seq004 Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 We could have the best one two punch in the league this year with Fedex and CJ. If we shore up the LT spot it could solidify our line for years to come. I realize the NFL has been a passing league for the last few years but getting a stud on the line could make us a double threat in the run and pass game. If we bank on Chris Hairston at LT it would seem to risky for such an important position where we need depth. That depth is gone with Bell going to Philly. If our line that was good not great with all five starters in falters we could end up with a bad year on offense. I hope we go OT in round 1 and grab a receiver later in round 1 trading up or in the 2nd like the speed receiver out of Rutgers. I like Floyd but IMO we need OL.
NoSaint Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Though I generally agree we need another good OT, if your trading up, I go Floyd then take OT in the 20s where these guys belong (and 1-2 will slip to)
KOKBILLS Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 We could have the best one two punch in the league this year with Fedex and CJ. If we shore up the LT spot it could solidify our line for years to come. I realize the NFL has been a passing league for the last few years but getting a stud on the line could make us a double threat in the run and pass game. If we bank on Chris Hairston at LT it would seem to risky for such an important position where we need depth. That depth is gone with Bell going to Philly. If our line that was good not great with all five starters in falters we could end up with a bad year on offense. I hope we go OT in round 1 and grab a receiver later in round 1 trading up or in the 2nd like the speed receiver out of Rutgers. I like Floyd but IMO we need OL. So name me the great would-be NFL LT that will be available at #10 overall, come in as a Rookie, and beat out Hairston? Because I don't think that guy exists in this Draft...
BEAST MODE BABY! Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 There's no surefire starter at LT at 10, Buddy doesn't like trading up and losing picks, and Sanu out of Rutgers is anything but a speed guy. Other than that, I agree with every word you wrote.
NewEra Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 IMO, the only guy that can do what you speak of is Kalil. I'm not a huge fan of giving up picks, but I'd trade our 1 and 2 to get our stud LT of the present and future. It would be great if we could use our picks this year and fill all of our holes (lt, Wr, OLB, and maybe cb), but it's unlikely we hit on all of our picks. Drafting Reiff, Martin, Glenn or Adams might yield us a good player, but it might not. If we spend a 1st rd pick on a tackle, I'd rather give up our 2nd and secure the best in the draft....by far
TheKidd Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 We could have the best one two punch in the league this year with Fedex and CJ. If we shore up the LT spot it could solidify our line for years to come. I realize the NFL has been a passing league for the last few years but getting a stud on the line could make us a double threat in the run and pass game. If we bank on Chris Hairston at LT it would seem to risky for such an important position where we need depth. That depth is gone with Bell going to Philly. If our line that was good not great with all five starters in falters we could end up with a bad year on offense. I hope we go OT in round 1 and grab a receiver later in round 1 trading up or in the 2nd like the speed receiver out of Rutgers. I like Floyd but IMO we need OL. ------------------------------------------------------------ What about drafting DeCastro for left guard and moving Levitre to left tackle?
Pilsner Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 If LT is BPA when our turn comes up (according to Buddy's board) then so be it. If another position is BPA when 10 is on deck I will trust Buddy's and Whaley's judgement. We need Talent. Having a stud LT in the first round would be awsome. But if a good solid LT is to be had in the 2nd along with a stud insta-starter at another position in the 1st I would not be opposed to it. We shall see what comes to pass.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Draft DeCastro and move Levitre to tackle if it becomes necessary. It will also give you incredible flexibility if Wood comes in subpar, which is always a possibility. Yes, Levitre has short arms but he's performed decently at tackle when he's had to.
