Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

[Blacksheep71]

Considering the holes this roster has, is this really the year to draft a QB?

Fitzpatrick did well last year behind a below average line and with no TE and raw receivers. There is no reason he should not start the pre-season as the named starter which means any draft pick will no initially see the field. With our holes elsewhere, our No3 and possibly our No34 need to start immediately.

You should IMO only draft QB above BPA if you're having a crisis at the position and I don't think we have. Peterson, Peterson, Miller, Green and Quinn are all better players available than Newton and Gabbert at their positions, and all fill a greater area of need than QB.

I doubt Dareus falls to No3, I don't think Fairley is a 3-4 DE but I do think that we can get guys like Jenkins, Bailey and Guy outside of Round1. I'm hoping Merriman regains his form but even if he is shadow of his former himself he's still a player the opposition need to account for. Miller may not be big enough though I do think he could have a LaMaar Woodley rather than Wimberly like career. No3 is too high however. Whilst you should build a team from the inside out can we really pass up on a talent like Peterson? With McGee constantly injured, Florence and Youboty possibly leaving, a secondary of McKelvin and Corner scares me more than a DL of Carrington-Williams-Edwards plus Troup, Johnson and others.

And as there is only one TE worth taking in this draft can we fail to pass on Rudolph considering he would have been the highest rated TE next year as well? He could be there at No34 too. Look what Gronkowski added to the Pats.

I think we should continue to develop Levi Brown as a future backup, and sign a guy like Bruce Gradkowski to a 2year deal to sit behind Fitzpatrick. With QBs like Luck, Barkley, Foles, Pryor, Lance Jones and John Brantley likely to be in the 2012 mix, alongside LTs of the likes of Kalil, Potter, deChristopher, Datko, Jonathan Martin and Riley Reiff gives a possibility of upgrading most of the offense next year once we've dealt with the Defense this year around.

For the record, my hoped for draft is

1. Patrick Peterson, CB, LSU
2. Kyle Rudolph, TE, Notre Dame
3. Jarvis Jenkins, DE/T, Clemson
4. Lawrence Guy, DE/T, Arizona St
4. Thomas Keiser, OLB/DE, Stanford
5. Darius Morris, G/RT, Temple
6. Alex Wujciak, ILB, Maryland
7. Davonte Shannon, SS, Buffalo

[Don't Panic]

I'd have no problem waiting on a QB until the 4th or 5th round. We definitely need to shore up other areas, so if Buddy and Chan don't see a guy they're sold on, it would be hard to complain with a DL and TE with the first two picks.

[Night Train]

Good post. You did your homework.

I wish more here would follow your lead.

[Luisito23]

Forget about it. :cgal:

[bigfish2112]

I'd have no problem waiting on a QB until the 4th or 5th round. We definitely need to shore up other areas, so if Buddy and Chan don't see a guy they're sold on, it would be hard to complain with a DL and TE with the first two picks.Whats the point of getting another project QB we got one of those last year? Its either 1st or 2nd round this year or I wouldnt take any qb. I would get a veteran qb to back up fitz if i am not going to pick a qb in the first two rounds.

[split71]

Good post...I think the pick at 3 will be BPA and that won't be a QB.

[X-Era]

Fitzpatrick did well last year behind a below average line and with no TE and raw receivers. There is no reason he should not start the pre-season as the named starter which means any draft pick will no initially see the field. With our holes elsewhere, our No3 and possibly our No34 need to start immediately.
Fitz won't cost a 4 and 12 team much. But when we get to the point where we are .500 and knocking on the door to the playoffs, he will be inadequate IMO. The Bills lately have done a bad job about getting starting quality play out of rookies, none of our rookies started the whole year last year. I'd love to have that as a requirement but I think it's unlikely.


You should IMO only draft QB above BPA if you're having a crisis at the position and I don't think we have. Peterson, Peterson, Miller, Green and Quinn are all better players available than Newton and Gabbert at their positions, and all fill a greater area of need than QB. IMO, this is the worst sitaution to throw a rookie QB into. You want to groom them and let them take over when they are much more ready. To me the best plan would be to have our future QB in the fold this whole year developing behind Fitz and being groomed by Gailey. At the same time, we should be developing into a decent team and becoming a threat for the playoffs. At the end of next year Fitz is a free agent and I don't want us to be stuck paying him starting QB money when he may hold us back from a playoff run. I want us to have leverage with a future QB who is ready to play.

