We need to pick a tackle in the 1st or 2nd

[thebandit27]

The stars of our offense are at RB and we have a young QB who is slow to make decisions.

 

Thinking about that for a second, what do you think would help our offense more? Another WR, or a much improved OL? I'd go with the latter.

 

Having a guy that's "open when he's not" will do far more to help encourage a young QB to throw the ball on time than giving him more time with which to be indecisive (partially thanks to WRs that aren't reliably getting open).

[C.Biscuit97]

Having a guy that's "open when he's not" will do far more to help encourage a young QB to throw the ball on time than giving him more time with which to be indecisive (partially thanks to WRs that aren't reliably getting open).

 

To go along with that, it's not luck that Tom Brady put up the best numbers of his career when he had Randy Moss and a healthy Gronk. His production fell of this year because he had a small and not super talented receiving core. In fact given the talent, it may have been one of Brady's best seasons.

[bobobonators]

 

 

Having a guy that's "open when he's not" will do far more to help encourage a young QB to throw the ball on time than giving him more time with which to be indecisive (partially thanks to WRs that aren't reliably getting open).

 

I don't agree. Having EJ do that will encourage him to just chuck it up and pray. Is that what you want?

 

EJ's indecisiveness is a result of his lack of playing time (I hope). As he matures, he'll feel more comfortable making the proper reads by recognizing the defense and exploiting it.

 

Of course there are always times where having a WR that can make a catch while covered is critically important, but if you're relying on that to breed QB success, you're relying on failure.

 

 

 

To go along with that, it's not luck that Tom Brady put up the best numbers of his career when he had Randy Moss and a healthy Gronk. His production fell of this year because he had a small and not super talented receiving core. In fact given the talent, it may have been one of Brady's best seasons.

 

Why are we talking about Tom Brady?

 

1. How many games had Tom Brady already played in the NFL before Moss and Gronk got there?

 

2. How many games has EJ played?

 

3. Tom Brady is arguably the best QB ever. Lets not use him as a point of comparison please.

Edited March 18, 2014 by bobobonators

[C.Biscuit97]

I don't agree. Having EJ do that will encourage him to just chuck it up and pray. Is that what you want?

 

EJ's indecisiveness is a result of his lack of playing time (I hope). As he matures, he'll feel more comfortable making the proper reads by recognizing the defense and exploiting it.

 

Of course there are always times where having a WR that can make a catch while covered is critically important, but if you're relying on that to breed QB success, you're relying on failure.

 

 

 

Why are we talking about Tom Brady?

 

1. How many games had Tom Brady already played in the NFL before Moss and Gronk got there?

 

2. How many games has EJ played?

 

Point is how much a big receiver helps a QB.

 

And on some of his deep throws to Goodwin, EJ overthrew him. But if it was a 6'5" guy instead of a 5'7" one, they would have been big plays. It's nice to have a guy with a big catch radius for the first time in forever.

[bobobonators]

Point is how much a big receiver helps a QB.

 

And on some of his deep throws to Goodwin, EJ overthrew him. But if it was a 6'5" guy instead of a 5'7" one, they would have been big plays. It's nice to have a guy with a big catch radius for the first time in forever.

 

I don't disagree with your last statement at all. Just IMO though, I'd rather give EJ the best foundation to stand on before we give him the toys that are a luxury, but not a necessity.

 

Time to throw is a necessity for long-term success. A 6'5 WR is not.

 

Stevie Johnson managed to get 1K+ yds three seasons in row with what many here considered to be a horrible NFL QB. Stevie at 27 is still in his prime.

 

Robert Woods was a 2nd round draft pick last season and showed flashes of being a solid player.

 

Neither of those players are "short". He has some tools to play with at WR. We're not the Jets.

Edited March 18, 2014 by bobobonators

[thebandit27]

 

 

I don't disagree with your last statement at all. Just IMO though, I'd rather give EJ the best foundation to stand on before we give him the toys that are a luxury, but not a necessity.

 

Time to throw is a necessity for long-term success. A 6'5 WR is not.

 

Stevie Johnson managed to get 1K+ yds three seasons in row with what many here considered to be a horrible NFL QB. Stevie at 27 is still in his prime.

 

Robert Woods was a 2nd round draft pick last season and showed flashes of being a solid player.

 

Neither of those players are "short". He has some tools to play with at WR. We're not the Jets.

 

Time to throw is not a necessity at all...Manning and Brady aren't the best because they have the most time; they're the best because they use the time they have most effectively (and it's not any more than the other QBs have by and large).

[C.Biscuit97]

I don't disagree with your last statement at all. Just IMO though, I'd rather give EJ the best foundation to stand on before we give him the toys that are a luxury, but not a necessity.

 

Time to throw is a necessity for long-term success. A 6'5 WR is not.

 

Obviously, you want to great linemen but I think you can be very successful at finding them later in the draft. IMO, it's harder to find 6'5" potentially dominant wrs past the 1st. I guess a good question is that if each player lives up to their hype - would you rather have Vincent Jackson (Mike Evans) or Jake Long at RT (Lewan)? Personally, I'd rather have VJax and hope to find a RT later (there's a slim chance that Pears rebounds being healthy this year).

