Coach Tuesday Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 We are not getting Suggs. Anyone want to wager? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Suggs plays in an enirely different defense. WHy is this so hard to understand. Because he routinely plays the DE position when they run a 4-3, or 3-3 on third down situations. Didnt you see him get those sacks vrs the Steelers, and the one where he injured himself the week before, he was lined up at DE.... why is that so hard to understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 We are not getting Suggs. Anyone want to wager? I agree that we won't sign him either, but I wish we did!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I can't wait for FA. Then we can know where we're going with this pick. I'd love the Bills to sign someone like Birk or Brown to cover the center need, then make Suggs a big offer and bring him in. Then we can go DT and TE, 1 and 2. Why do you want us to go DT with #11? We need a S, LB, or DE more than we need a DT...not to mention the pressing need at TE and O Line...I will be ticked if we go DT #11. Our interior line was playing much better with Schobel in there as we at least had a threat of a pass rush. Once he was gone, they just keyed on Stroud and clogged the middle. With a DE they must account for and more pressure from our LB's, our interior line would be top 10 in NFL as they were in the first half of the year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Why do you want us to go DT with #11? We need a S, LB, or DE more than we need a DT...not to mention the pressing need at TE and O Line...I will be ticked if we go DT #11. Our interior line was playing much better with Schobel in there as we at least had a threat of a pass rush. Once he was gone, they just keyed on Stroud and clogged the middle. With a DE they must account for and more pressure from our LB's, our interior line would be top 10 in NFL as they were in the first half of the year... As your scouts go out and identify DT's that look like they can add, it's pretty hard not to pull the trigger if one you give your top rating to falls in your lap in the 1st round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PushthePile Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Why do you want us to go DT with #11? We need a S, LB, or DE more than we need a DT...not to mention the pressing need at TE and O Line...I will be ticked if we go DT #11. Our interior line was playing much better with Schobel in there as we at least had a threat of a pass rush. Once he was gone, they just keyed on Stroud and clogged the middle. With a DE they must account for and more pressure from our LB's, our interior line would be top 10 in NFL as they were in the first half of the year... I don't think we are good enough to stray from the "take the best player available" approach. Aside from running back and corner we can pretty much go anywhere with our pick and hopefully get better. It's been said over and over that both lines are where we begin and I agree. Fortunately for us it seems to be a nice crop of lineman at the top and if Raji is the best to fall to us we should certainly take him. As far as DT being a strength on this team I have to disagree. I wish your memory of the middle being clogged was reality because I recall nothing but lanes and gaps. On the flipside if one of those top tier o lineman falls to us and we have them graded as the highest we should take them. This team lacks true strength anywhere, so lets get great somwhere and create an identity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 As your scouts go out and identify DT's that look like they can add, it's pretty hard not to pull the trigger if one you give your top rating to falls in your lap in the 1st round. A DT that can clog the middle will instantly make the DEs and LBs better. Why reach at 11 when you have a top 15 talent player in a position you can use? Right now there is no reason to take a TE at 11 because the talent isn't there and there is a good chance the DEs we want won't be there either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotPocket Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I really would just prefer to trade down. I'd definitely consider taking a teams late 1st round and 2nd round picks. This draft doesn't seem to be stacked with talent, alot of "probably good" players. So why not stockpile the chances. Or instead trade up and get a can't miss top pick. Well, that's a dream they won't pay for, just like signing a big FA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted January 22, 2009 Author Share Posted January 22, 2009 Why do you want us to go DT with #11? We need a S, LB, or DE more than we need a DT...not to mention the pressing need at TE and O Line...I will be ticked if we go DT #11. Our interior line was playing much better with Schobel in there as we at least had a threat of a pass rush. Once he was gone, they just keyed on Stroud and clogged the middle. With a DE they must account for and more pressure from our LB's, our interior line would be top 10 in NFL as they were in the first half of the year... I believe games are won/lost in the trenches. I believe O-Lineman and D-Lineman are the most important guys on your team. A good DT next to Stroud makes our team nearly impossible to run on, look what happened in Minny when they landed Fat Pat and put him next to Kevin Williams. Best run D in the league. As for the Schobel thing, you're just speculating, he was exactly a world-beater before he went down and he's getting up in years. Kelsay just plain sucks. I don't like the value in the TEs, none are worth going above pick 20. A good one can be had in round two, that also happens to be the consensus around here. I said we should go DT if we sign a C and a DE like Suggs in FA. Please read the full post before replying. Thank you. I believe in drafting the best player available, not reaching for a