P.O.V's on our draft strategy

[Marvelous]

-The media & some fans, but mainly the media personalities are so short sighted. Why do they feel we are gonna be able to repair the whole starting roster in 1 draft? And with no extra picks etc... Spiller is a need if we(we=coaches/Ralph etc) are unhappy w/ Lynch & only see Fred Jackson as a stud reserve/#2. Our O-line isn't as pathetic as it seemed in the last half o' the season. We we're YET-AGAIN bleeding from injured players who we're not in the starting lineup..

--The main argument is LT is the main "need" position. With DE being the #2 main need imo.. But If there's isn't a player available that "WE" like @ #9, then they go with who's the highest on their board. Jamie Dukes is the poster-child for having this kindergarden POV. And graded our draft a D. Because we didn't uddress the LT spot. Even though we did draft Wang. Does addressing LT only count if it's in the 1st round?
--What bothers me is Jamie Dukes said/did the same exact thing last year. Anytime after Maybin was selected, & in every draft show following, dude was a broken record repeating how ******ed we are for ignoring the O-line. Even though we drafted Eric Wood & Andy Levitre. Both two of our 1st 3 picks.

--The media never seems to consider that if a team drafts a guard high, that could allow us to move a current player like say Brad Butler to Tackle.. Instead of even considering this, Jamie Dukes & MANY media types are assuming that we don't know how to draft..

---I LIKE THE SPILLER PICK MORE & MORE.. It shows that we werent gonna draft based on the depth chart/need etc... Imagine if we did take Clausen @9? We even had NO interest in the 2nd round on him. LOL..
--Brian Bulaga & The Rutgers Tackle are two players who many "experts" wanted us to take. Based on the depth chart. I know our draft board didn't value the two tackles the way fans & media did. If either of teh two we're "The Answer" to our tackle needs then we woulda picked them.. Obvious right? It is to me..
----Also---How do media types and some fans view the draft as the opnly way to form a roster? What if we did sign a Flozell Adams to play LT? Or a FA next season.
-That can be said for any position.

--#77 Bell-- OBD is high on the kid. I am undecided. I remember hearing "holding #77" ALOT,,But isn't that to be expected with any new starter playing Thee coveted LT?

--My botom line--I'm annoyed @ experts, media & fans alike grading our draft just based on the depth chart.


--FYI- The safety Corey Chaveous from The Draft on NFLN graded our draft as thee best.. I've never heard a media type to grade any draft of ours that highly. Well he gave us a A+ and the only other A was Seattle(i-think)... Thanks Chaveous..

[jamze132]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

We had a damn good draft. I can't wait!

[hydro]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

Chavous gave us a A not a A+...

[ddaryl]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

Who cares what the media thinks. In the end the only thing that counts is winning...

[BoyILuvLoznStupidly]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

Who cares what the media thinks. In the end the only thing that counts is winning...

.......and a little "luck, you gotta have luck in life"

[OpIv37]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

--Brian Bulaga & The Rutgers Tackle are two players who many "experts" wanted us to take. Based on the depth chart. I know our draft board didn't value the two tackles the way fans & media did. If either of teh two we're "The Answer" to our tackle needs then we woulda picked them.. Obvious right? It is to me..


--#77 Bell-- OBD is high on the kid. I am undecided. I remember hearing "holding #77" ALOT,,But isn't that to be expected with any new starter playing Thee coveted LT?

--My botom line--I'm annoyed @ experts, media & fans alike grading our draft just based on the depth chart.

I disagree with a lot of what you've said, but I've already stated why and I'm not going to waste anyone's time doing it again. So I'll focus on these three things.

-If they were the answer we would have picked them? Based on WHAT exactly? This team has whiffed on so many draft picks in the past that it's not even funny.

-Bell is terrible. It's not just the holding. It's false starts, it's footwork (which leads to the holding), it's a lot of things. The guy just isn't that good.