Pilsner Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Keep Levitre at LG because that's where he excels. He's ok at RT in a pinch. Draft tackles and move them inward if they don't pan out outside. Levitre is flexible but his true calling is at guard.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 We could have the best one two punch in the league this year with Fedex and CJ. If we shore up the LT spot it could solidify our line for years to come. I realize the NFL has been a passing league for the last few years but getting a stud on the line could make us a double threat in the run and pass game. If we bank on Chris Hairston at LT it would seem to risky for such an important position where we need depth. That depth is gone with Bell going to Philly. If our line that was good not great with all five starters in falters we could end up with a bad year on offense. I hope we go OT in round 1 and grab a receiver later in round 1 trading up or in the 2nd like the speed receiver out of Rutgers. I like Floyd but IMO we need OL. There's no question we need depth at LT. I think there's also no question that Nix and Co are committed to standing by their board, and not doing what the rest of the league thinks they should.
bigc14120 Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 I watched Hairston last year, he is no sort of answer at LT. He was beat regularily, recall, when he got on the field, the fast start disappeared. I am not yet sure he is an NFL tackle...the situation is now worst than portrayed by those who think Hairston is OK. I am not there at all based on what I saw last year. (season ticket holder for 40 years)
ganesh Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 We could have the best one two punch in the league this year with Fedex and CJ. If we shore up the LT spot it could solidify our line for years to come. I realize the NFL has been a passing league for the last few years but getting a stud on the line could make us a double threat in the run and pass game. If we bank on Chris Hairston at LT it would seem to risky for such an important position where we need depth. That depth is gone with Bell going to Philly. If our line that was good not great with all five starters in falters we could end up with a bad year on offense. I hope we go OT in round 1 and grab a receiver later in round 1 trading up or in the 2nd like the speed receiver out of Rutgers. I like Floyd but IMO we need OL. Good LT can be found in the 2nd and 3rd rounds too. We need to go the Giants way....Add Pass Rush to the team...Another OLB will be great...If not, we really need to get a 2nd WR who can come in and start on day one. There is very limited talent at that position. It is going to be Floyd all the way! ------------------------------------------------------------ What about drafting DeCastro for left guard and moving Levitre to left tackle? We need to stop the Dick Jauron experiment of taking players out of positions....Levitre is our starting LG who can go to the pro bowl and that is where he needs to stay. We need to get true tackles to play at the Tackle position. I watched Hairston last year, he is no sort of answer at LT. He was beat regularily, recall, when he got on the field, the fast start disappeared. I am not yet sure he is an NFL tackle...the situation is now worst than portrayed by those who think Hairston is OK. I am not there at all based on what I saw last year. (season ticket holder for 40 years) Give the kid a chance. He did not get a full off season and training camp in his rookie year and did OK. With a good off season and a full training camp, he can improve. After all we have got two scrubs to go on to be starters for the Philadelphia Eagles!
White Linen Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 We could have the best one two punch in the league this year with Fedex and CJ. If we shore up the LT spot it could solidify our line for years to come. I realize the NFL has been a passing league for the last few years but getting a stud on the line could make us a double threat in the run and pass game. If we bank on Chris Hairston at LT it would seem to risky for such an important position where we need depth. That depth is gone with Bell going to Philly. If our line that was good not great with all five starters in falters we could end up with a bad year on offense. I hope we go OT in round 1 and grab a receiver later in round 1 trading up or in the 2nd like the speed receiver out of Rutgers. I like Floyd but IMO we need OL. So you hope we go OT in the 1st round even if our GM doesn't see a day 1 starter at pick 10?
RealityCheck Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Let's keep in mind that Hairston played well before the high ankle sprain and was rushed back into the lineup. I am not saying he is our LT of the future but he has also not proven that he won't be. To say that we should get A LT in the 1st is awful simple minded. This team needs players not positions. #10 needs to make an impact in September, whoever that may be.
