TPS Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I keep hearing about all the many holes we have to fill this offseason but I just don't see it. Maybe it's a question of semantics - I think of a "hole" in this context as a position that doesn't have a legitimate NFL caliber starter to fill. Some may consider a "hole" any position that could use an upgrade, but by that definition any position that doesn't have an all-pro could be considered a hole and that's just silly. By my count the only hole we have on offense is LG. RG and RT could stand to be upgraded, but I don't really consider the team to be devoid of NFL talent at either postion. Same with TE. With Woods and Goodwin showing potential as rookies, and Stevie still in the mix, I don't see WR in that light either, although a big WR would be nice. On defense we could use a physical LB to help in run support. Otherwise, unless Byrd flies the coup, I don't see a position that doesn't have a solid starter to fill it. So help me out here, what am I missing? You're right, there are "holes to fill" and there are positions to "upgrade." I agree with your assessment that there are two holes to fill, LG and LB. I disagree with those who say QB, because you've just drafted someone at #1 who has shown ability, and it's not certain yet that he won't be a good starting QB in this league. Given the salary cap, all teams have positions they can upgrade. Given the differences, I'd like to see the Bills use FA to fill the holes LG and LB, then use the draft to upgrade RT and TE.
Dean Cain Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 A defense that you can count on to stop the run.
BuffaloFan68 Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 Our biggest hole is the Special teams coach that is a lock for the worst ST in the league.
Section242 Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 T.J. Graham was on the field for 70% of the snaps. WR,TE, QB.
Solomon Grundy Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 After watching both SF and Seattle's defense, there is no denying that we need better LB play. Both teams LBs were flying to the ball making plays. IMHO, I believe our DBs and DL are comparable to both teams. Our LBs need upgrading and Khalil Mack is that upgrade.
simpleman Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 LG, RT, TE (depending on Moeaki), LB, S (depending on Byrd), QB (depending on EJ) Exactly. QB is a hole till it is filled. EJ has not done anything to prove he can fill it. Potential is just that, unproven hope, not reality. A player you say it takes patience in for them to grow into a position is not a filled hole. It is just hope and a dream. We have two quality starters on the Oline, LT and C. We have a barely passable TE. We need a LB to pair with Kiko. If Byrd is gone, we need another S. A big pass catching TE who can also block on running plays could fill our needs at both TE and WR. Goodwin has potential as a speedster to stretch the field. Woods has been passable and has potential. SJ is not a long term answer for the team at WR.
RyanC883 Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) After watching both SF and Seattle's defense, there is no denying that we need better LB play. Both teams LBs were flying to the ball making plays. IMHO, I believe our DBs and DL are comparable to both teams. Our LBs need upgrading and Khalil Mack is that upgrade. I 100% agree. Look at the games yesterday. Brady, looked pedestrian. Wilson and Kap didn't play well either. Why? Defenses! I think we get Mack or Barr or Mosley in RD1, then Aaron Donald RD2. Our D will rival any in the NFL, upgrade offense in RD3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. And FA, we have some cap space, but we need to keep Byrd. Exactly. QB is a hole till it is filled. EJ has not done anything to prove he can fill it. Potential is just that, unproven hope, not reality. A player you say it takes patience in for them to grow into a position is not a filled hole. It is just hope and a dream. We have two quality starters on the Oline, LT and C. We have a barely passable TE. We need a LB to pair with Kiko. If Byrd is gone, we need another S. A big pass catching TE who can also block on running plays could fill our needs at both TE and WR. Goodwin has potential as a speedster to stretch the field. Woods has been passable and has potential. SJ is not a long term answer for the team at WR. I agree these are all areas to address. One prospect who intrigues me at QB is Connor Shaw. I didn't see many SC games, but I believe he threw 1 INT all year in the SEC. That said, there is some elite D to be had where we are drafting, and not much elite offense (unless Watkins, Manzel, etc. falls to us). So solidify the D this draft, we make the playoffs, next year hit the offense again. Edited January 20, 2014 by RyanC883
BillsVet Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I agree these are all areas to address...So solidify the D this draft, we make the playoffs, next year hit the offense again. It's amazing how, year after year, the Bills have so many needs. It's almost as if they're building a team whack-a-mole style. Keeping Byrd will be the sign they're committed to winning and If not, it'll be hard to convince fans that self-created holes won't continue to be opened. Because the Bills have mastered the ability to win 4-7 games. Taking a step to the playoffs means filling these holes long term and not using the draft to replace departed free agents.
Mr. WEO Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 After watching both SF and Seattle's defense, there is no denying that we need better LB play. Both teams LBs were flying to the ball making plays. IMHO, I believe our DBs and DL are comparable to both teams. Our LBs need upgrading and Khalil Mack is that upgrade. What is comparable? Is anyone else comparing either Leodis or Gilmore to Sherman and Maxwell (a 3rd string backup)? Or Aaron Williams (!) to Chancellor?? Maybe (maybe) Byrd to Thomas.
