07 needs IMHO

[Pyrite Gal]

QB- set for a starter, need to try out Nall for #2 and if the braintrust thinks he can do it then acquiring a reasonable disaster QB is fine (or even having Holcomb for another year is fine if we believe in Nall), however if the braintrust is unsure of Nall then bring in a guy who is serious competition for #2. JP is not a sure thing, but it is definitely his job to lose and he should be given a little latitude before going to an alternative.

 

OL- Starters appear to be coming around and I suspect 4 of 5 are capable starters or capable of being trained into it (Peters. Fowler, Pennington, Preston) and Gandy may be but getting a solid G is the priority need to make this unit a force. There is a priority need though to get some back-up depth and we should be on the lookout for a proven back-up talent and use Gandy in this regard.

 

RB- We are in the driver's seat with McGahee who still has the unrealized potential he showed prior to his injury and the hard work which led to his surprisingly good recovery (I would not have been surprised if he had been cut given how badly he was hurt, but the Bills docs got it right that he would in fact come back to be at least an adequate NFL player. His performance has been disappointing for the last season and a half (though this says as much about the unrealistic expectations of most of us fans as it does about his play) but as he was the fastest Bill ever to rush for 2000 yards and given his show of some good stuff like his stiff arm and performances against the Jets, his performance clearly indicates he deserves another chance to prove himself that he really is an elite back (he ain't yet).

 

Many fans wanna throw him under the bus due to his stupid attitude towards women and silly fiscal perspectives (which seem in part based on the press being happy to interpret loose remarks by him in the worse light in order to gain eyeballs and ears so they can use the news to sell commercials). However, there does not seem to be any negative things being said about him by his teammates and unless he appears to be a cancer with a real impact on team chemistry, his off field comments mean zero to this person who really only cares about on-field performance and to a lesser but real extent potential.

 

Particularly since he is in his FA year and the fiscal implications of producing should solve any motivation issues (again I think mostly imagined by folks more focused on the WM soap opera stuff) and that the Bills pretty completely have the choice of signing or tagging him if he produces this year or letting him walk if he sucks, staying the course is by far the smart football move with him and see how this year plays out.

 

Thomas really impressed as a great fill in for a couple of games and even may have some good receiving chops if Fairchild can learn how to use the RB properly as a receiver. However, it would be foolish to count on him as being a starter as his pre-season numbers and very good but not outstanding #2 RB performance indicates it would be quite dangerous to count on him carrying the rock as a #1 RB. WM in fact does deserve some credit for being a workhorse in the same breath as folks whine about him not having breakaway speed.

 

Shelton added little and appears done.

 

The Bills should look to get an RB on the second day of the draft (we have too many other important needs to waste a first day pick on a player likely to sit most of the season). This may be tough but in a blue moon productive RBs can be found on the second day and finding a back-up capable of filling the Shaud Williams role and it is to be hoped at least providing additional motivation for WM by being a threat but really being capable of developing into a starter next year (or in two seasons if we franchise or keep WM) is more possible. I view this player less as someone who will contribute this year, but more as someone who may develop and thus gives us leverage in negotiations to come with WM or an answer next year if he sucks.

 

Shelton should be cut and the Bills should go more with a 1 back and spread offense rather than trying to run a power game that does not work/ I think they will be more successful running in a spread if Fairchild uses the WR's speed to force opposing Ds into the nickel and allows WM to return to using the stiff arm on outside runs and give him an extra DB instead of an LB to run on.

 

WRs- Drafting a solid possession guy with the 2nd (or preferably the 3rd) of our choices would be fine, but actually I think that we have scary speed talent to use Evans, PP, Parrish as our top 3 and then go with Reed and the empty backfield if we want a possession WR.

 

DL- We will need one more who will get some PT in our rotation assuming we will cut Anderson. I think the default is probably to go offense with this draft this year, but if the braintrust looks Amobi Okoye in the eye and like his talent and think his young psyche and body will stand up to being a pro then drafting a DT is probably the thing to do. On the other hand if they believe that McCargo's injury issues are behind him now that our docs have put a screw into his foot and that the sense he was turning a corner just before his injury, then picking up a cheaper FA at DT may be the way to go. DE looks fairly solid and either Kelsay should be resigned to a reasonable contract, but if someone offers him a ton then Hargrove it is.

 

LB- This looks like a weak year in the draft for LBs and I think if Fletch walks then trying to buy a Briggs (assuming he is not franchised) or the best available player (Crowell can move inside if necessary which allows us to look at OLBs to replace him). Willis appears easily to be the most talented MLB, but if the Bills want him it appears they can trade down substantially and get him (which says something about how ready he is to step in at MLB for us particularly given that our MLB in our Cover 2 will need to tackle like a DT and cover like a safety). Willis will eventually learn to read plays like a vet, but it will simply be painful and our D performance will likely be worse while he reads plays like a rookie as he will be for a good while. If we must draft a replacement for F-B, then moving Crowell inside and drafting a Timmons or Polwhatshisname at OLB makes more sense to me than drafting Willis and watching him do the JP thing of being a physically gifted player who simply needs some PT to make mistakes and learn the game before we are confident in him.

 

CBs- I think Whitner and Simpson leave us set at safety for quite a while. Given that the way our CBs play in the Tampa 2 we run calls on them to run press coverage and then release the WR after 10-15 yards, I do not see us paying Champ Bailey money for NC. NC is a great CB and really a playmaker, but he long ago lost the PR job to Parrish eliminating this benefit and actually though I think he can play the press well, he is of Champ Bailey level use in a D which allows him to sit back or range around like the zone blitz or Corey style which allowed him time to sit back, read the QBs eyes and jump routes.

 

I'd rather see us spend these big buck truly making our LBs formidable, getting a vet Guard, or getting a good reserve DT than see it used on an NC we are not gonna use to his full capability the way we use our CBs. In terms of replacing him I see Youbouty proving able to step in as our nickel and potentially even challenge to be the #2 CB as he is a big boy, competitive sort who has shown good hand-fighting ability. If we buy a cheaper vet at CB I feel fine using him in this defined somewhat limited role as our CB in our Cover 2.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Good post, and I find myself in agreement with much of it, other than Duke Preston being a viable starter at Guard. In my mind, he was the weak link, and I'd rather start Gandy than Preston.

 

I especially agree with not re-signing Nate Clements, and instead pursuing a LB, OG or DT in free agency. You hit that right on the button, right down to what positions we should be looking at.

 

The reason I'm replying is that I've got a question for you...you said if Patrick Willis came in as a rookie starter, he'd be overwhelmed and would naturally make rookie mistakes as he learns the system, which makes sense. I wonder, if we drafted a first-day MLB and designated London Fletcher-Baker as our franchise player, and then let Fletch walk next offseason...could we expect the draftee to come in and have a reasonable chance to limit his mistakes in the tampa 2, due to his experience as a rookie sitting behind Fletch on the depth chart and soaking it all in?

[obie_wan]

Good post, and I find myself in agreement with much of it, other than Duke Preston being a viable starter at Guard. In my mind, he was the weak link, and I'd rather start Gandy than Preston.

 

I especially agree with not re-signing Nate Clements, and instead pursuing a LB, OG or DT in free agency. You hit that right on the button, right down to what positions we should be looking at.

 

The reason I'm replying is that I've got a question for you...you said if Patrick Willis came in as a rookie starter, he'd be overwhelmed and would naturally make rookie mistakes as he learns the system, which makes sense. I wonder, if we drafted a first-day MLB and designated London Fletcher-Baker as our franchise player, and then let Fletch walk next offseason...could we expect the draftee to come in and have a reasonable chance to limit his mistakes in the tampa 2, due to his experience as a rookie sitting behind Fletch on the depth chart and soaking it all in?

 

Based on Pyrite's logic, a team could never draft a guy to play MLB because he would be a liability as a rookie but would never get any experence because he didn't play as a rookie.

 

Give it a rest.

[Bill from NYC]

Based on Pyrite's logic, a team could never draft a guy to play MLB because he would be a liability as a rookie but would never get any experence because he didn't play as a rookie.

 

Give it a rest.

 

The "guards for depth" thing was pretty rough as well. I would rather go with a promising rookie that a guard who already sucks.

[obie_wan]

Good post, and I find myself in agreement with much of it, other than Duke Preston being a viable starter at Guard. In my mind, he was the weak link, and I'd rather start Gandy than Preston.

 

I especially agree with not re-signing Nate Clements, and instead pursuing a LB, OG or DT in free agency. You hit that right on the button, right down to what positions we should be looking at.

 

The reason I'm replying is that I've got a question for you...you said if Patrick Willis came in as a rookie starter, he'd be overwhelmed and would naturally make rookie mistakes as he learns the system, which makes sense. I wonder, if we drafted a first-day MLB and designated London Fletcher-Baker as our franchise player, and then let Fletch walk next offseason...could we expect the draftee to come in and have a reasonable chance to limit his mistakes in the tampa 2, due to his experience as a rookie sitting behind Fletch on the depth chart and soaking it all in?

