To me, this draft should be logical for Buffalo

[patmoran2006]

To me, the solution to this draft being a good one is very simple.
I find it difficult for ANYBODY to possibly question what player in this draft we need the most. That guy is Patrick Willis.

I'd argue that if Buffalo had the sixth pick in the draft, we'd still take Willis over some of the bigger names projected ahead of him. I got nothing against Lynch; but I no longer think he's a good value pick at 12. Carriker or Jamaal Anderson coulda been great picks at DE, but ole' Marvin instead decided to overpay a mediocre player like Kelsay, killing a shot at DE this year.

So the pick has to be Willis, and obviously SF is a threat to take him before us.

The solution: Trade up 2 spots with Houston. Houston is almost certainly going either OL (Brown) or DT (Okoye, Branch). They can get one of those guys at 12. If AP is on the board at 10, they can still get him at 12 as SF wouldn't draft him.

The draft chart value between 10-12 is only 100 points. Buffalo needs to give up their second third rounder (92nd-132 points). Houston needs all the draft picks they can get. This shouldn't even be difficult to pull off. I think giving up one of your 2 thirds is an easy choice to make when the payoff is making sure you land Willis and not a project at LB.


That would leave RB as the next biggest hole. I'd definitely do a 2nd this year. 3rd next year for Turner. IF SD wants more than that then screw them; you draft the best RB in the second round (Probably Pittman or Irons)... If by some chance Marshawn Lynch happens to slip towards the end of Round one (which could happen if GB passes) then maybe you do the exact same trade as last year (2nd and 3rd) and you move up to get him.

Getting Willis is an absolute necessity. He could quickly become the leader of the defense. Take care of that first. Then between Turner or Lynch you may have improved this football team greatly.

the absolute WORST case scenario is doing nothing; drafting Pos because Willis is gone; not landing Turner or Lynch and ending up with another RB after. to me, that's disastrous and we'll be discussing a top 8 pick again next year.

[OpIv37]

if Marv pulled that off I'd feel much better about this upcoming season.

[Meathead]

whatchu talkin bout pat

holy crap i agree with you, about drafting willis anyway

for the love of god somebody shoot me lol

[kgun12]

whatchu talkin bout pat

holy crap i agree with you, about drafting willis anyway

for the love of god somebody shoot me lol

:machgun:

[Goobylal]

I think Patrick Willis is the no-brainer pick, assuming Adrian Peterson is gone. I'm not a big Marshawn Lynch fan.

What I could see the Bills doing is taking Michael Bush with their 2nd-3rd round pick, assuming SD's trade demands for Turner remain too high.

[venis2k1]

lets see how the cards start to fall before laying ours down.

[patmoran2006]

I think Patrick Willis is the no-brainer pick, assuming Adrian Peterson is gone. I'm not a big Marshawn Lynch fan.

What I could see the Bills doing is taking Michael Bush with their 2nd-3rd round pick, assuming SD's trade demands for Turner remain too high.
im starting to think that Patrick Willis is a no brainer pick, even if AP isnt gone..

Dont get me wrong, I love me some AP... And if he's there and Willis is gone I'd kill someone if we didnt take him..

But WIllis is too important to the defense; and there are other RB's who can do the job (Turner being the main one).. I dont have any confidence in ANY of the other LB's in the draft to be an impact player like Willis and I"ll be sick to my stomach if we draft one at 12 becuase he's the "next best LB on the board"

[HHURRICANE]

Pat is 100% correct. Give them one of our 3rds and guarantee Willis in a Bills uni. I already posted that you have to take Willis even if Peterson is sitting there. Willis is as close to a sure bet for a position that we absolutely have to fill!!!

Why take a chance of San Fran ****ing up our draft!!

[YardRat]

I'm staying at twelve and keeping my extra third, thank you very much.

If Willis is there, great. If he isn't, I'll take Lynch and a LB in the second round and still be able to go CB and WR in the third.

[HAMMER]

Flip Flop Flippity Flop

[Michael82]

Willis is SUCH a no-brainer pick that there is no way it will happen. :sigh:

[acehole]

Disagree...stay put or trade down even....we have multiple needs BPA that fills a need should do it. That 2nd rounder is so very important becuase a guy allways fall there that should have gone in the first....like POS.....

if you really think about it crowell is our MLB we really have to replace spikes...at OLB...

lot available ......



