If we take a CB at #11

[Simon]

So we draft players to specifically fit our defensive system.

Then in a year or two the staff is predictably fired again and we change defensive systems.

Then we dump the guys we drafted so we can draft new guys to fit the new defensive system.

Here's a thought: draft the best players on the board so we can play whatever damned system we want so we don't have to experience more massive turnover and rebuilding every time we frequently recycle coaches.

[Pyrite Gal]

So we draft players to specifically fit our defensive system.

Then in a year or two the staff is predictably fired again and we change defensive systems.

Then we dump the guys we drafted so we can draft new guys to fit the new defensive system.

Here's a thought: draft the best players on the board so we can play whatever damned system we want so we don't have to experience more massive turnover and rebuilding every time we frequently recycle coaches.

The situation you state is one of the bad effects that has clearly happened to the Bills with the debacles of life under GW and MM.

 

This is an effect which should be avoided if one wants to win.

 

However, we should be aware of what is a cause and what is an effect. The cause of the Bills coaching debacles under GW and MM was rooted in TD making a bad choice in hiring GW (who was a great DC in TN but proved to have no offensive feel and a bunch of insecurity in this area). MM turned out to have a better feel for HC work and picked an OC who was initially effective and had a DC forced upon him who was also initially effective. However, the cause of MM's coaching failure was TD's weird activities which in the end seemed more motivated by having an HC he hired never run him out of town again and MM not being able to HC his way out of a paper bag in this dysfunctional situation while Ralph was willing to tolerate a dysfunctional set-up rather than eat MM's remaining contract.

 

In the end it is my sense that the effect of having players who did not fit GW's Noffense under Sheppard and Gilbride and the offensive abortion we ended up with under TC was if we were gonna revolve the coaching door, the HCs hired needed to be good enough and secure enough to strike a balance between shoveling players who did not fit their preferred style out the door but instead built an offense which put the players we wanted to keep in a better position to win.

 

I think you can both fire an HC if you have to and hire a new HC who can both acquire the players he wants but also keeps guys it makes little sense to cut and build an offense (or defense)which fits the talents of the players we must keep.

 

I agree that if a very good player is available to you at your pick you take them even if there is no need perceived there. However, if DRC were an elite player (which I define as being a player good enough to merit a top 10 oick) then pick him when he slips to 11. However, though DRC is likely the best CB in this draft, I do not see anyone arguing he is such a great player we MUST trade up into the top 10 to insure we get this elite player.

 

Likely DRC will be there when we pick at #11 not because he is a great player who will slip to us, but because he is a good player who is available we should instead take a good player at a position of need for us, or more likely trade down because the best players in this draft for filling our needs at WR and TE likely will be available later.

[Steely Dan]

I almost don't want them to take a corner, not because I don't think we need one, but because I don't want to put up with the year's worth of bitching on this board.

 

Anyway, if we do take a corner at 11, all of you who will cry about it need to realize that the coaches and front office know what our scheme calls for, and what they plan to do on defense, way better than any of us armchair quarterbacks. So don't tell us (Pyrite Gal) that its a waste if we do take a corner "because our system doesn't need good corners." That's all I'm going to say... they know what we need for the system they design and run, so have faith, and keep the bitching to a minimum.

 

I agree, way too many Monday morning quarterbacks and too many people who believe they know better than the front office. That used to be the case, when Donahoe was here, but not now.

 

 

 

You do know that Bill in NYC complains more about corners than anyone don't you?

 

Of course you do, but it is soooooooooo much easier to pick on a girl. Real nice.

 

 

Hey girls have no business in football, auto racing, basketball or math class!

 

 

Just kidding. BTW, why was Helen Keller a bad driver? She was a woman.

 

 

Funny, because i thought the bills brought in 3 players along the defensive front 7 already this offseason. But those move obviously dont matter, because spending a 1st round pick is the only way to improve.

 

 

As far as CB goes I don't see anyone worthy of the 11th pick. In fact I don't see many players worthy of the 11th pick. All of the players expected to be there aren't worth it. If they can't trade down then IMO Limas Sweed is the best pick there. A CB of much greater value can be found in round 2 or round three.

[Búfalo Blanco]

I almost don't want them to take a corner, not because I don't think we need one, but because I don't want to put up with the year's worth of bitching on this board.

 

Anyway, if we do take a corner at 11, all of you who will cry about it need to realize that the coaches and front office know what our scheme calls for, and what they plan to do on defense, way better than any of us armchair quarterbacks. So don't tell us (Pyrite Gal) that its a waste if we do take a corner "because our system doesn't need good corners." That's all I'm going to say... they know what we need for the system they design and run, so have faith, and keep the bitching to a minimum.

 

Is this what you got your panties in a wad over?

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1009594

 

 

 

I disagree with Pyrite Gal because he/she

Are you calling Pyrite Gal a hermaphrodite?

[tennesseeboy]

I almost don't want them to take a corner, not because I don't think we need one, but because I don't want to put up with the year's worth of bitching on this board.

 

Anyway, if we do take a corner at 11, all of you who will cry about it need to realize that the coaches and front office know what our scheme calls for, and what they plan to do on defense, way better than any of us armchair quarterbacks. So don't tell us (Pyrite Gal) that its a waste if we do take a corner "because our system doesn't need good corners." That's all I'm going to say... they know what we need for the system they design and run, so have faith, and keep the bitching to a minimum.

Corner seems a bizarre choice given our needs in strengthening the offensive pass game either (or both?) through drafting WR TE or possibly strengthening the O-line. CB? we get CB's and marginally strengthen a mediocre to good defense while continuing with an anemic offense until our defensive players take off in free agency and we are back where we started. (Winfield et. al. redux?).

 

I say the future is now. Strengthen the team where it is weakest and go for the playoffs this year. Cornerback just isn't cutting it.

[Búfalo Blanco]

What?!? You don't like seeing those 1500 word expose's on the nuiances of the the Cover 2 defense and why its retarded to have capable cornerbacks playing in it?

 

Hey... but you must admit her dissertations on scheme is juicy material....

[Mike formerly from Florida]

I almost don't want them to take a corner, not because I don't think we need one, but because I don't want to put up with the year's worth of bitching on this board.

 

Anyway, if we do take a corner at 11, all of you who will cry about it need to realize that the coaches and front office know what our scheme calls for, and what they plan to do on defense, way better than any of us armchair quarterbacks. So don't tell us (Pyrite Gal) that its a waste if we do take a corner "because our system doesn't need good corners." That's all I'm going to say... they know what we need for the system they design and run, so have faith, and keep the bitching to a minimum.

 

OK, I'll say it...taking a corner is a waste, period. I rather give away picks and draft Gholsten who will immediately make an impact. That's what the draft is for--making an impact...not filling this mythological need that our corners aren't good enough. If Youbody improves and/or Will James plays more like Will Peterson than the corner position will be a BIG wasted pick at #1.

[Pyrite Gal]

OK, I'll say it...taking a corner is a waste, period. I rather give away picks and draft Gholsten who will immediately make an impact. That's what the draft is for--making an impact...not filling this mythological need that our corners aren't good enough. If Youbody improves and/or Will James plays more like Will Peterson than the corner position will be a BIG wasted pick at #1.

I know that the web tends toward extreme views, but while I fully agree that taking a CB in the first would be a big disappointment (particularly for those of us who believe the future is now) its hard for me to see this investment made in the crapshoot we call the draft as being a wasted pick.

 

I will see it as a waste if we pass on a player who seems good enough right now to make an immediate difference, but as even at the lofty #11 pick I do not see an immediate impact players slipping that far as being an alternative choice making the "kissing cousin" choice of the best CB a total waste.

[Lori]

So we draft players to specifically fit our defensive system.

Then in a year or two the staff is predictably fired again and we change defensive systems.

Then we dump the guys we drafted so we can draft new guys to fit the new defensive system.

Here's a thought: draft the best players on the board so we can play whatever damned system we want so we don't have to experience more massive turnover and rebuilding every time we frequently recycle coaches.

Quoted for truth...

[Orton's Arm]

I'm with you on that BeastMode54. I'd even put CB off til the 3rd round or even next year. There will be a veteran available somewhere before the season starts if we need to add one more guy. Add a DL and fix the O in this draft.

I came across an interesting datum: "Belichick has NEVER used anything higher than a third-round pick on a cornerback." Other than his three Super Bowl rings, Belichick doesn't have much to show for his strategy of taking linemen early, and cornerbacks late.

[Lori]

I came across an interesting datum: "Belichick has NEVER used anything higher than a third-round pick on a cornerback." Other than his three Super Bowl rings, Belichick doesn't have much to show for his strategy of taking linemen early, and cornerbacks late.

They must have missed Antonio Langham, then? Browns went S, RB, C, CB, WR, LB with Belichick's six #1s (two in 1994).

 

P.S.: Never say NEVER...

[BillsVet]

I like Pyrite Gal, one of the only posters on this board who puts thought and effort into their posts.

 

The reason why I said Pyrite Gal and not Bill, is because, while both don't advocate picking a corner high, they have a difference in their reasoning. Bill feels that drafting positions such as a DB, high, is not the way to go, and feels that top picks should be used on front seven picks, or lineman on either side of the ball. Pyrite Gal talks more knowledge of our defensive scheme when talking about why we shouldn't pick a corner. I disagree with Pyrite Gal because he/she discusses our system, what we play and when we play it, which IMO is completely wrong.

 

I wasn't picking on anyone, just wanted to post an idea I though Pyrite Gal should see, and I'm sorry if it seemed like I was calling someone out, I didn't intend for a bashing.

 

Why do people reason it's not as important to select a CB in the first? When your DL and OL aren't strong, that's when. Buffalo drafted a DB with 3 of their first 4 picks two years ago, despite having a DT pairing headlined by a guy who couldn't start in Indianapolis (Tripplett) nothing else. The OL in 2006? Peters, Villarrial, Fowler, Reyes, and Gandy. (not to mention Duke Preston!) We later found out the interior DL, along with the entire OL minus Peters, was just plain bad. Now that Buffalo has improved (on paper wrt the DL) at the LOS, I can see them going to the periphery of the field. It just made no sense in 2006, and it never will, especially considering it was a top 10 pick.

 

It's why this year, a host of good lineman (J. Long, C. Long, Gholston, Dorsey, Ellis, Clady, Albert, C. Williams, Otah, Cherilus, Harvey) will go in the top 30.

 

Not bashing you, but it seems like explaining the theory of big men first on this board is like trying to teach oneself Sanskrit.

[Orton's Arm]

They must have missed Antonio Langham, then? Browns went S, RB, C, CB, WR, LB with Belichick's six #1s (two in 1994).

 

P.S.: Never say NEVER...

Belichick has said that he learned from his mistakes in Cleveland; causing him to do things differently in New England.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

It seems foolish to me to draft a cornerback when you have one of the NFL's worst pass rushes. No secondary can make up for a lackluster pass rush. On the other hand, many a defensive line have been known to cover for less than ideal secondary personnel.