Reasons for getting Byrd

[Mitchell55]

Reason number 1. 27th in INTs.
Reason number 2. 6th most rushes over 20 yds
Reason number 3. 4th most rushes over 40 yds
Reason number 4. Tony Gonzalez


Then you could use the who was availble. Maualuga, cant play cover 2. Everette, we got maybin, payed lots of money on Denney, Kelsy, and Schobel, and got Maybin and Ellis. Guards, we got the best in the draft. Tackle, Butler fills that. TE, we got the best recieving TE in draft. LB, Harris is probably the best fit for us in the whole draft and we got him in the 5th.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Lexwhat]

What does Tony GONZALEZ have to do with this???

[Mitchell55]

What does Tony GONZALEZ have to do with this???



Turn on the KC game and watch Ko and Scott get burned for 2 TDs and 100+ yds. Our Safteys cant cover is my point.

[elltrain22]

I still am on the fence about Byrd. Considering who was still on the board, I'm gonna be highly critical on him, b/c I wanted us to take other players.

[methos4ever]

Scott did really well in terms of man coverage on most of the tight ends he had coverage on. Simpson, however did not do a good job with covering over the top to prevent TG getting open.

[yordad]

Question? How great was Crowell in coverage? And, since he was a straight beast, how much did it really matter? He was the best LB we had in a while. Physical. Plays around the line.

If you don't like E. Brown, Clint Sintim was there.

[Pinkerton Security]

reason #1 in my book: Ko Simpson blows so hard that Bryan Scott has routinely been playing over him.

[OpIv37]

Byrd got all those INT's as a CB.

In Buffalo, he's going to be a S. The excuse for Whitner is that the "system" keeps him from making big plays. Why would it be any different for Byrd?

[psubills62]

Byrd got all those INT's as a CB.

In Buffalo, he's going to be a S. The excuse for Whitner is that the "system" keeps him from making big plays. Why would it be any different for Byrd?

Because Whitner had 3 career INT's in college, from what I can see. Whitner obviously didn't have ballhawking skills even in college. Byrd was great at getting INT's in college...which may or may not translate to the NFL. But if you don't have those skills in college, you won't have them in the NFL. At least Byrd has a chance to be a ballhawk in our secondary.

[mikemac2001]

Gotta love the idea of having a Ball Hawing safety sick of these bruisers in the back who don't even bruise anyone....i thought Ko was gonna be our ball hawker but after his injury he is far from anything.

Hopefully this works out if not i know we will hear about it years to come

[Lexwhat]

Because Whitner had 3 career INT's in college, from what I can see. Whitner obviously didn't have ballhawking skills even in college. Byrd was great at getting INT's in college...which may or may not translate to the NFL. But if you don't have those skills in college, you won't have them in the NFL. At least Byrd has a chance to be a ballhawk in our secondary.

So what exactly was the reason for drafting Whitner so high then??

I know, I know: He's "fast, smart, and versatile."

...But he doesn't break up passes. He doesn't intercept the ball. He doesn't even deliver the big hit that makes WRs scared to come across the middle.

Since people don't like the comparison with Polamalu or Ed Reed, how about Brian Dawkins? Rodney Harrison of 2-3 years ago?

[psubills62]

So what exactly was the reason for drafting Whitner so high then??

I know, I know: He's "fast, smart, and versatile."

...But he doesn't break up passes. He doesn't intercept the ball. He doesn't even deliver the big hit that makes WRs scared to come across the middle.

Since people don't like the comparison with Polamalu or Ed Reed, how about Brian Dawkins? Rodney Harrison of 2-3 years ago?

Probably because Whitner was young, and showed good ability against the run. He was a solid safety who they thought could grow into something more.

As far as the "big hit" - do you not remember his hit against Chad Johnson, where they had to take "Ocho Cinco" out on a stretcher? That's not a big hit?

I'm not necessarily defending the Whitner pick because I've been pretty disappointed with him. But at the time, I'm sure OBD thought he had the potential to develop into a ballhawking safety. Now, they're very close to admitting that he won't, and that you need to be a ballhawk from the start to ever be an interception machine in the NFL.

[OpIv37]

Probably because Whitner was young, and showed good ability against the run. He was a solid safety who they thought could grow into something more.

As far as the "big hit" - do you not remember his hit against Chad Johnson, where they had to take "Ocho Cinco" out on a stretcher? That's not a big hit?

I'm not necessarily defending the Whitner pick because I've been pretty disappointed with him. But at the time, I'm sure OBD thought he had the potential to develop into a ballhawking safety. Now, they're very close to admitting that he won't, and that you need to be a ballhawk from the start to ever be an interception machine in the NFL.

The hit on CJ was Whitner's ONLY big hit in three years. Hell, a few years ago the Jets punter put the smackdown on Parrish after a big return. Should the punter now be referred to as a "big hitter"?

[madness]

Byrd got all those INT's as a CB.

In Buffalo, he's going to be a S. The excuse for Whitner is that the "system" keeps him from making big plays. Why would it be any different for Byrd?
Not just the system but the position in the system. Byrd will be at FS, not SS where Whitner has been. I agree with OBD on this though. I like Byrd at FS better than moving Whitner.

[Lexwhat]

Probably because Whitner was young, and showed good ability against the run. He was a solid safety who they thought could grow into something more.

As far as the "big hit" - do you not remember his hit against Chad Johnson, where they had to take "Ocho Cinco" out on a stretcher? That's not a big hit?

I'm not necessarily defending the Whitner pick because I've been pretty disappointed with him. But at the time, I'm sure OBD thought he had the potential to develop into a ballhawking safety. Now, they're very close to admitting that he won't, and that you need to be a ballhawk from the start to ever be an interception machine in the NFL.

Good post overall. I do agree for the most part.

However, ONE big hit in 3 years shouldn't mean anything. Even Keith Ellison has had 2 interceptions in 3 years, but that doesn't make him a playmaker.

I gave up on the Polamalu comparison, but Whitner can't even play like a Dawkins at age 35 (I'm also an Eagles fan). Coordinators gameplanned for Dawkins / Harrison. WRs were cognizant of them when they were on the field.

I actually don't have a problem with the Byrd pick. I think he could be a great player. But drafting him that high basically means we are admitting the shortcomings of both Whitner and Simpson. Our 1st round pick, #8 overall, is not the cornerstone of our franchise by any stretch of the imagination. Draft picks like them are the reason we are a losing franchise.

[psubills62]

The hit on CJ was Whitner's ONLY big hit in three years. Hell, a few years ago the Jets punter put the smackdown on Parrish after a big return. Should the punter now be referred to as a "big hitter"?

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see many guys laying the wood every game. Besides, Lex didn't say "he's only delivered one big hit," he said "he DOESN'T even deliver the big hit..." So I gave him a counterexample. I never said Whitner was the bomb and always provides a huge hit.

[streetkings01]

Byrd got all those INT's as a CB.

In Buffalo, he's going to be a S. The excuse for Whitner is that the "system" keeps him from making big plays. Why would it be any different for Byrd?Because Whitner has never been a ball hawk! Whitner has 3 career INTs counting his days at Ohio State.

[psubills62]

Good post overall. I do agree for the most part.

However, ONE big hit in 3 years shouldn't mean anything. Even Keith Ellison has had 2 interceptions in 3 years, but that doesn't make him a playmaker.

I gave up on the Polamalu comparison, but Whitner can't even play like a Dawkins at age 35 (I'm also an Eagles fan). Coordinators gameplanned for Dawkins / Harrison. WRs were cognizant of them when they were on the field.

I actually don't have a problem with the Byrd pick. I think he could be a great player. But drafting him that high basically means we are admitting the shortcomings of both Whitner and Simpson. Our 1st round pick, #8 overall, is not the cornerstone of our franchise by any stretch of the imagination. Draft picks like them are the reason we are a losing franchise.

