So The Bills Should Have Drafted Bulaga Or Clausen At #9 Just To Satisfy The Media ?

[Night Train]

I wanted a LT or QB as much as anyone.. but if none are actually worthy of that pick at #9, then how is that the Bills fault ? Overdraft Saffold ? Select a short popgun arm QB in McCoy, because he's famous ? Every position has 5-10 top line starters to chose from ? Really ? News to me and I follow college players closely. If you just reach for a need, then aren't you doing the same dumb things that wrecked this team before Nix came here ?

Instead, this is what we get from these media types.

Spiller is a luxury pick (really ? :rofl:) and the Bills didn't pick a LT or QB.

The names mean nothing to us (since we don't know anything about them unless they are named Tebow). Instead of grading each player we picked individually, (which would require actual knowledge and effort) lets wave a broad brush and predict the Bills won't make the playoffs this year. That way we win every argument.

:rolleyes:

This is a 2+ year rebuild job and some good players were added this past weekend. The job is hardly complete but perception/draft summaries by the media & by many here is borderline comical.

You honestly believe the media knows any of these guys we picked ?

[dasaybz]

I don't understand how Spiller wasn't in the top 3 picks. Sure, teams pick for needs, but this guy should have been seriously considered up there. He's that good. Why do you think the Bills took about 2 seconds before their pick was in?

[dasaybz]

Here's another thing, many draft "experts" say that we reached on our 2nd rounder, but how about making up for it by getting a steal in Spiller? Just my opinion.

[elltrain22]

- alot of "smart" football guys, that really understand football (Gil Brandt, Pat Kirwan, etc) loved our draft.

- people that don't know crap about football, and just look at mock drafts, naturally will say we screwed up, b/c they only have base their knowledge on stupid mock drafts.

- everyone says Troupe was a reach, but IMO, I really think, left unpicked, some team would've drafted him in the 2nd round.

- how could anyone call Spiller a luxury pick, when our offense sucked last year, the year before that, heck its sucked since Jim Kelly. We needed a playmaker, and we damn sure got one; nuff said. But hey if it wasn't on espn's or Mel Kiper's mock draft, we must have made a blunder.

I love our draft!!!

[hydro]

Well if no one remembers we have been getting pretty good draft grades the past few seasons. Look how that has turned out for us. This time we are going against the grain. Maybe it will play in our favor.

[DesertFox24]

- alot of "smart" football guys, that really understand football (Gil Brandt, Pat Kirwan, etc) loved our draft.

- people that don't know crap about football, and just look at mock drafts, naturally will say we screwed up, b/c they only have base their knowledge on stupid mock drafts.

- everyone says Troupe was a reach, but IMO, I really think, left unpicked, some team would've drafted him in the 2nd round.

- how could anyone call Spiller a luxury pick, when our offense sucked last year, the year before that, heck its sucked since Jim Kelly. We needed a playmaker, and we damn sure got one; nuff said. But hey if it wasn't on espn's or Mel Kiper's mock draft, we must have made a blunder.

I love our draft!!!
Agree....

Funny I was in Jacksonville watching the draft with friends and locals and media (not friends) were ripping Gene Smith (Jax GM) for picking small school guys, lol. This after the guy had probably the best draft in their history last year and got great production from rookies.

They have a writer on their page that does an article called ask vic everyday and he answered a question about small school prospects and that they suck because of it. He replied that he used to work the steelers during the 70s and listed all of their hofs and half of them came from schools you never heard of. Point he was trying to make is the object is to find football players not big name guys that sell seats (Cody).

[ddaryl]

OR if the Bills traded back and were able to fill needs like LT and/or QB the media would have jumped all over the Bills draft IMO

[Mike in Syracuse]

The national media seems to share this view that picking a QB or OT in the 1st round instantly solves your problems at that position. I some cases it may but the numbers don't show it. Clausen or McCoy wasn't going to come in here and "light it up" and Bulaga wasn't going to be an all pro OT. Bulaga is a LOT less talented that Gallery and he couldn't make it work at tackle.

Mike Williams anyone?