To me, the solution to this draft being a good one is very simple.
I find it difficult for ANYBODY to possibly question what player in this draft we need the most. That guy is Patrick Willis.

I'd argue that if Buffalo had the sixth pick in the draft, we'd still take Willis over some of the bigger names projected ahead of him. I got nothing against Lynch; but I no longer think he's a good value pick at 12. Carriker or Jamaal Anderson coulda been great picks at DE, but ole' Marvin instead decided to overpay a mediocre player like Kelsay, killing a shot at DE this year.

So the pick has to be Willis, and obviously SF is a threat to take him before us.

The solution: Trade up 2 spots with Houston. Houston is almost certainly going either OL (Brown) or DT (Okoye, Branch). They can get one of those guys at 12. If AP is on the board at 10, they can still get him at 12 as SF wouldn't draft him.

The draft chart value between 10-12 is only 100 points. Buffalo needs to give up their second third rounder (92nd-132 points). Houston needs all the draft picks they can get. This shouldn't even be difficult to pull off. I think giving up one of your 2 thirds is an easy choice to make when the payoff is making sure you land Willis and not a project at LB.


That would leave RB as the next biggest hole. I'd definitely do a 2nd this year. 3rd next year for Turner. IF SD wants more than that then screw them; you draft the best RB in the second round (Probably Pittman or Irons)... If by some chance Marshawn Lynch happens to slip towards the end of Round one (which could happen if GB passes) then maybe you do the exact same trade as last year (2nd and 3rd) and you move up to get him.

Getting Willis is an absolute necessity. He could quickly become the leader of the defense. Take care of that first. Then between Turner or Lynch you may have improved this football team greatly.

the absolute WORST case scenario is doing nothing; drafting Pos because Willis is gone; not landing Turner or Lynch and ending up with another RB after. to me, that's disastrous and we'll be discussing a top 8 pick again next year.

[jamesiscool]

Willis is SUCH a no-brainer pick that there is no way it will happen. :sigh:

it makes too much sense IMO. thats why we'll end up drafting a guard at 12. either a guard or a kicker. maybe a punter, moorman had an off year.


thats whats running thru levy's head.... jk

[Saratoga Slim]

I agree that Pat Willis is the best choice for us at 12. My preferences as to our choices to deal with RB/LB, in order:

1. Trade for Turner, draft Willis at 12
2. Draft Willis, Pittman in the 2nd.

If Willis if off the board
3. Trade for Turner, trade down into late first and take Beason, add a 2nd or two 3rds.
4. Draft Peterson if he's there, draft best LB available in 2nd round.

[Romes]

What happened to your idea of drafting Lynch and building the most potent offense possible?

[Saratoga Slim]

it makes too much sense IMO. thats why we'll end up drafting a guard at 12. either a guard or a kicker. maybe a punter, moorman had an off year.


thats whats running thru levy's head.... jk

If Willis is there, he's a Bill. There's literally nothing that I've read anywhere that would leave me to believe the guy wouldn't be a perfect fit.

If Willis AND Adrian Peterson are there, which I highly doubt, it'll be interesting, but I think we still would take Willis.

[HHURRICANE]

I'm staying at twelve and keeping my extra third, thank you very much.

If Willis is there, great. If he isn't, I'll take Lynch and a LB in the second round and still be able to go CB and WR in the third.

Lynch isn't worth a #12 pick and has plenty of ?????. If Willis and Peterson are gone I would rather see us trade out of our pick.

[HHURRICANE]

What happened to your idea of drafting Lynch and building the most potent offense possible?

When Lynch turned into Willis Jr. If he get's a haricut before the draft than maybe.

[Night Train]

What happened to your idea of drafting Lynch and building the most potent offense possible?

Can't you read ? It's difficult for ANYONE to question his ever changing wisdom.

[jamesiscool]

When Lynch turned into Willis Jr. If he get's a haricut before the draft than maybe.

:rofl:

i love how we're drafting players according to their hair.

[Michael82]

I have a feeling that Poz is the real pick. Willis is the pick to get teams thinking that we want him, so we can take Poz.

[patmoran2006]

What happened to your idea of drafting Lynch and building the most potent offense possible?
1- This was before Buffalo became a part of the Turner "sweepstakes". I'd take Turner before him. On top of that, the move I've seen and read up on Antonio Pittman; the more I think he can be just as good in the NFL as Lynch. I would not be disapointed with Lynch either, especially if Willis is gone.