PDaDdy Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 We could have the best one two punch in the league this year with Fedex and CJ. If we shore up the LT spot it could solidify our line for years to come. I realize the NFL has been a passing league for the last few years but getting a stud on the line could make us a double threat in the run and pass game. If we bank on Chris Hairston at LT it would seem to risky for such an important position where we need depth. That depth is gone with Bell going to Philly. If our line that was good not great with all five starters in falters we could end up with a bad year on offense. I hope we go OT in round 1 and grab a receiver later in round 1 trading up or in the 2nd like the speed receiver out of Rutgers. I like Floyd but IMO we need OL. We definitely need a LT without question. Floyd is a better pick and better value if he falls to us at #10. He also addresses a huge need. I to believe that if we don't fix the LT spot that we could have a bad year on offense and people will try to blame the wrong guys for it. What I question is is there much difference the talent we could get at LT at #10 much different than the talent we could get at #41. I watched Hairston last year, he is no sort of answer at LT. He was beat regularily, recall, when he got on the field, the fast start disappeared. I am not yet sure he is an NFL tackle...the situation is now worst than portrayed by those who think Hairston is OK. I am not there at all based on what I saw last year. (season ticket holder for 40 years) It is funny to me the whole LT thing. We were incredibly critical of the spot when our perennial probowler Jason Peters was here but we have had WILD unfounded optimism regarding anyone playing the spot not named Jason Peters since. IMO Bell wasn't good enough in large part due to his injury history and he was the clear starter over our 2nd 4th round pick rookie Hairston. Bell wasn't good enough and Hairston couldn't even beat him out for the starting job. Maybe Hairston will be something eventually. Unless he made a HUGE improvement in his game since we last saw him he isn't good enough right now and we have NO depth. It all depends on what Buddy and his scouts think but in my opinion drafting any tackle that might be available to us at #10 is the definition of drafting only for need vs best player available at a position of need.
clayboy54 Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 The more I contemplate the possibilities, given what Buddy did to get Mario Williams, it would not surprise me at all to see us make a move to get Kalil. The real question becomes at what point will he become available. At #3, if the Vikes really want him, we can't afford to offer a deal they can't refuse. If, by chance he drops past #3, which could happen, then I could see the Bills furiously calling to make a deal. Cleveland may be looking at Tannehill, or maybe not. They should be looking hard at Richardson. There is Claiborne and Blackmon in there someplace. Would Tampa Bay trade down to #10 and still have a shot at their guy? Very possibly, because it seems that St Louis wants Blackmon, Miami need Tannehill if he's not a Brown, and the Titans are probably going DL/LB. That would be a very real and doable scenario, IMO. We can afford to trade up to #5 or #7 if Kalil is highly rated by our staff. I know everyone can't see Nix trading picks to move up, but who honestly thought he would do what he did to land Super Mario? Certainly not me!
Buffaloed in Pa Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 No ......for so many reasons. Nobody at 10 worth it. Later ,like rd3. Not the time to PANIC PICK at 10. Pick another impact player.W-O CB or LB.
John from Riverside Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 I watched Hairston last year, he is no sort of answer at LT. He was beat regularily, recall, when he got on the field, the fast start disappeared. I am not yet sure he is an NFL tackle...the situation is now worst than portrayed by those who think Hairston is OK. I am not there at all based on what I saw last year. (season ticket holder for 40 years) Christ...yes Hairston on the field was why started losing We definitely need a LT without question. Floyd is a better pick and better value if he falls to us at #10. He also addresses a huge need. I to believe that if we don't fix the LT spot that we could have a bad year on offense and people will try to blame the wrong guys for it. What I question is is there much difference the talent we could get at LT at #10 much different than the talent we could get at #41. It is funny to me the whole LT thing. We were incredibly critical of the spot when our perennial probowler Jason Peters was here but we have had WILD unfounded optimism regarding anyone playing the spot not named Jason Peters since. IMO Bell wasn't good enough in large part due to his injury history and he was the clear starter over our 2nd 4th round pick rookie Hairston. Bell wasn't good enough and Hairston couldn't even beat him out for the starting job. Maybe Hairston will be something eventually. Unless he made a HUGE improvement in his game since we last saw him he isn't good enough right now and we have NO depth. It all depends on what Buddy and his scouts think but in my opinion drafting any tackle that might be available to us at #10 is the definition of drafting only for need vs best player available at a position of need. Perhaps my memory is fading....did Hairston not continue to start even when Bell was healthy?
Buffaloed in Pa Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Christ...yes Hairston on the field was why started losing Perhaps my memory is fading....did Hairston not continue to start even when Bell was healthy? yes he did. Hairston just might work out . Just like somebody said. Give him OTA`s, training camp and health ,then see what happens.I hate panic picks.
frogger Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 Another WR of quality prevents the safeties from moving into the box, leading to more rushing yards. Make the defense respond to us, not let's respond to the defense. Also, the gap between hairston and Reiff /Martin is smaller than the gap between Floyd and Jones.
Recommended Posts