need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Why do you want us to go DT with #11? We need a S, LB, or DE more than we need a DT...not to mention the pressing need at TE and O Line...I will be ticked if we go DT #11. Our interior line was playing much better with Schobel in there as we at least had a threat of a pass rush. Once he was gone, they just keyed on Stroud and clogged the middle. With a DE they must account for and more pressure from our LB's, our interior line would be top 10 in NFL as they were in the first half of the year... The Bills have been one of the worst run defending teams in the league for the last four seasons. They allow almost 125 rushing yards per game, 4.3 yards per carry and gave up 18 rushing TDs this past season. That was their best effort since 2004...and it sucks. Not only that, but they're paper thin at the position. If (when?) McCargo receives his walking papers in a few weeks, the Bills will be left with only 3 DTs on the roster. One of those, Marcus Stroud, will be 31 this upcoming season and has a recent history of nagging injuries. Given this, its all but certain that the Bills are going to add a DT fairly high, anyway. Given the problems they've had against the run and the need of another quality DT prospect, it seems to me that a strong case can be made for adding Raji at 11 if the Bills believe that he's worthy of that spot. Myself, I can't see Raji's potential addition to this lineup as anything but a positive for the Bills defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 The Bills have been one of the worst run defending teams in the league for the last four seasons. They allow almost 125 rushing yards per game, 4.3 yards per carry and gave up 18 rushing TDs this past season. That was their best effort since 2004...and it sucks. Not only that, but they're paper thin at the position. If (when?) McCargo receives his walking papers in a few weeks, the Bills will be left with only 3 DTs on the roster. One of those, Marcus Stroud, will be 31 this upcoming season and has a recent history of nagging injuries. Given this, its all but certain that the Bills are going to add a DT fairly high, anyway. Given the problems they've had against the run and the need of another quality DT prospect, it seems to me that a strong case can be made for adding Raji at 11 if the Bills believe that he's worthy of that spot. Myself, I can't see Raji's potential addition to this lineup as anything but a positive for the Bills defense. very valid points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 The Bills have been one of the worst run defending teams in the league for the last four seasons. They allow almost 125 rushing yards per game, 4.3 yards per carry and gave up 18 rushing TDs this past season. That was their best effort since 2004...and it sucks. Not only that, but they're paper thin at the position. If (when?) McCargo receives his walking papers in a few weeks, the Bills will be left with only 3 DTs on the roster. One of those, Marcus Stroud, will be 31 this upcoming season and has a recent history of nagging injuries. Given this, its all but certain that the Bills are going to add a DT fairly high, anyway. Given the problems they've had against the run and the need of another quality DT prospect, it seems to me that a strong case can be made for adding Raji at 11 if the Bills believe that he's worthy of that spot. Myself, I can't see Raji's potential addition to this lineup as anything but a positive for the Bills defense. Very good points and certainly can't argue a pick of a big guy like Raji. But all the reports on Pettigrew are that he is the most complete TE to come out in years. A good TE is a QB's best friend (especially a young one). This will help our run game (Royal was a good blocker) big time and give us a legimate red zone threat for the first time in years. Fine and Schoman would be excellent backups and could allow us to us more 2 TE sets to use our top 5 rb trio. But either way, i won't hate either pick. We can't screw up this pick, can we??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Very good points and certainly can't argue a pick of a big guy like Raji. But all the reports on Pettigrew are that he is the most complete TE to come out in years. A good TE is a QB's best friend (especially a young one). This will help our run game (Royal was a good blocker) big time and give us a legimate red zone threat for the first time in years. Fine and Schoman would be excellent backups and could allow us to us more 2 TE sets to use our top 5 rb trio. But either way, i won't hate either pick. We can't screw up this pick, can we??? I'm not as sold on the possibility of selecting Pettigrew. I'm not against selecting a TE high as some are, but if they do it, I believe that player should be capable of stretching the field from that position and I'm just not sure that Pettigrew is capable of being that type of player. Ideally, I'd put Pettigrew more in the late 1st/early 2nd area. I'm not really going to be upset if they select him, mind you...heck, I think a quality receiving TE has been a huge need for a number of years, but I'm a little apprehensive about it. Purely from a receiving standpoint, I think they'd do just as well with Chase Coffman in R2, and while I think that's a bit of a reach for Coffman as an all-around player at that position, I'd rather reach a little in R2 than in R1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I'm not as sold on the possibility of selecting Pettigrew. I'm not against selecting a TE high as some are, but if they do it, I believe that player should be capable of stretching the field from that position and I'm just not sure that Pettigrew is capable of being that type of player. Ideally, I'd put Pettigrew more in the late 1st/early 2nd area. I'm not really going to be upset if they select him, mind you...heck, I think a quality receiving TE has been a huge need for a number of years, but