DrDawkinstein Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 I take Blackmon without hesitation. Assuming we re-sign Stevie, adding a Top Tier WR on the other side of him does more to help Fitz and our Offense than adding a risky QB prospect. I want to like RG3, but I havent seen enough to be wowed and what I have seen has been "ok". Blackmon is more of a sure thing, and that is what this team needs at a position that is hurting more than our QB spot.
Offside Number 76 Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 The Bills will not have a pick around #10. It will be around #15 after they beat New England on Sunday.
H2o Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 For a wr? Do you think this is a good idea or just what you think it would take? Too much for a wr imo It's not a good idea considering we need so much help on the defensive side of the ball, but look at what Atlanta gave up last year for Julio Jones. Us having a higher pick would make us likely not have to give up the following year's 1st, but I imagine it would take a 1st, a 3rd, and next year's 2nd or something along those lines.
stony Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 I take Blackmon without hesitation. Assuming we re-sign Stevie, adding a Top Tier WR on the other side of him does more to help Fitz and our Offense than adding a risky QB prospect. I want to like RG3, but I havent seen enough to be wowed and what I have seen has been "ok". Blackmon is more of a sure thing, and that is what this team needs at a position that is hurting more than our QB spot. Bingo. Re-sign Stevie, add a legit talent across from him and all of a sudden 7.5 will look like a bargain when Stevie avgs. 90rec for the next 5 years.
T master Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 After what i saw last night out of RG3 i'll take him all day long !! He looked like Micheal Vick but with a better arm at the same stage of his career & the kids upside with some one like Gailey ---- It would just be stupid good how could you lose ??? That what i'm talkin bout !!!!!
section122 Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 The Bills will not have a pick around #10. It will be around #15 after they beat New England on Sunday. Farthest they can fall with a win is 13. Highest they can move up is 9. Ill take a sweep of the cheatriots for two spots (they are at 11 right now).
Cotton Fitzsimmons Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 I take Blackmon without a second thought. The guy is NFL ready and a legit #1 WR IMO. EVERYONE who played Oklahoma St. this season knew who they wanted to get the ball to. He still had 113 catches for over 1,300 yards and 15 TD's. As a Junior he had 111 catches for 1,700 yards and 20 TD's. These stats aren't coming against sub-par competition either, this is against Big XII opponents. He's won the Biletnikoff Award two years in a row. RGIII would be nice, but I WANT BLACKMON IN A BILLS' UNI!!! Blackmon to the left, Stevie to the right, D-Nelson in the slot... WHEEEWWWW DOGGIE!
PromoTheRobot Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 I take Blackmon without hesitation. Assuming we re-sign Stevie, adding a Top Tier WR on the other side of him does more to help Fitz and our Offense than adding a risky QB prospect. I want to like RG3, but I havent seen enough to be wowed and what I have seen has been "ok". Blackmon is more of a sure thing, and that is what this team needs at a position that is hurting more than our QB spot. If we did get RG3, I assume that means starting him immediately? It would have to. No one would stand for keeping him behind Fitz. PTR
DrDawkinstein Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 If we did get RG3, I assume that means starting him immediately? It would have to. No one would stand for keeping him behind Fitz. PTR If thats the case, and I dont disagree, then we have to spend at least 2 picks on WR and ignore the D. We cant put a rookie QB out there with just SJ13 (IF we re-sign him).
Mr. WEO Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 If thats the case, and I dont disagree, then we have to spend at least 2 picks on WR and ignore the D. We cant put a rookie QB out there with just SJ13 (IF we re-sign him). Didn't Cincy put their rookie QB out there with just a rookie WR (after dumping the franchie's all time leading WR)? Didn't Carolina put their rookie out there with just Steve Smith?
DrDawkinstein Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Didn't Cincy put their rookie QB out there with just a rookie WR (after dumping the franchie's all time leading WR)? Didn't Carolina put their rookie out there with just Steve Smith? Cincy has a defense that keeps the Bengals in the game, unlike the Bills. Carolina is going to end up 6-10 this year and started the season 2-8. Also, imo, RG3 is no Cam Newton. Furthermore, you are (or should be) smart enough to know that a couple of successful (lucky) examples does not guarantee anything for us. Didnt the Jags start Gabbert without WR help? Didnt the Vikings do the same thing to Ponder?
stinky finger Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Cincy has a defense that keeps the Bengals in the game, unlike the Bills. Carolina is going to end up 6-10 this year and started the season 2-8. Also, imo, RG3 is no Cam Newton. Furthermore, you are (or should be) smart enough to know that a couple of successful (lucky) examples does not guarantee anything for us. Didnt the Jags start Gabbert without WR help? Didnt the Vikings do the same thing to Ponder? Given the choice, I'd go Blackmon too. Get that ultra talent in place then address the QB position. Just adding that WR makes your present QB better. What a nice array of targets should we re-sign Stevie. What round do we take an OC?
