OCinBuffalo Posted May 26, 2012 Posted May 26, 2012 This post lacks coherence and cohesion. Perhaps. However, if it causes consideration of correlation vs causation, then, it has high propensity for being 3.5 times longer than the average thread. I can barely stomach the Gilmore selection. It was a stupid pick imo, but at least we firmed up the defensive foundation via free agency. EA, imo, is making tons of sense. There is little reason to believe, looking at Bills history, that picks such as Spiller and Gilmore were anything but stupid. It may work THIS time, but it never has. Bill's position, in general, has been historically proven to be accurate in many threads, long before this one. However, in this instance: Most mocks had us taking a LT. Hell Holy God had us taking a LT.....but not even he had us taking Kalil. No, everybody had us taking Martin or Glenn, until the very end, when it became clear that neither of those guys were 1st round talent. We still got the LT most of us thought they would take at 10. The draft doesn't happen in a vacuum. Therefore, given our position, and the players available, I don't see how the Gilmore pick was stupid by any definition. So, what would you have us do? Take Glenn at #10 for the sake of symbolism? There's no way the Gilmore pick is stupid. The only thing that remains to be seen is: if Gilmore pans out, will the Bills try to extend him early, or will they let him walk? That's how the cycle EA describes will be broken, and that's how we avoid the endless recycling of DBs. Spiller showed big time last year. Does anybody still doubt that pick...objectively, not "I am still trying to be right"? With an "unknown to them" 28-9 year old RB on the team in Jackson, and the consensus "best player on O" at #5, I don't see how you can fault these guys for taking Spiller. How were they, or any of us, supposed to know that Fred was for real, at that point in time? Consider the team they inherited. They had to be thinking "we need a stud RB, and, we've been ordered to get rid of Lynch, and, we have no clue what to make of Fred, and, we have holes everywhere, therefore, we need a playmaker". I don't see how anyone can be critical of a new FO looking to make the team better instantly with a guy like Spiller. Did I mention, he showed big time last year? All you have to do is apply the same thinking to the QB position, and see the validity of it: "'we need somebody right now who can make an immediate difference, we'll worry about the long term later". They were in desperation mode when they put this team together, and it just so happens that those moves are now paying off. Did they get lucky? I dunno. Seems like a lot of coincidences...to many...to be based solely on luck.
Meathead Posted May 26, 2012 Posted May 26, 2012 (edited) the op is a perfect example of my 'star or suck' observation some fans have only two grades for players: star or suck youre either bruce smith or aaron maybin, there is no chris kelsay youre either henry jones or coy wire, there is no donte whitner youre either nate odomes or chris williams, there is no thomas smith youre either thurman thomas or shaud williams, there is no antowain smith youre either jim kelly or gary marangi, there is no ryan fitzpatrick when you do that crap youre just invalidating every argument you make about quality of players. every pick cant be a hofer, youve got to have average guys all over your roster. an average nfl starter is still a pretty damn impressive achievement and provides value. you have to evaluate their draft position AND their cap hit AND their production to even begin to determine value to the organization, or the efficacy of management. if you dont do that youre just exposing yourself as wasting everybodys time. but that wont stop you, will it Edited May 26, 2012 by Meathead
EasternOHBillsFan Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 [*]Antoine Winfield. Result: left the team after five years. Had a thirteen year career. [*]Nate Clements. Result: left the team after six years. Has had an eleven year career thus far. There are no success stories on the above list. Some of the DBs left early because they were busts, and some left early because the team decided to let them go first-contract-and-out. Either way, first round DBs didn't stay long. The Bills responded by using early picks on the replacements for those DBs. I vehemently disagree with you on the above two former Bills. Even though they didn't stay in Buffalo as FAs, this does not mean they should be disparaged as not being success stories, because they were good picks for us. It is not their fault that their market value was not offered by the Bills, they didn't have the sort of team to succeed with, or that their coaches left little to be desired. I will always look positively on Winfield and Clements, and they deserved better, just like some of the other Bills that had to endure all the mediocrity.