T master Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I keep hearing about all the many holes we have to fill this offseason but I just don't see it. Maybe it's a question of semantics - I think of a "hole" in this context as a position that doesn't have a legitimate NFL caliber starter to fill. Some may consider a "hole" any position that could use an upgrade, but by that definition any position that doesn't have an all-pro could be considered a hole and that's just silly. By my count the only hole we have on offense is LG. RG and RT could stand to be upgraded, but I don't really consider the team to be devoid of NFL talent at either postion. Same with TE. With Woods and Goodwin showing potential as rookies, and Stevie still in the mix, I don't see WR in that light either, although a big WR would be nice. On defense we could use a physical LB to help in run support. Otherwise, unless Byrd flies the coup, I don't see a position that doesn't have a solid starter to fill it. So help me out here, what am I missing? Start with the HC & OC position then if Pettine leaves DC if not make him the HC , O line coach OH & the ST coach as well once they find competent people to fill those positions we will have a good team . We can find the players NP !!
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 QB This. You look at a team like the Broncos and across the board, we are just as talented, if not more talented, a team. They add in a star QB, and suddenly they are unstoppable.
JPS Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I can't argue or discuss "holes" with someone who only thinks the Bills have 1. Whatchu drinkin' Mr Jones???
chris heff Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 (edited) This. You look at a team like the Broncos and across the board, we are just as talented, if not more talented, a team. They add in a star QB, and suddenly they are unstoppable. I've posted this before and I'm going to do it again. In any era there are four or five elite QBs in the NFl, there is a handful of guys that have no business starting, but are, because of injury or because a team mistakenly made an investment in them. Then there are all the other guys. Guys that probably aren't going to the HOF, but can win if they have a good team around them and good coaching. Think Phil Simms, two SB rings, SB MVP. Would you take that record for a Bills QB? Payton Manning was drafted in 1998. How many QBs have been drafted since then? And yet there are still only three or four QBs playing today that can even be mentioned in the same sentence as Payton. He is arguably one of the best to have ever played. If a teams has a QB that they believe is good enough if they build a team around him but probably not elite, does that organization build a team around him or keep trying to draft an elite guy? Edited January 20, 2014 by chris heff
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I've posted this before and I'm going to do it again. In any era there are four or five elite QBs in the NFl, there is a handful of guys that have no business starting, but are, because of injury or because a team mistakenly made an investment in them. Then there are all the other guys. Guys that probably aren't going to the HOF, but can win if they have a good team around them and good coaching. Think Phil Simms, two SB rings, SB MVP. Would you take that record for a Bills QB? Payton Manning was drafted in 1998. How many QBs have been drafted since then? And yet there are still only three or four QBs plying today that can even be mentioned in the same sentence as Payton. He is arguably one of the best to have ever played. If a teams has a QB that they believe is good enough if they build a team around him but probably not elite, does that organization build a team around him or keep trying to draft an elite guy? Nice post. Tough question to answer. I think if you have a solid--but not elite--QB (Flacco comes to mind), you can win. But it seems like it's more of a crap shoot every year. Any team with Brady or Manning will be competing for the Super Bowl every year. A team with Flacco may legitimately have a shot to win the Super Bowl once or twice in a guy's 15-year career.
FloridaSnow Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 This. You look at a team like the Broncos and across the board, we are just as talented, if not more talented, a team. They add in a star QB, and suddenly they are unstoppable. Just as talented as the Broncos? What? They are far superior, especially on offense. We have better running backs and a better defensive line. That's about it. I agree with the larger point you're making, but I think you should look at the Colts to make it, not Denver.
Dorkington Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 I keep hearing about all the many holes we have to fill this offseason but I just don't see it. Maybe it's a question of semantics - I think of a "hole" in this context as a position that doesn't have a legitimate NFL caliber starter to fill. Some may consider a "hole" any position that could use an upgrade, but by that definition any position that doesn't have an all-pro could be considered a hole and that's just silly. By my count the only hole we have on offense is LG. RG and RT could stand to be upgraded, but I don't really consider the team to be devoid of NFL talent at either postion. Same with TE. With Woods and Goodwin showing potential as rookies, and Stevie still in the mix, I don't see WR in that light either, although a big WR would be nice. On defense we could use a physical LB to help in run support. Otherwise, unless Byrd flies the coup, I don't see a position that doesn't have a solid starter to fill it. So help me out here, what am I missing? Offense: LG WR TE RB (for the future) RG/RT OLB MLB FS (assuming Byrd doesn't stay) DL depth DC (assuming Pettine leaves) HC (assuming Marrone gives us more of the same poor coaching)
Fingon Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 What is comparable? Is anyone else comparing either Leodis or Gilmore to Sherman and Maxwell (a 3rd string backup)? Or Aaron Williams (!) to Chancellor?? Maybe (maybe) Byrd to Thomas. Byrd is better than Thomas, IMO. The NFL hasn't seen a free safety with Byrd's ability to create turnovers since Ed Reed. Byrd's first 5 years: 22 INT 11 forced fumbles Reed's first 5 years: 27 INT 5 forced fumbles Byrd has the same number of forced fumbles as Ed Reed has in his entire career (11). http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/3552/ed-reed http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/12613/jairus-byrd
MarkyMannn Posted January 20, 2014 Posted January 20, 2014 6. DT (specifically a run stuffing D, I know Branch, Dareus and K. Williams make a nice trio on paper, but we gave up way too many yards rushing up the middle) Yep, I agree with this. Something wrong there
Rob's House Posted January 20, 2014 Author Posted January 20, 2014 I can't argue or discuss "holes" with someone who only thinks the Bills have 1. Whatchu drinkin' Mr Jones??? Who thinks the Bills have only one hole? If that's in reference to my opening post maybe you should take a remedial reading course.
Recommended Posts