DrDawkinstein Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 What round do we take an OC? Are you giving up on Woods? Or did you mean Offensive Coordinator?
McBeane Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 If we did get RG3, I assume that means starting him immediately? It would have to. No one would stand for keeping him behind Fitz. PTR This board would literally explode if Fitz was starting over RG3. I hate to even think of what the threads and posts would look like if that were to happen. Thankfully, RG3 will be gone long before the Bills are picking.
Dennis in NC Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 RGIII in a heartbeat. Honestly, I don't think it would be too crazy to take him over Luck either. Last night at halftime, both Lou Holtz and Mark May said they would pick RG3 over Luck if they had the 1st pick. Luck will also be a great franchise QB (a foreign concept to Bills fans) but that RG3 had that Newton/Vick sort of thing that has changed the game these days. They said RG3 could compensate for a poor offensive line (like the worst teams usually have) better than Luck could.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Just Curious of your opinions...But if both guys were somehow to still be on the board when we pick, who would you take if you could make the call? I would go RG III b/c with the new rookie wage scale its not much of a gamble out anymore. How has Cam worked out for Carolina??? and I believe we have more overall talent than that team easily, but he keeps them in every game. What would you guys do, there is no wrong answer here, just opinions... Both I'd go Blackmon and draft Tannehill 2nd who is just as talented as RG3 but not as fast and is smart as Fitz.
Mr. WEO Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Cincy has a defense that keeps the Bengals in the game, unlike the Bills. Carolina is going to end up 6-10 this year and started the season 2-8. Also, imo, RG3 is no Cam Newton. Furthermore, you are (or should be) smart enough to know that a couple of successful (lucky) examples does not guarantee anything for us. Didnt the Jags start Gabbert without WR help? Didnt the Vikings do the same thing to Ponder? Yes, yes--the Cincy defense. The offense still has to score. Dalton is having a good year. Face it. My examples were not "guarantees" (huh??), but were meant to show that it certainly can be done and has been--twice--this year. Very few people confused Gabbert and Ponder as the number one QB prospect coming out of college (as RG3 is considered to be). Percy Harvin plays WR for Vikings--he's not bad you know. This board would literally explode if Fitz was starting over RG3. I hate to even think of what the threads and posts would look like if that were to happen. Thankfully, RG3 will be gone long before the Bills are picking. Don't understand this thinking. You would pass on a potential franchise/starting QB because the fans might want him to start over Fitz--and therefore it would be a good thing the Bills won't have to make that choice?
missthe kgun Posted December 30, 2011 Author Posted December 30, 2011 Say RG3 goes first, and causes Luck to slide, do we trade up??? I would!!! If we did get RG3, I assume that means starting him immediately? It would have to. No one would stand for keeping him behind Fitz. PTR I would be fine with Fitz grooming the youngster for a yr or 2
Zulu Cthulhu Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 (edited) Both I'd go Blackmon and draft Tannehill 2nd who is just as talented as RG3 but not as fast and is smart as Fitz. Man, you really, REALLY, like Ryan Tannehill. I'll take your word he's good - I don't catch a lot of Aggie games. Anyways I like RG3 but I don't see him becoming another Cam Newton. Buffalo's public statements suggest they're committed to Fitzpatrick anyways. I vote Blackmon. Edited December 30, 2011 by Zulu Cthulhu
Offside Number 76 Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 (edited) If thats the case, and I dont disagree, then we have to spend at least 2 picks on WR and ignore the D. We cant put a rookie QB out there with just SJ13 (IF we re-sign him). Don't put a rookie Q out there at all. That's been one of the problems with this team. I'm not going to argue the qualities of Losman and Edwards, but I will say that putting a true rook at Q usually doesn't work well. YES, there are exceptions. Please (not necessarily you, Dr.D.) don't come back with Brady this or Manning that. A good QB sits for two years and develops, most of the time. There are more Rodgerses (yeah, that's the correct plural despite the B-Lo tendency to add an apostrophe when not needed), Kellys (don't think for a second that the USFL didn't help him develop, and don't forget his record in '86), and Breeses (see Rodgers on the plural) than there are Mannings or Bradys. A good Q needs time, a good line, and a good coach. I think the BIlls have a decent, but not great, line; I also think that Gailey, while not a SB coach, might be the guy to develop a young Q. Edited December 31, 2011 by Offsides Number 76
Recommended Posts