Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 26, 2019 Posted February 26, 2019 Sam-me 2.0? Build the O line. 7th round WRs can be super bowl MVPs when you are great in the trenches 2
TheBeaneBandit Posted February 26, 2019 Posted February 26, 2019 57 minutes ago, Augie said: There was a time when Oliver looked like nothing more than a pipe dream. Now? You never now. I realize there are some questions (weight, injury, “the blowup”, etc.) but it’s hard to ignore the way the guy looks on the field. There should be an elite player there at #9. This can’t happen soon enough! I personally would love to have Oliver as our 3 tech, but after the combine Im thinking he'll be long gone by 9. If he shows up at 290 or higher and does well in all the drills......kiss that possibility goodbye. IMO of course.
Augie Posted February 26, 2019 Posted February 26, 2019 16 minutes ago, TheBeaneBandit said: I personally would love to have Oliver as our 3 tech, but after the combine Im thinking he'll be long gone by 9. If he shows up at 290 or higher and does well in all the drills......kiss that possibility goodbye. IMO of course. The last I heard he was more like 272#, but who knows? If he rises, some other stud falls.....I hope. But I think some non-QB stud will be there.
BillsSB2020 Posted February 26, 2019 Posted February 26, 2019 3 hours ago, RoyBatty is alive said: In today's NFL if you dont have a franchise QB you have to reach in the draft to roll the dice to get one MAYBE some stupid team falls in love with Lock. Murray and Haskins will be gone by 9. Not such a bad thing for the Bills considering that means we'll have a crack at the 7th position player. I just think we need to pump the brakes on the assumption that a trade down is likely. It takes two to tango. 1
Saxum Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 6 hours ago, Albany,n.y. said: I firmly believe that there won't be a QB that any team will want to trade up for at #9, so any discussion of a trade down that includes the team trading up for a QB is pretty much nonsense IMO. Not if it is a first stage to another trade up.
formerlyofCtown Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 4 hours ago, LABILLBACKER said: 1,3,6 in that order. Oliver replaces Kyle instantly. Williams could play LT and slide Dion to RT. I'd only pick TJH on a trade down. Waiting to see how Metcalf looks at Indy. Dawkins sucks at RT. Been there done that. Williams however can play RT.
BuffaloBillies Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 9 minutes ago, formerlyofCtown said: Dawkins sucks at RT. Been there done that. Williams however can play RT. I struggle with the idea that a guy can play great (or good enough) on one side of the line, but apparently "suck" on the other side of the line. From the article, "If Buffalo landed Dillard it could move Dion Dawkins back to the right side, which may actually be his natural and more comfortable fit." I'm not saying Dillard is the answer, but the author calls the right side the natural/comfortable fit for Dawkins. How do people on this board (I've seen it many times) dismiss any possibility that Dawkins could play RT or RG? These are guys that are professional athletes that have been around football their whole lives. If you had a whole off-season and pre-season to learn new footwork and concepts couldn't you fairly easily pick up whatever position the team needed you in? Left side, right side, whatever... I just don't buy it. If Dawkins was coached up at RT, I think he'd be a damn good one.
Sherlock Holmes Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 Trade down and take TJ Gronkenson... 1
formerlyofCtown Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) 35 minutes ago, BuffaloBillies said: I struggle with the idea that a guy can play great (or good enough) on one side of the line, but apparently "suck" on the other side of the line. From the article, "If Buffalo landed Dillard it could move Dion Dawkins back to the right side, which may actually be his natural and more comfortable fit." I'm not saying Dillard is the answer, but the author calls the right side the natural/comfortable fit for Dawkins. How do people on this board (I've seen it many times) dismiss any possibility that Dawkins could play RT or RG? These are guys that are professional athletes that have been around football their whole lives. If you had a whole off-season and pre-season to learn new footwork and concepts couldn't you fairly easily pick up whatever position the team needed you in? Left side, right side, whatever... I just don't buy it. If Dawkins was coached up at RT, I think he'd be a damn good one. Well the author of that article is an idiot then because the Left side is his more natural fit. What Im saying is a fact. He was tried on the Right and did not do well. When Glenn got injured he played for him and did well. He was lacadazacle in the offseason and recognizes it and says he wont take things for granted in the future. I do have to acknowledge we have a new OL Coach and it hasnt been ruled out or even a move to G. Edited February 27, 2019 by formerlyofCtown
BuffaloBillies Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 4 minutes ago, formerlyofCtown said: Well the author of that article is an idiot then because the Left side is his more natural fit. What Im saying is a fact. He was tried on the Right and did not do well. When Glenn got injured he played for him and did well. He was lacadazacle in the offseason and recognizes it and says he wont take things for granted in the future. The larger point is that he should/could be just as effective on either side, given the right coaching/practice/preparation, if that's where the team needed him. Maybe he didn't do well initially on the right side (small sample), but he can learn/grow into a right side position. In the end, we just need him to maul the guy over him (football) regardless of what side of the line he's on.