2- I've studied up on all of these LB's, how they'd fit in here, etc. and Willis is so much above the next tier of rookies that it's silly.

3- I havent given up on my "explosive offense' theory anyway. we have four day one picks if no trades are made. We can get Willis and use the other three picks on offense (RB, WR, TE). **** cornerback..

[HHURRICANE]

I have a feeling that Poz is the real pick. Willis is the pick to get teams thinking that we want him, so we can take Poz.

Poz might still be available in the second round so please God no!!!!

When was the last time the Bills drafted who we wanted????

I can't see Willis here because that would make too much sense. Killer player, who has a killer combine, who fills the largest hole on the team.

Yeah, I'm thinking long snapper to replace Schnek.

[patmoran2006]

I have a feeling that Poz is the real pick. Willis is the pick to get teams thinking that we want him, so we can take Poz.
Let me make sure I have this right, because I just spit my Cherry Pepsi all over the desk when I read that.

Are you suggesting that we're leading teams on to think we're interested in Willis because we secretly are planning to draft Pos at NUMBER 12??????


Umm.. I'm pretty sure we dont have to lead anybody on, because I'm going to go out on a limb and say that POS will not be amongst the top 11 players drafted.

Marv can show up on draft day with a "I WANT POS" T shirt on, and nobody is taking him before Buffalo

[Ed]

Let me make sure I have this right, because I just spit my Cherry Pepsi all over the desk when I read that.

Are you suggesting that we're leading teams on to think we're interested in Willis because we secretly are planning to draft Pos at NUMBER 12??????


Umm.. I'm pretty sure we dont have to lead anybody on, because I'm going to go out on a limb and say that POS will not be amongst the top 11 players drafted.

Marv can show up on draft day with a "I WANT POS" T shirt on, and nobody is taking him before Buffalo
Seriously. If Marv really wants Posluzsny at #12 he might as well just turn the card in before the draft even starts and take a nap until round 2.

[Romes]

1- This was before Buffalo became a part of the Turner "sweepstakes". I'd take Turner before him. On top of that, the move I've seen and read up on Antonio Pittman; the more I think he can be just as good in the NFL as Lynch. I would not be disapointed with Lynch either, especially if Willis is gone.

2- I've studied up on all of these LB's, how they'd fit in here, etc. and Willis is so much above the next tier of rookies that it's silly.

3- I havent given up on my "explosive offense' theory anyway. we have four day one picks if no trades are made. We can get Willis and use the other three picks on offense (RB, WR, TE). **** cornerback..

fair enough. I agree with your points.

[X-Era]

To me, the solution to this draft being a good one is very simple.
I find it difficult for ANYBODY to possibly question what player in this draft we need the most. That guy is Patrick Willis.

I'd argue that if Buffalo had the sixth pick in the draft, we'd still take Willis over some of the bigger names projected ahead of him. I got nothing against Lynch; but I no longer think he's a good value pick at 12. Carriker or Jamaal Anderson coulda been great picks at DE, but ole' Marvin instead decided to overpay a mediocre player like Kelsay, killing a shot at DE this year.

So the pick has to be Willis, and obviously SF is a threat to take him before us.

The solution: Trade up 2 spots with Houston. Houston is almost certainly going either OL (Brown) or DT (Okoye, Branch). They can get one of those guys at 12. If AP is on the board at 10, they can still get him at 12 as SF wouldn't draft him.

The draft chart value between 10-12 is only 100 points. Buffalo needs to give up their second third rounder (92nd-132 points). Houston needs all the draft picks they can get. This shouldn't even be difficult to pull off. I think giving up one of your 2 thirds is an easy choice to make when the payoff is making sure you land Willis and not a project at LB.


That would leave RB as the next biggest hole. I'd definitely do a 2nd this year. 3rd next year for Turner. IF SD wants more than that then screw them; you draft the best RB in the second round (Probably Pittman or Irons)... If by some chance Marshawn Lynch happens to slip towards the end of Round one (which could happen if GB passes) then maybe you do the exact same trade as last year (2nd and 3rd) and you move up to get him.

Getting Willis is an absolute necessity. He could quickly become the leader of the defense. Take care of that first. Then between Turner or Lynch you may have improved this football team greatly.

the absolute WORST case scenario is doing nothing; drafting Pos because Willis is gone; not landing Turner or Lynch and ending up with another RB after. to me, that's disastrous and we'll be discussing a top 8 pick again next year.

