Bad Year to Need OLT

[Buffalo Barbarian]

In my opinion, the Bills' clear number one need is to find a good starting OLT. I disagree with those that say that Chris Hairston showed enough to warrant starting this year.

 

I am not suggesting that the team does not also have a crying need for another NFL starting-caliber WR and for 1-2 starting-caliber OLBs.

 

It looks to be a particularly bad year to need to find an OLT. We've been through the suspects ad-nauseum:

Reiff looks more like a RT or even a G to many.

Glenn looks like a RT on a good day and a G to many others. NFL Network's Mike Mayock recently said that he didn't think Glenn should go until round 2.

Jonathan Martin is not well-regarded by many and may be a stretch to eventually start at either OT position.

Mike Adams is a very talented under-achiever.

 

While I strongly believe that the offense will be grounded without a starting-caliber OLT, I don't particularly want to take my chances on any of the iffy players available who MIGHT be able to play that position. However, I am not much higher on any of the prospects at the Bills' other positions of need.

 

I am leery of Michael Floyd's off-field problems, however I am heartened by his year of trouble free behavior.

I am not totally sold on Luke Kuechly at OLB, but he seems a safe pick with a high floor.

 

The best-bets, in my opinion (based on my reading of Pro Football Weekly and Russ Lande - former NFL scout, as well as NFL Network's Mayock) are mostly defensive players:

DT Fletcher Cox is pretty highly regarded by many, but the Bills' seem pretty set at DT with Dareus and Kyle Williams.

DE Melvin Ingram looks like he could be a highly productive pass rusher, but I don't think he can play 4-3 OLB. Where does he play with Mario Williams on-board?

Pick-your-favorite CB among Kirkpatrick and Gilmore - Gilmore has less baggage, but Kirkpatrick has a bit better ability (again, based on what I've read).

S Mark Barron is highly regarded, but I think the Bills are pretty OK there with Byrd and Wilson. This guy is a dark-horse candidate for the 10th pick IMHO

 

To me, this is a very shaky year in terms of talent in the draft. I've been following the draft very closely for 25+ years and I don't ever remember being so under-whelmed with the possible Bills' selections in round 1. Now, I know that there might be some depth in the mid-rounds 2-4, but it's hard to make up for it, if the first round pick doesn't pan out.

 

I've flip-flopped all over the place on this, but at the moment my view is that I'd strongly consider Kuechley and Floyd at 10, with some consideration for Gilmore/Kirkpatrick and Barron. I think the OTs are all way too questionable to invest that high of a pick on, unless the Bills think that Erik Pears also needs to be replaced at RT. If that is the case, then Reiff/Glenn look a little more attractive as their fall-back position would also be considered a position of need.

 

Lastly, I am not in favor of this, BUT with the questions surrounding the top candidates at the Bills' main positions of need, it might make sense to take a chance on Ryan Tannehill.

 

Finally, I talked myself off the LT ledge by looking at the starting LT on last year's playoff teams. DO NOT read this to say that I don't believe that a good-very good LT is not an important part of a good offense. However, many teams last year were successful without pro-bowl caliber OLTs:

Hou: Duane Brown - drafted late first/early 2nd can't remember, but he wasn't ultra-highly regarded

Pitt: Max Starks - not a highly drafted guy

Balt: Bryant McKinnie - high draft pick who didn't live up to his status and wasn't in particularly good shape (reportedly) last year.

NE: Matt Light - 2nd round pick, who has done a good, not great job for the Pats

Jets: D'Brickashaw Ferguson - high number 1 pick who is good.

Den Ryan Clady - high number 1 pick who is good.

GB M. Newhouse - Don't know ANYTHING about this guy

Det Jeff Backus - career over-achiever whom they would like to replace

Atl Sam Baker/Will Svitek - Baker has disappointed and Svitek is a journeyman

NO Jermane Bushrod - nothing special

Giants: William Beatty - lightly regarded mid-round pick who wasn't considered tough enough

49ers: Joe Staley - wasn't highly regarded in the draft - OT/G tweener.

