal. The only thing remotely surprising about this article is that so few LBs in a 3-4 league are high draft picks. Back in the 90s with Conlan, Bennett and Talley, the Bills had some high picks playing. I don't know about you, but my Grandma used to have a rotary phone. It worked and was simple and straightforward. Think of it as an offensive line. I have a smart phone with over one million contacts listed and sorted. Think of that as a cornerback. From time to time we all might wish for the nostalgic dial phone, but we all know that the smart phone will allow you to do more things, more quickly.
4BillsintheBurgh Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 And another thing. The chart shows the FACTS. These stats show where the players are drafted (or not) for every team, not just the lowly Bills. It hasn't been the POSITION of the players that has been the problem, it's the PLAYERS that they have drafted. The players have been sub-par performers. Plus, they haven't had an elite QB since Jim Kelly, and that's a big part of their problems. The Bills are "off the charts" at sucking. I thought the chart was interesting and really underscores the Bills drafting problems in all rounds of the draft. We just do not get enough players (especially lineman) from the draft. I really like what the Bills have done in the past couple of years and I hope they can have another draft with a couple linemen in the first three rounds.
Geno Smith's Arm Posted March 1, 2011 Author Posted March 1, 2011 (edited) If you choose to invest in an article as stupid as this, I have no objections. I contend that if the Bills drafted good first round dbs and rbs they would still suck because they are small and weak at OT and the front 7. Fitz is a decent qb and they still are picking 3rd. The Bills and 2 of their divisional opponents play in the elements. We have forsaken our home field advantage by drafting 1st round shrimps who are irrelevant in the elements because they play behind suckass lines in situations where passing is sometimes not as important. If you want to argue this point, please tally up how many game Lil' Donte, McKelvin, Spiller, and an undersized Maybin have won us since 2006. I feel compelled to point out that NFL Football games are won by good quarterbacks and big, strong men. Weak sister Levy/Jauron style teams lose football games, in case you haven't noticed. The chart shows where ALL teams are drafting by position. Yes, EVEN THE WINNING TEAMS! It has nothing to do SPECIFICALLY with the BIlls. The Bills have chosen poorly. And they HAVEN'T been following the chart or they wouldn't have drafted Mike "Fatman" Williams" or Lil' Donte. They have also blown it when drafting D-lineman (Maybin, Erik Flowers). I don't like the guys they have chosen, never did, and will be very disappointed if they draft a defensive back in the first 3 rounds. They also haven't been drafting good O-lineman in the 3rd round. They have been chasing their own tail for years. I think the main reason they have sucked FOR SO LONG is because they haven't had a good QB. Yes, Fitz is "alright", but obviously not good enough to overcome the many deficiencies the Bills have, especially in ONE SEASON. I am not saying they have to follow this chart, nor do I think they shouldn't draft big players, but the chart shows where NFL teams are expecting to get the best value for their picks. I think the main thing I see on the chart that I think is particularly relevant to THIS DRAFT, and THE BILLS, is that OFFENSIVE LINEMAN are generally found in the 3rd, and middle rounds. I am hoping (and suspect the Bills, and apparently the rest of the #%$^ing NFL!) won't use either of the first two picks on an offensive lineman. Good Day Sir...........I SAID "GOOD DAY SIR"!! Edited March 1, 2011 by Matthews' Bag
boyst Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 I don't know about you, but my Grandma used to have a rotary phone. It worked and was simple and straightforward. Think of it as an offensive line. I have a smart phone with over one million contacts listed and sorted. Think of that as a cornerback. From time to time we all might wish for the nostalgic dial phone, but we all know that the smart phone will allow you to do more things, more quickly. By the way, what was your grandma's phone number again? She needs to return the Gordon Lightfoot CD to me.
Geno Smith's Arm Posted March 1, 2011 Author Posted March 1, 2011 By his own analysis, he should be encouraging the Lions to continue to pick WRs in the 1st 2 rounds--after all, that's where 45% of the "2 deep" spots are filled for that position. Crappy article. Check out the "stars" he mentions (Delhomme!, PArker!). Nowhere does it suggest to continually draft the same position at the round they are on the chart year after year. No one can account for Matt Millen's idiocy It merely shows that if you are looking for a starting caliber QB, or cornerback you are wasting your time trying to draft one in the lower rounds because the good ones go in the first. On the other hand, starting caliber Guards are relatively easy to find in the middle rounds, suggesting perhaps that teams either don't value that position, or that an "elite talent" Guard might not have much more impact than a Guard with "pretty good" talent. And that the skills needed to compete at QB and corner are set at a higher bar with fewer possessing the rare talents needed. I know there are other variables, other angles to criticize, but the FACT remains, THIS IS WHERE TEAMS ARE DRAFTING THE STARTERS AT EACH POSITION.
Recommended Posts