Only if its "logical" to be stuck on one player. Thats never logical because we have NO idea what can happen draft day.

No, Lynch is as smart a pick or maybe more so if you consider its easy to "cover" a weak LB corp than a weak starting RB.

Moving up for Peterson is also smart.

I think being locked into one player is a bit to Ditka-ish for me.

[X-Era]

I have a feeling that Poz is the real pick. Willis is the pick to get teams thinking that we want him, so we can take Poz.

I honestly think Puz is a 2nd rounder at best. His tangibles just arent good enough to warrant that high of a pick.

No, just wait, he will be there in round 2.

[X-Era]

im starting to think that Patrick Willis is a no brainer pick, even if AP isnt gone..

Dont get me wrong, I love me some AP... And if he's there and Willis is gone I'd kill someone if we didnt take him..

But WIllis is too important to the defense; and there are other RB's who can do the job (Turner being the main one).. I dont have any confidence in ANY of the other LB's in the draft to be an impact player like Willis and I"ll be sick to my stomach if we draft one at 12 becuase he's the "next best LB on the board"

if no-brainer implies we make the pick without using our brains, i agree...picking Willis is a no-brainer. I just hope the Bills realize what a star RB can do for your team as well and hence use their brains

[wozrob11]

guys if we take willis 1st round im thinking kenny irons 2nd round i ve read alot of stuff on this guy i think he would be a good fit in that back field with A- train

[Mr. Pink]

I do not flip flop...I've been saying for over a month now that we're drafting Greg Olsen TE Tha U.

I would not be disappointed in the least in getting Wllis though. But I do feel a legitimate TE threat will also improve our porous run D. By them not being on the field as much and not being as tired as the game wears on.

PLUS...Olsen would do wonders to JPs development.

[Philagape]

if no-brainer implies we make the pick without using our brains, i agree...picking Willis is a no-brainer. I just hope the Bills realize what a star RB can do for your team as well and hence use their brains

Of last year's NFL rushing leaders, you have to go down to Thomas Jones, 11th, before you find one who even played in the conference championships.

Seven of the top 10 rushers played for teams that were .500 or worse.

A star RB can lead your fantasy team, but it the real world it means squat.

[X-Era]

Of last year's NFL rushing leaders, you have to go down to Thomas Jones, 11th, before you find one who even played in the conference championships.

Seven of the top 10 rushers played for teams that were .500 or worse.

A star RB can lead your fantasy team, but it the real world it means squat.
5 of the last 7 Superbowl winning teams had 1st round RB's...whats your point?

That include last years Joseph Addai...a rookie I might add.

Might want to steer clear of the stats, they wont back your opinion.

[Philagape]

5 of the last 7 Superbowl winning teams had 1st round RB's...whats your point?

That include last years Joseph Addai...a rookie I might add.

Might want to steer clear of the stats, they wont back your opinion.

You're the one steering clear of stats since you keep stopping at seven in your Super Bowl argument, which I tore to shreds the last time you brought it up (with my next point).

Another tip if you want to be taken seriously someday: Stick to your terms. You mix up "star RB" and "first-rounder" as if they were synonymous. They're not.

I made my point ("star RB" not essential), I backed it up with relevant facts and disproved the basis of your opinion.

[Romes]

5 of the last 7 Superbowl winning teams had 1st round RB's...whats your point?

That include last years Joseph Addai...a rookie I might add.

Might want to steer clear of the stats, they wont back your opinion.

:rofl:

You are including Antwain Smith in that group?

Cause without him its only 3 of the last 7...that makes your stat not very impressive...

[ShadowHawk7]

Goodness gracious, just the thought of grabbing Willis, and then trading back up for Lynch..

[John Doe]

2- I've studied up on all of these LB's, how they'd fit in here, etc. and Willis is so much above the next tier of rookies that it's silly.


I would feel better if you had actually seen them play and broken down some tape.

[X-Era]

You're the one steering clear of stats since you keep stopping at seven in your Super Bowl argument, which I tore to shreds the last time you brought it up (with my next point).

Another tip if you want to be taken seriously someday: Stick to your terms. You mix up "star RB" and "first-rounder" as if they were synonymous. They're not.

I made my point ("star RB" not essential), I backed it up with relevant facts and disproved the basis of your opinion.

You have proven and backed up nothing. Thats in your mind, not in the record column.

If your claiming we need a LB at 12, show me how THAT wins us Superbowls.

My 5 of 7 stands, hell, its actually a hell of alot more:

1993- Dallas wins-Emmitt Smith-1st rounder
1994- Dallas- Smith-1st round
1995- SF- Ricky Watters- 2nd round
1996- Dallas- Smith-1st round
1997- GB-Dorsey Levens- 5th round
1998- Den- Terrell Davis- 6th round
1999- Den- Davis- 6th round
2000- Marshall Faulk-1st round
2001- Bal- Jamal Lewis- 1st round
2002- NE- A Smith- 1st round
2003- TB- Michael Pittman- 4th round
2004- NE- A Smith- 1st round
2005- NE- Corey Dillon- 2nd round
2006- Pitt- Willie Parker- Undrafted

So out of the past 13 Superbowls, 7, or better than half, had 1st round RB's for the winning team compared to less than half from ALL the remaining rounds

Not enough for you?

Lets look at the losers of the past 13 Superbowls:

93- Buff- Thomas- 2nd round
94- Buff- Thomas- 2nd round
95- SD- Natrone Means- 2nd round
96- Pitt- Bam Morris- 3rd round
97- NE- Curtis Martin- 3rd round
98- GB- Dorsey Levens- 5th round
99- ATL- Jamal Anderson- 7th round
00- Tenn- Eddie George- 1st round
01- NYG- Tiki Barber- 2nd round
02- STL- Faulk- 1st round
03- Oak- Charlie Garner- 2nd round
04- Car- Stephen Davis- 4th round
05- Phi- Westbrook- 3rd round
06- Sea- Shaun Alexander- 1st round

So, most of the losing teams in the Superbowl had day one RB's. This is pretty clear that if you want a trip to the Superbowl, you draft a RB early, of the 26 teams that went to the Superbowl in the past 13 years, 20 of the starting RB's were day one picks, 16 in the 1st 2 rounds, and 10 from the 1st round.

Lets let that sink in a bit.

26 teams went to the dance, 20 of those teams had a day one RB as a starter. Thats 77% of the time, the teams in the SB have a day one drafted RB as a starter.

Furthermore, 38% of the time the team has a 1st rounder, but 54% of the time, the SB winning team had a 1st round starting RB.

And you can somehow argue that a 1st round RB wont make a difference?

It also seems to say that if you want to win one, you take that RB in round 1.

Do I think this tells the whole story? No. But you no one can deny that having a 1st round RB starting certainly helps your cause based on this evidence.

You want to talk about "star". I dont care about star RB's. I want the best damn RB that draft pick or picks can buy, my evidence shows it matters. Star? star means they perpetually run for alot of yards and score alot of TD's. Thats a bad thing? Im waiting to hear how having a star RB is a bad thing, how its a curse.

[X-Era]

:rofl:

You are including Antwain Smith in that group?

Cause without him its only 3 of the last 7...that makes your stat not very impressive...

I aint saying its pretty, only factual.

Im just waiting to see how we can argue we dont need the best RB we can get. I want that evidence.

Show me a list of teams that end up 15 or worse in the league in rushing but win the SB.

[Philagape]

Yeah 7 out of 13 really makes your case :rofl:

And of those seven, they all played like first-rounders? They were the reason those teams won the Super Bowl? I bet the Pats thanked their lucky stars they had Antowain Smith!

I don't have to argue anything, because you make my case for me, so much so that you keep changing your story again, going from "what a star RB can do for your team" to "I dont care about star RB's", then taking the star/first round regression to "day one" RBs, then showing how many teams get to the Super Bowl WITHOUT a first-rounder! I'm never hiring you as my lawyer!

Keep going, TheismannEra. :up:

[socalfan]

......
So the pick has to be Willis, and obviously SF is a threat to take him before us.

[B][I]The solution: Trade up 2 spots with Houston......Buffalo needs to give up their second third rounder (92nd-132 points). .........

Getting Willis is an absolute necessity. ......


I disagree. Willis is not a necessity, this is just a silly post. And advocating giving up a first and a third round pick for him is outrageous. The rest of your post is over the top stupid.

Selecting a player in the 12 position of this year's draft will garauntee us a quality player that will start from day one.

What a knucklehead.

[Philagape]

I aint saying its pretty, only factual.

Im just waiting to see how we can argue we dont need the best RB we can get. I want that evidence.

Show me a list of teams that end up 15 or worse in the league in rushing but win the SB.

Changing your terms again!! Going from star RB to team rushing, which can be very different things.