As far as where they stack up in rankings, I rank both a bit higher than you, but I respect anyone's opinion on that. So we should just agree to disagree.

[Blacksheep71]

Fitz won't cost a 4 and 12 team much. But when we get to the point where we are .500 and knocking on the door to the playoffs, he will be inadequate IMO. The Bills lately have done a bad job about getting starting quality play out of rookies, none of our rookies started the whole year last year. I'd love to have that as a requirement but I think it's unlikely.

IMO, this is the worst sitaution to throw a rookie QB into. You want to groom them and let them take over when they are much more ready. To me the best plan would be to have our future QB in the fold this whole year developing behind Fitz and being groomed by Gailey. At the same time, we should be developing into a decent team and becoming a threat for the playoffs. At the end of next year Fitz is a free agent and I don't want us to be stuck paying him starting QB money when he may hold us back from a playoff run. I want us to have leverage with a future QB who is ready to play.

As far as where they stack up in rankings, I rank both a bit higher than you, but I respect anyone's opinion on that. So we should just agree to disagree.

I think we could find our 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounders starting - Peterson will be a no-brainer as would Rudolph, whilst a DE in Round3 would really push Carrington, Edwards and Johnson for immediate playing time. The fact was last year we drafted players we were always likely to have riding the bench as we had decent players on the roster at RB and NT. I think the brain trust realise with little FA, whoever we draft on Day1 and Day2 will be on the field.

As for QB, I like the Rams situation where Bradford and Saffold were Day1 starters. You can look at the likes of Ryan, Stafford etc and see that it doesn't hurt to start a QB from Day1 and formulate an offensive strategy to hide their initial inexperience. Sitting on the bench for a year does not always help a rookie especially when the only real experience they get over 12months is the odd few mop up minutes and practise against team mates.

If we tank, I can see 2012 bringing someone like Luck in R1 and a LT like Andrew Datko in R2, and you could say that Luck might be more ready to start from Day1 than either Gabbert or Newton with a year riding the pine.

[alohabillsfan]

I would say no to a QB in rounds 1 and 2. We need a DE, ILB x2 (POZ gone), OLB, CB (possibly 2 gone), and SS (goodbye Whitner) just for the defense......

I seriously would love to be able to trade down. ehhh.

[X-Era]

I think we could find our 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounders starting - Peterson will be a no-brainer as would Rudolph, whilst a DE in Round3 would really push Carrington, Edwards and Johnson for immediate playing time. The fact was last year we drafted players we were always likely to have riding the bench as we had decent players on the roster at RB and NT. I think the brain trust realise with little FA, whoever we draft on Day1 and Day2 will be on the field.

As for QB, I like the Rams situation where Bradford and Saffold were Day1 starters. You can look at the likes of Ryan, Stafford etc and see that it doesn't hurt to start a QB from Day1 and formulate an offensive strategy to hide their initial inexperience. Sitting on the bench for a year does not always help a rookie especially when the only real experience they get over 12months is the odd few mop up minutes and practise against team mates.

If we tank, I can see 2012 bringing someone like Luck in R1 and a LT like Andrew Datko in R2, and you could say that Luck might be more ready to start from Day1 than either Gabbert or Newton with a year riding the pine.

My issue with the Luck comment is that it happens every year. Every single year we hear that next years class will be better or that we can simply grab Player X next year. We have to address the position. Luck will require a trade up to #1 overall which will require our 1st, 2nd, and probably more. No, I don't think we will be picking 1st next year. Are you saying you want us to spend that many picks on him? My guess is that you wouldn't especially if you want our first several picks to be day one starters.

If Gabbert or Newton is deemed worthy, do it and move on.