[trapezeus]

interesting thread after i read the "scouts hate mcshay" article.

It's funny, right? we are trying please media members who actually are looked down upon within the scouting community.

We need three years to see if we got it right. but i think we'll know in 2 games if spiller can overcome a weak line.

[Saratoga Slim]

- alot of "smart" football guys, that really understand football (Gil Brandt, Pat Kirwan, etc) loved our draft.


That's what I've been noticing. There are a few guys that think we knocked our draft out of the park, and more that think we did a terrible job. There aren't many opinions in between.

I think that chasm comes down to

A) The group that likes our draft understands two things:

1. With the switch to a 3-4 and the need for real playmakers, the Bills had major needs other than LT and QB. As such, Spiller wasn't a "luxury" pick, and

2. Because Nix is approaching this as a 2-3 year rebuilding to fill all of our many needs, he was going to stick to his draft board and take the BPA among 4-5 positions of major need. Thus you didn't see him reach for a LT that he didn't like (Charles Brown) when there was a NT that he did like available.

Whereas

B) The group that thinks we totally tanked the draft:

1) Has a more limited understanding of the Bills needs in the context of the direction that Nix/Gailey are taking the team, and is therefore totally focused on the QB and LT positions. They think that those two positions should have been addressed immediately with the BPA at those positions. Thus, for instance, they would apparently have had us take Clausen instead of Troup even if our internal draft grade on Clausen said that he doesn't bring anything to the table that we don't already have with Edwards or Brohm. Instead, we took Troup, because NT is also a position of major need, and Troup did offer a major upgrade over what we had.

You can't disagree with those commentators that say we needed a QB and didn't get one, but you can very surely argue that the Bills were wise to refrain from spending their 2nd round pick on a guy they didn't think would significantly improve the QB position, when they had a guy available that they thought would constitute a major upgrade at another position critical to the system that they are installing.

2) Also, the people that hated our draft generally are media people and therefore focus on measurables and perceived talent. They have access to some film, other people's mock drafts and profiles, and that about it - they haven't had the opportunity that scouts do to learn about the guys' character and football acumen through interview and investigation. This leads to a working knowledge that tends to skew toward big-school, big-name prospects that are easiest to learn about. Thus I don't think a lot of commentators that didn't like our draft gave us enough credit for the value we got in guys like Carrington & Moats - simply because they didn't know enough about them (while guys like Kirwin note that Carrington was among the best players on the field at the Senior Bowl).

[EDS]

I don't understand how Spiller wasn't in the top 3 picks. Sure, teams pick for needs, but this guy should have been seriously considered up there. He's that good. Why do you think the Bills took about 2 seconds before their pick was in?

The reason is that running backs just are not drafted that highly anymore unless they are truly special, because so many teams have been successful finding productive backs later in the draft.

[jamze132]

I could give a **** about the majority of these so called "draft graders" since most have no clue about the Bills and their needs other than cruising the depth chart on buffalobills.com.

I have said this numerous times over the past week; just because you have a need doesn't mean it can be filled in the draft. There was one decent QB IMO and he was drafted #1. You don't go spending top 10 picks on the 2nd or 3rd best prospect when a bonafide homerun hitter is sitting there. I absolutely loved the Spiller pick.

[TigerJ]

Seeing that Clausen dropped to fairly late in the second round, he clearly would have been seen as a reach by the rest of the NFL, if not the media at #9 overall. Bulaga is an interesting case. He is clearly the most NFL ready of all the top tackles in the draft, but he probably has the lowest ceiling, and some just don't think he has the requisite athleticism to handle the LT spot in the NFL, and would thus have to play RT. Since Buffalo's offensive line need was clearly centered on left tackle, Bulaga may not have been a great pick for them. The other available tackles at #9 were not clear solutions either. Davis has serious maturity issues and Campbell is much more of an athlete than a proven tackle. Plus, he has injury issues. I would be curious to know what Buffalo would have done had Okung or Trent Williams had dropped, but that's not going to happen. I'm satisfied that they made a good pick at #9.