I'm a little apprehensive about it. Purely from a receiving standpoint, I think they'd do just as well with Chase Coffman in R2, and while I think that's a bit of a reach for Coffman as an all-around player at that position, I'd rather reach a little in R2 than in R1. can't disagree with this logic at all. Your first name isn't Russ by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haven Moses Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I would have a hard time passing on Percy Harvin, especially for a TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bufcomments Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 The fact that the Bills went after Wake strongly tells me they are targeting Pass rushers either in the draft or the Free agent market. I would not be surprised at all if the Bills went after Suggs, they have enough room under the cap and if they did you best believe that Kelsey is gone They know need pass rushers because Kelsey is below average and Schobels best days are behind him plus his is coming off a foot injury and they need some insurance just in case this is a nagging injury and it might be. although they need a TE badly because I believe that Royal is toast they can pick up one in round 2 or 3 I wonder what Kiper is smoking these days , or he doesnt know want the teams real needs are anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 The Bills have been one of the worst run defending teams in the league for the last four seasons. They allow almost 125 rushing yards per game, 4.3 yards per carry and gave up 18 rushing TDs this past season. That was their best effort since 2004...and it sucks. Not only that, but they're paper thin at the position. If (when?) McCargo receives his walking papers in a few weeks, the Bills will be left with only 3 DTs on the roster. One of those, Marcus Stroud, will be 31 this upcoming season and has a recent history of nagging injuries. Given this, its all but certain that the Bills are going to add a DT fairly high, anyway. Given the problems they've had against the run and the need of another quality DT prospect, it seems to me that a strong case can be made for adding Raji at 11 if the Bills believe that he's worthy of that spot. Myself, I can't see Raji's potential addition to this lineup as anything but a positive for the Bills defense. I cannot believe how poorly the Bills are in the front 7, and it shows in the run game almost weekly. They have 3 DT's on the roster, one of whom will be 31 next season, while the other two are depth types. At DE, 3 guys are or will be 30+ in 09. Buffalo has 2 NFL caliber LB's in Posluszny and Mitchell, while the rest is depth or fringe NFLers. As bad as the front 7 is, their offense isn't special either. But if Raji can play well in the Senior Bowl, perform in the combine and workouts, the Bills may need to take a long hard look at a DT. At this early point Raji seems to be a strong presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUFFALOTONE Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Your the one who doesn't understand. Suggs was drafted out of College as a DE. He is more naturally suited to be a 4-3 DE. He is not that good in pass coverage. Dont compare college to the pros. he has been in the same system for 5 years now. Its not easy to go from a D thats engrained in your head to the Cover 2. Totally different responsibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Dont compare college to the pros. he has been in the same system for 5 years now. Its not easy to go from a D thats engrained in your head to the Cover 2. Totally different responsibilities. I will compare the two because that is his natural position. When he made the "switch" from 4-3 to 3-4 it was a new position for him, but he made the transition a smooth one. It won't be that difficult for him to transition back to it. Not to mention he basically plays in a DE down stance alignment more than half the time anyway. So it's the same thing. Did you not happen to catch the game against the steelers? His two biggest plays in the game in were as a down lineman (2 sacks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 The Bills have been one of the worst run defending teams in the league for the last four seasons. They allow almost 125 rushing yards per game, 4.3 yards per carry and gave up 18 rushing TDs this past season. That was their best effort since 2004...and it sucks. Not only that, but they're paper thin at the position. If (when?) McCargo receives his walking papers in a few weeks, the Bills will be left with only 3 DTs on the roster. One of those, Marcus Stroud, will be 31 this upcoming season and has a recent history of nagging injuries. Given this, its all but certain that the Bills are going to add a DT fairly high, anyway. Given the problems they've had against the run and the need of another quality DT prospect, it seems to me that a strong case can be made for adding Raji at 11 if the Bills believe that he's worthy of that spot. Myself, I can't see Raji's potential addition to this lineup as anything but a positive for the Bills defense. Valid points, and I agree the lines on both side of the ball are where a team is built from. I just feel we have more pressing needs and that if we shore those up, our interior line would be pretty good with the personnel we have. They were pretty good before we lost the threat of a pass rush when Schobel went down which allowed teams to focus up front on Stroud. And if I am not mistaken, we didnt allow a 100 yard rusher until Schobel went down and were near the top of the league in run defense... I wouldnt be opposed to a DT, I just think we are good enough inside to focus on LB, DE, TE, or OL before DT...there will likely be top players at all those positions available at #11, so whatever we dont fill in FA should be addressed first. If we didnt have so many holes I would see the push for DT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts