Beerball Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 From KC Joyner's chat yesterday: Eric (Long Island, NY): KC my friend thinks Mike Jenkins the CB from South Florida is a future star. If he is there at 11 do you think the Bills should take him over any of the wr's? KC Joyner: Jenkins is that good but with the way the Buffalo secondary played last year (which is to say pretty well), they might be better suited to take a WR. Having said that, guys like Jenkins don't come along every day and there aren't any dominant WRs in this year's draft, so they'd have to go with Jenkins. Bills might be better suited to take a WR, but they'd have to go with Jenkins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 From KC Joyner's chat yesterday: Bills might be better suited to take a WR, but they'd have to go with Jenkins. pretty simple the WRs are inferior talents. Jenkins is a better playmaker than any WR in the first round. So even though the Bills may need a WR, they should take the better talent at #11. IMO - that impact player would be Harvery, Rivers or Albert - more than a CB or WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 Yeah, 29th in pass defense is "playing real well." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 KC rarely makes much sense, and his attempts at statistical analysis are laughable, but I think he's on to something here, although he made it clear as mud. The simple fact is our secondary played well in spurts, mostly due to injury at other positions. In fact they were doing a decent job even at the Pats home game. The problem there was that, as I was watching it form the end zone and timing each play, they were expected to cover guys for 5-7 seconds, or else they'd make the play. Every time that they were able to stick with their guys for 5-7 seconds we stopped em. Mostly they ran crossing patterns which took 5 seconds to develop and once they did, bam, completion. But that's the problem, they should only have to realistically cover people for 5 seconds max, not 7. There simply was no pass rush to speak of. We get a decent pass rush going, and the more I think about it, the more I think we might just be surprised with how well McGee, Greer and Youboty can play. But who knows? If a guy like McKelvin is there at 11, he's the best available, and I have no problem taking him. If nothing else than to get his return game and give McGee a rest/less chance of injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike formerly from Florida Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 Yeah, 29th in pass defense is "playing real well." You can fault the pass-rush and the linebackers for their role in covering the middle of the field. The cornerbacks played well. We don't need a stinkin' cornerback until the middle rounds. This is the year Youboty steps up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 You can fault the pass-rush and the linebackers for their role in covering the middle of the field. The cornerbacks played well. We don't need a stinkin' cornerback until the middle rounds. This is the year Youboty steps up. It didn't help that the defense was on the field the entire game, either. Part of that was their fault, but part of that was also the fact that the offense probably led the league in 3 and outs and couldn't sustain drives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts