Terrel Bernard Discussion

[Einstein's Dog]

1 hour ago, Yantha said:

My hope is still that we trade down, and land Jack Campbell, but you have to find a trade partner to do so AND hope that someone doesn't trade AHEAD of us to steal him away.  I don't think it's a secret in the NFL world, that the Bills need MLB....

 

There seems to be this echo chamber that you can trade down and get Jack Campbell (JC)   Pure conjecture.  I believe JC is in a tier of his own at the top of the mlb rankings, and for good reason, he is a decorated, experienced, high IQ, big person with a huge RAS.

 

I believe the FO interest in what it would take to move up is based on getting JC.  The offensive weapon rouse was classic Beane.  The lb needs of NYG and possibly Dallas (if B Robinson is gone) scare Beane.  We've seen the FO get nervous before just last year and I don't think they regret it at all (remember our 4th Balt got went to a punter).

 

Another disadvantage to trading down is the FO would regret not getting JC in the 1st round for the 5 year deal.  JC is a great candidate to be extended after year 3 like the smart teams do when they know they have a keeper (see J Allen/D Knox/T White).   

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

What really struck me about him is that he really hasn't looked like the prospect those scouting reports describe so far. I hadn't watched him at all before the draft last year, but I found some videos after we picked him. I'm with those reports what I saw in college was an undersized, sub package, linebacker who looked great in space but struggled to hold up physically in the box particularly against the run. 

 

However, both in pre-season and limited regular season action for the Bills he has actually held up better than expected against the run, and hasn't been the non-factor I feared. The issue has been he has shown no coverage ability whatsoever. He looks slow in space and hasn't shown any of that sideline to sideline range. It is as if the guy on film at Baylor is not the same guy that turned up in Buffalo. I don't know if injuries at the end at Baylor have played a part, if he was just a bit overwhelmed by the NFL or something else but what we saw on the field last year was bad. Particularly in the areas he was supposed to be good. 

 

As for the "can he fill the Edmunds space" question.... I'm not sure the answer is yes even if we do get the guy from the film at Baylor in the longer term. 

I think sometimes a rookie LBers sideline to sideline ability is stunted because they aren’t confident in their assignments.  Processing is slow, hence they aren’t running around full speed.  Dunno if that’s Bernards case, but it’s a thing.  

[whorlnut]

16 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

There seems to be this echo chamber that you can trade down and get Jack Campbell (JC)   Pure conjecture.  I believe JC is in a tier of his own at the top of the mlb rankings, and for good reason, he is a decorated, experienced, high IQ, big person with a huge RAS.

 

I believe the FO interest in what it would take to move up is based on getting JC.  The offensive weapon rouse was classic Beane.  The lb needs of NYG and possibly Dallas (if B Robinson is gone) scare Beane.  We've seen the FO get nervous before just last year and I don't think they regret it at all (remember our 4th Balt got went to a punter).

 

Another disadvantage to trading down is the FO would regret not getting JC in the 1st round for the 5 year deal.  JC is a great candidate to be extended after year 3 like the smart teams do when they know they have a keeper (see J Allen/D Knox/T White).   

It’s hilarious that you think in any way Beane would trade up in the first for a guy with a second round grade. This is 2023…the league is geared towards offense. This isn’t the old days when anyone gave a crap about who your middle LB was. In fact, I’d bet the bengals and chiefs are sitting there hoping we do something dumb like you are talking about so more offensive players fall to them. 

[hondo in seattle]

For all those advocating for a 4-3 defense next season, I have an honest question.

One of the things we hear from coaches is that you need to get your best players on the field.  At present we only have one good LB.  We now seem to have 3 good safeties and, debatably, 3 decent/good CBs.  So why would we line up with 3 LBs?

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

18 minutes ago, Yantha said:

The instincts will come after a rookie season, but he's got to put on like 15-20 pounds to be a seek and destroy linebacker.

Im not even trying to say I think Spector will be good, I’m just throwing it out there. I’m all for a guy from outside the current roster coming in. I was done with Edmunds I was looking forward to the next chapter. I don’t think it will be Bernard but we’ll see.

[Snappysnackcakes]

Bernard was drafted as a backup to Milano. Historically speaking, Milano has missed his fair share of games and his position is very important in our system. Bernard is not going to line up at Mike and we’re definitely not going to use 3 LB’s consistently. I don’t know how creative they’re going to be with Rapp, as he signed a one-year contract, for the minimum, and he’s a very slow DB. Heck, he’d be considered a slow LB. If, somehow, Rapp plays a large part in our game plan, it may mean we run with ONE LINEBACKER and Rapp plays the Rover role. But my gut tells me that Rapp is nothing more than a depth piece. And Bernard is not a Sam, either. He’s a backup to Matt and that’s why they picked him. Also, you must remember that his draft was one where we didn’t have a lot of holes on paper, hence the forgivable reach. Don’t throw the whole “we needed help here and there” nonsense at me. When they were assembling the roster for that season, there were very few holes. Beane is very good at assembling a pre-draft roster to minimize reaches or picking out of need. However, we cannot enter camp with the Mikes we have on the roster. I do wonder if Miles Jack has been contacted and is waiting to sign after the compensatory formula wouldn’t be impacted. He’s a good enough stop-gap and still has a lot of football left.

 

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

1 hour ago, nosejob said:

I like Bernard and Spector, but I am praying for Jack Campbell.  It's a reach!!!!! Not worth a 1st round pick at 27!!!!!!   Well Zerholtz and the Chiefs took him at 31!

 

They must not get it!!  There's no way we can pass on him cause he ain't gonna make it past 32.

If I am following that mock draft thread correctly,  Zervovoltz traded up and took a DL. It was the Lions pick at 31 that took Campbell. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

53 minutes ago, Einstein's Dog said:

There seems to be this echo chamber that you can trade down and get Jack Campbell (JC)   Pure conjecture.  I believe JC is in a tier of his own at the top of the mlb rankings, and for good reason, he is a decorated, experienced, high IQ, big person with a huge RAS.

 

I believe the FO interest in what it would take to move up is based on getting JC.  The offensive weapon rouse was classic Beane.  The lb needs of NYG and possibly Dallas (if B Robinson is gone) scare Beane.  We've seen the FO get nervous before just last year and I don't think they regret it at all (remember our 4th Balt got went to a punter).

 

Another disadvantage to trading down is the FO would regret not getting JC in the 1st round for the 5 year deal.  JC is a great candidate to be extended after year 3 like the smart teams do when they know they have a keeper (see J Allen/D Knox/T White).   

The 5th year is important but its also irrelevant for this team right now. The SB window will have been slammed shut by then. 

 

[Dr. Who]

40 minutes ago, whorlnut said:

It’s hilarious that you think in any way Beane would trade up in the first for a guy with a second round grade. This is 2023…the league is geared towards offense. This isn’t the old days when anyone gave a crap about who your middle LB was. In fact, I’d bet the bengals and chiefs are sitting there hoping we do something dumb like you are talking about so more offensive players fall to them. 

I sometimes wonder if imbecility is contagious. If it is, I wonder if the distance of the virtual world is in any manner prophylactic. 

I say this because I suspect Einstein's dog, who is generally pretty astute, has been drinking from our Einstein's water bottle.

Then again, watch this regime trade up for Jack Campbell. 

[Virgil]

We can’t be the team we want to be with our current LBs on the roster 

[Dr. Who]

13 minutes ago, Virgil said:

We can’t be the team we want to be with our current LBs on the roster 

If it requires trading up from 27 to achieve the answer, the FO has massively messed up.

[LyndonvilleBill]

15 minutes ago, Virgil said:

We can’t be the team we want to be with our current LBs on the roster 

There's always Noah Sewel.😉

[Virgil]

1 minute ago, Dr. Who said:

If it requires trading up from 27 to achieve the answer, the FO has massively messed up.

I’m not for trading up because of the draft capital it will cost.  But if they do it, then I trust they think they are getting a difference maker. 

[Success]

1 hour ago, TheBeaneBandit said:

Terrell Bernard. Wasted draft pick. Discussion over. Sorry not sorry.

 

There is actually no basis for that conclusion at this point in time.  

 

[Einstein's Dog]

29 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

The 5th year is important but its also irrelevant for this team right now. The SB window will have been slammed shut by then. 

 

They say the draft is for the future.   And by drafting properly the SB window will still be open 8 years from now - we'll still have J Allen, the main component.

 

Most picks won't factor much in 2023 - IOL, WR, and especially TE would start as backups.  Jack Campbell has the quickest path to 2023 relevance of anyone they could take.

[whorlnut]

Just now, Einstein's Dog said:

They say the draft is for the future.   And by drafting properly the SB window will still be open 8 years from now - we'll still have J Allen, the main component.

 

Most picks won't factor much in 2023 - IOL, WR, and especially TE would start as backups.  Jack Campbell has the quickest path to 2023 relevance of anyone they could take.

Talking out of both sides of your mouth again I see. Yes, by drafting a WR, that would allow that guy a year to get acclimated to take over when Davis is gone. No middle LB is going to move the needle more than offensive weapons for Allen.  This team only goes as far as Allen takes them.  Jack campbell isn’t going to do that. 

[Chaos]

1 hour ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

He's listed at 224 pounds. If Beane or McD thinks that is ok for MLB then they are coaching a different game than I am watching. You still need size up the middle. He is closer to a big nickel safety than he is a MLB. If he was insurance if Milano got hurt then it was a complete waste of a draft pick when the team needed other depth players. 

It doesn't really matter though. Our only hope with this coaching staff is Allen scores 40 a game. Get 3 more guys that can contribute on offense and a LB, DT, or edge in the top 4 picks

Real question.  What did Edmunds do that Nickle Safties don't do? 

[KOKBILLS]

I think Bernard is a perfectly reasonable back-up for Milano... 

 

That's about it...At least right now... 

[Maine-iac]

What if we play a 4-3 and our LB's are Milano (MLB), Bernard (SLB) and Rapp (WLB)?  Could two physical safety sized players equal one LB and one CB?  If nothing else we have options and more cap space without Edmunds.  It'll be interesting to see if we have "better" or even "good enough".  I think McDermott calling the defense will make a difference but we'll see.

Edited April 9, 2023 by Maine-iac

[Rockinon]

It could be that the coaches felt that Edmunds didn't live up to the standard that Kuechly set and decided to go in a different direction. It will be interesting to see what they do at the LB position, but I do think the reason the front office liked Bernard in the first place was is ability to get into the backfield quickly and his speed. He wasn't drafted to be the next MLB at his weight.