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 (edited) 1999 Rnd Name College Note 1 Antoine Winfield Ohio State 2 Peerless Price Tennessee 3 Shawn Bryson Tennessee 4 Keith Newman North Carolina 4 Bobby Collins North Alabama 5 Jay Foreman Nebraska 6 Armon Hatcher Oregon State 7 Sheldon Jackson Nebraska 7 Bryce Fisher Air Force 1998 Rnd Name College Note 2 Sam Cowart Florida State 3 Robert Hicks Mississippi State 5 Jonathan Linton North Carolina 6 Fred Coleman Washington 7 Victor Allotey Indiana 7 Kamil Loud Cal Poly-San Luis Obispo 1997 Rnd Name College Note 1 Antowain Smith Houston 2 Marcellus Wiley Columbia 4 Jamie Nails Florida A&M 5 Sean Woodson Jackson State 6 Marcus Spriggs Houston 7 Pat Fitzgerald Texas 1996 Rnd Name College Note 1 Eric Moulds Mississippi State 2 Gabe Northern Louisiana State 3 Matt Stevens Appalachian State 4 Sean Moran Colorado State 5 Ray Jackson Colorado State 6 Leon Neal Washington 6 Dusty Ziegler Notre Dame 7 Dan Bradenburg Indiana State 7 Jay Riemersma Michigan 7 Eric Smedley Indiana 1995 Rnd Name College Note 1 Reuben Brown Pittsburgh 2 Todd Collins Michigan- was a decent backup for a few games. sucked as a starter. 3 Marlon Kerner Ohio State 3 Damien Covington North Carolina State 4 Ken Irvin Memphis 4 Justin Armour Stanford 4 Tony Cline Stanford 5 John Holecek Illinois 6 Shannon Clavelle Colorado 7 Tom Nutten Western Michigan 7 Darick Holmes Portland State 1994 Rnd Name College Note 1 Jeff Burris Notre Dame 2 Bucky Brooks North Carolina 2 Lonnie Johnson Florida State 2 Sam Rogers Colorado 3 Marlo Perry Jackson State 3 Corey Louchiey South Carolina 4 Sean Crocker North Carolina 5 A.J. Ofodile Missouri 6 Anthony Abrams Clark 6 Kevin Knox Florida State 7 Filmel Johnson Illinois 1993 Rnd Name College Note 1 Thomas Smith North Carolina 2 John Parrella Nebraska 4 Russell Copeland Memphis 5 Mike Devlin Iowa 5 Sebastian Savage North Carolina State 6 Corbin Lacina Augustana (IL) 7 Willie Harris Mississippi State 8 Chris Leuneberg West Chester (PA) I thought butler did a good job! 31 starters... not bad Edited May 27, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
Adam Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 the op is a perfect example of my 'star or suck' observation some fans have only two grades for players: star or suck youre either bruce smith or aaron maybin, there is no chris kelsay youre either henry jones or coy wire, there is no donte whitner youre either nate odomes or chris williams, there is no thomas smith youre either thurman thomas or shaud williams, there is no antowain smith youre either jim kelly or gary marangi, there is no ryan fitzpatrick when you do that crap youre just invalidating every argument you make about quality of players. every pick cant be a hofer, youve got to have average guys all over your roster. an average nfl starter is still a pretty damn impressive achievement and provides value. you have to evaluate their draft position AND their cap hit AND their production to even begin to determine value to the organization, or the efficacy of management. if you dont do that youre just exposing yourself as wasting everybodys time. but that wont stop you, will it ha! You need to check out the PPP board!
Just in Atlanta Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 EA does not dish out praise much. I've got to say Whitner was hardly a bust. But, I hope he's right about Nix being different.
Reks Ryan Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 the op is a perfect example of my 'star or suck' observation some fans have only two grades for players: star or suck youre either bruce smith or aaron maybin, there is no chris kelsay youre either henry jones or coy wire, there is no donte whitner youre either nate odomes or chris williams, there is no thomas smith youre either thurman thomas or shaud williams, there is no antowain smith youre either jim kelly or gary marangi, there is no ryan fitzpatrick when you do that crap youre just invalidating every argument you make about quality of players. every pick cant be a hofer, youve got to have average guys all over your roster. an average nfl starter is still a pretty damn impressive achievement and provides value. you have to evaluate their draft position AND their cap hit AND their production to even begin to determine value to the organization, or the efficacy of management. if you dont do that youre just exposing yourself as wasting everybodys time. but that wont stop you, will it
Reks Ryan Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Well stated Meatead. Whitner certainly was not the ideal pick at #8. So it can be said that picks like Whitner and A. Smith were not successful picks in terms of the Bills career you expect from a first rounder. But they're also not total busts in the realm of mike williams, Mcargo, or Maybin.