I see it more as the Bills moving Whitner back to where he's a better player - strong safety defending against the run. Whitner isn't a ballhawk, so they brought in a couple guys (Byrd, Lankster), who could be.

[streetkings01]

Probably because Whitner was young, and showed good ability against the run. He was a solid safety who they thought could grow into something more.

As far as the "big hit" - do you not remember his hit against Chad Johnson, where they had to take "Ocho Cinco" out on a stretcher? That's not a big hit?

I'm not necessarily defending the Whitner pick because I've been pretty disappointed with him. But at the time, I'm sure OBD thought he had the potential to develop into a ballhawking safety. Now, they're very close to admitting that he won't, and that you need to be a ballhawk from the start to ever be an interception machine in the NFL.Whitner should be known as the "Get Hit Man" instead of the "Hit Man"!

[mikemac2001]

that hit was soooo awesome tho

[psubills62]

I don't understand what your guys' problem is. I told you - I'm just as disappointed in Whitner as anyone. But you can't just go around saying "he doesn't do this, he doesn't do this," when he has done it. I'm not saying he's a ballhawk, I'm not saying he lays the wood all the time.

And I don't know the reasoning of the FO when they drafted him. I doubt that they still would have drafted him there if they know what they know about him now.

I was originally defending Byrd, then people jump on me about why the FO picked Whitner? Save it, people. I'll defend Whitner to an extent where people are incorrect about him, but I don't think he's a playmaker, and I doubt he ever will be.

I know some of you want to turn this thread into another "bash the FO" thread. But there are plenty of other places where you can talk about Whitner besides this thread. Byrd has been a turnover machine thus far in his career, and has shown intelligence as well as return ability on ST's (like we needed another one). That's why they drafted him.

Somehow, you guys aren't happy when they draft a guy who wasn't a ballhawk, now you're not happy when they do?

[kid mickey]

When Whitner had a solid FS playing next to him he did well. When the FS was not playing well or any other DB was not playing well his play regressed. He had to play multiple roles. I think if you just let him concentrate on being a SS he will be good.

[Lexwhat]

Somehow, you guys aren't happy when they draft a guy who wasn't a ballhawk, now you're not happy when they do?

This is not the point though.

I don't think the Byrd pick was all that bad. I think the Whitner and Simpson picks were terrible. If Whitner/Simpson were good picks, we would (likely) never have even picked Byrd in the first place. We could've used that pick to fill another position (Tackle, Linebacker, DT, WR, etc.)

When a team drafts poorly, they are forced to spend high draft picks on those same positions in future drafts. Don't you see the cycle?

And even though Whitner will move back to Strong Safety, I don't think he will do much better there. The front office talked all about how Whitner was being moved to FS to give him more playmaking opportunities. He obviously failed at that. If he was any good at it, we would've just drafted a Strong Safety.

[OpIv37]

When Whitner had a solid FS playing next to him he did well. When the FS was not playing well or any other DB was not playing well his play regressed. He had to play multiple roles. I think if you just let him concentrate on being a SS he will be good.

and the Saint Donte excuse-fest continues!

[Mitchell55]

and the Saint Donte excuse-fest continues!



Were giving Youboty, McCargo, and Williams 1 more year. Give Whitner 1 more year.

[Lexwhat]

When Whitner had a solid FS playing next to him he did well. When the FS was not playing well or any other DB was not playing well his play regressed. He had to play multiple roles. I think if you just let him concentrate on being a SS he will be good.

:shakeno:

[OpIv37]

Were giving Youboty, McCargo, and Williams 1 more year. Give Whitner 1 more year.

I'm pretty convinced McCargo is a bust and I wouldn't mind seeing them move/cut him now, if a more viable option becomes available. Youboty finally showed some promise last year so I have no problem giving him at least one more season, maybe more depending on how he progresses. Williams has surpassed McCargo- he's not spectacular and I think he could do more to live up to his potential, but I don't mind having him as part of our rotation.

