#34fan Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 (edited) I've been villified for suggesting we take a guard at #10 overall, but If RG3 isn't doable then why not? Our run game was dominant in the early part of the 2011 season, so why not build on that with some sound run-blocking? Plus if we end up sticking with Fitz, couldn't he use a little help up front? My only knock on DeCastro is that he could use an extra 20 lbs of muscle. Other than that, #52 is a MACHINE. Check out and sound off. Edited February 9, 2012 by #34fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 The run game was dominant with OG's who are still on the roster, who won't cost a 1st rounder that could be better spent elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimer1960 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Where would he play? Is he going to beat out Levitre or Urbick? If so, how much of a real upgrade would he be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#34fan Posted February 10, 2012 Author Share Posted February 10, 2012 The run game was dominant with OG's who are still on the roster, who won't cost a 1st rounder that could be better spent elsewhere. Like where? and Specifically, like who? For the love of king and country, please don't say another dang-blasted cornerback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Like where? and Specifically, like who? For the love of king and country, please don't say another dang-blasted cornerback. Has anybody suggested a CB? Multiple LB's, offensive tackles and WR's are all of bigger concern than OG. By all accounts, DeCastro should be great, but OG is one of the least needed positions on the roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Guard is among the easiest positions in the NFL to fill. That is why teams do not draft a guard high in the draft. That is why taking a guard at 10 is crazy talk. Especially when the Bills already have two starting quality guards. For the love of king and country, please don't say another dang-blasted cornerback. It would be a better pick than guard at #10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Like where? and Specifically, like who? For the love of king and country, please don't say another dang-blasted cornerback. Depends on what happens in FA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Taking a guard at ten instead of a DE or OLB (or even WR) would make the fanbases' collective heads explode. He does seem like a great player though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple haze Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Like where? and Specifically, like who? For the love of king and country, please don't say another dang-blasted cornerback. Why not? They need a couple without question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 I've been villified for suggesting we take a guard at #10 overall, but If RG3 isn't doable then why not? Our run game was dominant in the early part of the 2011 season, so why not build on that with some sound run-blocking? Plus if we end up sticking with Fitz, couldn't he use a little help up front? My only knock on DeCastro is that he could use an extra 20 lbs of muscle. Other than that, #52 is a MACHINE. Check out and sound off. After DT & RB I can't think of a position where we need help less. That being said, if this guy's got the ability to be a perennial all-pro I'd rather have the league's most dominant interior O-line than reach for someone just to fill a hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Like where? and Specifically, like who? For the love of king and country, please don't say another dang-blasted cornerback. If you want line - go tackle, and you can always move that guy inside if he's not good enough. The tackle is much harder to find than guard if you are going line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouds Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Like where? and Specifically, like who? For the love of king and country, please don't say another dang-blasted cornerback. How about a WR? How about Kendall Wright? How about a LT? I love DeCastro, but Levitre's a great guard and Urbik had good year. Both need to be resigned by next year, so it wouldn't shock me if they did take a G to add depth, but taking one so early when we have holes at WR, CB, DE, LB and T would be akin to taking Trent Richardson if he fell to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjmac Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 I've been villified for suggesting we take a guard at #10 overall, but If RG3 isn't doable then why not? Our run game was dominant in the early part of the 2011 season, so why not build on that with some sound run-blocking? Plus if we end up sticking with Fitz, couldn't he use a little help up front? My only knock on DeCastro is that he could use an extra 20 lbs of muscle. Other than that, #52 is a MACHINE. Check out and sound off. I don't need to see the link to sound off. He doesn't fill a position of need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 I've been villified for suggesting we take a guard at #10 overall, but If RG3 isn't doable then why not? Our run game was dominant in the early part of the 2011 season, so why not build on that with some sound run-blocking? Plus if we end up sticking with Fitz, couldn't he use a little help up front? My only knock on DeCastro is that he could use an extra 20 lbs of muscle. Other than that, #52 is a MACHINE. Check out and sound off. We already have guys that don't need to gain 20 Lbs of muscle that are road Graders (Brown, Colin OL 6-7 328, Rinehart, Chad OL 6-5 323) . I Don't understand your obsession with guards when that is our strongest position on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Romes Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 How many super bowls do the giants have to win before people believe you need to stack the defensive line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#34fan Posted February 10, 2012 Author Share Posted February 10, 2012 We already have guys that don't need to gain 20 Lbs of muscle that are road Graders (Brown, Colin OL 6-7 328, Rinehart, Chad OL 6-5 323) . I Don't understand your obsession with guards when that is our strongest position on the team. I disagree. protection was an issue throughout the season. I also think that Fred is such a talented, and instinctive runner, that he made the most of of opportunities a lesser back would have missed. It also seems like Chan and Lee aren't letting this wildcat thing die. I would think that having aggressive, intelligent, guys up front would improve their luck with this impossibly cheesy formation. I'm not at all impressed with our o-line. I think it lacks (among other things) a standard-bearer. Dave DeCastro doesn't quit, and he understands his job. I seriously doubt he would have been protecting the most valuable player in college football if it were otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Protection was not an issue throughout the year. Spiller ran well behind the line as well, Fred did not mask any perceived weaknesses in the line. Actually, spiller ran well behind a diminished line with Wood out. Come on man, you're reaching. No one agrees with you. Just accept it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 I disagree. protection was an issue throughout the season. I also think that Fred is such a talented, and instinctive runner, that he made the most of of opportunities a lesser back would have missed. It also seems like Chan and Lee aren't letting this wildcat thing die. I would think that having aggressive, intelligent, guys up front would improve their luck with this impossibly cheesy formation. I'm not at all impressed with our o-line. I think it lacks (among other things) a standard-bearer. Dave DeCastro doesn't quit, and he understands his job. I seriously doubt he would have been protecting the most valuable player in college football if it were otherwise. And you guys say that I'm crazy about Tannehill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#34fan Posted February 10, 2012 Author Share Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) Protection was not an issue throughout the year. Spiller ran well behind the line as well, Fred did not mask any perceived weaknesses in the line. Actually, spiller ran well behind a diminished line with Wood out. Come on man, you're reaching. No one agrees with you. Just accept it. I may be reaching a bit, but I'm also envisioning a Bills offense that can pound the rock with authority for the next 6-10 years. I totally accept the fact that no one here agrees with me. I just wanted people to see the impact this kid was having on games in a pro-style offense. He really plays at a high level. Edited February 10, 2012 by #34fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Yes, "pound the rock." Because that is how it's done in the NFL nowadays. That's how the Saints, Pack, and Giants won the last three championships. What decade are you living in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts