Pyrite Gal Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 There are so many variables in terms of which players drop in the draft to #12, whether we can trade down from #12 and which player we would get, which team is willing to be a trade partner and for what, and the likelihood we will need at least 2 (if not 3 RBs who will get serious time next year (Thomas and FB Cieslak are the only backfield players we currently have that I think will be on the opening day roster) that I think all the stone cold lock picks of our next RB choice are simply guesses. Whomever is correct it will be more likely due to coincidence than any superior football knowledge because almost certainly someone has to be right in their guesses/estimate. However, though I do not feel it is all that worthwhile for me to join the guessing I feel a bit more certain in stating the following criteria which I feel will almost certainly describe our RB choices: I am curious what people think is likely gonna be true about RBs ans who and why they think particular players meet these definitions. Likely truisms: 1. The Bills braintrust will not pick a Willis McGahee type pain in the butt to replace a player they viewed as a pain in th butt. WM like others really defined potential. Like it or not, it took him fewer starts as a Bill than any other RB to rush for 2000 yards. He of course is no where near the achievements of complete RBs like Thurman or great episodic achievers like OJ, but his accomplishments and promise remain very good (hence him collecting big bucks in the marketplace) and are what they are. However, even though his teammates probably at worse rolled their eyes and sloughed off his idiotic comments and horrible attitude towards fathering as "thats just Willis" he was no fun for most fans to root for and for Ralph to own and away he went for not stunning but OK value but leaving a gaping hole in the roster (a hole he did not fill with his own production as he simply showed potential which means you have not done anything yet but we do not even have even potential right now as Thomas reasonably is nothing more than a good #2). College performance is gonna be important, but even the best the RBs we likely can pick (Lynch is likely Peterson is not but may drop to us) is not so great he is gonna produce more than a #16-20 1st round pick (a probable immediate starter but statistically only a little better than 50/50 chance he may even be good enough to be our starter next year). College performance will be important just to make sure a player is a possibility of contributing significantly his first year (down to around a 3rd round choice) but the key factor I think will be the interview with the Bills at the Combine, over the phone, and at individual or school try-outs. My sense is that if the Bills get even a whiff in the interviews that an RB may have the legend in his own mind tendencies which Willis M showed, they will run rather than walk the other way. Folks who are basing their love for Lynch (or for Peterson) on some impressive college highlights are not talking a lot about what I think will be the deciding factor in whether we take a player or not which is how the braintrust reacted to his character. Marv showed with the selection of Butler last year that we might still pick a guy who had a demonstrably low-class act if he accepts his guilt, is punished and independent folks speak up for him. However, I think that Willis's outlandish behavior and speech is going to put any RB choice we make on a short leash as the braintrust will not want to take on a pain in the butt after getting rid of a pain in the butt. 2. We are likely to have as many as 3 RBs on the opening day roster who are not on the roster right now. Right now we are committed to Anthony Thomas from the depth chart of HBs and FBs. Shaud Thomas may lose out in the competition because he is a vet but not so good he cannot be beaten out as our 3rd down HB. Jackson is journeyman whom Marv has mentioned but there is no guarantee he even makes the final cut. Shelton is on the depth chart at FB, but actually he is likely gone and TE Cieslak is a far more likely candidate at FB. The bottomline is that we are looking at not only picking up an FA (or two) but also we may well draft two RBs at the draft likely one the first day and another the second day. 3. Part of the reason we likely will load up at RB is the increasing use of RBBC (RBbycommittee) in the NFL. Few leagues seem to have as much imitation as the NFL. The Bills are in the forefront of this movement as Marv chose as his HC a Cover 2 guy who then chose a DC schooled in the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2. Given the Colts winning the SB last year running a Cover 2 (and like the Bills having a D which could be shredded at times by the run game) this likely will be the standard NFL D for a while. The Saints also did well running an offense which featured McCallister and even still used a premium choice to take Reggie Bush. With this tandem they moved from near worst to near first and we likely will see the Bills doing their version of the Dillon/Mulroney thing this year. The problem for us is that no one would mistake Anthony Thomas for being even the lesser player in these dual RB pairings and this likely means we are going to see this team drop some resources on RBs. Unfortunately, Chris Brown and Michael Turner appear to be about the best you can do in FA and even if we get them both are worse than the lesser back in the pairings mentioned and though draftees like Lynch or Peterson have potential, again this simply means they have not done anything yet. We will be overjoyed in retrospect if either of these players turned out to be as good of a pro as let's say a Larry Johnson. However, even Larry gained 100 and change his rookie year and a hair over 500 yards his second year and depending on the crapshoot known as the draft for the lead in our RBBC is simply a dangerous game. So come draft day look for us to pick at least 2 RBs to see us go with numbers rather than quality and see the guy we pick get significant time regardless of where they are picked and i think that this is quite likely to be the case.
Billsjunkie Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Shelton is not even on the team. He is a UFA. I know they show him on the depth chart but he is not on team as of right now.
Sketch Soland Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 There are so many variables in terms of which players drop in the draft to #12, whether we can trade down from #12 and which player we would get, which team is willing to be a trade partner and for what, and the likelihood we will need at least 2 (if not 3 RBs who will get serious time next year (Thomas and FB Cieslak are the only backfield players we currently have that I think will be on the opening day roster) that I think all the stone cold lock picks of our next RB choice are simply guesses. Whomever is correct it will be more likely due to coincidence than any superior football knowledge because almost certainly someone has to be right in their guesses/estimate. However, though I do not feel it is all that worthwhile for me to join the guessing I feel a bit more certain in stating the following criteria which I feel will almost certainly describe our RB choices: I am curious what people think is likely gonna be true about RBs ans who and why they think particular players meet these definitions. Likely truisms: 1. The Bills braintrust will not pick a Willis McGahee type pain in the butt to replace a player they viewed as a pain in th butt. WM like others really defined potential. Like it or not, it took him fewer starts as a Bill than any other RB to rush for 2000 yards. He of course is no where near the achievements of complete RBs like Thurman or great episodic achievers like OJ, but his accomplishments and promise remain very good (hence him collecting big bucks in the marketplace) and are what they are. However, even though his teammates probably at worse rolled their eyes and sloughed off his idiotic comments and horrible attitude towards fathering as "thats just Willis" he was no fun for most fans to root for and for Ralph to own and away he went for not stunning but OK value but leaving a gaping hole in the roster (a hole he did not fill with his own production as he simply showed potential which means you have not done anything yet but we do not even have even potential right now as Thomas reasonably is nothing more than a good #2). College performance is gonna be important, but even the best the RBs we likely can pick (Lynch is likely Peterson is not but may drop to us) is not so great he is gonna produce more than a #16-20 1st round pick (a probable immediate starter but statistically only a little better than 50/50 chance he may even be good enough to be our starter next year). College performance will be important just to make sure a player is a possibility of contributing significantly his first year (down to around a 3rd round choice) but the key factor I think will be the interview with the Bills at the Combine, over the phone, and at individual or school try-outs. My sense is that if the Bills get even a whiff in the interviews that an RB may have the legend in his own mind tendencies which Willis M showed, they will run rather than walk the other way. Folks who are basing their love for Lynch (or for Peterson) on some impressive college highlights are not talking a lot about what I think will be the deciding factor in whether we take a player or not which is how the braintrust reacted to his character. Marv showed with the selection of Butler last year that we might still pick a guy who had a demonstrably low-class act if he accepts his guilt, is punished and independent folks speak up for him. However, I think that Willis's outlandish behavior and speech is going to put any RB choice we make on a short leash as the braintrust will not want to take on a pain in the butt after getting rid of a pain in the butt. 2. We are likely to have as many as 3 RBs on the opening day roster who are not on the roster right now. Right now we are committed to Anthony Thomas from the depth chart of HBs and FBs. Shaud Thomas may lose out in the competition because he is a vet but not so good he cannot be beaten out as our 3rd down HB. Jackson is journeyman whom Marv has mentioned but there is no guarantee he even makes the final cut. Shelton is on the depth chart at FB, but actually he is likely gone and TE Cieslak is a far more likely candidate at FB. The bottomline is that we are looking at not only picking up an FA (or two) but also we may well draft two RBs at the draft likely one the first day and another the second day. 3. Part of the reason we likely will load up at RB is the increasing use of RBBC (RBbycommittee) in the NFL. Few leagues seem to have as much imitation as the NFL. The Bills are in the forefront of this movement as Marv chose as his HC a Cover 2 guy who then chose a DC schooled in the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2. Given the Colts winning the SB last year running a Cover 2 (and like the Bills having a D which could be shredded at times by the run game) this likely will be the standard NFL D for a while. The Saints also did well running an offense which featured McCallister and even still used a premium choice to take Reggie Bush. With this tandem they moved from near worst to near first and we likely will see the Bills doing their version of the Dillon/Mulroney thing this year. The problem for us is that no one would mistake Anthony Thomas for being even the lesser player in these dual RB pairings and this likely means we are going to see this team drop some resources on RBs. Unfortunately, Chris Brown and Michael Turner appear to be about the best you can do in FA and even if we get them both are worse than the lesser back in the pairings mentioned and though draftees like Lynch or Peterson have potential, again this simply means they have not done anything yet. We will be overjoyed in retrospect if either of these players turned out to be as good of a pro as let's say a Larry Johnson. However, even Larry gained 100 and change his rookie year and a hair over 500 yards his second year and depending on the crapshoot known as the draft for the lead in our RBBC is simply a dangerous game. So come draft day look for us to pick at least 2 RBs to see us go with numbers rather than quality and see the guy we pick get significant time regardless of where they are picked and i think that this is quite likely to be the case. It is virtually written in stone that the Bills are going RBBC this year for many of the reasons you suggest. The FA options are such that there is no proven 1 guy out there who can carry the whole load, and any rookie, whether 1st round or 7th round, is going to take time to learn the ropes and not be a 1 guy immediately upon entering the NFL if he ever develops into a 1 guy at all. Jones-Drew and Moroney obviously shared duties, among others. So did Addai. Also, a minor correction, Fred Jackson has 1 year of experience as of now so he hasn't qualified for "journeyman" status yet one way or the other
Buffan00 Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 "Pyrite"....you have ALOT of time on your hands huh????
JinWPB Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 What if there was a 29 year old healthy back out there with Hall of Fame ability both running and receiving we could get for "cheap". Who would probably take a contract based on productivity and good behavior (see roster bonus).If a trade was made make any picks we give up conditional. Before you say absolutely not , just think about. We know who, huh? wel-l-l-l ?
The Cincinnati Kid Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 We are not taking offense in round one unless we trade back into the round. Thats it. We are taking D. Marv always picks D first round because there is less chance that he turns out to be a bust. We are taking defense.
The Dean Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 What if there was a 29 year old healthy back out there with Hall of Fame ability both running and receiving we could get for "cheap". Who would probably take a contract based on productivity and good behavior (see roster bonus).If a trade was made make any picks we give up conditional.Before you say absolutely not , just think about. We know who, huh? wel-l-l-l ? I'll say to you what I said to jduncan last year when he was pimping the idea of TO to the Bills: IT AIN"T GONNA HAPPEN I'm not saying Ricky won't be good again for someone, I'm not saying he's a bad egg, all I'm saying is: He WON'T be a Bill. You know it, I know it, we all know it...let's move on,
Mike formerly from Florida Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 We are not taking offense in round one unless we trade back into the round. Thats it. We are taking D. Marv always picks D first round because there is less chance that he turns out to be a bust. We are taking defense. I've said the exact thing the other day....and i didn't need a long-winded thesis to make my point.
Sketch Soland Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 I'll say to you what I said to jduncan last year when he was pimping the idea of TO to the Bills: IT AIN"T GONNA HAPPEN I'm not saying Ricky won't be good again for someone, I'm not saying he's a bad egg, all I'm saying is: He WON'T be a Bill. You know it, I know it, we all know it...let's move on, Exactamundo. It's hard to imagine someone would even bring it up as a possibility. We will sooner sign Rosie O'Donnell to play 1-tech DT.
JinWPB Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 I'll say to you what I said to jduncan last year when he was pimping the idea of TO to the Bills: IT AIN"T GONNA HAPPEN I'm not saying Ricky won't be good again for someone, I'm not saying he's a bad egg, all I'm saying is: He WON'T be a Bill. You know it, I know it, we all know it...let's move on, True true all true , but wouldn't it be great to have him do to the Fins what he did to us. like a 300yd. game behind this line.
Sketch Soland Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 I've said the exact thing the other day....and i didn't need a long-winded thesis to make my point. You crack me up.
JinWPB Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Anybody in Buff. know what kind of feedback came from north of the border on Ricky. looking for an "honest" assessment.Did he cause any trouble in T town?
MattyT Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 True true all true , but wouldn't it be great to have him do to the Fins what he did to us. It's him doing to us what he did to the Fins that I'm worried about. They went from 10-6 in '03 to 4-12 in '04 and still haven't recovered.
The Dean Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 It's him doing to us what he did to the Fins that I'm worried about. They went from 10-6 in '03 to 4-12 in '04 and still haven't recovered. I freakin' LOVE Ricky Williams!
MattyT Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 I freakin' LOVE Ricky Williams! You're right! I typed that line it like it was a bad thing.
makbeer Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 Anybody in Buff. know what kind of feedback came from north of the border on Ricky. looking for an "honest" assessment.Did he cause any trouble in T town? He was actually a model citizen for the Argos. His production wasn't great, but the CFL doesn't really reward a grinding runner, it's all about being shifty. He broke his arm and could have easily packed it in for the year, but came back. By all accounts his teammates liked him, he spoke highly of the CFL and never disparaged anyone in the community or league. There was no talk of him playing with a 'holier' attitude because he was a NFL back etc. That said, there's no drug testing for weed in the CFL either.
Bills_Chick Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 very true. i can definitely see us picking up 2 RBs in the draft.
JinWPB Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 It's him doing to us what he did to the Fins that I'm worried about. They went from 10-6 in '03 to 4-12 in '04 and still haven't recovered. Yeah, kinda like he carried their whole team on his back in 03. Oh well , quess we get to look forward to Shaud's -2 on 1st and ten.