I want the best TEAM we can get. ENOUGH FANTASY FOOTBALL.

[McBFLO]

To me, the solution to this draft being a good one is very simple.
I find it difficult for ANYBODY to possibly question what player in this draft we need the most. That guy is Patrick Willis.

I'd argue that if Buffalo had the sixth pick in the draft, we'd still take Willis over some of the bigger names projected ahead of him. I got nothing against Lynch; but I no longer think he's a good value pick at 12. Carriker or Jamaal Anderson coulda been great picks at DE, but ole' Marvin instead decided to overpay a mediocre player like Kelsay, killing a shot at DE this year.

So the pick has to be Willis, and obviously SF is a threat to take him before us.

The solution: Trade up 2 spots with Houston. Houston is almost certainly going either OL (Brown) or DT (Okoye, Branch). They can get one of those guys at 12. If AP is on the board at 10, they can still get him at 12 as SF wouldn't draft him.

The draft chart value between 10-12 is only 100 points. Buffalo needs to give up their second third rounder (92nd-132 points). Houston needs all the draft picks they can get. This shouldn't even be difficult to pull off. I think giving up one of your 2 thirds is an easy choice to make when the payoff is making sure you land Willis and not a project at LB.


That would leave RB as the next biggest hole. I'd definitely do a 2nd this year. 3rd next year for Turner. IF SD wants more than that then screw them; you draft the best RB in the second round (Probably Pittman or Irons)... If by some chance Marshawn Lynch happens to slip towards the end of Round one (which could happen if GB passes) then maybe you do the exact same trade as last year (2nd and 3rd) and you move up to get him.

Getting Willis is an absolute necessity. He could quickly become the leader of the defense. Take care of that first. Then between Turner or Lynch you may have improved this football team greatly.

the absolute WORST case scenario is doing nothing; drafting Pos because Willis is gone; not landing Turner or Lynch and ending up with another RB after. to me, that's disastrous and we'll be discussing a top 8 pick again next year.

Excellent post. As more and more time passes, and we get closer and closer to the draft, I think this is the way to go.

[X-Era]

Yeah 7 out of 13 really makes your case :rofl:

And of those seven, they all played like first-rounders? They were the reason those teams won the Super Bowl? I bet the Pats thanked their lucky stars they had Antowain Smith!

I don't have to argue anything, because you make my case for me, so much so that you keep changing your story again, going from "what a star RB can do for your team" to "I dont care about star RB's", then taking the star/first round regression to "day one" RBs, then showing how many teams get to the Super Bowl WITHOUT a first-rounder! I'm never hiring you as my lawyer!

Keep going, TheismannEra. :up:

Waiting for your arguement as to how to win a SB with a 1st round LB....waiting....waiting.

7 of 13 was 1st rounders vs ALL OTHER ROUNDS!!!!!!!!!! Just a point that you missed. But why let reality into your dream world. :rolleyes:

Put up or shut up. Show me your "secret" to a Superbowl. Wheres your "plan".

Lets see it.

[X-Era]

Changing your terms again!! Going from star RB to team rushing, which can be very different things.

I want the best TEAM we can get. ENOUGH FANTASY FOOTBALL.
You pick the terms.

Im waiting for some sort of evidence that a rushing game to take you to and win a Superbowl can be had with other teams backups or later round picks. My data isnt showing that.

Im also not seeing evidence that drafting a LB in the 1st round wins you SB's either.

Pick your terms...just keep them tangible..A.K.A REAL, not crap like we dont need a "star", where you cant define "star".

Wheres your plan?

[Philagape]

Waiting for your arguement as to how to win a SB with a 1st round LB....waiting....waiting.

7 of 13 was 1st rounders vs ALL OTHER ROUNDS!!!!!!!!!! Just a point that you missed. But why let reality into your dream world. :rolleyes:

Put up or shut up. Show me your "secret" to a Superbowl. Wheres your "plan".

Lets see it.

My plan is filling needs based on what we have and what we don't have. We need a star LB more than a star RB. I've stated my case in several other threads, including today. I'm not married to any position; I only want a complete team.

The point I "missed" is irrelevant and rather silly. If 6 of 13 can win a SB without a first-rounder, then having a first-rounder is not essential. If 7 of last year's top 10 RBs couldn't even lead their teams to winning records, then it's not essential to have one. That's my point, and it's proven and untouchable. You can keep adding irrelevant points if you want; you're really good at it.