As far as Whitner, while I wouldn't mind an upgrade, I don't think he urgently needs to be replaced. He's not that bad and this team has far more pressing needs. My problems with Whitner are:

1. He's never lived up to the hype or expectations of being a #8 overall draft pick
2. When he screws up or even when his play is average, people insist on defending the guy. It's always the system or some other player or something other than Whitner himself that gets blamed.

It's just exhausting to see people continuously defend mediocrity. I just want all the players on this team to be held accountable for their performance, Whitner included.

[kid mickey]

With a team with no pass rush the past 3 years you are expecting these guys to be saviors on this team. This team is so young and they have to learn all by themselves. No vets to help learn the intricacies of the game. The average age of these guys is 25. That's a pretty young roster. You get better with experience. Most rookies don't start right away. The Bills are one of those teams who have had a lot of rookies starting or getting starts their first year. With the exception of McCargo and Hardy most guys taken in the first two rounds are getting a shot to start. This year won't be any different. In fact six guys in this draft have the potential to start day one. Their will be growing pains. Three guys on offense, three guys on defense.

[psubills62]

This is not the point though.

I don't think the Byrd pick was all that bad. I think the Whitner and Simpson picks were terrible. If Whitner/Simpson were good picks, we would (likely) never have even picked Byrd in the first place. We could've used that pick to fill another position (Tackle, Linebacker, DT, WR, etc.)

When a team drafts poorly, they are forced to spend high draft picks on those same positions in future drafts. Don't you see the cycle?

And even though Whitner will move back to Strong Safety, I don't think he will do much better there. The front office talked all about how Whitner was being moved to FS to give him more playmaking opportunities. He obviously failed at that. If he was any good at it, we would've just drafted a Strong Safety.

Before the injury, Simpson was not a bad pick. He was much better at covering and could actually run. For a fourth rounder, he did well as a rookie starting safety. Maybe Simpson wouldn't have turned into anything special, but his development seemed obviously hampered by the genius that was Jason Webster.

If you don't think the Byrd pick is that bad, then stop complaining. We can't go back in time and reverse the Whitner pick. I'm betting that everyone in the FO knows we shouldn't have picked him that high. Great, but it's done. He's on the team, and he's not a bad strong safety. They'll use him however they can, and they're drafting to try and complement him, so his weaknesses aren't as apparent.

[Lexwhat]

Before the injury, Simpson was not a bad pick. He was much better at covering and could actually run. For a fourth rounder, he did well as a rookie starting safety. Maybe Simpson wouldn't have turned into anything special, but his development seemed obviously hampered by the genius that was Jason Webster.

If you don't think the Byrd pick is that bad, then stop complaining. We can't go back in time and reverse the Whitner pick. I'm betting that everyone in the FO knows we shouldn't have picked him that high. Great, but it's done. He's on the team, and he's not a bad strong safety. They'll use him however they can, and they're drafting to try and complement him, so his weaknesses aren't as apparent.

Simpson broke his ankle. I can't understand why he didn't fully recover from that. But anyways, his biggest regression has been mentally. He doesn't seem to have what it takes to be a solid NFL player.

And when did I complain about the Byrd pick? I am complaining about the poor decisions this FO keeps on making, year after year.

1. Unless Nic Harris / Bowen / DiGiorgio are the answer, we still have no replacement for that piece of crap player Keith Ellison.

2. It took wayyyyy too long for the Bills to draft some O-Lineman. I won't complain about this too much because they finally got it right, IMO. But still, makes you wonder how a FO can be so incompetent.

3. Why is Chris Kelsey still on this team?

4. Dick Jauron / Turk Schonert / Perry Fewell. Game planning and management are absolutely horrendous. Even though our talent level is improving with this draft, do you really think these 3 guys have what it takes to compete against Bill Belichick, Tony Sparano, and Rex Ryan?

[Mahdi]

Question? How great was Crowell in coverage? And, since he was a straight beast, how much did it really matter? He was the best LB we had in a while. Physical. Plays around the line.

If you don't like E. Brown, Clint Sintim was there.
Sintim is not a coverage LB. He is a blitzer, edge rusher. Not ideal for a cover 2. If anything he would be a DE in our scheme.

[TigerJ]

I find it curious that all the talk about Whitner this offseason has been about him moving to FS. If Buffalo was going to draft a safety, it would be a strong safety top air with Whitner playing FS. Now there's been a flop flop. Whitner will go back to SS and Byrd is being talked about only as a FS. I understand that Byrd's reputation all along has been that he makes the kind of momentum turning plays that you want from a free safety. What I wonder is whether Buffalo had in the back of their mind all along that if Byrd was available in round two they would draft him as their free safety and the talk about whitner was intentionally misleading, or they were really surprised Byrd was there in round two, and reversed their earlier thinking on the spot.

[psubills62]

I find it curious that all the talk about Whitner this offseason has been about him moving to FS. If Buffalo was going to draft a safety, it would be a strong safety top air with Whitner playing FS. Now there's been a flop flop. Whitner will go back to SS and Byrd is being talked about only as a FS. I understand that Byrd's reputation all along has been that he makes the kind of momentum turning plays that you want from a free safety. What I wonder is whether Buffalo had in the back of their mind all along that if Byrd was available in round two they would draft him as their free safety and the talk about whitner was intentionally misleading, or they were really surprised Byrd was there in round two, and reversed their earlier thinking on the spot.

I do think you bring up a good point. I also wonder how much of this is a depth move. Scott seems able to play the SS position as well as Whitner. We also have to consider the rumors that Whitner has played injured a decent amount during the past couple of years. If that's true, then maybe Buffalo doesn't want Whitner playing injured anymore, so Byrd was partially drafted to ensure good depth at the safety spot. That way if Whitner does have a minor injury that would hamper his play, he has no excuse - we've got a replacement for him and he can wait to let his injury heal.

[madness]

I do think you bring up a good point. I also wonder how much of this is a depth move. Scott seems able to play the SS position as well as Whitner. We also have to consider the rumors that Whitner has played injured a decent amount during the past couple of years. If that's true, then maybe Buffalo doesn't want Whitner playing injured anymore, so Byrd was partially drafted to ensure good depth at the safety spot. That way if Whitner does have a minor injury that would hamper his play, he has no excuse - we've got a replacement for him and he can wait to let his injury heal.

I don't know about previous years but he did play with a separated shoulder for almost half the season while covering three positions so depth in the secondary is definitely a concern in my book.

[psubills62]

I don't know about previous years but he did play with a separated shoulder for almost half the season while covering three positions so depth in the secondary is definitely a concern in my book.

I don't remember any specifics, but I do recall some talk of him playing injured last year. Byrd is versatile and will definitely provide good depth for our secondary.

[Mahdi]

Im 100% certain that Byrd will be our starting FS day 1 with Whitner at SS. One of Wilson or Simpson will be cut.

[Ed]

I find it curious that all the talk about Whitner this offseason has been about him moving to FS. If Buffalo was going to draft a safety, it would be a strong safety top air with Whitner playing FS. Now there's been a flop flop. Whitner will go back to SS and Byrd is being talked about only as a FS. I understand that Byrd's reputation all along has been that he makes the kind of momentum turning plays that you want from a free safety. What I wonder is whether Buffalo had in the back of their mind all along that if Byrd was available in round two they would draft him as their free safety and the talk about whitner was intentionally misleading, or they were really surprised Byrd was there in round two, and reversed their earlier thinking on the spot.
I think the Bills probably realized that Whitner and Scott were our two best safeties and that Scott is a much better fit at SS, where Whitner is a guy that could really play any DB position, so it made sense to move him to FS in order to get Scott on the field. At the time, they didn't know who they were going to draft, so now that Byrd is in the picture they have more options.