sarmanuscg07 Posted March 30, 2007 Posted March 30, 2007 There are so many variables in terms of which players drop in the draft to #12, whether we can trade down from #12 and which player we would get, which team is willing to be a trade partner and for what, and the likelihood we will need at least 2 (if not 3 RBs who will get serious time next year (Thomas and FB Cieslak are the only backfield players we currently have that I think will be on the opening day roster) that I think all the stone cold lock picks of our next RB choice are simply guesses. Whomever is correct it will be more likely due to coincidence than any superior football knowledge because almost certainly someone has to be right in their guesses/estimate. However, though I do not feel it is all that worthwhile for me to join the guessing I feel a bit more certain in stating the following criteria which I feel will almost certainly describe our RB choices: I am curious what people think is likely gonna be true about RBs ans who and why they think particular players meet these definitions. Likely truisms: 1. The Bills braintrust will not pick a Willis McGahee type pain in the butt to replace a player they viewed as a pain in th butt. WM like others really defined potential. Like it or not, it took him fewer starts as a Bill than any other RB to rush for 2000 yards. He of course is no where near the achievements of complete RBs like Thurman or great episodic achievers like OJ, but his accomplishments and promise remain very good (hence him collecting big bucks in the marketplace) and are what they are. However, even though his teammates probably at worse rolled their eyes and sloughed off his idiotic comments and horrible attitude towards fathering as "thats just Willis" he was no fun for most fans to root for and for Ralph to own and away he went for not stunning but OK value but leaving a gaping hole in the roster (a hole he did not fill with his own production as he simply showed potential which means you have not done anything yet but we do not even have even potential right now as Thomas reasonably is nothing more than a good #2). College performance is gonna be important, but even the best the RBs we likely can pick (Lynch is likely Peterson is not but may drop to us) is not so great he is gonna produce more than a #16-20 1st round pick (a probable immediate starter but statistically only a little better than 50/50 chance he may even be good enough to be our starter next year). College performance will be important just to make sure a player is a possibility of contributing significantly his first year (down to around a 3rd round choice) but the key factor I think will be the interview with the Bills at the Combine, over the phone, and at individual or school try-outs. My sense is that if the Bills get even a whiff in the interviews that an RB may have the legend in his own mind tendencies which Willis M showed, they will run rather than walk the other way. Folks who are basing their love for Lynch (or for Peterson) on some impressive college highlights are not talking a lot about what I think will be the deciding factor in whether we take a player or not which is how the braintrust reacted to his character. Marv showed with the selection of Butler last year that we might still pick a guy who had a demonstrably low-class act if he accepts his guilt, is punished and independent folks speak up for him. However, I think that Willis's outlandish behavior and speech is going to put any RB choice we make on a short leash as the braintrust will not want to take on a pain in the butt after getting rid of a pain in the butt. 2. We are likely to have as many as 3 RBs on the opening day roster who are not on the roster right now. Right now we are committed to Anthony Thomas from the depth chart of HBs and FBs. Shaud Thomas may lose out in the competition because he is a vet but not so good he cannot be beaten out as our 3rd down HB. Jackson is journeyman whom Marv has mentioned but there is no guarantee he even makes the final cut. Shelton is on the depth chart at FB, but actually he is likely gone and TE Cieslak is a far more likely candidate at FB. The bottomline is that we are looking at not only picking up an FA (or two) but also we may well draft two RBs at the draft likely one the first day and another the second day. 3. Part of the reason we likely will load up at RB is the increasing use of RBBC (RBbycommittee) in the NFL. Few leagues seem to have as much imitation as the NFL. The Bills are in the forefront of this movement as Marv chose as his HC a Cover 2 guy who then chose a DC schooled in the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2. Given the Colts winning the SB last year running a Cover 2 (and like the Bills having a D which could be shredded at times by the run game) this likely will be the standard NFL D for a while. The Saints also did well running an offense which featured McCallister and even still used a premium choice to take Reggie Bush. With this tandem they moved from near worst to near first and we likely will see the Bills doing their version of the Dillon/Mulroney thing this year. The problem for us is that no one would mistake Anthony Thomas for being even the lesser player in these dual RB pairings and this likely means we are going to see this team drop some resources on RBs. Unfortunately, Chris Brown and Michael Turner appear to be about the best you can do in FA and even if we get them both are worse than the lesser back in the pairings mentioned and though draftees like Lynch or Peterson have potential, again this simply means they have not done anything yet. We will be overjoyed in retrospect if either of these players turned out to be as good of a pro as let's say a Larry Johnson. However, even Larry gained 100 and change his rookie year and a hair over 500 yards his second year and depending on the crapshoot known as the draft for the lead in our RBBC is simply a dangerous game. So come draft day look for us to pick at least 2 RBs to see us go with numbers rather than quality and see the guy we pick get significant time regardless of where they are picked and i think that this is quite likely to be the case. you must not work weekdays
Recommended Posts