[Night Train]

That's what I've been noticing. There are a few guys that think we knocked our draft out of the park, and more that think we did a terrible job. There aren't many opinions in between.

I think that chasm comes down to

A) The group that likes our draft understands two things:

1. With the switch to a 3-4 and the need for real playmakers, the Bills had major needs other than LT and QB. As such, Spiller wasn't a "luxury" pick, and

2. Because Nix is approaching this as a 2-3 year rebuilding to fill all of our many needs, he was going to stick to his draft board and take the BPA among 4-5 positions of major need. Thus you didn't see him reach for a LT that he didn't like (Charles Brown) when there was a NT that he did like available.

Whereas

B) The group that thinks we totally tanked the draft:

1) Has a more limited understanding of the Bills needs in the context of the direction that Nix/Gailey are taking the team, and is therefore totally focused on the QB and LT positions. They think that those two positions should have been addressed immediately with the BPA at those positions. Thus, for instance, they would apparently have had us take Clausen instead of Troup even if our internal draft grade on Clausen said that he doesn't bring anything to the table that we don't already have with Edwards or Brohm. Instead, we took Troup, because NT is also a position of major need, and Troup did offer a major upgrade over what we had.

You can't disagree with those commentators that say we needed a QB and didn't get one, but you can very surely argue that the Bills were wise to refrain from spending their 2nd round pick on a guy they didn't think would significantly improve the QB position, when they had a guy available that they thought would constitute a major upgrade at another position critical to the system that they are installing.

2) Also, the people that hated our draft generally are media people and therefore focus on measurables and perceived talent. They have access to some film, other people's mock drafts and profiles, and that about it - they haven't had the opportunity that scouts do to learn about the guys' character and football acumen through interview and investigation. This leads to a working knowledge that tends to skew toward big-school, big-name prospects that are easiest to learn about. Thus I don't think a lot of commentators that didn't like our draft gave us enough credit for the value we got in guys like Carrington & Moats - simply because they didn't know enough about them (while guys like Kirwin note that he was among the best players on the field at the Senior Bowl).

:bf1:

[Philagape]

I'm liking this draft more and more. Excellent points by Saratoga (most underrated Bills poster!) and jamze

[Bill Cody]

There aren't many opinions in between.



I would like to ask Buddy Nix about the Troup pick. My take was we reached for him at least a half a round early. I just think they felt they had to have a NT and they were willing to reach to get him. Pity we didn't move down 10-12 spots and take him there and then use the extra third to snatch Colt McCoy right out from under Cleveland's nose. Other than that I think we took players in positions of value which is something we haven't done in years. You can argue about the Spiller pick (and I have) but at least we didn't reach for him. That was my biggest worry going in was that we'd reach and reach. other than Troup I don't think we did. If we hit on a couple of the late picks this could be a pretty damn solid draft, we would have needed 20 picks to fill all of our holes.

[Iehoshua]

would have needed 20 picks to fill all of our holes.
That's what she said.

[mysticsoto]

I would like to ask Buddy Nix about the Troup pick. My take was we reached for him at least a half a round early. I just think they felt they had to have a NT and they were willing to reach to get him. Pity we didn't move down 10-12 spots and take him there and then use the extra third to snatch Colt McCoy right out from under Cleveland's nose. Other than that I think we took players in positions of value which is something we haven't done in years. You can argue about the Spiller pick (and I have) but at least we didn't reach for him. That was my biggest worry going in was that we'd reach and reach. other than Troup I don't think we did. If we hit on a couple of the late picks this could be a pretty damn solid draft, we would have needed 20 picks to fill all of our holes.

I'm going to guess that the Bills had in mind jumping back into the 1st rd to get Dan Williams and when they were not able to, decided they better take their next best NT before he was gone too.

[Prov401]

I don't understand how Spiller wasn't in the top 3 picks. Sure, teams pick for needs, but this guy should have been seriously considered up there. He's that good. Why do you think the Bills took about 2 seconds before their pick was in?