[Extremebillsfan247]

Whats the point of getting another project QB we got one of those last year? Its either 1st or 2nd round this year or I wouldnt take any qb. I would get a veteran qb to back up fitz if i am not going to pick a qb in the first two rounds.Gailey likes to have it competitive at every position, even for backups. Taking a QB in the late rounds to compete with Brown is something I could see this team doing. A veteran QB isn't a bad idea, but if your building for the future, you take gambles on the young guys first before going after veterans who already come with uncorrectable baggage. JMO

[X-Era]

Gailey likes to have it competitive at every position, even for backups. Taking a QB in the late rounds to compete with Brown is something I could see this team doing. A veteran QB isn't a bad idea, but if your building for the future, you take gambles on the young guys first before going after veterans who already come with uncorrectable baggage. JMOFirst, the lower you draft a player, the lower the likelihood they ever become great. That's the rule. BTW, "rule" allows for exceptions but is the generality that can be drawn. It's a usually valid generalization.

Using your plan, we could easily end up close to being a playoff team with a FA starter (Fitz) who has made it obvious he can't take us to the playoffs, and two late round QB's that just don't seem to have what it takes to take over as the starter.

Or, we could have a guy sitting there that was the best in his draft class (or #2) and someone we believe can get it done and develop way past Fitz.

None of this is a given of course, it's simply my take on what I think will happen.

[TigerJ]

I would not be inclined to go QB at #3, but I could be tempted to do so at #34. Still, yours is a valid position, and if that's what the Bills choose to do, I wouldn't be devastated.

[X-Era]

I would not be inclined to go QB at #3, but I could be tempted to do so at #34. Still, yours is a valid position, and if that's what the Bills choose to do, I wouldn't be devastated.Nor will I and I can't state that strongly enough. I will be happy with several different players at 3.

[Extremebillsfan247]

Here is my opinion on that 3rd or 34th pick being a QB. Do you need to select one in those slots? no, but then again, if you have the opportunity to land a good prospect even if he doesn't look like the next Peyton Manning, you have to do it. Otherwise your left with another year of debating the old would have, could have, should have that's been a topic of many discussions with the Bills for such a long time. The only way to change the discussion is to roll the dice when the opportunity presents itself, and take a chance. He could be the next Ryan Leaf for all we know, but then again he could turn out to be the one to get you a Super Bowl ring. You only ever find out if you take a chance. JMO

[X-Era]

Here is my opinion on that 3rd or 34th pick being a QB. Do you need to select one in those slots? no, but then again, if you have the opportunity to land a good prospect even if he doesn't look like the next Peyton Manning, you have to do it. Otherwise your left with another year of debating the old would have, could have, should have that's been a topic of many discussions with the Bills for such a long time. The only way to change the discussion is to roll the dice when the opportunity presents itself, and take a chance. He could be the next Ryan Leaf for all we know, but then again he could turn out to be the one to get you a Super Bowl ring. You only ever find out if you take a chance. JMOAnd Nix and Gailey have stated as much.

[baalworship]

I love Fitz but the cardinal rule of the draft is you never pass on a franchise QB if one is there and you don't have one.

[TacklingDummy]

I love Fitz but the cardinal rule of the draft is you never pass on a franchise QB if one is there and you don't have one.
The question is, is there one there?

IMO, no there is not.

[TacklingDummy]

Considering the holes this roster has, is this really the year to draft a QB?

1. Patrick Peterson, CB, LSU
2. Kyle Rudolph, TE, Notre Dame
3. Jarvis Jenkins, DE/T, Clemson
4. Lawrence Guy, DE/T, Arizona St
4. Thomas Keiser, OLB/DE, Stanford
5. Darius Morris, G/RT, Temple
6. Alex Wujciak, ILB, Maryland
7. Davonte Shannon, SS, Buffalo


Agreed with you whole post.

I also have the Bills drafting those 2 players in my Mock 1.0.

[X-Era]

The question is, is there one there?

IMO, no there is not.Very much the question. I will differ to Nix and Gailey.

[better days]

I say no to a CB at #3, I don't care how good he is.

[Danny Duberstein]

No, considering the holes we have, especially on defense, we should go with the biggest, freak of a man we get at #3. Dareus is my top choice. But Fairley would be good too. If neither are there, then Quinn would be a solid pick.

If a good QB falls to us in the 2nd, I wouldn't mind it at that point....but we certainly can't reach on one, even at that point.

[NOT THE DUDE...]

take newton or gabbert or dont take a qb at all...

[X-Era]

take newton or gabbert or dont take a qb at all...I don't know that I disagree with this. I am intrigued by Stanzi and Kaepernick. Locker at the right point, and Mallett only if Gailey and Nix think his character is fine. The rest I could take or leave.

[Mike]

If we tank, I can see 2012 bringing someone like Luck in R1 and a LT like Andrew Datko in R2, and you could say that Luck might be more ready to start from Day1 than either Gabbert or Newton with a year riding the pine.

I would venture out and say that this will be the case. We can compare them next year for sure. I think Lucks decisions to stay was a good one. Next year his team might contend for the National Title, while in the NFL there may be a lockout and a rookie cap set for this year. I also really like Matt Berkley (*sp).

[YardRat]

Hell no to a QB at #3. If somebody like Gabbert or Newton fall to #34 (which, btw, neither will) go for it, otherwise pass there also. After the first two rounds, completely forget about QB until FA to pick up a #2, and the '12 draft to see if there is a 'franchise' guy available.

Building a solid defense and o-line should always be the top priorities, and let the skill positions fall into place as they become available. Including QB.

[TigerJ]

Very much the question. I will differ to Nix and Gailey.I believe Nix has been quoted as saying he believes there is a franchise QB in the draft, and it was a matter of figuring out who it is. I'm not sure there is an instant one at this point. I do think it's possible that more than one of the draft eligible QBs could develop into one.

[whkfc]

The Bills are taking a qb. In either rd 1 or 2. But they are taking 1 and taking 1 early.

[elltrain22]

I have an open mind about it to tell you the truth. Let me preface by saying that my #1 preference is for us to draft either Dareus and/or Von Miller, but I am open to the idea of us drafting Gabbert, and maybe even Newton. I agree w/ you that we need to fill holes, and defense, especially us improving our front 7, is our #1 need going forward. However, where I disagree w/ you is by buying into the fact that Fitz is a franchise-type QB. I hope I'm wrong, but at best, Fitz is a serviceable NFL qb, fairly good, but not great at all. I like the guy alot, but he's not our long term solution. The thing is, if we do go QB, ya can't get mad, b/c you only get rare opportunities to draft a franchise-type QB, and Gabbert could very realistically be a franchise-type QB.

I want Dareus and/or Miller first, but I am 100% open to us drafting Gabbert.

[X-Era]

I have an open mind about it to tell you the truth. Let me preface by saying that my #1 preference is for us to draft either Dareus and/or Von Miller, but I am open to the idea of us drafting Gabbert, and maybe even Newton. I agree w/ you that we need to fill holes, and defense, especially us improving our front 7, is our #1 need going forward. However, where I disagree w/ you is by buying into the fact that Fitz is a franchise-type QB. I hope I'm wrong, but at best, Fitz is a serviceable NFL qb, fairly good, but not great at all. I like the guy alot, but he's not our long term solution. The thing is, if we do go QB, ya can't get mad, b/c you only get rare opportunities to draft a franchise-type QB, and Gabbert could very realistically be a franchise-type QB.

I want Dareus and/or Miller first, but I am 100% open to us drafting Gabbert.Very sensible opinion.

[roby]

The Bills are taking a qb. In either rd 1 or 2. But they are taking 1 and taking 1 early.

Like it or not, this will probably happen.

[Blacksheep71]

I think we are under-estimating by a serious margin the need for a CB

Leondis McKelvin - starter
Terrence McGee - starter but continually injured
Drayton Florence - UFA
Ashton Youboty - UFA
Reggie Corner

Do you seriously want to be starting McKelvin/Corner .... when we could draft an elite CB who will reduce the opponents passing options by 50% each game?

I like the idea offered by another poster of trading down with Arizona for example, grabbing Peterson at No5 and getting their R2 selection as well.

On the draft value board No34 (560) and No38 (520) give us enough points to potentially move up as high as Miami at No15.

Our own No34 and our No68 (250) would get us to No21

Players like to be available from No15 down include Cameron Jordan, Muhammed Wilkerson, Corey Liuget and Cameron Heyward

[Nighthawk]

Considering the holes this roster has, is this really the year to draft a QB?

Fitzpatrick did well last year behind a below average line and with no TE and raw receivers. There is no reason he should not start the pre-season as the named starter which means any draft pick will no initially see the field. With our holes elsewhere, our No3 and possibly our No34 need to start immediately.

You should IMO only draft QB above BPA if you're having a crisis at the position and I don't think we have. Peterson, Peterson, Miller, Green and Quinn are all better players available than Newton and Gabbert at their positions, and all fill a greater area of need than QB.

I doubt Dareus falls to No3, I don't think Fairley is a 3-4 DE but I do think that we can get guys like Jenkins, Bailey and Guy outside of Round1. I'm hoping Merriman regains his form but even if he is shadow of his former himself he's still a player the opposition need to account for. Miller may not be big enough though I do think he could have a LaMaar Woodley rather than Wimberly like career. No3 is too high however. Whilst you should build a team from the inside out can we really pass up on a talent like Peterson? With McGee constantly injured, Florence and Youboty possibly leaving, a secondary of McKelvin and Corner scares me more than a DL of Carrington-Williams-Edwards plus Troup, Johnson and others.

And as there is only one TE worth taking in this draft can we fail to pass on Rudolph considering he would have been the highest rated TE next year as well? He could be there at No34 too. Look what Gronkowski added to the Pats.

I think we should continue to develop Levi Brown as a future backup, and sign a guy like Bruce Gradkowski to a 2year deal to sit behind Fitzpatrick. With QBs like Luck, Barkley, Foles, Pryor, Lance Jones and John Brantley likely to be in the 2012 mix, alongside LTs of the likes of Kalil, Potter, deChristopher, Datko, Jonathan Martin and Riley Reiff gives a possibility of upgrading most of the offense next year once we've dealt with the Defense this year around.

For the record, my hoped for draft is

1. Patrick Peterson, CB, LSU
2. Kyle Rudolph, TE, Notre Dame
3. Jarvis Jenkins, DE/T, Clemson
4. Lawrence Guy, DE/T, Arizona St
4. Thomas Keiser, OLB/DE, Stanford
5. Darius Morris, G/RT, Temple
6. Alex Wujciak, ILB, Maryland
7. Davonte Shannon, SS, Buffalo

Again, we hear this every year..."oh, NEXT year is the year to draft a QB"...blah, blah, blah. Eventually you actually have to pull the trigger...

[justasportsfan]

If there is a franchise qb in this draft, you take him. No if's and buts about it. Question is , is there one? If not, I say go where the games are won and lost In the trenches. A great DL will make your DB's look better more often than the db's making the Dl look good via coverage sacks.

[better days]

I would venture out and say that this will be the case. We can compare them next year for sure. I think Lucks decisions to stay was a good one. Next year his team might contend for the National Title, while in the NFL there may be a lockout and a rookie cap set for this year. I also really like Matt Berkley (*sp).

Well, I disagree with his decision to stay in school. As the clear #1 in this years draft, his value at best stays the same in the next draft & could easily drop like a rock.


Luck will be playing for a new ROOKIE HC next year instead of Jim Harbaugh. Not only that but Harbaugh raided the coaching Staff at Stanford taking the DC with him as well as a couple other coaches. Luck also lost 3 starters on his OL & his go to WR.

As I said, at best Luck will have the same value next year as he had this year, but another QB or maybe even two could overtake him or he could get injured. I don't see how staying in school does anything to benefit Luck especially when he lost his HC/offensive mastermind & mentor in Harbaugh.

[Philagape]

I don't care how good he is.

That sentence should never be spoken when deliberating prospects

[better days]

That sentence should never be spoken when deliberating prospects

Why? The fact is no matter how good any CB is his play can only have a limited effect on any game. At best a CB can make 10 to 12 impact plays a game.


Deion Sanders, a once in a lifetime HOF DB & returner was only the 5th pick in the draft for that reason. There is no way Peterson is anywhere close to Sanders in ability & I will be very surprised if he is picked as high as Sanders was.

[Philagape]

Why? The fact is no matter how good any CB is his play can only have a limited effect on any game. At best a CB can make 10 to 12 impact plays a game.

Plus shutting down the other team's WR1, and allowing the rest of the defense to be more creative. That impacts the whole game.