ColdFront_USAF Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 I'd be happy with most of these. I think if Oliver is there, you take him and don't look back. He's up there with Bosa as one of the top 2 or 3 players in this class and him falling to us was unfathomable a few months ago. Short of that, I would like to see Metcalf, Taylor, Dillard or Williams at 9. At this point I'm leaning Metcalf, because we're more likely to get good starters on the o line in free agency then we are to find a potential #1 reciever. Guy has it all, speed, RAC ability, ball skills, fights for contested catches. If we do go o line, it's a choice between pass and run. Dillard is a stud in pass pro and can move Dawkins to RT, Taylor is a run game mauler that has the tools to be good in pass pro but needs refinement, and Jonah Williams seems to be the technician that doesn't have the elite tools physically that Taylor has, but is the most mentally and technically sound. Depends on the identity they want to build. Hockinsen is the one I want to stay away from. Don't get me wrong, I think he'll be a great player. I just think you will get more yards/catches/tds out of a top flight reciever. He would be a solid addition to the offense and a good safety net for Allen, but I want more than that with a top 10 overall pick. 1
Ethan in Cleveland Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) 2-6 are fine. I would prefer not to take a WR in the first round. I just don;t see the value of a DT in the first round. They take too much time to develop and in McD's scheme they eat space not penetrate and disrupt. Much prefer OLB/DE if the go defense in the first round. If a top edge rusher falls stay at 9 and take him. Consider Hockenson at 9 but ultimately I would trade down 3-10 spots. Ideally drop 5-6 spots and get a first in 2020 and a third this year. Perfect partner would be Atlanta or Washington. Both of them are going to be worse next year and will be top 10 picks in 2020. Washington will want a QB, and Atlanta needs to make a splash for the current GM/HC to keep their jobs. Edited February 27, 2019 by Ethan in Portland
White Linen Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, Albany,n.y. said: We'll see. We'll see what? You said it's nonsense that anyone would trade to the #9 for a QB - then stated you think 3 are getting drafted before 9. That's like calling heads and tails on a coin flip. Edited February 27, 2019 by White Linen
Doc Brown Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 Beane showed last year he will take unfinished products with massive potential. Metcalf is another love/hate prospect that I can see them taking a chance on.
FeelingOnYouboty Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 18 hours ago, NewEraBills said: I want to see him at the combine. If he displays flexibility, burst, speed, to me you take him at 9. But I don't think the Bills will. I think Beane will be more in the mindset of when he was an understudy with Dave Gettleman. It will be a trench player, whether that is edge or interior on defense, which is more than likely, or OT. The rumors surrounding Metcalf right now are out of control. People are saying he's going to run a 4.39. He might not even be there at #9 at this point.
Albany,n.y. Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 9 hours ago, White Linen said: We'll see what? You said it's nonsense that anyone would trade to the #9 for a QB - then stated you think 3 are getting drafted before 9. That's like calling heads and tails on a coin flip. We'll see the day of the draft-It's an opinion of something that hasn't happened yet. It's called a prediction. Fortunately, when you make a prediction about something 2 months away, you get the results if it happened or not in 2 months. Debating a prediction before the event is an exercise in futility. Either it happens or it doesn't. So, on the 1st day of the draft we will see if I'm right or wrong. If I'm wrong it won't be the 1st time I predicted something incorrectly, likewise, if I'm right it won't be the 1st time I've been right in a prediction. What I said is very consistent-I think that by #9 3 QBs will be gone & nobody is trading up to #9 to draft the 4th best QB. That's only calling it one way.
White Linen Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 22 minutes ago, Albany,n.y. said: We'll see the day of the draft-It's an opinion of something that hasn't happened yet. It's called a prediction. Fortunately, when you make a prediction about something 2 months away, you get the results if it happened or not in 2 months. Debating a prediction before the event is an exercise in futility. Either it happens or it doesn't. So, on the 1st day of the draft we will see if I'm right or wrong. If I'm wrong it won't be the 1st time I predicted something incorrectly, likewise, if I'm right it won't be the 1st time I've been right in a prediction. What I said is very consistent-I think that by #9 3 QBs will be gone & nobody is trading up to #9 to draft the 4th best QB. That's only calling it one way. Yeah, that's what your first post said/meant.
Jay_Fixit Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 21 hours ago, 947 said: Metcalf is a much better athlete than he is a WR. I don't want to spend a first rounder on a guy who can only run a partial route tree, just because he's fast & jacked. His game film is pretty "meh". And he’s the second best Ole Miss receiver in the draft.
Recommended Posts