If I'm right, Adrian Peterson was picked right around Spiller's spot (8th or 9th). Sometimes RB's are viewed as luxuary picks because football games are won in the trenches. However, many teams are kicking themselves for passing up on AP, and I believe some will kick themselves for passing up on CJ.

I'm happy with all our picks, and believe we have found at the very least 3 starters this year with CJ, Troup, and Carrington. Easly looks like he has hands made of glue, and was a walk on in college that was on the verge of having 1,000 receiving yards last year. Moats and Batten are good solid depth. I'm not too crazy about the Wang pickup, but at least we're going to get some exposure in China. Calloway from what I've been hearing is beastly when on his game, but a bit slow. And we have now 2 project QB's in Brohm and Brown, which is fine by me.

I believe we have made the right steps in building a contending football team.
'Draft experts' have no clue how these kids will transition into the professional level of football, so I can care less about our C-/D grades we are getting. Bottom line, Nix has said this is a process, and is going to take more than 1 draft. It's obvious he wanted to beef our D up, and will most likely focus on the O-Line next year.

[Mike]

Only time will tell how Good or Bad their draft was.

From the way it appears right now, according to many mock drafts and the consensus on many players the Bills FO had reaches! That means poeple in the Know strongly felt that they could have drafted some of the same players later on in the draft.

Now they may pan out, or they may not. Generrally speaking, the average NFL career is 3yrs! That means, most players picked will be Busts! So right off the bat, you are fighting an uphill battle.

[Bill Cody]

I'm going to guess that the Bills had in mind jumping back into the 1st rd to get Dan Williams and when they were not able to, decided they better take their next best NT before he was gone too.

I think you're right. I just think the odds are quite high they could have moved down and still gotten him.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

Mike Williams anyone? I'll raise you a Bryant McKinnie, who the Bills SHOULD've drafted that year and we wouldn't be in this situation.

Like I said, this team was thinking they had too many holes to fill. In reality, they had one huge glaring hole (ahem...

LEFT TACKLE!!!!

...thank you), a few medium-sized holes (D-line), and a bunch of other holes that could be filled rather easily. I've said it before and I'll say it again: LT prospects at the high end are much less risky than any other position. See, for instance, Jake Long and Dabrickashaw Ferguson-- both in this division alone-- who were immediate upgrades for their respective teams. They last far longer than running backs. They are VERY EXPENSIVE and thus worth the top-round money, especially in a city that can't draw flies for free agents (especially after TO's debacle). You have to get them while they're captive and keep them happy once they're here, otherwise you'll just end up with another Jason Peters-- underpay now, then have him end up holding out until he gets to go to another team.

With all that in mind, the Bills' mentality should've been trading up to the top 5. As I said before, the Redskins, with no Day 2 or fourth-round picks, would've been ideal for this. Everyone wants to move around in the upper-2nd/lower-1st rounds, and that's not really smart. By trading up to the top 5, they would've had the choice of any LT they wanted. So this excuse of not having a good enough LT there at #9 was bullcrap. No one said they had to stay at #9.

Priorities.

[Mike]

Just about every year a team takes a huge reach, and the homers on that team find a way to justify that pick while it is obvious to everyone else that the pick was bad. Sometimes these picks are so bad that even average fans that only look at mock drafts would not make the same mistake.

This year it was Jax selecting Alualu (sp) who I think will be a good player, but deffintaly not top 10 talent this yr. Last year it was the Raiders taking a speedy wr that was not top 10 material. These mistakes were obvious to all but homers that justify the picks.

A few years ago the Bills did the same thing taking Whittner (sp) a player no one had in the top 10. Bills homers justified the pick agruing that he could become a great player... and kept justifying it for years, until the Reality Set in. He is average! We could of had a Top DT - consensus was that he was a better player.

This year we reach w/the Troup Pick. Most GM had him as a 3rd or 4th rounder! We took him in the second ahead of Cody, who most experst had rated much higher. Now Bills fans are justifying the pick and critizing the media. You will be doing this for 3 more years, until it is appeart that it was a bad pick, then justify the bad pick by arguing that hiegn sight is only 20/20.