Bill from NYC Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 the op is a perfect example of my 'star or suck' observation some fans have only two grades for players: star or suck What difference does it make if the team is losing? If you don't want to call Whitner a "bust" at #8, that's fine. But drafting him didn't help the Bills win football games. They used him as their first building block to rebuild an ailing franchise. And they passed on players such as Ngata, Mangold, and others who there is no debate about wrt their skills. I think the message EA is sending is that if a team devotes 50% of their best resources to RBs and DBs, said team will consistently lose. Is there really any doubt about this?
JohnC Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 What difference does it make if the team is losing? If you don't want to call Whitner a "bust" at #8, that's fine. But drafting him didn't help the Bills win football games. They used him as their first building block to rebuild an ailing franchise. And they passed on players such as Ngata, Mangold, and others who there is no debate about wrt their skills. I think the message EA is sending is that if a team devotes 50% of their best resources to RBs and DBs, said team will consistently lose. Is there really any doubt about this? There is no doubt that the Jauron/Levy era staffing mentality was skewed toward the defensive backfield. Let's put that aside as a given. In general, Nix has had a contrasting drafting approach that leans toward reshaping the roster into being bigger and bulkier. My difference with your assessment of the more recent Bills personnel approach is that you give too much weight to the first round draft selections without looking at the totality of the player acquisitions from the later rounds and from free agency. You have allowed the Spiller and Gilmore picks to agitate you to the point that you can't see what else has happened beyond those picks. Without a doubt Spiller isn't the type of player you would have selected in that draft year. But waht you don't acknowledge is that the next two picks (Troup & Carrington) fit your go big approach. You are very aggravated about another first round DB selection with Gilmore but fail to emphasize the fact that Nix added to the infastructure of the defense with the free agent selections of Williams and Anderson. Stand back and don't get clouded by the first round selections that although you disagree with you can't dispute the fact that they were certainly drafted in the range of where they were ranked. Stand back a little further and you will (reluctantly) have to agree that in a few short years Nix has remade this roster into a bigger and stronger roster----far from the light and quick built roster that you find very objectionable. Nix has done what you have strenuously advocated in roster building. You may not agree with how it was done or the sequence of the rebuilding but if you are as fair-minded as I know you are (?????) then you will have to grudgingly concede that the roster is being built just the way you recommended.
Rico Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 the op is a perfect example of my 'star or suck' observation some fans have only two grades for players: star or suck youre either bruce smith or aaron maybin, there is no chris kelsay youre either henry jones or coy wire, there is no donte whitner youre either nate odomes or chris williams, there is no thomas smith youre either thurman thomas or shaud williams, there is no antowain smith youre either jim kelly or gary marangi, there is no ryan fitzpatrick when you do that crap youre just invalidating every argument you make about quality of players. every pick cant be a hofer, youve got to have average guys all over your roster. an average nfl starter is still a pretty damn impressive achievement and provides value. you have to evaluate their draft position AND their cap hit AND their production to even begin to determine value to the organization, or the efficacy of management. if you dont do that youre just exposing yourself as wasting everybodys time. but that wont stop you, will it I think the vast majority realize that not every position can be filled by a star player.., but if a player is going to be a starter (especially for many years), he should at the the very least be competent. I don't see anyone being down on say Kirk Morrison, at least not yet...everyone is willing to give him a chance. Lil Donte and Kelsay were/are less than competent for many years, and the fanbase responded accordingly.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 (edited) What difference does it make if the team is losing? If you don't want to call Whitner a "bust" at #8, that's fine. But drafting him didn't help the Bills win football games. They used him as their first building block to rebuild an ailing franchise. And they passed on players such as Ngata, Mangold, and others who there is no debate about wrt their skills. I think the message EA is sending is that if a team devotes 50% of their best resources to RBs and DBs, said team will consistently lose. Is there really any doubt about this? Well, I could be mistaken, but I think the losing may have had something to do with overall poor talent recognition and acquisition and possibly poor coaching/player development. If Aaron Maybin, Chris Ellis, Paul Pozluzny, John McCargo, James Hardy, and Trent Edwards had achieved the on-field productivity or at least solid competence one expects from draft picks in the 1st 3 rounds, would we have fielded a better team despite drafting RBs and DBs? Then there's the question of what rBs or DBs one chooses to draft. If Byrd, McKelvin, Whitner, and Youboty had achieved the on-field productivity or at least solid competence one expects from DBs in the 1st 3 rounds, would we have fielded a better team by drafting them, even though they are DBs? If Marshawn had been as Beastly as advertised? I have the greatest respect for BfNYC's thoughtful post-game analysis, and I think the focus on "drafting too many RBs and DBs" as a root cause of the Bills ailments is perhaps somewhat misplaced. I think the vast majority realize that not every position can be filled by a star player.., but if a player is going to be a starter (especially for many years), he should at the the very least be competent. I don't see anyone being down on say Kirk Morrison, at least not yet...everyone is willing to give him a chance. Lil Donte and Kelsay were/are less than competent for many years, and the fanbase responded accordingly. Actually, I have heard quite a lot of negativity about our LBs as being "not NFL quality" this year, which is kinda puzzling to me as Barnett was a Beast last year, Morrison is a respectable NFL player, and Sheppard, while a rookie and prone to rookie mistakes, looked pretty promising. We also look to have drafted some value players at LB. But that's a nit. What I really want to know is: so many fans are down underground on Chris Kelsay. Yet the coaches seem to like him and the FO rewards him with a nice contract. What's with that? Does he have nekkid pictures of RW's man-parts? The gouge on Nix's secret fetish involving cheese grits and a Whizzinator? Or do the coaches and FO rightly see talents and contributions from Kelsay invisible to Joe Average Fan? Edited May 27, 2012 by Hopeful
Orton's Arm Posted May 29, 2012 Author Posted May 29, 2012 First, I'd like to thank everyone in this thread who made an effort to post something intelligent/constructive. (Especially Bill from NYC.) I'd also like to address some of the points which have been raised. Claim: players like Whitner, Maybin, Antowain Smith, etc. were not busts. Response: if you pick a SS 8th overall, the expectation should be that he'll be a better football player than George Wilson. If you want to say that Whitner contributed more to the team than, for example, John McCargo, then fine. He did. But if the Bills had drafted no one at eighth overall in 2006, and had used George Wilson as their starting SS, they would have lost very little except for depth at SS. Aaron Maybin contributed nothing to the Bills. For the Jets, he's a blitzing SS who can't cover. While he'll get the occasional sack, he is clearly not what one would expect from a first or second round pick. Antowain Smith and the Bills parted ways after his fourth year in the league. He was not a particularly sought-after free agent. The Patriots picked him up, mostly because they had few other options at RB. He was okay for them, but nothing more than okay. The Patriots released him after three years. Marshawn Lynch was traded away for a fourth and sixth rounder after a few years in the league. That should have been the time when his market value was at its peak: he'd been in the league long enough to show what he could do, but not so long that there was much mileage on him. The 12th overall pick is worth 1200 points; whereas a third round pick (allegedly what the Saints were offering for Lynch) is typically worth about 200 points or less. The selection of Lynch resulted in the destruction of 5/6 of the value of that 12th overall pick. For some, 6/6 of that value would have had to have been destroyed for him to fall into the bust category. I acknowledge that some are using the word "bust" in a narrower sense than me, and I don't see much to be gained by arguing about the definition of that word. Claim: players like Winfield, Burris, etc. were success stories because they were good football players. It's not their fault they went first-contract-and-out. Response: I never said that first-contract-and-out was the players' fault. (It wasn't.) But if you use a first round pick on a player at any position, only to let him go first-contract-and-out, it's not a success story. A player like Antoine Winfield could have been a great success story for the Bills, had he been retained for the entirety of his career. Instead, he's a great success story for the Minnesota Vikings. They received most of his career, and didn't have to use any draft picks at all. Claim: it's a viable strategy to use first round picks on CBs, only to let them go first-contract-and-out. This