Top Five Best Fit Bills Draft Prospects

[YardRat]

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/story/2008/3/23/0837/94675

1 - Vernon Gholston, DE, Ohio State

2 - Devin Thomas, WR, Michigan State

3 - Glenn Dorsey, DT, LSU

4 - Sedrick Ellis, DT, USC

5 - Owen Schmitt, FB, West Virginia

[ddaryl]

If a stud DT or DE falls to us we probably have to pull the trigger...

However we cannot come out of this draft without some Offensive firepower to build on...

Owen Schmitt in the later rounds would be a solid pickup. I love the fact were bringing the FB back

[clumping platelets]

Reggie Smith or Aqib Talib

[coastal]

Reggie Smithyup...

he is the physical corner that this defense is lacking. He'd e a great addition. If we were to trade down, I would be trading down for this guy and then going offense the rest of the way.

[DraftBoy]

I like how 3 of the 5 fits are pretty much guaranteed to not be there at our pick. Thomas I agree with and I think Schmitt is just the name everybody fell in love with. His versatility is great for an offense that plans to utilize that. Ours does not, we simply need a great lead blocker, so to take a guy who can do all that and then let half his talents waste away doesnt make sense to me.

[YardRat]

Interesting that he left corner off of the list but chose to include Schmitt.

[Confused]

Pretty good take on owen schmitt. Malcolm Kelley is more Eric Moulds than Devin Thomas.

[TacklingDummy]

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/story/2008/3/23/0837/94675

1 - Vernon Gholston, DE, Ohio State

2 - Devin Thomas, WR, Michigan State

3 - Glenn Dorsey, DT, LSU

4 - Sedrick Ellis, DT, USC



I'd take any one of those with the first pick.

[Confused]

Y the fruck are all you sooooooo high on Thomas? I dont get it...

[yordad]

I like how 3 of the 5 fits are pretty much guaranteed to not be there at our pick. Thomas I agree with and I think Schmitt is just the name everybody fell in love with. His versatility is great for an offense that plans to utilize that. Ours does not, we simply need a great lead blocker, so to take a guy who can do all that and then let half his talents waste away doesnt make sense to me.Now your reaching. :band:

[DraftBoy]

Now your reaching. :band:

Not yet, but I could if I wanted to though :respect:

[Night Train]

Pro Football Weekly has a similar team listing with Limas Sweed at the top.

[John Doe]

...I think Schmitt is just the name everybody fell in love with. His versatility is great for an offense that plans to utilize that. Ours does not, we simply need a great lead blocker, so to take a guy who can do all that and then let half his talents waste away doesnt make sense to me.

Having a fullback who can block, run, and catch is good for any team's offense that has a fullback - including the Bills.

Even a great blocking fullback like Sam Gash would catch the occasional pass.

[ddaryl]

I think Schmitt is just the name everybody fell in love with. His versatility is great for an offense that plans to utilize that. Ours does not, we simply need a great lead blocker, so to take a guy who can do all that and then let half his talents waste away doesnt make sense to me.


You must have missed the memo.

Our new OC has already said he is implementing the FB back into the Bills Offense...

[X-Era]

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/story/2008/3/23/0837/94675

1 - Vernon Gholston, DE, Ohio State

2 - Devin Thomas, WR, Michigan State

3 - Glenn Dorsey, DT, LSU

4 - Sedrick Ellis, DT, USC

5 - Owen Schmitt, FB, West Virginia

Heres mine:

1- Vernon Gholston
2- Malcolm Kelly
3- DRC
4- Limas Sweed
5- Dustin Keller
6- Devin Thomas
7- Fred Davis
8- Brandon Flowers
9- Owen Schmitt
10- Vince Hall

I know you picked 5, Im saying take any 3 from that stack and we have had a stellar draft IMO. Every single one of those guys plays like their hair is on fire and would bring back the lunch pail, tough guy attitude that we were known for in the 90's.

I will give you a few more names of guys I like alot:

Taj Smith
Marcus Monk
Eddie Royal
Kevin Smith- RB- UCF... I think hes gonna be really good
Erik Ainge
Colt Brennan
Tony Hills- OT- Tex

[X-Era]

You must have missed the memo.

Our new OC has already said he is implementing the FB back into the Bills Offense...

I like Draftboy, but ive gone here before, its his opinion.

To me, however, adding an Alstott type FB like Schmitt adds another outlet receiver, a tough runner in the red zone, another roll out option in the redzone, and a helluva lead blocker.