-whether you like it or not, the depth chart goes a long way in determining how good or bad the Bills do this year, and right now it has some glaring holes that weren't addressed in either FA or the draft. The idea of rebuilding is to improve slowly. After a full draft and a full FA period, we are better at RB.... and RB. Getting better at 1 position per off-season is simply not good enough.

[BidsJr]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

After a full draft and a full FA period, we are better at RB.... and RB. Getting better at 1 position per off-season is simply not good enough.

This is utter horsecrap.


But I am not surprised.


:

[OpIv37]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

This is utter horsecrap.


But I am not surprised.


:

It's absolutely not horsecrap.

On D, we added a couple of 3-4 vets and moved everybody in the front 7 to a new position. The only NT on the roster is a rookie. The D is worse due to not having the right personnel and the learning curve associated with the position switch alone.

On O, we replaced Butler with Green (downgrade). QB's- Push. RB's- upgrade with Spiller. WR's- Lost Owens and Reed, added a rookie (downgrade). Interior OL- push. TE's- push.

We literally have not gotten better at a single position outside of RB. Call it horsecrap if you want, but it's the reality of the situation.

[ct bills fan]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

If you were watching the analysts on ESPN and NFLN, Chavous knew more than anybody else - he really studies all the players via film, etc and came across as very knowledgable. They were even calling him Professor Chavous. My opinion of the draft is it's for the long term. This team is so broken now that not one, nor probably two drafts will fix it - so take the best players you can and build for the future.

This is also why you won't find the Bills signing Flozell Adams, Faneca (to Arizona already) or a quick fix WR (Owens). Thye're building for 2-3 years from now and those type of players won't help us then. That tackle from Baltimore (Gaither??) would, so, that's why they apparently went after him.

Despite what Nix says, I still think they trade Marshawn, probably for a 2011 pick (3rd round??) to a team that has a RB get injured in pre-season. Of course he's going to say Marshawn is staying - if he didn't he'd lose all leverage in trading him.

[OpIv37]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

If you were watching the analysts on ESPN and NFLN, Chavous knew more than anybody else - he really studies all the players via film, etc and came across as very knowledgable. They were even calling him Professor Chavous. My opinion of the draft is it's for the long term. This team is so broken now that not one, nor probably two drafts will fix it - so take the best players you can and build for the future.

This is also why you won't find the Bills signing Flozell Adams, Faneca (to Arizona already) or a quick fix WR (Owens). Thye're building for 2-3 years from now and those type of players won't help us then. That tackle from Baltimore (Gaither??) would, so, that's why they apparently went after him.

Despite what Nix says, I still think they trade Marshawn, probably for a 2011 pick (3rd round??) to a team that has a RB get injured in pre-season. Of course he's going to say Marshawn is staying - if he didn't he'd lose all leverage in trading him.

Why can't we do both? Why can't we draft for the future and sign someone like Flozell now? Loading up the entire roster with expensive FA's at this point is stupid, but filling a few key holes with vets for a year or two isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[mysticsoto]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

It's absolutely not horsecrap.

On D, we added a couple of 3-4 vets and moved everybody in the front 7 to a new position. The only NT on the roster is a rookie. The D is worse due to not having the right personnel and the learning curve associated with the position switch alone.

On O, we replaced Butler with Green (downgrade). QB's- Push. RB's- upgrade with Spiller. WR's- Lost Owens and Reed, added a rookie (downgrade). Interior OL- push. TE's- push.

We literally have not gotten better at a single position outside of RB. Call it horsecrap if you want, but it's the reality of the situation.

If we had drafted an OT in the 1st rd, you'd be *****ing that we reached and took a mediocre LT and that it is ludicrous to rely on a rookie to protect the QB's blindside. Not only that, but you'd then be *****ing that we passed up on a playmaker in Spiller.

If we used Troup's pick for something else, then you'd be *****ing that we have no real NT on the roster that can start and that Kyle Williams isn't going to cut it.

It really doesn't matter what happened in the draft. No matter what, you will ***** about it...