[bobobonators]

 

 

Time to throw is not a necessity at all...Manning and Brady aren't the best because they have the most time; they're the best because they use the time they have most effectively (and it's not any more than the other QBs have by and large).

 

Again with Manning and Brady. Maybe Manning and Brady are in a league of their own.

 

When we have Manning or Brady on our team, wake me up.

 

 

 

Obviously, you want to great linemen but I think you can be very successful at finding them later in the draft. IMO, it's harder to find 6'5" potentially dominant wrs past the 1st. I guess a good question is that if each player lives up to their hype - would you rather have Vincent Jackson (Mike Evans) or Jake Long at RT (Lewan)? Personally, I'd rather have VJax and hope to find a RT later (there's a slim chance that Pears rebounds being healthy this year).

 

I would say it depends. If Robert Woods develops into an NFL #1 and we have Stevie at #2 I'll take Jake Long.

 

Does nobody here have any faith on Woods developing into a good NFL WR? I do.

 

I don't see us going with WR at #1.

[thebandit27]

 

 

Again with Manning and Brady. Maybe Manning and Brady are in a league of their own.

 

When we have Manning or Brady on our team, wake me up.

 

You can say the exact same thing for Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, etc.

 

Seattle had a horrific pass blocking OL this year--Wilson still lead them to the Superbowl.

 

It's about the QB being able to beat the pressure; that's part I his job. Getting him the best WR corps possible makes it all the easier.

 

That's all I'm saying...mentioning Manning and Brady was just in reference to the earlier posts in which they were discussed.

[C.Biscuit97]

Again with Manning and Brady. Maybe Manning and Brady are in a league of their own.

 

When we have Manning or Brady on our team, wake me up.

 

 

 

I would say it depends. If Robert Woods develops into an NFL #1 and we have Stevie at #2 I'll take Jake Long.

 

Does nobody here have any faith on Woods developing into a good NFL WR? I do.

 

I don't see us going with WR at #1.

 

I love Woods but we will have the same problem with him as we do with SJ. They won't ever been consistent red zone targets because of their size. If the Bills convert a fg into touchdown last year, what's their record? Big wrs can be game changers.

[bobobonators]

 

 

You can say the exact same thing for Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, etc.

 

Seattle had a horrific pass blocking OL this year--Wilson still lead them to the Superbowl.

 

It's about the QB being able to beat the pressure; that's part I his job. Getting him the best WR corps possible makes it all the easier.

 

That's all I'm saying...mentioning Manning and Brady was just in reference to the earlier posts in which they were discussed.

 

Seattle's WR corps are nothing special at all. Russell Wilson is a scrambler and is faster than EJ and better at making plays when the pocket collapses. EJ needs to become an effective pocket passer if he's going to succeed. How is a big target going to improve that aspect?

 

Who is the elite WR on the Packers? Jordy Nelson? James Jones? Neither are taller than 6'3.

 

Drew Brees will be a HOF QB. And before Graham got there, who was their "monster" WR/TE? Colston, who was a 7th round pick.

[Dopey]

I'm so desperate for a good OLine I don't think I'd be upset if they drafted 7 offensive linemen.

[bobobonators]

 

 

I love Woods but we will have the same problem with him as we do with SJ. They won't ever been consistent red zone targets because of their size. If the Bills convert a fg into touchdown last year, what's their record? Big wrs can be game changers.

 

Dude, stevie is 6'2. Woods is 6'0. You want a red zone target? We have Chandler who's like 7'0 tall. Stevie had 10TD's with Fitzpatrick throwing him the ball.

[C.Biscuit97]

Dude, stevie is 6'2. Woods is 6'0. You want a red zone target? We have Chandler who's like 7'0 tall. Stevie had 10TD's with Fitzpatrick throwing him the ball.

 

Chandler plays way smaller. And you don't always have to be 6'5" but it's much harder to be consistent. Look at what Chicago did with it's wrs or Matt Stafford does with Megatron. Plus, if you have Evans, someone out of him, Woods, and SJ is getting single covered. I like that idea.

[bobobonators]

Chandler plays way smaller. And you don't always have to be 6'5" but it's much harder to be consistent. Look at what Chicago did with it's wrs or Matt Stafford does with Megatron. Plus, if you have Evans, someone out of him, Woods, and SJ is getting single covered. I like that idea.

 

What does Stafford do with Megatron other than lose?

 

Look what Chicago did with an improved OL this year.

[thebandit27]

 

 

What does Stafford do with Megatron other than lose?

 

Look what Chicago did with an improved OL this year.

 

Finished 8-8?

 

It's also worth noting that Chicago has two of the biggest, most talented WRs in the NFL.

[bobobonators]

 

 

Finished 8-8?

 

It's also worth noting that Chicago has two of the biggest, most talented WRs in the NFL.

 

That they do. But Cutler himself was quoted saying this season that a large part of the passing games success was b/c of the improved OL play. And that's the entire point: we see the QB throw the ball to the WR, we want that. We want that kind of explosive play and who wouldn't. But how does that play develop 80% of the time? Nobody cares about the pass blocking that gave cutler 4+ seconds to throw a bomb to Marshall.