With Marshawn being as good as he is, I think I would give up a bit of lead block ability to add the receiving, and running ability from the FB position.

Im think more Larry Centers than Lorenzo Neal. Centers was far from a stud blocker, Neal is pretty much one of the best lead blockers ever to put on a helmet. I want a well rounded FB but one thats a bit more versatile like Centers, rather than Neal.

[DraftBoy]

You must have missed the memo.

Our new OC has already said he is implementing the FB back into the Bills Offense...

No I missed the memo that annoited Schmitt the next Alstott and specifically said we will be using a FB in the regard of running the ball and being a consistent option out of the backfield.

We are going to be using a traditional FB, the one who occasionally carries, and puts his head down and drills LB's in the hole.

[TigerJ]

yup...

he is the physical corner that this defense is lacking. He'd e a great addition. If we were to trade down, I would be trading down for this guy and then going offense the rest of the way.
If Will James actually signed, or will sign, isn't he supposed to be a physical cornerback?

[X-Era]

No I missed the memo that annoited Schmitt the next Alstott and specifically said we will be using a FB in the regard of running the ball and being a consistent option out of the backfield.

We are going to be using a traditional FB, the one who occasionally carries, and puts his head down and drills LB's in the hole.

I know this wasnt directed at me, but I want to comment:

saying someone "seems like ____" or someone is a _____ "type" player, is not the same as annointing.

Every single player in the draft is worthing zip until the prove themselves.

But, I see no harm in drawing comparisons based on style of play, size, approach to the game, etc...

Im not saying he IS anything yet, Im saying he SEEMS like that type of player.

[gr8slayer]

Drafting Schmitt at any point before the fifth round would be a mistake. We have far too many other issues that are bigger than FB to be wasting picks on a guy because of his name.

[DraftBoy]

I know this wasnt directed at me, but I want to comment:

saying someone "seems like ____" or someone is a _____ "type" player, is not the same as annointing.

Every single player in the draft is worthing zip until the prove themselves.

But, I see no harm in drawing comparisons based on style of play, size, approach to the game, etc...

Im not saying he IS anything yet, Im saying he SEEMS like that type of player.

I disagree and the comparison has been made like "____ is the next ____" thats annoiting a player. I hate how draft guides have made everybody want to compare this player to that player. Schmitt is Schmitt he's not anybody else.

[PECKERWOOD]

Reggie Smith or Aqib Talib

I love those 2 picks.

[ddaryl]

No I missed the memo that annoited Schmitt the next Alstott and specifically said we will be using a FB in the regard of running the ball and being a consistent option out of the backfield.

We are going to be using a traditional FB, the one who occasionally carries, and puts his head down and drills LB's in the hole.

How do you know that is how we will use the FB in the offense... If you pick up a player that adds a dimension then you find away to use that dimension.

I don't know much about Schmitt, but I don't buy the argument that we will only use our FB for just blocking... unless that is all that our FB is capable of.

You post here is kind of confusing in that in this reply you say we will use the FB in regard of running the ball and being a consistent option out of the back field...
then in paragraph 2 you contradict that point.

[feelthepain]

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/story/2008/3/23/0837/94675

1 - Vernon Gholston, DE, Ohio State

3 - Glenn Dorsey, DT, LSU

4 - Sedrick Ellis, DT, USC



I just don't see these three making it out of the top 10.

[Luisito23]

I just don't see these three making it out of the top 10.


Yeah me neither.....

[casdhf]

Maybe if we had a FB that could actually carry the ball we would let him.

[Luisito23]

I just don't see these three making it out of the top 10.


:negrep: on that horrible sig though.....

[Bmax]

Bennett and Finley both would be good fits in Buffalo.



Bmax

[feelthepain]

:negrep: on that horrible sig though.....
What? I didn't say he made the team....:D:

[X-Era]

Drafting Schmitt at any point before the fifth round would be a mistake. We have far too many other issues that are bigger than FB to be wasting picks on a guy because of his name.

Please name the other 4 "issues" that need to be addressed prior to the starting FB.

[X-Era]

I disagree and the comparison has been made like "____ is the next ____" thats annoiting a player. I hate how draft guides have made everybody want to compare this player to that player. Schmitt is Schmitt he's not anybody else.

All I said was that Schmitt reminds me of Alstott. Thats not annointing.