[EDS]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

This is also why you won't find the Bills signing Flozell Adams, Faneca (to Arizona already) or a quick fix WR (Owens). Thye're building for 2-3 years from now and those type of players won't help us then. That tackle from Baltimore (Gaither??) would, so, that's why they apparently went after him.

I agree that they should be building for 2-3 years from now, but some of the free agent signings they made don't necessarily fit with that construct - Green and Davis in particular due to their advanced age. So in your opinion, why did Nix sign those guys but someone like Adams or Faneca are not desireable?

[OpIv37]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

If we had drafted an OT in the 1st rd, you'd be *****ing that we reached and took a mediocre LT and that it is ludicrous to rely on a rookie to protect the QB's blindside. Not only that, but you'd then be *****ing that we passed up on a playmaker in Spiller.

If we used Troup's pick for something else, then you'd be *****ing that we have no real NT on the roster that can start and that Kyle Williams isn't going to cut it.

It really doesn't matter what happened in the draft. No matter what, you will ***** about it...

I have no problems with you disagreeing with me, but do NOT put words in my mouth. If you go back and look at my posts before the draft, I absolutely said I did not want Spiller because he does not meet one of this team's needs, and I am not a hypocrite. And I would have been perfectly content with a left tackle. If you have a legitimate argument based on something I said, please post it, but do not base your argument on what YOU think I would have said if X had happened instead of Y.

I'm really sick of people coming on here and assuming I ***** just to *****. My predictions are right more often than not.

If we had picked Cody or maybe even Linval instead of Troup, I wouldn't be *****ing at all. If we had gotten an NT or two in FA, then maybe we wouldn't have even needed to use the pick on NT.

I don't know where you got this assumption that the way the Bills' FO acted this off-season is the best way. They haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

[mysticsoto]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

I have no problems with you disagreeing with me, but do NOT put words in my mouth. If you go back and look at my posts before the draft, I absolutely said I did not want Spiller because he does not meet one of this team's needs, and I am not a hypocrite. And I would have been perfectly content with a left tackle. If you have a legitimate argument based on something I said, please post it, but do not base your argument on what YOU think I would have said if X had happened instead of Y.

I'm really sick of people coming on here and assuming I ***** just to *****. My predictions are right more often than not.

If we had picked Cody or maybe even Linval instead of Troup, I wouldn't be *****ing at all. If we had gotten an NT or two in FA, then maybe we wouldn't have even needed to use the pick on NT.

I don't know where you got this assumption that the way the Bills' FO acted this off-season is the best way. They haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

It's your pattern Op. You can say they you would have been happy with a LT pick, but I've never seen you happy, period. You would find something else to complain about. Face it, you're a complainer.

I did not see anyone in the offseason that I felt was a MUST have and that the Bills absolutely NEEDED to act on. The biggest deal was getting a coach here, and you can remember how hard that was. I wanted Shanahan or Cowher...but the well thought out draft of our current FO allows me to give them the benefit of the doubt. They didn't have me scratching my head on why we picked yet another CB when we had 20 on the roster.

[OpIv37]

Re: P.O.V's on our draft strategy

It's your pattern Op. You can say they you would have been happy with a LT pick, but I've never seen you happy, period. You would find something else to complain about. Face it, you're a complainer.

I did not see anyone in the offseason that I felt was a MUST have and that the Bills absolutely NEEDED to act on. The biggest deal was getting a coach here, and you can remember how hard that was. I wanted Shanahan or Cowher...but the well thought out draft of our current FO allows me to give them the benefit of the doubt. They didn't have me scratching my head on why we picked yet another CB when we had 20 on the roster.

I'm a complainer because the TEAM ALWAYS SUCKS. When this team does something right, I'll stop complaining. When they stop losing and stop doing the same things that cause them to lose over and over again, I'll stop complaining. But I'm a fan who wants the team to win- when the team isn't winning, the complaints are legitimate. So deal with them or go read the message board for a better team.

They picked an RB when we had two decent ones on the roster and tons of other holes, and that allows you to give them the benefit of the doubt. But when the previous regime picks a CB when we already have good CB's, you scratch your head. Huh?