[X-Era]

Yeah 7 out of 13 really makes your case :rofl:

And of those seven, they all played like first-rounders? They were the reason those teams won the Super Bowl? I bet the Pats thanked their lucky stars they had Antowain Smith!

I don't have to argue anything, because you make my case for me, so much so that you keep changing your story again, going from "what a star RB can do for your team" to "I dont care about star RB's", then taking the star/first round regression to "day one" RBs, then showing how many teams get to the Super Bowl WITHOUT a first-rounder! I'm never hiring you as my lawyer!

Keep going, TheismannEra. :up:
Dont get confused. I am certain that we dont have adequate talent on this team right now. Thats why Im praying we get the best damn players we can possible. I also think we have a huge hole at RB, and that we need a very very good one to be competitive in our division and have the best chance to get into the playoffs and beyond. If that RB is also a star, double bonus in my mind. But its not a requirement.

Tell ya what I dont want, a RB from some other team that hasnt proven anything as a full time starter (Turner), or a RB who hasnt started for several years in college (Irons), or guys that lack ideal size (Pittman), or guys that can find any other reason to come in here and NOT light the league on fire.

This isnt a game or a gamble, or a "lets find a late round gem" game to me anymore. Ive seen the Sammy Morris's, Darrick Holmes's, and guys that could have but didnt like Willis McGahee.

No, You give me a guy who plays angry and gives 310% on the field every damn play, who can beat you in a short/stacked game, around the corner, or who can beat most of your DB's to the end zone.

Add all that up and your talking about a 1st round RB like AP or Lynch. You want to take on some of those reasons/excuses for not running for big yards behind our monsterous OL, have at it. I choose not to.

I want the best damn RB possible and I have a very good feeling the Bills agree. I will be suprised if we dont take a RB in round 1, it may be a trade up/trade back up into the 1st, or a player that drops right into our laps. But I take Marv at face value when he said he wants to run and stop the run. I think that follows us right into the draft.

Thats it, right there. Take it or leave it, thats how I feel.

[Philagape]

One can go through every position in football and make a case that getting one in the first round is not essential. Therefore, comparing SB records is pretty stupid anyway when deciding who we should take in the first round. My arguments haven't proved anything in favor of a position, but they've DISproved that it MUST be a RB.
The choice should be made on what our needs are, what we currently have at those positions, and the nature and importance of the positions.

[MarvLevy]

i want Willis 1 and Irons 2..period!!!!!!!!!!

[X-Era]

My plan is filling needs based on what we have and what we don't have. We need a star LB more than a star RB. I've stated my case in several other threads, including today. I'm not married to any position; I only want a complete team.

The point I "missed" is irrelevant and rather silly. If 6 of 13 can win a SB without a first-rounder, then having a first-rounder is not essential. If 7 of last year's top 10 RBs couldn't even lead their teams to winning records, then it's not essential to have one. That's my point, and it's proven and untouchable. You can keep adding irrelevant points if you want; you're really good at it.

Not married to any one position? now we agree. I can make a big arguement for a RB, but its not the only way.

Sounds like someone who isnt "married" to a certain position is firmly "married" against a 1st round RB. Does it matter or not?

I love it, you might be the ticked off guy on draft day. Its very likely, but not certain, that we end up taking a 1st round RB.

The 1st round is one of 7 rounds, we can complete our team by making the best choices based on what the draft gives us. LB is pretty deep, RB is not. We need both, I agree. A smart team will get what it needs when they can get it. LB's can be had throughout day one, RB's who fit the Bill, in my mind, cant be found out of round 1 with one or two exceptions.

[Philagape]

There will be ticked off guys on draft day no matter what.

[X-Era]

One can go through every position in football and make a case that getting one in the first round is not essential. Therefore, comparing SB records is pretty stupid anyway when deciding who we should take in the first round. My arguments haven't proved anything in favor of a position, but they've DISproved that it MUST be a RB.
The choice should be made on what our needs are, what we currently have at those positions, and the nature and importance of the positions.

Thats putting words in my mouth. Find ONE SINGLE post where I said it MUST be a RB in round one. Ill save you time, Ive never said that.

I, also would like the best players available, but unlike you I will be very happy if we take a RB in round 1. If we dont, I willbe worried about our RB game considering the rest of the prospects. Id then be hopefull that Im wrong and someone comes out of the woodwork.