 

With all that in mind, maybe it is OK to take a chance on one of the OTs at 10 and hope that they are adequate at LT.

 

Constructive opinions welcomed.

In that case slide Levitre over and draft Decastro ( can't believe I just said that after all the no Decastro talk I've put on here) If Levitre doesn't pan out we can draft Jake Matthews next year son of the Legendary Bruce Matthews.

[truth on hold]

Fleener is the right pick, OT in 2nd or even 3rd and one later. Nix says the draft is deep with them. If he says so we should be able to get by with a developing player. Hairston should start unless he is beaten out in camp.

Fleener is a playmaker, that is still a need. I would be okay with

Him in the 1st (yes I like him better than Floyd)

OT of choice in the 2nd (Gleen?)

CB or LB in rounds 3-5 (every pick so maybe 2 each?)

OT 6th

BPA rest of draft (maybe with a center in there)

or something like that.

Fleener is an interesting pick. In any recent year other than this hed be on a lot of short lists as it seemed we were always looking for a TE. His speed at his size is freaky good. He would ad to Fitz receiving targets so hey why not give him fair consideration at 10.

[peterpan]

Why do some people think it will be hard for a rookie LT to come in and play right away? OL is one of the easiest transitions. Joe Thomas, Jake Long, The LT from Denver whose name I cant think of right now, They all came in and started from day 1. Same with Wood and Levitre, and as we saw with Hairston, even if they dont start they can play well for you.

 

It will be easier to get PT out of an OLman than WR or CB thats for sure

Edited April 18, 2012 by peterpan

[truth on hold]

Because none of the guys that will be there at 10 are the caliber of a long or Thomas.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Last year no rookie OT started at LT for his team...except for the Bills' Chris Hairston, and that was because of injuries. Expecting one to come in this year and start, much less play at a high level, is expecting too much.

 

This. Hairston didn't play like a pro-bowl quality LT last year, but given the lack of off-season, I thought he showed promise for a rookie and should be able to "hold down the fort" if he continues to improve with team-guided off-season conditioning and OTAs.

 

I don't think we're trying to draft a Guaranteed Day 1 Starting LT. I think we're trying to draft a proven durable, quality player who can develop into a quality LT with time.

[Sisyphean Bills]

This. Hairston didn't play like a pro-bowl quality LT last year, but given the lack of off-season, I thought he showed promise for a rookie and should be able to "hold down the fort" if he continues to improve with team-guided off-season conditioning and OTAs.

 

I don't think we're trying to draft a Guaranteed Day 1 Starting LT. I think we're trying to draft a proven durable, quality player who can develop into a quality LT with time.

Unfortunately, the Bills recent past is full of picks that fit the mold of "guys we think we can develop into something special". It hasn't been a sound strategy and the results prove it.

[tennesseeboy]

In fact when he was a starting RT because we had a LT by the name of Bulaga both those guys were anchors for a guy named SHONN GREEN who was the first IOWA rb to ever win the DOAK award. The only rb that season to have 12 100yd games. REIFF will open up holes for freddy and cj

Glenn had not all that many starts at LT and the news did a good analysis of him, projecting him as a guard in the NFL. I think Kalil is the real deal, but can't imagine how we should get him. We didn't (again) adress LT in free agency or trade. We simply cannot go anywhere with Hairston. We have to pick Reiff, Martin, or Glenn if we are going to win this year. I like Reiff as the safest bet. Martin needs strength and conditioning (which he may get) Glenn has laziness issues (read Mike Williams) and I think we should go with the guy who has played a full season successfully at left tackle.

I can't imagine we can go another year under this administration with another less than Jauron like record. Hence

[JPS]

Hairston was decent for a rookie who had no off-season to learn the playbook, get practice time and get into shape, and who missed half of training camp and pre-season, and didn't take any starting snaps until Bell got injured. Not to mention he suffered a high ankle sprain against the Giants and was rushed back too soon because they needed him back on the field.

