Football is a numbers game

[Orton's Arm]

A lot of times football comes down to a numbers game.

 

Maybe the defense has a NT who can be productive despite being double teamed. The face that one defender uses up two offensive players affects the numbers game.

 

Maybe the offense has a WR who can be productive despite being double-teamed. If one of the offense's players uses up two defenders, that helps the offense with the numbers game.

 

Players can help with the numbers game in another way as well. Suppose a RDE would normally require a double team. But suppose a Pro Bowl LT is able to block that RDE one-on-one. That LT helps with the numbers game, because he eliminates a numerical advantage the defense would otherwise have had.

 

Any time you pick a player 10th overall, one of the following should be true. Either a) he should be a franchise QB, or b) he should consistently add +1 to the numbers game.

 

I don't care that much how he makes his contribution. But if a player isn't going to change the equation for the numbers game, and if he isn't a franchise QB, then he has no business going 10th overall!

[uncle flap]

A lot of times football comes down to a numbers game.

 

Maybe the defense has a NT who can be productive despite being double teamed. The face that one defender uses up two offensive players affects the numbers game.

 

Maybe the offense has a WR who can be productive despite being double-teamed. If one of the offense's players uses up two defenders, that helps the offense with the numbers game.

 

Players can help with the numbers game in another way as well. Suppose a RDE would normally require a double team. But suppose a Pro Bowl LT is able to block that RDE one-on-one. That LT helps with the numbers game, because he eliminates a numerical advantage the defense would otherwise have had.

 

Any time you pick a player 10th overall, one of the following should be true. Either a) he should be a franchise QB, or b) he should consistently add +1 to the numbers game.

 

I don't care that much how he makes his contribution. But if a player isn't going to change the equation for the numbers game, and if he isn't a franchise QB, then he has no business going 10th overall!

 

You make a great case for Floyd

[Green Lightning]

Then go for a kicker. Usually there are two return men to handle one guys kick.

[Coach Tuesday]

I think you mean a game of matchups. Create mismatches and you win.

[Malazan]

I disagree, I think it is a game of symbols !@#$%^&*()

[eball]

Football is a game of letters, too. TD, FG, QB, RB, DE, OT. I'm sure there are more.

[3rdand12]

A lot of times football comes down to a numbers game.

 

Maybe the defense has a NT who can be productive despite being double teamed. The face that one defender uses up two offensive players affects the numbers game.

 

Maybe the offense has a WR who can be productive despite being double-teamed. If one of the offense's players uses up two defenders, that helps the offense with the numbers game.

 

Players can help with the numbers game in another way as well. Suppose a RDE would normally require a double team. But suppose a Pro Bowl LT is able to block that RDE one-on-one. That LT helps with the numbers game, because he eliminates a numerical advantage the defense would otherwise have had.

 

Any time you pick a player 10th overall, one of the following should be true. Either a) he should be a franchise QB, or b) he should consistently add +1 to the numbers game.

 

I don't care that much how he makes his contribution. But if a player isn't going to change the equation for the numbers game, and if he isn't a franchise QB, then he has no business going 10th overall!

for the most part that is what our FO has been saying recently. why is the cutoff at ten? random #? because we pick at it? I feel that we are hard pressed to select one this year. Last was sooo easy comparing to this year. But you have a valid point to a degree or two!

[Geno Smith's Arm]

A lot of times football comes down to a numbers game.

 

Maybe the defense has a NT who can be productive despite being double teamed. The face that one defender uses up two offensive players affects the numbers game.

 

Maybe the offense has a WR who can be productive despite being double-teamed. If one of the offense's players uses up two defenders, that helps the offense with the numbers game.

 

Players can help with the numbers game in another way as well. Suppose a RDE would normally require a double team. But suppose a Pro Bowl LT is able to block that RDE one-on-one. That LT helps with the numbers game, because he eliminates a numerical advantage the defense would otherwise have had.

 

Any time you pick a player 10th overall, one of the following should be true. Either a) he should be a franchise QB, or b) he should consistently add +1 to the numbers game.

 

I don't care that much how he makes his contribution. But if a player isn't going to change the equation for the numbers game, and if he isn't a franchise QB, then he has no business going 10th overall!

 

I agree. The problem with the Bills HAS NOT been that they have chosen players at the wrong playing position (too many CB's or not enough linemen, etc.). It's that they haven't hit on many elite players.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Agree, EA.

 

Some would call that type of player "a difference maker."

 

Because of this philosophy that you state, I would rather see the team swing for the fences and choose a player with a big ceiling than take a safe pick with a low ceiling (ie-Reiff).

[DanInUticaTampa]

Using this type of philosophy, what would be the best pick? Is Floyd capeable of drawing double teams? I am asking because I am not really sure. I agree with the numbers thing, but I think it is really hard to tell what a player will do as far as getting double teamed in the nfl, or being able to go head to head opposite an elite player.

[uncle flap]

Using this type of philosophy, what would be the best pick? Is Floyd capeable of drawing double teams? I am asking because I am not really sure. I agree with the numbers thing, but I think it is really hard to tell what a player will do as far as getting double teamed in the nfl, or being able to go head to head opposite an elite player.

 

For the Bills, I'd say Floyd is the best pick. Using the "numbers" justification, defenses will have to commit extra resources somewhere leaving less resources in another area. Double SJ, then Floyd gets single coverage and vice versa. If the defenses use the safeties to help cover both, that takes the safeties out of run defense or creates a mismatch with an LB trying to cover Fred or CJ coming out of the backfield.

 

And don't forget the Bills run a lot of multiple receiver sets. Focus on Floyd and SJ, there's Nelson et al to deal with too. With Floyd's ability to beat press coverage and his ability to "go up and get it," I don't know how effective opposing defenses will be if they try to sit on all the short and intermediate routes like they did the latter half of last year. Say what you want about Fitz's deep ball accuracy, the signs point to Floyd being able to track it down over smaller defensive backs on less than perfect throws.

[Orton's Arm]

I agree. The problem with the Bills HAS NOT been that they have chosen players at the wrong playing position (too many CB's or not enough linemen, etc.). It's that they haven't hit on many elite players.

I completely agree that the Bills haven't hit on many elite players in the draft, and that this has been a huge part of their problem.

 

However, this organization has often been run by men grimly determined not to leave any mistake left unmade! Not only have they been picking non-elite players with their early draft picks, they've also been focusing on the wrong positions.

 

Over the last 40 years, the Bills have used 25% of their first picks of the draft on RBs, and another 25% on DBs. If a guy is going to have a career like Antoine Winfield had, and if he's going to spend that career with the Bills, then sure, use a first round pick on him. No problem. But the Bills have devoted first picks of the draft to the DB and (especially!) the RB positions far in excess of those positions' importance. This is because of shortsightedness and the emphasis on the quick fix. RBs have short careers, but also can make a quick impact as a rookie. A GM who wants to make improvement right away will often start by drafting a first round running back. The Bills have squandered numerous first round picks in this manner over the last decade. In addition, they've allowed their DBs with the best combination of youth + talent to go first-contract-and-out, and have used first round picks on their replacements.

 

But to return to my earlier point about the numbers game. I think the Bills should divide prospects available at 10th overall into three categories. 1) Potential franchise QBs. 2) Players who will add + 1 to the numbers game. 3) Everyone else. If possible, the Bills should take a player from category 1 at 10th overall. Unfortunately, it almost certainly won't be possible. This means they need to select a player from category 2; while completely ignoring the players in category 3!

 

Floyd has been mentioned as one example of a player who could add +1 to the numbers game. If, as an NFL player, he will consistently draw double coverage, and will produce anyway, then he'd certainly be an example of a guy who'd make that contribution to the numbers game. If he's the only player like that available at 10th overall, and if the Bills feel reasonably comfortable with him, then it becomes an easy decision. But if there are other players available at 10th overall who could also add +1 to the numbers game, then the decision becomes more complex. At that point, you have to ask yourself which of the category 2 players are most likely to be successful, as well as which seem to have the most upside.

[Jauronimo]

May as well rename this thread BPA, because essentially that is what this thread describes. You're better off picking up a difference maker even if you're already stacked at the position then drafting a serviceable starter to address a need.

 

The theory is simple, but the application proves to be much more challenging. Is the #1 CB in the draft this year a bigger difference maker than the #2 OT, #1WR, #3 QB, etc.? Taking the concept one step further, we can rename the thread "Talent Evaluation is Paramount."

[Billsrhody]

I dont know how Kuechly fits in this equation but I really think he should be the pick. He'll be a good player for us for the next 10 years.

[Orton's Arm]

May as well rename this thread BPA, because essentially that is what this thread describes. You're better off picking up a difference maker even if you're already stacked at the position then drafting a serviceable starter to address a need.

 

The theory is simple, but the application proves to be much more challenging. Is the #1 CB in the draft this year a bigger difference maker than the #2 OT, #1WR, #3 QB, etc.? Taking the concept one step further, we can rename the thread "Talent Evaluation is Paramount."

The theme of my OP is not identical to best player available.

 

As an example: some believe that the best player available when the Bills pick will be a LB, RB, or OG. I have heard arguments made in favor of each of those players, often on a best player available basis. My OP is a call to reject those arguments, unless someone can clearly explain how the LB, OG, or RB will add +1 to the numbers game. Thus far, I have yet to see proponents of any of those three players provide a plausible explanation about how those guys would go about adding +1. The LB, RB, and OG should be rejected on a numbers game basis, even if one of them is the best player available when the Bills pick.

[Doc]

Actually, football is a game of match-ups, which encompasses the numbers game.

[K-9]

So, if you line up more playmakers on your side of the ball than the other team, you have a better chance of winning?

 

Playmaker: always a position of need.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[The Wiz]

I thought it was a game of inches?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSDhhZtRwFU

Edited April 11, 2012 by The Wiz

[It's in My Blood]

I disagree, I think it is a game of symbols !@#$%^&*()

 

Hahaha...thats great.

 

I like OP's post. The game really does come down to if your guy is better than theirs. So obvious but so true.

[atlbillsfan1975]

to a point i agree.

If you have a LT you know will not need help against an opposing DE then you have an extra guy to throw to