Were in agreement here, use our brains when our pick is up. We onky disagree when you shun us taking a RB.

[X-Era]

There will be ticked off guys on draft day no matter what.

There always are. I agree. Its amazing how so many slammed and disowned the team last year only to watch Ngata show up fat, and Bunkley have trouble learning the system.

Just goes to prove getting stuck on one player can make for an angering draft day.

[Philagape]

If the Bills take a RB first, I'll disagree but won't jump off a roof.

I lean against RB because it's a simpler position to play, therefore easier to succeed at, it can be platooned easier, and we already have a decent part-timer there.

[Philagape]

Thats putting words in my mouth. Find ONE SINGLE post where I said it MUST be a RB in round one. Ill save you time, Ive never said that.


"I just hope the Bills realize what a star RB can do for your team as well and hence use their brains"

So using their brains is not a must then ....

[Michael82]

I'm staying with my prediction...the Bills will either trade down and select him, or draft Poz with the 12th pick overall!

[Michael82]

Tell ya what I dont want, a RB from some other team that hasnt proven anything as a full time starter (Turner),

This quote bothers the hell out of me. What the **** did Marshawn Lynch prove? Hell, he's even more unproven than Michael Turner. :ill:

[X-Era]

"I just hope the Bills realize what a star RB can do for your team as well and hence use their brains"

So using their brains is not a must then ....

Using their brains meaning not to put the card in with 14:59 left with Willis's name on it. You have to read this in context to the starting thread.

I meant I want them to spend the 15 minutes thinking through the pick and what helps the Bills the most and then make the pick.

[X-Era]

This quote bothers the hell out of me. What the **** did Marshawn Lynch prove? Hell, he's even more unproven than Michael Turner. :ill:

Its about potential here. Your right about Turner at least being in the NFL, thats worth something for sure.

However, I dont know how you go from backup on one team to star on another either. It could happen, I can see that. But what if hes simply not going to be a carry the load RB? And how much are we trading for that?

This is a troublesome trade to me. I just havent seen enough to warrant that much in a trade, I also havent seen enough to think hes all the answer we need at RB.

[acehole]

Plenty of back ups go on to have great careers..they have been mentioned over and over. M Turner is much better then your average back up RB and safer then an unknown draftee and yes needs to be had at the right price. However I would rather have M Turner then any other RB in the draft even A Peterson as his upright running style gets him hurt all the time....we will have to waste picks to trade up to get him and we have to many needs. My opinion is to wait and see who is on the board at 12.....willis may be gone anyway so trade down once or twice give away a pick for turner, draft the best OLB and start filling your needs with BAP.....and willis would be nice to have but I think the consensus is that Turner would be better then any 2nd round prospect. So thats what I would give up for him a second rounder. I would also trade down in the first and possible recoup it......




Its about potential here. Your right about Turner at least being in the NFL, thats worth something for sure.

However, I dont know how you go from backup on one team to star on another either. It could happen, I can see that. But what if hes simply not going to be a carry the load RB? And how much are we trading for that?

This is a troublesome trade to me. I just havent seen enough to warrant that much in a trade, I also havent seen enough to think hes all the answer we need at RB.

[alohabillsfan]

First off didn't we just let 2 "star" LB's leave? What did that get us? The TC2 is designed to stop the pass, for it to work we need to have the other team needing to pass! To get the other team to need to pass the freaking offense needs to score more than 17 points a game! Hence we need a RB, TE and legit #2 WR. We also need 1 CB, 1 or 2 LB that's alot, how do we get there?

We pray that Willis is there at 12 and Denver trade up with us to get him!

21 WR Meecham/Bowe
43 CB McCauley/Hughes
70 RB Pittman
74 LB Black/Durant
86 TE Newton/Spaeth
92 S/LB Piscatilli

Round 4 RB/FB Battle
Round 6 CB C. Brown
Round 7 OG Studdard
Round 7 QB M. Moore

[Michael82]

Its about potential here. Your right about Turner at least being in the NFL, thats worth something for sure.

However, I dont know how you go from backup on one team to star on another either. It could happen, I can see that. But what if hes simply not going to be a carry the load RB? And how much are we trading for that?

This is a troublesome trade to me. I just havent seen enough to warrant that much in a trade, I also havent seen enough to think hes all the answer we need at RB.
ummm, did you happen to see who San Diego's starter is? Even IF Turner was a damn good RB and ready to start, San Diego wouldn't start him. LT is there. :doh: