Orton's Arm Posted December 18, 2011 Posted December 18, 2011 And the year before the Colts got Manning, they drafted LT Tarik Glenn and RT Adam Meadows in rounds 1 and 2. Still, if you think a QB will be great, it's rough to pass him up because they are just so rare. That said, the Bills need pass rush and a LT. They don't have credible OLB on the entire roster, and this is unimagineable imo. This is a good point. On the one hand, the Colts would have been extremely foolish to pass up Manning, whether they'd previously upgraded their offensive line or not. On the other, you're completely right about the importance of upgrading the offensive line. Manning had some rough games as a rookie, but by the end of his second year I think it was clear to most people he was going to be a special player. After the end of Steve Young's second year the Bucs gave up on him, and traded him away for a second round pick. As you pointed out, the Colts made a very serious draft day investment in their offensive line. The Bucs did practically nothing to fix their sieve of a line. That's probably the biggest single reason why Manning's career got off to a faster start than Young's. (That said, you need to draft a Manning or a Young in the first place if you want a QB who will have a Manning-like career!) You have to take a franchise QB if one is available, because they're so ridiculously rare. But once you have one, you need to be serious about the offensive line! One of the (many) reasons I like keeping rookie quarterbacks on the bench is that it gives the general manager an extra year to fix the offensive line before the QB gets thrown to the wolves. I also agree with your point about the need for an OLB--this defense is really hurting due to that lack. If the Bills don't have an opportunity to take a franchise QB in this upcoming draft, a good LT or pass rushing OLB would be a very solid choice.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted December 18, 2011 Posted December 18, 2011 Well, the year before they picked Troy Aikman, the Cowboys drafted Michael Irvin and Ken Norton Jr. The year before that they drafted DL Danny Noonan (not that Danny Noonan, although it wouldn't have made a difference) and CB Ron Francis. My point is the same one many others are making… if a franchise QB* is there, you have to treat it as a historical opportunity. You CANNOT pass up a franchise QB whether the rest of your roster can support him or not. *franchise meaning not simply the best QB in the draft but rather, a QB who rates highly compared to elite QBs drafted in other years.
Bill from NYC Posted December 18, 2011 Posted December 18, 2011 I also agree with your point about the need for an OLB--this defense is really hurting due to that lack. If the Bills don't have an opportunity to take a franchise QB in this upcoming draft, a good LT or pass rushing OLB would be a very solid choice. I can't see any other choices. Whether it involves reaching a bit or trading down, the Bills abslutely have no pass rush whatsoever from the outside. A legit pass rushing OLB would take blockers away from Dareus, which could potentially make him a literal star. Even if they do fall in love with a qb, they will lose if they do not dramatically increase the pass rush. As for LT, it depends on how much they think Bell is worth, and how many more years they are willing to wait for him. Hairston looks like a RT from where I sit, but who really knows? Pears was a good signing. It's nice to have another body who can play but imo the LT position is far from solidified.
Orton's Arm Posted December 18, 2011 Posted December 18, 2011 (edited) I can't see any other choices. Whether it involves reaching a bit or trading down, the Bills abslutely have no pass rush whatsoever from the outside. A legit pass rushing OLB would take blockers away from Dareus, which could potentially make him a literal star. Even if they do fall in love with a qb, they will lose if they do not dramatically increase the pass rush. As for LT, it depends on how much they think Bell is worth, and how many more years they are willing to wait for him. Hairston looks like a RT from where I sit, but who really knows? Pears was a good signing. It's nice to have another body who can play but imo the LT position is far from solidified. I think we're on the same page about the importance a very good OLB would have to the defense. I strongly agree that the Bills need more pass rushers besides just Darius. An elite OLB, when combined with Darius and (hopefully) a healthy Kyle Williams, could give the front-7 a tremendous boost! But if it's a choice between an elite OLB and an elite QB, which should the Bills choose? As I see it, there are two draft day philosophies. Philosophy 1: The focus here is primarily on the upcoming season. A GM using this philosophy will take whichever player will help the team the most in his rookie year, or his second year at most. Marv employed this philosophy back in 2006. His thought was that a SS and a DT could hold the defense together over the short-term, and would be excellent building blocks for the long run. Given that the Bills went a respectable 7-9 during Marv's first year as GM, his drafting philosophy seemed to pay off--at least over the short-term. Philosophy 2: The idea here