 

 

Also not sure why Pyrite is conviinced Crowell can master the MLB posittion which he has never played before.

 

Although it may take some time for Willis to learn the cover-2, at least he has played MLB for his entire career and has the athletic talent and size to make plays.

[YOOOOOO]

I'd rather go with Waters on the 2nd day then Willis in the first.....alot more value, although still risky even if its a 2nd day pick

 

Waters was a first round talent, that got !@#$ed this year by injury....I'd sign Kawika Mitchell to start at MLB then let Waters develope in a back up role, if he were to regain his form...We'd have a Vilma type playing MLB for years...

[OnTheRocks]

The "guards for depth" thing was pretty rough as well. I would rather go with a promising rookie that a guard who already sucks.

I would like to see the Bills draft a OG in the second or third round, and put him in an open competition with Gandy, Peterson and Villarial. (although I think Villarial will be cut).

 

And let them fight it out for the starting position. It might mean a rookie at LG, and moving Gandy to RG. It might mean Duke to LG and a rookie to RG, whatever it takes, there definately needs to be an upgrade however.

[LynchMob23]

Crowell's been looked at as the possible new Mike due to his prior play of the position as a versatile LB at UVA and being Fletcher's backup prior to TKO going down two years ago. After Spikes went down he replaced him and then stayed the OLB backup (til we cut Posey), but knows the MLB position well (both in our prior system and now in the Tampa 2).

 

I think that would be the best, as we've seen with Ellison if you put a rookie that's played in this before at SLB they can roam and get to the ball. At Mike that's a lot of responsibility, especially since our Mike and the SS will be calling plays.

[tennesseeboy]

good analysis. I'd franchise Fletcher though and put my money into building the front four. Okoye or Branch would be the first round pick for me, and I might even to for Justin Harrel if he makes it to round 3 (doubtful). I think there will be very good gaurd candidates there at 2 (Aaron Sears comes to mind). I worry about CB if Clements goes (like to keep him but I think there isgoing to OBSCENE money coming his way in free agency and we have to be keeping our heads about us.) I might look to free agency to get an "insurance" CB. I think our receivers are okay as is, but might take a flyer on Kelley Washington if available, and later in the draft look to that HUGE linebacker from Brown. It will be interesting to see how the combine goes.

 

All in all Pyrite gal, I think we're not far from being real contenders. My priorities would be to add strength to the trenches first and foremost and try to sign and keep the talent we have, although I can't see how we will be able to keep NC.

[pdh1]

The Bills should look to get an RB on the second day of the draft (we have too many other important needs to waste a first day pick on a player likely to sit most of the season). This may be tough but in a blue moon productive RBs can be found on the second day and finding a back-up capable of filling the Shaud Williams role and it is to be hoped at least providing additional motivation for WM by being a threat but really being capable of developing into a starter next year (or in two seasons if we franchise or keep WM) is more possible. I view this player less as someone who will contribut

 

Where did Lionel Gates end up?

I thought in preseason he looked the best of all of our RBs.

 

Ran the hardest, that was for sure.

[In space no one can hear]

Where did Lionel Gates end up?

I thought in preseason he looked the best of all of our RBs.

 

Ran the hardest, that was for sure.

 

 

see Anthony Gray.

[Astrobot]

WRs- Need= Medium High (1st or 2nd Round or FA) - Suggest Meachem via Tradedown for Saints' 2nd in Round 1

 

OG- Need=High (1st or 2nd Round)- Suggest Blalock or Beekman in Round 2

 

LB- Need=High (Franchise Fletcher or 1st or 2nd Round or FA) - Suggest Brandon Siler in Round 2 (Saints' Pick)

 

FB- Need=Medium-High (FA or 4th Round)-Suggest Brian Leonard in Round 3

 

TE's-Need=Medium (Mid Rounder)-Suggest Matt Spaeth, Minnesota, Round 4

 

RB- Need=Medium-Low (5th Pick or Lower)- Suggest Dwayne Wright From Fresno St. in Round 5

 

QB- Need=Low (6th or 7th Round or No Pick)- Suggest Jeff Rowe from Nevada in Round 6

 

DL- Need= Medium High (1st or 2nd Round or FA)- Suggest FA

 

CBs- Need=Medium High (1st or 2nd Round or FA) - Suggest FA

[nuklz2594]

Nice post. I do however do not agree that Willis is the answer after this up and coming season. Willis is the type of player that has just enough talent to tantalize everyone. He lacks heart. His IQ is somewhere between a beet and a cabbage. We need more players who exemplify the team first. I never wanted us to draft him in the first place. We should have drafted Larry Johnson. At the time we drafted Willis, he was a luxury pick. A luxury we could not afford at that time. I don't care what anyone says rbs are a dime a dozen--ask the Broncos. The game is won in the trenches on both sides of the ball.

[NY Nole]

My record player has somehow got stuck -- it keeps repeating MLB Buster Davis FSU -- I'm telling you he is London Fletcher's replacement and I do think he could come in and play MLB right away.

[ganesh]

If the Bills are high on Gandy being a solid LG, why haven't they re-signed him like a Wire.

[Bill from NYC]

If the Bills are high on Gandy being a solid LG, why haven't they re-signed him like a Wire.

 

Seriously G-Man, how could they be? What was it about his game that stood out, other than getting beaten down against the better DTs? I would much rather see a UFA (Steinbach of course ), or even a high draft pick who has upside.

 

The one who worries me is Kelsay. Many fans seem to under-rate him as far as I'm concerned. Any DE who can rush the qb is worth big bucks, and Kelsay is stepping right into his prime. I would truly hate to lose him.

[Pyrite Gal]

Good post, and I find myself in agreement with much of it, other than Duke Preston being a viable starter at Guard. In my mind, he was the weak link, and I'd rather start Gandy than Preston.

 

I especially agree with not re-signing Nate Clements, and instead pursuing a LB, OG or DT in free agency. You hit that right on the button, right down to what positions we should be looking at.

 

The reason I'm replying is that I've got a question for you...you said if Patrick Willis came in as a rookie starter, he'd be overwhelmed and would naturally make rookie mistakes as he learns the system, which makes sense. I wonder, if we drafted a first-day MLB and designated London Fletcher-Baker as our franchise player, and then let Fletch walk next offseason...could we expect the draftee to come in and have a reasonable chance to limit his mistakes in the tampa 2, due to his experience as a rookie sitting behind Fletch on the depth chart and soaking it all in?

 

 

I think the answer to your question is yes! I do think that Wllis would likely profit from doing the same thing that Crowell did which is to be F-B back-up for a year and be coached, practice and play the opposing D for the O starters and learn the position and be ready to start next year.

 

However, this is probably my own unreasonable expectations that we should be able to get a quality starter immediately from our 1st round choice. This certainly happens in real life as seen in the case of top 10 picks like Whitner and in later round first CBs taken like Clements, though it certainly is not always the case for 1st round choices.

 

Most fans seem to really over-value the draft, but i think that we should be able to and certainly hope for even if we do not expect it for certain that we get an immediate starting contribution from our #12 pick. Thus from what I see of Willis he has great potential to be the Bills MLB for years, my bias is still for us to pick someone who is an immediate starter on this team. I suspect we can do this with an OG choice, create great competition at DT with McCargo if we made this choice, and potentially if NC goes perhaps pick a CB who can start immediately.

 

Given the starters we have in place and the quality of the players who should be available at #12 (though it is still too early to pick a player for sure until we see the Combine results, particularly the reactions to personal meetings with the players) I do not think we can get a QB at $12 capable unseating JP, an RB at # 12 that makes sense for us in terms of unseating WM, a WR which makes sense for us in terms of unseating PP, a TE capable of unseating Royal, a DE capable of unseating Schobel or who makes sense for us unseating Denney or Kelsy, or in this case an MLB who makes sense for us to start at MLB in the version of the Cover 2 we run.

[Pyrite Gal]

Based on Pyrite's logic, a team could never draft a guy to play MLB because he would be a liability as a rookie but would never get any experence because he didn't play as a rookie.

 

Give it a rest.

 

My apologies for stating what I think is a fairly simple point so poorly that you seem to misnterpret the point I am making.

My logic DOES NOT claim you never draft a rookie to start at MLB because it cannot be done. I know of at least one team (I think it was Seattle but i am not sure) that actually drafted an MLB who started almost all their games last year and he equited himself well enough.

 

What my logic argues is that THE BILLS are specifically running a version of the Tampa 2 within which they require the MLB to both attack the run and tackle a lot (as though he were a DT when the MLB is filling a gap on the DL) or alternately on pass plays in our Tampa 2 style D, the MLB divides the deep cover responsibility with the two safeties to cover the middle of the field often running with a fleet footed WR running a post pattern.