Deion Sanders, a once in a lifetime HOF DB & returner was only the 5th pick in the draft for that reason. There is no way Peterson is anywhere close to Sanders in ability & I will be very surprised if he is picked as high as Sanders was.

That's an argument about how good he is. If he isn't that good, then of course don't take him.

[PTI]

Which draft picks started and were key contributors last year? Oh, yeah, none of them. We better take a QB at 3 or 34, who cares if they play immediately, no picks did last year.

[better days]

Plus shutting down the other team's WR1, and allowing the rest of the defense to be more creative. That impacts the whole game.



That's an argument about how good he is. If he isn't that good, then of course don't take him.

The fact that Sanders was only the #5 pick should tell everyone all they need to know about CB's in the NFL's eyes. Sanders was thought of as highly entering the draft as he turned out to be.

No CB can impact a game as much as the DL or even LB's no matter how good that CB may be.

[Philagape]

The fact that Sanders was only the #5 pick should tell everyone all they need to know about CB's in the NFL's eyes. Sanders was thought of as highly entering the draft as he turned out to be.

No CB can impact a game as much as the DL or even LB's no matter how good that CB may be.

2 picks separate 5 from 3. So what?

Notice how you phrased the second part: "No CB (singular) can impact the game as much as the DL (the line) or even LBs." You compared one player to groups of players. That you need to do that to make your point actually makes my point. A team can't draft a line with one pick.

[Blacksheep71]

Deion Sanders

Was drafted in 1989 at No5 behind Troy Aikman, Barry Sanders and Derrick Thomas all HoF. Only Tony Mandarich at No2 is the exception.

Being taken at No5 is not a reflection of whether Sanders is or not a great CB - in another year he might have been No1 overall. There were also questions about his dedication to football considering his MLB status which is why he also didn't go any higher.

In the modern era Shawn Springs has gone at No3 and Charles Woodson at No4. As Peterson is most often compared to Woodson, there is no reason to say he shouldn't go as high in which case No3 is good value for him

[Nighthawk]

If there is a franchise qb in this draft, you take him. No if's and buts about it. Question is , is there one? If not, I say go where the games are won and lost In the trenches. A great DL will make your DB's look better more often than the db's making the Dl look good via coverage sacks.

No, the games are won at the QB spot...that is a fact.

[Nighthawk]

2 picks separate 5 from 3. So what?

Notice how you phrased the second part: "No CB (singular) can impact the game as much as the DL (the line) or even LBs." You compared one player to groups of players. That you need to do that to make your point actually makes my point. A team can't draft a line with one pick.

There is no defense that is improved from a mediocre defense to a good/great defense by a CB. A CB can make a good defense great, but does nothing for a mediocre defense...I've never seen a great CB come in and all of a sudden turnaround a defense. Now, I've seen a great DL or pass rushing LB come in and completely change the shape of a defense.

[YardRat]

The fact that Sanders was only the #5 pick should tell everyone all they need to know about CB's in the NFL's eyes. Sanders was thought of as highly entering the draft as he turned out to be.

No CB can impact a game as much as the DL or even LB's no matter how good that CB may be.

To be fair, three of the four selections ahead of Sanders are also HOFers (Aikman, Barry Sanders, and Derrick Thomas). Every one had a significant impact for the team that drafted them, and Deion actually made three teams better, not just one.

The only bust of the top 5 was Mandarich, and the hype surrounding him up through the draft was almost unheard of at the time for an offensive lineman.

[YardRat]

Oops...posted before reading Blacksheep's comments :D

[better days]

2 picks separate 5 from 3. So what?

Notice how you phrased the second part: "No CB (singular) can impact the game as much as the DL (the line) or even LBs." You compared one player to groups of players. That you need to do that to make your point actually makes my point. A team can't draft a line with one pick.

OK how is this then, no CB's can impact a game like the DL or even LB's. Or no CB can impact a game as much as a DL player or LB.

So what is the fact even though Deion was thought of as a potential HOF player he was not drafted before #5 that is what.

Peterson will not go before #5 & I would bet usernames on that fact.

[THE END OF ALL DAYS]

i say get the qb now and at 3
but... whatever

[justasportsfan]

No, the games are won at the QB spot...that is a fact.
The qb is right there in the middle trenches. I agree which is why I said if theres a franchise qb to be had grab him. Problem is, Luck decided to stay in school.