Why is that even after 10yrs of bad football we Bills fans can not call a spade a spade and realize when bad football decisions are being made? Why do you have to wait 3-5yrs until it is appearent, why is it obvious to everyone but us?

Jouron was an obviously bad hire, some on this board critized it many justified it!
Gaily is an even worse hire, and only a few crisized it and many more justified it?

Is false hope that impartant, that you are not even willing to call a spade a spade?

[Philagape]

I'll raise you a Bryant McKinnie, who the Bills SHOULD've drafted that year and we wouldn't be in this situation.

Like I said, this team was thinking they had too many holes to fill. In reality, they had one huge glaring hole (ahem...

LEFT TACKLE!!!!

...thank you), a few medium-sized holes (D-line), and a bunch of other holes that could be filled rather easily. I've said it before and I'll say it again: LT prospects at the high end are much less risky than any other position. See, for instance, Jake Long and Dabrickashaw Ferguson-- both in this division alone-- who were immediate upgrades for their respective teams. They last far longer than running backs. They are VERY EXPENSIVE and thus worth the top-round money, especially in a city that can't draw flies for free agents (especially after TO's debacle). You have to get them while they're captive and keep them happy once they're here, otherwise you'll just end up with another Jason Peters-- underpay now, then have him end up holding out until he gets to go to another team.

With all that in mind, the Bills' mentality should've been trading up to the top 5. As I said before, the Redskins, with no Day 2 or fourth-round picks, would've been ideal for this. Everyone wants to move around in the upper-2nd/lower-1st rounds, and that's not really smart. By trading up to the top 5, they would've had the choice of any LT they wanted. So this excuse of not having a good enough LT there at #9 was bullcrap. No one said they had to stay at #9.

Priorities.

Left tackle is NOT the one huge glaring hole. That's ridiculous. The defense was 30th against the run. The offense scored 23 total TDs, and Spiller does more to impact that than ANY LT.

And yeah, just trade up, as if they can do it at will, and take away picks for the many other needs and stick with 4-3 players at the most important 3-4 positions, and turn a two-year rebuild into at least a three-year rebuild.

Just plain asinine.

[Bill Cody]

This year we reach w/the Troup Pick. Most GM had him as a 3rd or 4th rounder! We took him in the second ahead of Cody, who most experst had rated much higher.

It is going to be a point worth noting down the road. I do believe we reached on this pick and my main beef with it is we can't afford to do that when a trade down would have netted us another potential starter. On the other hand I am quite willing to give Nix the benefit of the doubt on the choice of Troup over Cody. Cody is a biscuit away from eating himself out of the league before he starts. Age 21 and 360 pounds? Yes, he's a talent but he's also a risk. I'm not ready to second guess that Nix didn't do his homework on the NT options.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

Left tackle is NOT the one huge glaring hole. That's ridiculous. The defense was 30th against the run Primarily because the offense kept getting run off the field after three downs, wearing down the defense and burning them out, opening up opportunities for the opposition to make big plays. How many come-from-behind wins did the Bills' opponents make against the Bills last year? How many times did the wheels come off in the fourth quarter? Precisely because they lost the time-of-possession battle. Care to take a guess as to WHY they were losing TOP? It wasn't just DT trouble (and, by the way, as I understand it the big weakness of the 3-4 is that it's not as good against the run). It was a lack of pass protection. Whenever the QB of the week would step onto the field, he'd get sacked or hurried on third down, or else Demetrius Bell or Andy Levitre would draw a 10-yard holding penalty and kill the drive. It's a trickle-down effect. Bad protection at the LT position reflects poorly downward onto the passing game and then to, yes, the defense. So for those who say "LTs don't stop the run..." indirectly, yeah, they do.