 

Certainly an MLB who has shown outstanding tackling ability (as Willis has) and good coverage ability (which I think Willis has one on one against college talent, but he struggled with against the best college talent in the senior bowl and it is an unknown how he covers in an NFL zone coverage against NFL talents) can do this as a rookie.

 

I simply argue that Fletcher clearly benefited from seeing NFL plays run for about a decade so that he could diagnose as well as anyone whether the opposing team was likely to try a run play given the down distance and formation or try a run.

 

I simply argue that while Willis should not be completely overwhelmed and unable to perform at all as our starting MLB (at least I hope not though it is quite possible even for an eventual Pro Bowl quality player as we saw where Eric Moulds playing a much simpler position and being for years the best athlete on the Bills team was simply overmatched for two years) throwing him into this position where it is critical how he diagnoses plays is likely to be quite painful to watch.

 

My contention is that if I am an opposing OC, I simply am salivating at the opportunity to face the Bills who at times in 06 could be fooled or had even with a 10 year vet who is a tackling machine who led NFL LBs in INTs at the MLB position. If i was an opposing OC, i would feel like we failed if we did not get at least 1 TD or huge gain from fooling this rookie MLB into hesitating for at least one step in when I faked a run and instead sent a WR up the middle for a long pass,

 

I certainly feel we can start at rookie at MLB and by the end of the year he will be a vet. I just argue that he will become a vet in part because he makes a few critical misreads that get turned into big plays by the opponent.

 

I think we can do better in 2007 and am not willing to have yet another learning year to get future benefits from a MLB who is our starter for a long time. Do you disagree that starting Willis at MLB will not be something which opposing OCs will try to exploit? Is there something tangible you know that you can share with us about why Willis will be good enough right off the bat to not be exploited.

 

I am happy to give this logic a rest when folks provide some objective credible perspective that says this will not or even may not be a concern.

[Pyrite Gal]

good analysis. I'd franchise Fletcher though and put my money into building the front four. Okoye or Branch would be the first round pick for me, and I might even to for Justin Harrel if he makes it to round 3 (doubtful). I think there will be very good gaurd candidates there at 2 (Aaron Sears comes to mind). I worry about CB if Clements goes (like to keep him but I think there isgoing to OBSCENE money coming his way in free agency and we have to be keeping our heads about us.) I might look to free agency to get an "insurance" CB. I think our receivers are okay as is, but might take a flyer on Kelley Washington if available, and later in the draft look to that HUGE linebacker from Brown. It will be interesting to see how the combine goes.

 

All in all Pyrite gal, I think we're not far from being real contenders. My priorities would be to add strength to the trenches first and foremost and try to sign and keep the talent we have, although I can't see how we will be able to keep NC.

 

Agreed that I think we are not far away from being real contenders.

 

The de-emphasis which the way we employ the Cover 2 places on the strongest part of NC's game (he reads QBs and opposing teams well which in bend but do not break defenses allows him to jump routes or range all over the field as he did nicely in a game against Miami a few years back where he read Miami as not sending anyone into his zone, seem to yell to his colleagues to not to let anyone go coming into his area and then ranged across the field and picked off a pass to Winfield's man) should allow us to get a cheaper FA who can perform the press coverage in the short zone we need from a CB or possibly even allow Youbouty to take this job.

[Pyrite Gal]

WRs- Need= Medium High (1st or 2nd Round or FA) - Suggest Meachem via Tradedown for Saints' 2nd in Round 1

 

OG- Need=High (1st or 2nd Round)- Suggest Blalock or Beekman in Round 2

 

LB- Need=High (Franchise Fletcher or 1st or 2nd Round or FA) - Suggest Brandon Siler in Round 2 (Saints' Pick)

 

FB- Need=Medium-High (FA or 4th Round)-Suggest Brian Leonard in Round 3

 

TE's-Need=Medium (Mid Rounder)-Suggest Matt Spaeth, Minnesota, Round 4

 

RB- Need=Medium-Low (5th Pick or Lower)- Suggest Dwayne Wright From Fresno St. in Round 5

 

QB- Need=Low (6th or 7th Round or No Pick)- Suggest Jeff Rowe from Nevada in Round 6

 

DL- Need= Medium High (1st or 2nd Round or FA)- Suggest FA

 

CBs- Need=Medium High (1st or 2nd Round or FA) - Suggest FA

 

This looks like a reasonable ballpark to me. The Combine will tell us more whether in which cases we may fill this need in the draft or instead need to go FA.