 

I was referring to Chicago's passing game with "look at what Chicago did". Chicago has done a 180 from a dominant D and lousy offense to a dominant offense and lousy D.

Edited March 18, 2014 by bobobonators

[thewildrabbit]

What gets me is the mentality of some fans here regurgitating the same philosophy of the franchise the last 14 years. I wonder why that is....

 

Its OK to draft a DT with the 3rd overall pick, but OT's can be found in the 3rd round.....which of course is complete and utter nonsense. To teams other then the Buffalo Bills, a blue chip O linemen is just as important as a D linemen.

 

2010 draft--#4 overall Redskins, Trent Williams OT-- #6 Seattle, Russell Okung OT--#11 San Francisco, Anthony Davis OT-- #17 San Francisco, Mike Iupati OG-- #18 Pittsburgh, Maurkice Pouncey C- #23 Green Bay, Bryan Bulaga OT.

 

What do all those teams have in common? Yea, that's right. They all have made the playoffs since 2010, and the Packers- Steelers, 49ers, Seahawks have all recently been to a super bowl. Seattle also used a #1 pick on an OT in 2011.

Edited March 18, 2014 by FeartheLosing

[papazoid]

What gets me is the mentality of some fans here regurgitating the same philosophy of the franchise the last 14 years. I wonder why that is....

 

Its OK to draft a DT with the 3rd overall pick, but OT's can be found in the 3rd round.....which of course is complete and utter nonsense. To teams other then the Buffalo Bills, a blue chip O linemen is just as important as a D linemen.

 

2010 draft--#4 overall Redskins, Trent Williams OT-- #6 Seattle, Russell Okung OT--#11 San Francisco, Anthony Davis OT-- #17 San Francisco, Mike Iupati OG-- #18 Pittsburgh, Maurkice Pouncey C- #23 Green Bay, Bryan Bulaga OT.

 

What do all those teams have in common? Yea, that's right. They all have made the playoffs since 2010, and the Packers- Steelers, 49ers, Seahawks have all recently been to a super bowl. Seattle also used a #1 pick on an OT in 2011.

 

what he said.

 

 

another interesting tidbit.

 

 

for teams who had one of the first 13 picks in last years draft:

 

6 teams picked an OL. of those 6 teams, 4 made the playoffs.

 

7 teams picked something other than an OL. of those 7 teams, ZERO made the playoffs.

[thebandit27]

what he said.

 

 

another interesting tidbit.

 

 

for teams who had one of the first 13 picks in last years draft:

 

6 teams picked an OL. of those 6 teams, 4 made the playoffs.

 

7 teams picked something other than an OL. of those 7 teams, ZERO made the playoffs.

 

Once again, you have to look at WHO the players drafted were, and the teams they went to...we can draw correlations to anything without there being a causation. For example, Seattle traded their 1st round pick for a WR that didn't play in the regular season, and went on to win the Superbowl...does that mean that Buffalo needs to trade their 1st round pick for a WR and then make sure he doesn't play all season long? Of course not.

 

As I've pointed out to the "tackle in the top 10 = success" crowd before, let's examine that a bit:

 

Seattle and their two 1st round picks on tackles netted them an OL that nearly got Russell Wilson killed all season. That 1st rounder they used on an OT in 2011 was for James Carpenter...who cannot even crack the starting lineup as a guard. Russell Okung and his 6th overall status missed half the season last year--it's hard to say he's the reason for their success.

 

That 49ers line that some prefer to espouse blocked for a running game that averaged 0.1 YPC better than Buffalo, and ranked 29th in the NFL in Football Outsiders' Adjusted Line Yards. Not to mention they allowed approximately 1/2 sack per game fewer than Buffalo during the 2013 season.

 

The Steeler offensive line that spent 1st round picks on Pouncey and DeCastro, and 2nd round picks on Adams and Gilbert, allowed 43 sacks last season and rushed for 3.5 YPC, which ranked 30th in the NFL.

 

If we're looking for the reason that those teams made the playoffs, how about this:

 

Russell Wilson

RG3

Colin Kaepernick

Big Ben

Aaron Rodgers

 

Let's go a step further and look at the OT-made top 10 of the 2013 draft:

 

Eric Fisher nearly lost his starting job in 2013, and was part of the biggest paper-tiger team possibly in NFL playoff history...they also allowed 41 sacks, only 7 more than Buffalo

Luke Joeckel played for a Jacksonville team that was 0-5 before he was injured and lost for the season--hard to speak to his impact there

Lane Johnson was repeatedly victimized at RT for Philadelphia, part of the reason they gave up 46 sacks during the season, 2 fewer than Buffalo. Oh by the way, it also didn't hurt that the Eagles stumbled into Nick Foles at QB, who happend to throw 27 TDs and 2 INTs

 

Look, I'm not bashing the idea of drafting an OT in the top 10...if he's the best player available, then yes, it makes complete sense. What I am saying, however, is that the mirage of a causation between drafting an OT in the top 10 and becoming a good team should not drive Buffalo's approach to the draft.