[Philagape]

Primarily because the offense kept getting run off the field after three downs, wearing down the defense and burning them out, opening up opportunities for the opposition to make big plays. How many come-from-behind wins did the Bills' opponents make against the Bills last year? How many times did the wheels come off in the fourth quarter? Precisely because they lost the time-of-possession battle. Care to take a guess as to WHY they were losing TOP? It wasn't just DT trouble (and, by the way, as I understand it the big weakness of the 3-4 is that it's not as good against the run). It was a lack of pass protection. Whenever the QB of the week would step onto the field, he'd get sacked or hurried on third down, or else Demetrius Bell or Andy Levitre would draw a 10-yard holding penalty and kill the drive. It's a trickle-down effect. Bad protection at the LT position reflects poorly downward onto the passing game and then to, yes, the defense. So for those who say "LTs don't stop the run..." indirectly, yeah, they do.

The run defense sucked plenty on its own. The Jets didn't run for 567 yards in two games because of the Bills' left tackle.
I didn't say it was "just" DT trouble. But nor was it because of the LT in big capital letters.
The quarterbacks sucked plenty on their own.
Of course LT is a need. But not worth trading up for -- which would delay the Bills' rebuilding -- and not worth passing up superior players.

[BertSquirtgum]

I'll raise you a Bryant McKinnie, who the Bills SHOULD've drafted that year and we wouldn't be in this situation.

Like I said, this team was thinking they had too many holes to fill. In reality, they had one huge glaring hole (ahem...

LEFT TACKLE!!!!

...thank you), a few medium-sized holes (D-line), and a bunch of other holes that could be filled rather easily. I've said it before and I'll say it again: LT prospects at the high end are much less risky than any other position. See, for instance, Jake Long and Dabrickashaw Ferguson-- both in this division alone-- who were immediate upgrades for their respective teams. They last far longer than running backs. They are VERY EXPENSIVE and thus worth the top-round money, especially in a city that can't draw flies for free agents (especially after TO's debacle). You have to get them while they're captive and keep them happy once they're here, otherwise you'll just end up with another Jason Peters-- underpay now, then have him end up holding out until he gets to go to another team.

With all that in mind, the Bills' mentality should've been trading up to the top 5. As I said before, the Redskins, with no Day 2 or fourth-round picks, would've been ideal for this. Everyone wants to move around in the upper-2nd/lower-1st rounds, and that's not really smart. By trading up to the top 5, they would've had the choice of any LT they wanted. So this excuse of not having a good enough LT there at #9 was bullcrap. No one said they had to stay at #9.

Priorities.
you're an idiot. your post have all been whining about left tackle this, left tackle that since the draft. do us all a favor and give it a rest.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

I think I'm done harping on the issue. It's a dead horse at this point. I was explaining why it's not just "satisfying the media." It's truly making a move that is most likely to improve the team in as many facets of the game as possible.

[ServoBillieves]

We got an astounding playmaker in the first?! IS DICK RUNNING THIS DRAFT!?
A big body to fill the new 3-4 scheme?! FAILURE!
A starting caliber DE in the 3rd?! **** ME!
Lack of productive receivers... we've only had midgets at WR before T.O. but they wouldn't dare take a HOLY GUACAMOLE A RECEIVER IN THE 4th?! DIE BUDDY NIX!
Ed Wang in the 5th... Pffft no one could start on an NFL line in the 5th round! (SB winning Jon Goodwin, Jake Scott, Ryan O'Callaghan, Jake Bell, David Diehl, Brad Butler, Chris Kuper, Geoff Hangartner, Dan Koppen, Sean Mahan, Tony Pashos... I can go on in recent memory, probably missing some...)
Depth in rounds after and a project QB...

This draft was a failure.

We didn't take Mel Kipers love-child at 9 instead of 48 = fail
The best OT's are off the board, why didn't we move up?! = fail
Glaring weaknesses everywhere, but we didn't fill the one I wanted!! = fail.

... Oh hey South Park is on I can stop being sarcastic.

[Marvelous]

I like this thread. I agree with 1st post...We can't pick LT @9 just because we don't have a good starter there. Maybe i'd be curious if Trent Williams or Okung we're still on the board at the time. But they mighta passed even then for SPiller. Seems like the Ralph and Buddy & co are in love, lol

[PECKERWOOD]

It was either Clausen or Davis in my mock drafts, let the future decide.