 

Again, no rookie taken in this draft will be better than Hairston. And outside of Kalil, none of them seem to be any great shakes.

As long as we eliminate 7 step drops from the playbook, I agree. I think you all who are sold on Hairston are giving him more credit than Gailey and Nix.

 

If they do not take a LT in the 1st 2 picks, it will be tragic.

[thebandit27]

In my opinion, the Bills' clear number one need is to find a good starting OLT. I disagree with those that say that Chris Hairston showed enough to warrant starting this year.

 

I am not suggesting that the team does not also have a crying need for another NFL starting-caliber WR and for 1-2 starting-caliber OLBs.

 

It looks to be a particularly bad year to need to find an OLT. We've been through the suspects ad-nauseum:

Reiff looks more like a RT or even a G to many.

Glenn looks like a RT on a good day and a G to many others. NFL Network's Mike Mayock recently said that he didn't think Glenn should go until round 2.

Jonathan Martin is not well-regarded by many and may be a stretch to eventually start at either OT position.

Mike Adams is a very talented under-achiever.

 

While I strongly believe that the offense will be grounded without a starting-caliber OLT, I don't particularly want to take my chances on any of the iffy players available who MIGHT be able to play that position. However, I am not much higher on any of the prospects at the Bills' other positions of need.

 

I am leery of Michael Floyd's off-field problems, however I am heartened by his year of trouble free behavior.

I am not totally sold on Luke Kuechly at OLB, but he seems a safe pick with a high floor.

 

The best-bets, in my opinion (based on my reading of Pro Football Weekly and Russ Lande - former NFL scout, as well as NFL Network's Mayock) are mostly defensive players:

DT Fletcher Cox is pretty highly regarded by many, but the Bills' seem pretty set at DT with Dareus and Kyle Williams.

DE Melvin Ingram looks like he could be a highly productive pass rusher, but I don't think he can play 4-3 OLB. Where does he play with Mario Williams on-board?

Pick-your-favorite CB among Kirkpatrick and Gilmore - Gilmore has less baggage, but Kirkpatrick has a bit better ability (again, based on what I've read).

S Mark Barron is highly regarded, but I think the Bills are pretty OK there with Byrd and Wilson. This guy is a dark-horse candidate for the 10th pick IMHO

 

To me, this is a very shaky year in terms of talent in the draft. I've been following the draft very closely for 25+ years and I don't ever remember being so under-whelmed with the possible Bills' selections in round 1. Now, I know that there might be some depth in the mid-rounds 2-4, but it's hard to make up for it, if the first round pick doesn't pan out.

 

I've flip-flopped all over the place on this, but at the moment my view is that I'd strongly consider Kuechley and Floyd at 10, with some consideration for Gilmore/Kirkpatrick and Barron. I think the OTs are all way too questionable to invest that high of a pick on, unless the Bills think that Erik Pears also needs to be replaced at RT. If that is the case, then Reiff/Glenn look a little more attractive as their fall-back position would also be considered a position of need.

 

Lastly, I am not in favor of this, BUT with the questions surrounding the top candidates at the Bills' main positions of need, it might make sense to take a chance on Ryan Tannehill.

 

Finally, I talked myself off the LT ledge by looking at the starting LT on last year's playoff teams. DO NOT read this to say that I don't believe that a good-very good LT is not an important part of a good offense. However, many teams last year were successful without pro-bowl caliber OLTs:

Hou: Duane Brown - drafted late first/early 2nd can't remember, but he wasn't ultra-highly regarded

Pitt: Max Starks - not a highly drafted guy

Balt: Bryant McKinnie - high draft pick who didn't live up to his status and wasn't in particularly good shape (reportedly) last year.

NE: Matt Light - 2nd round pick, who has done a good, not great job for the Pats

Jets: D'Brickashaw Ferguson - high number 1 pick who is good.

Den Ryan Clady - high number 1 pick who is good.

GB M. Newhouse - Don't know ANYTHING about this guy

Det Jeff Backus - career over-achiever whom they would like to replace

Atl Sam Baker/Will Svitek - Baker has disappointed and Svitek is a journeyman

NO Jermane Bushrod - nothing special

Giants: William Beatty - lightly regarded mid-round pick who wasn't considered tough enough

49ers: Joe Staley - wasn't highly regarded in the draft - OT/G tweener.

 

With all that in mind, maybe it is OK to take a chance on one of the OTs at 10 and hope that they are adequate at LT.

 

Constructive opinions welcomed.

 

Meaning no offense, and purely from a constructive standpoint, I believe there are a few issues with your post that require correction...

 

- Regarding the tackle class, if we're going by popular opinion, your statements about Reiff and Martin should be modified. I think we all regard Mayock as one of the (if not the) best in the business of media-draft-experts, and he said he believes both Martin and Reiff will be starting LTs; he just doesn't think either will start there right away or become elite prospects.

- Regarding your assessment of playoff LTs, I offer the following information:

 

Hou: Duane Brown - drafted late first, and was considered a "riser" prior to the draft

NE: Matt Light - he is a multiple pro bowler, so it's hard to argue here

GB M. Newhouse - 5th round compensatory pick who started over rookie LT Sherrod

Det Jeff Backus - I don't think they're looking to replace him since he just signed a new contract this offseason

NO Jermane Bushrod - made the pro bowl in 2011

Giants: William Beatty - he was a 2nd round pick who fell inexplicably...very capable LT

49ers: Joe Staley - former TE who was drafted 20th overall, and only lasted that long because he'd only played OT for 2 years

 

All that said, I do agree with your opinion that it's okay to take a chance on a LT. He doesn't need to be all-world, he just needs to be a quality starter. If they can find one in round one, I'm all for it.

[Doc]

That's an opinion, and not one with a whole lot to back it up, that none of them will be better than Hairston. It's not a fact.

 

Mayock believes Reiff will be a good LT, though not immediately.

 

Gil Brandt thinks Reiff is the tenth best player this year.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d82821dd1/article/hot-100-plenty-of-draftstock-movement-as-pro-days-wrap-up

 

There are plenty of contrasting opinions out there on most of the LTs. And really, unless you have a higher pick, it's often not a good year to need an OLT. There are so few of them out there that are slam dunks.

True, it's not a fact. It's also not a fact that a rookie LT will be better. Given the weakness of this draft WRT LT, I feel more confident saying Hairston will be better than any rookie not named Kalil. Reaching for a LT in a weak draft for LT's is a bad idea.

In the long term? Yeah, there's a good chance it is, IMHO.

That's an opinion. It's not a fact.

My apologies to the OP...it wasn't you who made this statement about no rookie starting at LT, it was ^^^. Anyway, like I said, Castonzo from BC started like 12 games at LT for the Colts.

Ooops, missed Castonzo. But still, that's one out of the whole draft. I didn't see him play. How was he?

As long as we eliminate 7 step drops from the playbook, I agree. I think you all who are sold on Hairston are giving him more credit than Gailey and Nix.

 

If they do not take a LT in the 1st 2 picks, it will be tragic.

I doubt they'll go to 7-, or even 5-, step drops with a rookie.

[st pete gogolak]

I'll disagree pretty violently on the characterization of Matt Light being a "good" but not "great" pick. If you can get consistent Pro Bowl-level play out of a left tackle for a dozen years, I would put that down as a great pick, especially for a second rounder. Light hasn't missed much time and is part of what arguably has been the best

O-Line in the NFL for the last twelve years, keeping the pretty boy clean as the driven snow.

 

Hopping on the Captain Hindsight bus, if we had made Hutchinson and Light our first two selections in 2001 (and God knows the O-Line was the weakest part of the team), we would have had a rock solid left side of the O-Line for a dozen years.