is because one can often find good CBs in the first round, and because free agent CBs are overpriced. Response: A Super Bowl winning team needs a good core of players. Guys who play at or near an elite level, and who will remain with your team for a long period of time. While some of this core can come from free agency, and some from rounds 2 - 7, the primary source of core players will typically be the first round. A team which uses many of its first round picks on short duration positions (RBs and first-contract-and-out DBs) will, ceteris paribus, have a weaker core than a team which uses all its first round picks on its effort to build its core. If a team is a player or two away from being a legitimate Super Bowl contender, it might be justified in using first round picks on short duration positions. If the Patriots, for example, felt that a first-contract-and-out CB might give them that last piece they need to get Brady another Super Bowl ring, a first-contract-and-out CB might be logical for them. It is illogical for a rebuilding team to neglect its core in order to acquire short-career RBs or first-contract-and-out DBs.
Canadian Bills Fan Posted May 29, 2012 Posted May 29, 2012 I don't worship the man, but I do admire him for what he accomplished during his time with the Buffalo Bills. Marv's claim to fame was that he was a special teams coach for George Allen's Rams and Redskins, Marv was never an OC or DC afaik. I can recall the Bills hiring him in 86 after they fired Bullough mid season. I immediately read everything I could on the guy and saw that he tried to run the wing -T while as HC in KC I'm thinking oh. no! They went from Kay Stephenson / Hank Bullough with Jim Ringo as OC to another tool for HC. But then I read that Marv coached the Chiefs for 5 season and they got better every year until the strike year. Then I also read that Levy won 2 grey cups with the Alouettes. He was also the head coach of the USFL Chicago Blitz for a season. Marv was a great head coach as he hired some really good assistant coaches, and let them do their jobs without interfering. Marv was a supreme motivator, and over the course of his career with the Buffalo Bills had some amazing sayings that are now known as "Marvisms" He used to take a quote from the ballad of Sir Andrew Barton said it to his players. "Fight on, my men," says Sir Andrew Barton, "I am hurt, but I am not slain; I'll lay me down and bleed a while, And then I'll rise and fight again. At the start of a game Marv would say.... "Where else would you rather be, then right here, right now!" "Ability without character will lose. The Buffalo Bills are going to be a team of high character." A reporter once asked Marv, At one time you hid your age, now you seem to celebrate it. What happened? I came out of the closet on it, I guess. Way back when I was hired in 1986, I was 61 years of age, and it sounded too old so I lied and said I was 58. Finally I cleared that up. Maybe as I matured I came to realize it wasn't a factor. It's what you can do that counts. "Norm Pollom (the former Bills chief college scout) is a good personnel man and a good friend of mine. He said, "If we take this guy, he's going to go to the Pro Bowl.' I said, Well, let's take somebody who's going to take us to the Super Bowl. And we picked Shane Conlan." "I'm old enough to know my limitations and I'm young enough to exceed them." "If you don't change with the times, the times are going to change you." "If you listen to the fans, you will end up being one." "They say two things happen when you get older. One is you begin to forget things . . . and I can't remember what the other one is right now." "don't be dumb, don't be dirty" "Great football coaches have the vision to see, the faith to believe, the courage to do... and 25 great players." "Security comes from earning it--not seeking it." "Systems don't win, players do." "Adversity is an opportunity for heroism." "The harder you work, the harder it is to surrender." "What it takes to win is simple, it's not easy." "Plan your work and work your plan." "If you have everything prepared, the rest will take care of itself." "What you do should speak so loudly that no one will hear what you say." "Expect rejection, but expect even more strongly to overcome it." "There will be many failures sprinkled among the successes you enjoy." "A failure becomes just one time at bat if you refuse to let it defeat you." No other head coach has done more for the Buffalo Bills then what Marv levy has done in his 11 year career with the Bills, nobody else is even close.JMO Probably why RW asked an 81 year old Marv Levy to be his GM in 2006 I'm paraphrasing here but I love when he said in an interview "I think to win in the NFL you have to be able to run and stop the run" MIke Williams. Now there is a bust
wnyBacker Posted May 29, 2012 Posted May 29, 2012 It's easy to call someone like Ryan leaf a bust....but calling someone such as marshawn a bust At this point in their career a bust is nothing more than a opinion....wait a few years before declaring someone a bust.