Why do you want to add a FB who can only block? Isnt that telegraphing our plays? If we pass isnt that one less option?

I would like to see DB's against 4 or 5 options including the RB and FB so that we get more 1 on 1 matchups. That favors guys like Evans or a bigger WR.

[gr8slayer]

Please name the other 4 "issues" that need to be addressed prior to the starting FB.
Are you serious?

- Center
- Corner
- TE
- WR
- TE

Sadly there are more. I'd rather draft Josh Johnson in the 3rd or 4th than Schmitt who by the way is no Mike Alstott.

[YardRat]

Are you serious?

- Center
- Corner
- TE
- WR
- TE

Sadly there are more. I'd rather draft Josh Johnson in the 3rd or 4th than Schmitt who by the way is no Mike Alstott.

I agree, and would throw DT/DE into the mix. Having said that, if we do happen to snag Schmitt in the fourth it wouldn't upset me at all (depending, of course, on who we took prior and who is on the board at the time).

[DraftBoy]

Are you serious?

- Center
- Corner
- TE
- WR
- TE

Sadly there are more. I'd rather draft Josh Johnson in the 3rd or 4th than Schmitt who by the way is no Mike Alstott.

Backup QB, RG, overall OL and DL Depth, another WR, and then FB

[ParanoidAndroid]

Schmitt will be picked too early. We have other worries. Someone like Caulcrick could be had in round 6 or later.

[gr8slayer]

Backup QB, RG, overall OL and DL Depth, another WR, and then FB
I'm actually satisfied with Butler at RG after watching the film again. Fowler just can't handle the larger 1's in the league. When you're running the C2 you can never have enough depth at the DT so yeah, I'm all for it. WR is no question, especially if Evans is out after this year. I might even be for drafting two WR's like Arizona did a few year back with Johnson and Boldin.

[X-Era]

Are you serious?

- Center
- Corner
- TE
- WR
- TE

Sadly there are more. I'd rather draft Josh Johnson in the 3rd or 4th than Schmitt who by the way is no Mike Alstott.

You managed to list 3 spots where we need depth.

We have a total of 1 position that has a starting vacancy. Vacancy meaning we have no one back from last year to start. Thats #2 WR.

After that, you are arguing about depth or players that MAY supplant the current starter. At that point its a toss up with about 10 positions being equal level of need.

I would even go along with a few spots where we have questionable starters that we could use an upgrade. Namely, CB, TE, FB. But no way do I see Melvin Fowler as being a clown, I think hes solid. Furthermore, If you think we are addressing ANY starting OL when they broke a rookie for 1000+ yards, and kept our rookie QB to a franchise low number of sacks, your mistaken.

So, we have 1 starting need, and 3 other spots where the starter could use an upgrade.

Thats 4 positions, and FB is one of them.

[X-Era]

Backup QB, RG, overall OL and DL Depth, another WR, and then FB

Draft depth before filling a starting position??? I dont see that.

[DraftBoy]

Draft depth before filling a starting position??? I dont see that.

Who says we dont have the starter in Barnes who has been a starter for a few other teams?

[gr8slayer]

You managed to list 3 spots where we need depth.

We have a total of 1 position that has a starting vacancy. Vacancy meaning we have no one back from last year to start. Thats #2 WR.

After that, you are arguing about depth or players that MAY supplant the current starter. At that point its a toss up with about 10 positions being equal level of need.

I would even go along with a few spots where we have questionable starters that we could use an upgrade. Namely, CB, TE, FB. But no way do I see Melvin Fowler as being a clown, I think hes solid. Furthermore, If you think we are addressing ANY starting OL when they broke a rookie for 1000+ yards, and kept our rookie QB to a franchise low number of sacks, your mistaken.

So, we have 1 starting need, and 3 other spots where the starter could use an upgrade.

Thats 4 positions, and FB is one of them.You're in denial and are trying to justify your unwarranted obsession with a mediocre player. Barnes is a fine FB and these comparisons to Alstott are ridiculous and are as stupid as comparing Trent Edwards to Joe Montana.

By the way, did you seriously call Melvin Fowler solid? You should really go back and watch film.

Wow, an RB gaining a thousand yards. If an RB doesn't gain a thousand yards with 16 games available to him then he should be fired (See Shaun Alexander when the June 1st cuts come.)

We're not drafting the guy either way, our coaches know that we have bigger concerns in other places.

[gr8slayer]

Who says we dont have the starter in Barnes who has been a starter for a few other teams?
But Barnes isn't a "sexy" name. He's someone he's never heard of and Mike Mayock didn't :drool: over coming out of college so he must not be that good right?

I like the way that everyone assumes just because our OC said were going to use a FB more that means that he's going to be freaking Larry Centers.

[DraftBoy]

But Barnes isn't a "sexy" name. He's someone he's never heard of and Mike Mayock didn't :drool: over coming out of college so he must not be that good right?

I like the way that everyone assumes just because our OC said were going to use a FB more that means that he's going to be freaking Larry Centers.

But Kiper loved him!

[gr8slayer]

But Kiper loved him!
Well then he must be a God.

[X-Era]

Who says we dont have the starter in Barnes who has been a starter for a few other teams?

22 starts in 66 games isnt exactly what I would call a "starter".

[X-Era]

But Barnes isn't a "sexy" name. He's someone he's never heard of and Mike Mayock didn't :drool: over coming out of college so he must not be that good right?

I like the way that everyone assumes just because our OC said were going to use a FB more that means that he's going to be freaking Larry Centers.

Its easy to criticize others thoughts and provide none of your own.

By the way, if you have the answers, Im suprised your wasting your time here responding to some shlub like me's posts rather than being a GM for a team.

I have been a Schmitt fan for a long time, long before he got any public hype.

[gr8slayer]

Its easy to criticize others thoughts and provide none of your own.

By the way, if you have the answers, Im suprised your wasting your time here responding to some shlub like me's posts rather than being a GM for a team.

I have been a Schmitt fan for a long time, long before he got any public hype.
I've posted my thoughts on Barnes and Schmitt on several occasions.

[ParanoidAndroid]

22 starts in 66 games isnt exactly what I would call a "starter".

Perhaps that's because they didn't always start in a 2 back set. :idunno:

Look back at Lorenzo Neal's career. As good of a FB as he is, he has NEVER started every game in a single season. It is very rare that a team will be exclusively in a 2-back set at the start of every game.

[X-Era]

Perhaps that's because they didn't always start in a 2 back set. :idunno:

Look back at Lorenzo Neal's career. As good of a FB as he is, he has NEVER started every game in a single season. It is very rare that a team will be exclusively in a 2-back set at the start of every game.

All I am saying is this:

We did not have any FB's last year, this year we plan to use a FB. We have signed Barnes who is not a household name by any means and is really a journeyman.

As with many other positions, FB is then a position where we have a questionable starter.

Unlike other positions, namely CB and even TE, we do not have a player here that has been with the team and is a known quantity.

To me, that puts FB a bit higher on the need list. Add in the fact that we could maybe get the best Fb in the whole draft way down in the 4th or even 5th round where we typically get guys that are depth at best and I think its good value at a position where we are unsure of our starter.

Thats all, thats it. Its not a make or break, I think the guy will be good, I think we are unsettled, it makes sense.

[X-Era]

I've posted my thoughts on Barnes and Schmitt on several occasions.

Well, Im surpised at how much "energy" we are spending here debating about a 4th or 5th round FB.

If it was our pick at 11, I could understand.

Its a guy I like, I think it would help our team, thats my opinion.

[ParanoidAndroid]

If he's around in the 5th, I'd definately consider it.

[X-Era]

If he's around in the 5th, I'd definately consider it.

I hope the Bills use the red phone to call you as the 5th round pick comes up to find out what your considering. :dance:

I dont know why but I had to.

I think a 5th for him is a good deal personally.

[yordad]

I really don't understand how some of you have third string TE, 5th WR, backup DE, backup RG, third string QB and overall depth before starting FB. You guys act like STARTING FB is number 53 on the team. In my book, he is #22. And, used properly, he can have a huge contribution. Why would a backup TE be needed more then a starter? And, the right FB can be used like a TE. One who starts!!

Why in the hell would anyone advocate a one dimensional FB?

[X-Era]

I really don't understand how some of you have third string TE, 5th WR, backup DE, backup RG, third string QB and overall depth before starting FB. You guys act like STARTING FB is number 53 on the team. In my book, he is #22. And, used properly, he can have a huge contribution. Why would a backup TE be needed more then a starter? And, the right FB can be used like a TE. One who starts!!

Why in the hell would anyone advocate a one dimensional FB?

Add in the fact that we get a versatile guy who is a devastating blocker in round 4 or 5 when usually you are talking about special teams players or depth at that point... Im sold.