billnutinphoenix Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Worst option is you a pick a All-Pro RB (Everyone acknowledges it)...Best thing is to trade pick and get a whole lot for it...
hondo in seattle Posted April 6, 2012 Author Posted April 6, 2012 Judging by this thread it would appear that the concept of due diligence is not clearly understood. When properly applied you gain experience and knowledge at a more rapid pace and contingencies reveal themselves rather than the need to sweat details and assume unnecessary risks based upon assumption. Smart GMs assess players that know they will not pick or be able to pick to make projections for them hypothetically and then track their progress in the league. It is part of self assessing your abilities to make accurate projections on players. I guarantee that Cam Newton is being observed indirectly to self evaluate if they would have been correct in drafting him if he was available. If this concept is lost on some of you then you should really study it. It can vastly improve your own job performance or investments depending on the variables in play. Leave no stone unturned as they say. Thanks for the condescending attitude. May we all be as bright and worldly as you some day. As a business professional, I'm familiar with the concept of "due diligence." I'm also familiar with the concept of "limited resources." As a business owner, I don't waste much time on unlikely scenarios. Time is too valuable. The Bills have only so much time to study players and can only bring in 30 players. When time/money/visits are limited, why spend it on a player we are highly unlikely to draft? I think I'm asking a valid question. And I think Buddy probably has a valid answer. And maybe the answer is indeed "due diligence." Maybe drafting Richardson isn't as unlikely as I assume it to be. Then again, maybe it's not due diligence. Maybe the Bills just want to appear interested in Richardson to influence the decision making of other clubs. I'm not pretentious enough to claim to know Buddy's intent. P.S. My business is highly successful despite your comments.
Orton's Arm Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 He'll be a dynamite RB. Among the best right away that's why. The Bills already have two dynamite RBs in the form of Spiller and Jackson! There's been discussion--justified, IMO--about whether Jackson deserves to be considered a top-5 back in the NFL. In limited playing time, Spiller did things, and made plays, that Jackson lacks the speed and athleticism to duplicate. On the other hand, Jackson is the more polished of the two--in part because he's a very polished player, and in part because Spiller is still young and raw. The point of all this is that the Bills shouldn't be attempting to acquire enough dynamite at the RB position to level half the mountains of West Virginia, while ignoring other, far more important positions. Positions at which there's an actual need!
RealityCheck Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Thanks for the condescending attitude. May we all be as bright and worldly as you some day. As a business professional, I'm familiar with the concept of "due diligence." I'm also familiar with the concept of "limited resources." As a business owner, I don't waste much time on unlikely scenarios. Time is too valuable. The Bills have only so much time to study players and can only bring in 30 players. When time/money/visits are limited, why spend it on a player we are highly unlikely to draft? I think I'm asking a valid question. And I think Buddy probably has a valid answer. And maybe the answer is indeed "due diligence." Maybe drafting Richardson isn't as unlikely as I assume it to be. Then again, maybe it's not due diligence. Maybe the Bills just want to appear interested in Richardson to influence the decision making of other clubs. I'm not pretentious enough to claim to know Buddy's intent. P.S. My business is highly successful despite your comments. Complacency is born from either arrogance or laziness and catches up to everyone sooner or later. My post wasn't even directed at you in particular but you seem quite defensive for some reason. If your particular business is not vulnerable to too many surprises then I say good for you. I am just not familiar with many businesses that are not considering the US GDP as a whole is leveraged some 60 to 1 with massive inflation looming on the horizon to liquidate that debt. But hey, you have time to post here so life can't be all that bad.
Calgary_JG Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 It's been widely stated by NFL FO's that there is a lot of misdirection in the days leading up to the draft. No team wants to show their cards. You get 30 visits and 7 draft picks, you can afford to "waste" 5 or 6 of those visits
NoSaint Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 (edited) Thanks for the condescending attitude. May we all be as bright and worldly as you some day. As a business professional, I'm familiar with the concept of "due diligence." I'm also familiar with the concept of "limited resources." As a business owner, I don't waste much time on unlikely scenarios. Time is too valuable. The Bills have only so much time to study players and can only bring in 30 players. When time/money/visits are limited, why spend it on a player we are highly unlikely to draft? I think I'm asking a valid question. And I think Buddy probably has a valid answer. And maybe the answer is indeed "due diligence." Maybe drafting Richardson isn't as unlikely as I assume it to be. Then again, maybe it's not due diligence. Maybe the Bills just want to appear interested in Richardson to influence the decision making of other clubs. I'm not pretentious enough to claim to know Buddy's intent. P.S. My business is highly successful despite your comments. There are a host of questions they can answer for the cost of a flight, and putting him with a couple people one afternoon. In a league where guys get 100m contracts, resources are less limited. Seeing his face when you ask him the right pointed question could be worth every bit of time and money Similarly, if he ends up in say Miami, it's also worth every cent to know how he breaks down plays in his own mind. Edited April 6, 2012 by NoSaint
Orton's Arm Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 Complacency is born from either arrogance or laziness and catches up to everyone sooner or later. My post wasn't even directed at you in particular but you seem quite defensive for some reason. If your particular business is not vulnerable to too many surprises then I say good for you. I am just not familiar with many businesses that are not considering the US GDP as a whole is leveraged some 60 to 1 with massive inflation looming on the horizon to liquidate that debt. But hey, you have time to post here so life can't be all that bad. There are two possible reasons for interviewing Trent Richardson: 1. The Bills have ruled out taking him, but want to interview him anyway for reasons others have stated. 2. The Bills are considering taking him if he falls to 10th overall. To eliminate the second option from the Bills' consideration set would not be a sign of complacency, arrogance, or laziness. It would be a healthy sign of discipline. The only valid reason for interviewing Richardson is the first.
RealityCheck Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 There are two possible reasons for interviewing Trent Richardson: 1. The Bills have ruled out taking him, but want to interview him anyway for reasons others have stated. 2. The Bills are considering taking him if he falls to 10th overall. To eliminate the second option from the Bills' consideration set would not be a sign of complacency, arrogance, or laziness. It would be a healthy sign of discipline. The only valid reason for interviewing Richardson is the first. The word "complacency" was used in jest as a response to the bolded type in my response to Hondo's post. How did you make the false correlation that it was a summary of Nix' desire to fly Richardson in for an interview? It doesn't make sense at all.
Orton's Arm Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 The word "complacency" was used in jest as a response to the bolded type in my response to Hondo's post. How did you make the false correlation that it was a summary of Nix' desire to fly Richardson in for an interview? It doesn't make sense at all. I'd thought you were implying that if the Bills didn't want to fly Richardson in for an interview, it might be a sign of complacency.
Recommended Posts