thewildrabbit Posted May 29, 2012 Posted May 29, 2012 First, I'd like to thank everyone in this thread who made an effort to post something intelligent/constructive. (Especially Bill from NYC.) I'd also like to address some of the points which have been raised. Claim: players like Whitner, Maybin, Antowain Smith, etc. were not busts. Response: if you pick a SS 8th overall, the expectation should be that he'll be a better football player than George Wilson. If you want to say that Whitner contributed more to the team than, for example, John McCargo, then fine. He did. But if the Bills had drafted no one at eighth overall in 2006, and had used George Wilson as their starting SS, they would have lost very little except for depth at SS. Aaron Maybin contributed nothing to the Bills. For the Jets, he's a blitzing SS who can't cover. While he'll get the occasional sack, he is clearly not what one would expect from a first or second round pick. Antowain Smith and the Bills parted ways after his fourth year in the league. He was not a particularly sought-after free agent. The Patriots picked him up, mostly because they had few other options at RB. He was okay for them, but nothing more than okay. The Patriots released him after three years. Marshawn Lynch was traded away for a fourth and sixth rounder after a few years in the league. That should have been the time when his market value was at its peak: he'd been in the league long enough to show what he could do, but not so long that there was much mileage on him. The 12th overall pick is worth 1200 points; whereas a third round pick (allegedly what the Saints were offering for Lynch) is typically worth about 200 points or less. The selection of Lynch resulted in the destruction of 5/6 of the value of that 12th overall pick. For some, 6/6 of that value would have had to have been destroyed for him to fall into the bust category. I acknowledge that some are using the word "bust" in a narrower sense than me, and I don't see much to be gained by arguing about the definition of that word. Claim: players like Winfield, Burris, etc. were success stories because they were good football players. It's not their fault they went first-contract-and-out. Response: I never said that first-contract-and-out was the players' fault. (It wasn't.) But if you use a first round pick on a player at any position, only to let him go first-contract-and-out, it's not a success story. A player like Antoine Winfield could have been a great success story for the Bills, had he been retained for the entirety of his career. Instead, he's a great success story for the Minnesota Vikings. They received most of his career, and didn't have to use any draft picks at all. Claim: it's a viable strategy to use first round picks on CBs, only to let them go first-contract-and-out. This is because one can often find good CBs in the first round, and because free agent CBs are overpriced. Response: A Super Bowl winning team needs a good core of players. Guys who play at or near an elite level, and who will remain with your team for a long period of time. While some of this core can come from free agency, and some from rounds 2 - 7, the primary source of core players will typically be the first round. A team which uses many of its first round picks on short duration positions (RBs and first-contract-and-out DBs) will, ceteris paribus, have a weaker core than a team which uses all its first round picks on its effort to build its core. If a team is a player or two away from being a legitimate Super Bowl contender, it might be justified in using first round picks on short duration positions. If the Patriots, for example, felt that a first-contract-and-out CB might give them that last piece they need to get Brady another Super Bowl ring, a first-contract-and-out CB might be logical for them. It is illogical for a rebuilding team to neglect its core in order to acquire short-career RBs or first-contract-and-out DBs. NFN, but you can argue about busts till the cows come home and all it does is kill any credibility you have when you state a player like Donte Whitner is a bust. Understand that the Buffalo Bills wanted to resign the guy, and he took less money when he went to the niners! He chose to leave the Bills, otherwise he would still be the starting safety for the Buffalo Bills! Can you blame the man, he left a 4-12 team to go to a 13-3 team. Whitner is a 6 year starter with 84 game starts over those 6 years, and was constantly making the tackles that were missed by the Bills players in front of him. Like I stated in my earlier post in this thread...." If anything the Bills have proven they don't know how to get production out of many many players. Jaberi Greer with a NO Saints SB ring on his finger ring any bells?" "Donte Whitner because the Bills drafted him with a #1 pick when the rest of the NFL world had him graded as a 2nd or 3rd rounder. Was that his fault he was drafted so high and coached so badly in Buffalo? Like I said, Donte just started on a 13-3 team that lost in the playoffs to the team that won the SB." Whitner made a hit against the Saints last year in the playoffs, caused a fumble and knocked out their starting RB for the rest of the game. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEzJM1nWr38 I consider an actual "bust" someone like John McCargo who was a #1 pick by the Buffalo Bills. McCargo was another player like Whitner graded as a 2nd / 3rd round pick by the rest of the world that the Bills "brain farting" scouting dept thought should be drafted in the first round. So the Bills actually traded up to select him 26th overall in the 2006 draft. In college McCargo played with Mario Williams at NC state and the prevailing thought at OBD was that the reason Super Mario was so good was because of his teammate at DT in McCargo. While the rest of the world with normal brains though it was the other way around. In his 5 year career with the Bills McCargo started ONE game! Now that's a bust!
K-9 Posted May 29, 2012 Posted May 29, 2012 Understand that the Buffalo Bills wanted to resign the guy, and he took less money when he went to the niners! He chose to leave the Bills, otherwise he would still be the starting safety for the Buffalo Bills! Thanks for pointing this out. Some around here make it sound like the Bills deliberately let a player go one and done when it takes two. EVERY one and done DB the Bills have lost over the years has gone to a team offering more money and/or a better winning opportunity. Few, if ANY were worth the price they signed for elsewhere. We can say Winfield for sure but he didn't want to stay in Buffalo anyway. People will bring up Greer, but while decent, he isn't anything special. And there is no better example than Clements when it comes not matching other offers. GO BILLS!!!
yungmack Posted May 29, 2012 Posted May 29, 2012 If Spiller and Gilmore turn into success stories, they will do two things. 1) Strengthen the team at RB and DB, respectively. 2) Discourage the team from using first round picks on RBs and DBs, thereby freeing those picks up for use elsewhere. An overall good post but the heart of it is right there. An ongoing problem for the Bills for the last 20 years is an inability (because of management or because of the player) to keep top players at key positions over an extended period of time. Every time a player like Winfield leaves, you generally wind up expending a new draft pick on that position. And that means one or more fewer picks for all other positions. One last thing: for those of you who are down on the concept of drafting DBs high in the draft, all I can say is this ain't your daddy's NFL anymore. With the emphasis on passing and on big receivers -- and the use of TEs virtually like WRs -- CBs are among the most coveted players in the draft. And in Free Agency, they are commanding more and more money.
Bill from NYC Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 One last thing: for those of you who are down on the concept of drafting DBs high in the draft, all I can say is this ain't your daddy's NFL anymore. With the emphasis on passing and on big receivers -- and the use of TEs virtually like WRs -- CBs are among the most coveted players in the draft. And in Free Agency, they are commanding more and more money. The above is true, but also worth a look imro. The jets and eagles were 2 recent teams who spent a boatload of money on the secondary. As we know, this didn't work. Revis will take up at least 10% of the jets salary cap, and he wants another raise! Now, is Revis the best corner in the game? I think he is. But they had to play with Sanchez's contract (and give him a raise/extension) just to stay under the cap, and imo Sanchez really isn't so good. Additionally, with the rule changes, teams are lining up 5 wide sets. In this scenario, your "shutdown" corner is covering 1 of 5 receivers, unlike the "old days." Not only that, in a zone many times corners will be giving up their receivers at a designated place. In that sense, it might now actually make sense to let a star studded corner walk in these new times. I liked the Brooks selection, and will be interested to see how Menzie plays on the Chiefs. We now employ a #10, #11, and the 2nd pick of round 2 in our secondary. I fail to see why we must devote so much to the secondary, but this of course doesn't make me correct.
Recommended Posts