[Kelly the Dog]

Here is what Nix said today. It could only mean one of five things, and I don't know what any of them are.

Bills GM Buddy Nix talked about the team’s offensive tackle situation in terms of their roster numbers and who they believe are capable for the blind side.

 

“We need tackles, but we think Chris Hairston can play left tackle for us and win,” said Nix. ”People say Fitz gets the ball out quick, but we run our offense with a lot of empty sets, with five blockers and if they bring six he better get it out. In this offense he has to get it out quick. Chris Hairston might not be the prettiest foot athlete that he can protect the back side. We’ve got Pears and Sam Young is coming off of knee surgery. So we’ve only got three. We’d like to have two more.”

 

To me, it's what he has been saying all along, and the reality is, he doesn't know who he is going to draft at #10 yet because he doesn't know who is going to be available. Duh. He may have a LT targeted but if Floyd or Blackmon or Tannehill or Claiborne are there, he is going to take them instead. I'm just using random names. If he can't get an LT at #10, he will take one in the #2 or #3 slots and start Hairston.

 

He also said today he is willing to trade the pick. And reiterated that they would take a franchise QB if they felt one was available, regardless of Fitz and his contract. I actually think Nix would take Tannehill in a second if he was available and he liked him. I just don't think he will be there, and i have no idea if he likes Tannehill as a "franchise" QB. I'm sure he likes him.

[Lurker]

Here is what Nix said today.

"I'd be really dumb to pick a guy just based on where he's from. ... We go down to the south because that's where the players are'"

 

Looks like he's still fishing in the same hole.

 

 

"Chris Hairston might not be the prettiest foot athlete [but] he can protect the back side.

 

Sounds like Glenn as well. Buddy seems to like big men in the LOT position, even if they're not dancing bears.

 

 

"We expect this team to be competitive all year ... It's time for us to take the next step"

 

We want immediate starters/major contributors with picks 1-3, not developmental QBs or guys who need to adjust to an NFL playbook.

[Mark Long Beach]

"I'd be really dumb to pick a guy just based on where he's from. ... We go down to the south because that's where the players are'"

 

Looks like he's still fishing in the same hole.

 

 

"Chris Hairston might not be the prettiest foot athlete [but] he can protect the back side.

 

Sounds like Glenn as well. Buddy seems to like big men in the LOT position, even if they're not dancing bears.

 

 

"We expect this team to be competitive all year ... It's time for us to take the next step"

 

We want immediate starters/major contributors with picks 1-3, not developmental QBs or guys who need to adjust to an NFL playbook.

 

wait... How'd you get this? I can't find anything anywhere.

[K-9]

Why do some people think it will be hard for a rookie LT to come in and play right away? OL is one of the easiest transitions. Joe Thomas, Jake Long, The LT from Denver whose name I cant think of right now, They all came in and started from day 1. Same with Wood and Levitre, and as we saw with Hairston, even if they dont start they can play well for you.

 

It will be easier to get PT out of an OLman than WR or CB thats for sure

 

Next to QB, OL is the HARDEST transition in terms of material to be learned. Thomas and Long are rare talents. If they were in this draft, Kalil would be the third best OT prospect.

 

That said, Gailey clearly designed his offense to minimize the lack of All Pro talent on the OL, especially at OT. Even though Hairston and Pears did OK, they were protected by the scheme. Given that scheme, a rookie would seem to have a better chance at contributing and which is why I think Hairston will be that much better this season.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[JÂy RÛßeÒ]

wait... How'd you get this? I can't find anything anywhere.

http://www.buffalobills.com/media-center/videos/Nix-on-Bills-Left-Tackle-Situation/06dd986a-090c-4d7d-ab6e-60c8f49a622a

Edited April 18, 2012 by JÂy RÛßeÒ

[Mark Long Beach]

http://www.buffalobills.com/media-center/videos/Nix-on-Bills-Left-Tackle-Situation/06dd986a-090c-4d7d-ab6e-60c8f49a622a

 

Thanks! I looked on bb, but it didn't show up for me.