is to begin with the end in mind. Over the course of several years, you will use your draft picks to build the team as you envision it. The emphasis here is on the long-term. The thought is that it's much more important to have the team you want after X number of years than it is to worry overmuch about your record during your first year or two as GM. According to Philosophy 1, taking the OLB over the QB would be the correct decision. An elite OLB would probably have a more significant impact on the Bills' W/L record in 2012 than would a rookie QB. (Even a rookie QB destined to become franchise.) A GM adhering to Philosophy 2 would examine the situation differently. His long-term vision would call for both an elite QB and an elite pass rushing OLB. If over the short-term he could only obtain one or the other, he'd take whichever one played at the more valuable and harder-to-fill position. In this case, that means he'd take the QB. He realizes he cannot complete his vision all in one year, and so he waits until later to take the OLB. (Which he eventually will!) I personally adhere to Philosophy 2, so I'd also take the QB in that situation. Edited December 18, 2011 by Edwards' Arm
thewildrabbit Posted December 18, 2011 Posted December 18, 2011 (edited) I think we're on the same page about the importance a very good OLB would have to the defense. I strongly agree that the Bills need more pass rushers besides just Darius. An elite OLB, when combined with Darius and (hopefully) a healthy Kyle Williams, could give the front-7 a tremendous boost! But if it's a choice between an elite OLB and an elite QB, which should the Bills choose? As I see it, there are two draft day philosophies. Philosophy 1: The focus here is primarily on the upcoming season. A GM using this philosophy will take whichever player will help the team the most in his rookie year, or his second year at most. Marv employed this philosophy back in 2006. His thought was that a SS and a DT could hold the defense together over the short-term, and would be excellent building blocks for the long run. Given that the Bills went a respectable 7-9 during Marv's first year as GM, his drafting philosophy seemed to pay off--at least over the short-term. Philosophy 2: The idea here is to begin with the end in mind. Over the course of several years, you will use your draft picks to build the team as you envision it. The emphasis here is on the long-term. The thought is that it's much more important to have the team you want after X number of years than it is to worry overmuch about your record during your first year or two as GM. According to Philosophy 1, taking the OLB over the QB would be the correct decision. An elite OLB would probably have a more significant impact on the Bills' W/L record in 2012 than would a rookie QB. (Even a rookie QB destined to become franchise.) A GM adhering to Philosophy 2 would examine the situation differently. His long-term vision would call for both an elite QB and an elite pass rushing OLB. If over the short-term he could only obtain one or the other, he'd take whichever one played at the more valuable and harder-to-fill position. In this case, that means he'd take the QB. He realizes he cannot complete his vision all in one year, and so he waits until later to take the OLB. (Which he eventually will!) I personally adhere to Philosophy 2, so I'd also take the QB in that situation. Clearly the Bills need a pass rusher more then a QB at this point, no question! But then they have needed one since Aaron Schobel was hurt in 2008 and they saw they had no pass rush once he left the field. While I agree that if an "elite" QB is there you draft him regardless, ordinarily. With this coaching staff I'm not convinced they wouldn't ruin him just like so many Bills staffs have ruined QB's in the past. The mere fact that this regime knew they needed O line help and went after Cornell Green and then didn't draft any real immediate O line help the last 2 years shows me they don't know the difference between a good player and a bad player. Plus Gailey has tried to make do with some not so good players on that line for 2 years now. It simply makes no sense to me that an offensive minded HC would try and get by with injury prone and less then decent players. Then there is the fact that Gailey spent an off season grooming Trent Edwards, Ryan Fitzpatrick, and Brian Brohm while finally settling on Edwards. This shows me he didn't clearly know Fitz was the better QB, remember him stating that all 3 were about the same. Looking at the game plans and play calls the last 5 weeks, I'd sure as heck not trust this staff with an "elite" rookie QB. I realize that this team has suffered quite a few injuries, but I also realize that when your QB is in a slump and not playing well game after game you that make some changes to your offense. You try and build a power running game to take pressure off the QB, instead of calling pass play after pass play and putting even more pressure on the QB. Its like Gailey abandons the run after getting down by 7 points. Looking 5-11 right now, if RW chooses to keep this staff, then a pass rusher. If he has a do over and hires a new HC who will hire some top assistants, then yea a QB. Edited December 18, 2011 by Fear the Beard
Recommended Posts