[stuckincincy]

OK how is this then, no CB's can impact a game like the DL or even LB's. Or no CB can impact a game as much as a DL player or LB.

So what is the fact even though Deion was thought of as a potential HOF player he was not drafted before #5 that is what.

Peterson will not go before #5 & I would bet usernames on that fact.

A couple of days ago, the CIN beat reporter Joe Reedy said that DBs have been taken in the top 5 only twice since 1998.

[Philagape]

OK how is this then, no CB's can impact a game like the DL or even LB's. Or no CB can impact a game as much as a DL player or LB.

So what is the fact even though Deion was thought of as a potential HOF player he was not drafted before #5 that is what.

Peterson will not go before #5 & I would bet usernames on that fact.

As has been pointed out, 3 of the 4 players who went before Sanders are in fact HOFers, and the other was thought to be the greatest OL prospect of all time.
Who's this year's Troy Aikman? Barry Sanders? Tony Mandarich?

The reason Peterson is a potential top-3 is because no one is a superstud like those guys. Almost every top prospect has issues. The closest thing I can see to a can't-miss is Dareus, and he's obviously at the top of my board.

There's parity in this year's top 10. Peterson could fall to 7th, or he could go first overall.
When evaluating prospects, you can't just lump in all players by position. You have to predict how good they'll be, and what the individual risk factor is. If Peterson is the next Revis, as some have called him, how many other top-10 guys would you want over Revis? (And Revis impacts the Jets defense more than any other Jet.)

[better days]

As has been pointed out, 3 of the 4 players who went before Sanders are in fact HOFers, and the other was thought to be the greatest OL prospect of all time.
Who's this year's Troy Aikman? Barry Sanders? Tony Mandarich?

The reason Peterson is a potential top-3 is because no one is a superstud like those guys. Almost every top prospect has issues. The closest thing I can see to a can't-miss is Dareus, and he's obviously at the top of my board.

There's parity in this year's top 10. Peterson could fall to 7th, or he could go first overall.
When evaluating prospects, you can't just lump in all players by position. You have to predict how good they'll be, and what the individual risk factor is. If Peterson is the next Revis, as some have called him, how many other top-10 guys would you want over Revis? (And Revis impacts the Jets defense more than any other Jet.)

Well, as I said I am willing to bet usernames. I say Peterson will not be picked before #5.

[Philagape]

Well, as I said I am willing to bet usernames. I say Peterson will not be picked before #5.

Parity means anything's possible, that included.

[better days]

A couple of days ago, the CIN beat reporter Joe Reedy said that DBs have been taken in the top 5 only twice since 1998.

And everyone knows that the NFL is much more of a passing league than it was back in 1998.

[better days]

Parity means anything's possible, that included.

I don't understand what you are saying in this post. You agree with me that Peterson will not be picked before #5?

Well you said & I agree with you that there is no other player thought of more highly than Peterson in this draft. Therefore Peterson should be a top 5 pick unless I am right about CB's not being valued as worthy of a top 5 pick.

[Philagape]

I don't understand what you are saying in this post. You agree with me that Peterson will not be picked before #5?

Well you said & I agree with you that there is no other player thought of more highly than Peterson in this draft. Therefore Peterson should be a top 5 pick unless I am right about CB's not being valued as worthy of a top 5 pick.

I'm saying I have no idea where Peterson will be picked. Could be anywhere in the top 10.

Many factors go into a draft pick, and it reflects only the opinion of the team that makes it, so where Peterson goes will say nothing about the general value of a CB.
Not everyone thinks position-only like message board fans.

[better days]

I'm saying I have no idea where Peterson will be picked. Could be anywhere in the top 10.

Many factors go into a draft pick, and it reflects only the opinion of the team that makes it, so where Peterson goes will say nothing about the general value of a CB.
Not everyone thinks position-only like message board fans.

Well, former NFL scout Chris Landry for one that I know of agrees with me. He does not think a CB is worth a top 5 pick no matter how good he is.

[stuckincincy]

And everyone knows that the NFL is much more of a passing league than it was back in 1998.

Reedy's an astute, just-the-facts reporter. IIRC, he's a member of the HOF selection committee.