 

Hmmph. Don't entirely know what to make of that. Said that Hairston was a good enough starter.

 

I got the impression that he felt a really good LT better be taken early. Pro-bowl ones tended to be drafted in the first 8 or 9 picks. The second part of that clip where he thought LTs are difference makers in that they raise the whole team up. This along with him saying we needed two tackles, leads me to believe that we'll go LT "early". probably rnds 1-3. I haven't watched Glenn, but he seems to fit Nix's profile.

 

Whaley's comments back up that they'd try him at tackle first, but wisely doesn't mention LEFT or not:

 

“For us a guy with that size and that type of foot athlete you try him out at tackle,” said Whaley. “We believe that he’s got a chance to play there and produce there at a high level.”

 

So rarely in a draft do I have NO idea what the heck is going to happen.

[Kelly the Dog]

Thanks! I looked on bb, but it didn't show up for me.

 

Hmmph. Don't entirely know what to make of that. Said that Hairston was a good enough starter.

 

I got the impression that he felt a really good LT better be taken early. Pro-bowl ones tended to be drafted in the first 8 or 9 picks. The second part of that clip where he thought LTs are difference makers in that they raise the whole team up. This along with him saying we needed two tackles, leads me to believe that we'll go LT "early". probably rnds 1-3. I haven't watched Glenn, but he seems to fit Nix's profile.

 

Whaley's comments back up that they'd try him at tackle first, but wisely doesn't mention LEFT or not:

 

"For us a guy with that size and that type of foot athlete you try him out at tackle," said Whaley. "We believe that he's got a chance to play there and produce there at a high level."

 

So rarely in a draft do I have NO idea what the heck is going to happen.

They're never ever going to say the guy we got at that position cannot start and play well, simply because they don't know who they are going to draft yet, and if it's not a LT, then Hairston is likely to start. They want him and everyone on the team and media and stands to think they have confidence in him whether they do or don't if he has to play. So they are going to say we like our WR (which they have) and we like our LB (which they have) and we like our CB simply because they only have one #1 pick and that is likely the only guy they will think could and would start immediately.

[Mark Long Beach]

They're never ever going to say the guy we got at that position cannot start and play well, simply because they don't know who they are going to draft yet, and if it's not a LT, then Hairston is likely to start. They want him and everyone on the team and media and stands to think they have confidence in him whether they do or don't if he has to play. So they are going to say we like our WR (which they have) and we like our LB (which they have) and we like our CB simply because they only have one #1 pick and that is likely the only guy they will think could and would start immediately.

 

Buddy is pretty straight. Yes he doesn't come out and directly say a guy sucks. BUT he's willing to say that we're really weak at a position or in its depth. This means he thinks we suck there. Listen to his comments on depth of the CB. He says that when McGee is healthy he's as good as anyone. But when we get to our depth like we did the last two years, we can't compete. This is a pretty strong indictment of McKelvin and IMO Florence.

 

Obviously the coaching staff feels the same about McKelvin as he was demoted to below a 7th round rookie despite all the injuries.

 

After listening to that I'd be shocked if we didn't draft a CB in rounds 1 or 2.

[3rdand12]

so i think we have covered it. We are going to take BPA in the first round and maybe second then we will start filling need>/bpa.

Once our first pick is in we can narrow down what the next picks will be. Because we are going to draft tackles cb's wr's lb's and maybe a QB. Hell if I/we know who it will be at 10. it's a real challenge this year! i think we should hope one of the top 6 drop to us magically

If we dont get Kalil then it may not matter whether we pick up the first tackle in the second or 3rd round. Heck maybe they see someone in the 4th like Potter and are cool with that. For depth we could find another off the waiver wire as Buddy loves to do. i think that is his pride and joy to pull that stunt off.