LB

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Mike
    Registered User
    • Jan 2009
    • 3805

    LB

    A good LB can be had in the 2nd round. Why pick one at 10, especially when he's not great?
    Please Make Sense
  • Buffalogic
    Rumblin' Stumblin' Bumblin'
    • Feb 2006
    • 5345

    #2
    Re: LB

    Agreed. Picking kuechly at 10 would be the worst case scenario I think. I'd be very disappointed with the pick if that happened.

    Comment

    • YardRat
      Well, lookie here...
      • Dec 2004
      • 86151

      #3
      Re: LB

      Linebackers are going to be the smallest piece of Wanny's defensive puzzle.
      YardRat Wall of Fame
      #56 DARRYL TALLEY
      #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS

      Comment

      • jamze132
        Don’t hate…
        • Jun 2003
        • 29295

        #4
        Re: LB

        Probably better than drafting a WR or a LT at #10. I'm not sold on Floyd, Rieff, or Martin that high in the draft.

        Comment

        • better days
          Registered User
          • Jan 2010
          • 22028

          #5
          Re: LB

          Originally posted by Wagon Circler
          Agreed. Picking kuechly at 10 would be the worst case scenario I think. I'd be very disappointed with the pick if that happened.
          Kuechly will not be the best player available at #10 & the Bills do not need INSIDE LB's which Kuechly is, they need OUTSIDE LB's.

          I am not worried at all that Nix would be so stupid to draft Kuechly at #10. If the Bills draft a LB at #10, it should be Ingram.

          Comment

          • ddaryl
            Everything I post is sexual inuendo
            • Jan 2005
            • 10714

            #6
            Re: LB

            Originally posted by jamze132
            Probably better than drafting a WR or a LT at #10. I'm not sold on Floyd, Rieff, or Martin that high in the draft.
            I really disagree.

            A play maker WR that is BPA over a LB is a no brainer.. There is little doubt that we can use an upgrade to our WR corps

            A solid OT on a team in need of OT's is also not a bad option, and arguably there is a LT worth the #10 pick...


            However the best value at #10 appears to be WR and CB
            Last edited by ddaryl; 04-02-2012, 08:19 AM.

            Comment

            • Night Train
              Retired - On Several Levels
              • Jul 2005
              • 33117

              #7
              Re: LB

              Originally posted by ddaryl
              I really disagree.

              A play maker WR that is BPA over a LB is a no brainer

              A solid OT on a team in need of OT's is also not a bad option, and arguably there is a LT worth the #10 pick...


              However the best value at #10 appears to be WR and CB
              Agree with CB. Not sure about WR, which seem to be everywhere throughout this draft. Floyd comes with red flags, ala Lynch, McGahee etc. No more drama queens.
              Anonymity is an abused privilege, abused most by people who mistake vitriol for wisdom and cynicism for wit

              Comment

              • Philagape
                WIN NOW
                • Jul 2002
                • 19432

                #8
                Re: LB

                I would think anyone drafted in the second round is supposed to be good.

                And all the feasible options at #10 have red flags that make them "not great."

                It really is wide open there, which means the ideal scenario is to trade down. Get an extra pick and still draft a first-rounder at the same level as your original slot.
                "It is better to be divided by truth than to be united by error." -- Martin Luther

                "Those who appease the crocodile will simply be eaten last." -- Winston Churchill

                2003 BZ Pick Em Champion
                2004 BZ Big Money League Champion

                Comment

                • Philagape
                  WIN NOW
                  • Jul 2002
                  • 19432

                  #9
                  Re: LB

                  Originally posted by ddaryl
                  I really disagree.

                  A play maker WR that is BPA over a LB is a no brainer.. There is little doubt that we can use an upgrade to our WR corps

                  A solid OT on a team in need of OT's is also not a bad option, and arguably there is a LT worth the #10 pick...


                  However the best value at #10 appears to be WR and CB
                  Every scenario at #10 is arguable. There is no right answer.
                  "It is better to be divided by truth than to be united by error." -- Martin Luther

                  "Those who appease the crocodile will simply be eaten last." -- Winston Churchill

                  2003 BZ Pick Em Champion
                  2004 BZ Big Money League Champion

                  Comment

                  • better days
                    Registered User
                    • Jan 2010
                    • 22028

                    #10
                    Re: LB

                    Originally posted by Night Train
                    Agree with CB. Not sure about WR, which seem to be everywhere throughout this draft. Floyd comes with red flags, ala Lynch, McGahee etc. No more drama queens.
                    I agree. This draft is supposed to be deep at the WR position.

                    Comment

                    • Night Train
                      Retired - On Several Levels
                      • Jul 2005
                      • 33117

                      #11
                      Re: LB

                      Originally posted by Philagape
                      I would think anyone drafted in the second round is supposed to be good.

                      And all the feasible options at #10 have red flags that make them "not great."

                      It really is wide open there, which means the ideal scenario is to trade down. Get an extra pick and still draft a first-rounder at the same level as your original slot.
                      Couldn't agree more. Yet the phone must ring with an actual offer.

                      If it doesn't, just stick to your board.

                      Half the people will yell "value" or "reach" no matter who is selected.. but that's the norm. No real consensus, so many will feign outrage for the attention it garners them.
                      I'm sure many are already preparing their rant.
                      Anonymity is an abused privilege, abused most by people who mistake vitriol for wisdom and cynicism for wit

                      Comment

                      • Maximilli
                        Registered User
                        • Feb 2009
                        • 215

                        #12
                        Re: LB

                        What about gilmore

                        Comment

                        • BillsLunaticEZE
                          Registered User
                          • Feb 2012
                          • 20

                          #13
                          Re: LB

                          Originally posted by better days
                          Kuechly will not be the best player available at #10 & the Bills do not need INSIDE LB's which Kuechly is, they need OUTSIDE LB's.

                          I am not worried at all that Nix would be so stupid to draft Kuechly at #10. If the Bills draft a LB at #10, it should be Ingram.
                          Luke has the coverage skills, size, and athleticism to be a dominant SAM linebacker in this league. He's not my first choice but I would be thrilled to land him.

                          Comment

                          • Night Train
                            Retired - On Several Levels
                            • Jul 2005
                            • 33117

                            #14
                            Re: LB

                            Kueckly played OLB until his Soph year, when Mark Herzlich went down with Cancer and he took over the middle. He can play ANY LB position.

                            The few BC games I saw showed him dominating. Laugh at the people that wave a broad brush and compare him to Poz. He is NOTHING like Poz. Much faster, breaks early on the play, covers downfield. I wouldn't be upset at all if he was selected.
                            Anonymity is an abused privilege, abused most by people who mistake vitriol for wisdom and cynicism for wit

                            Comment

                            • JCBills
                              Registered User
                              • Jan 2010
                              • 3631

                              #15
                              Re: LB

                              Originally posted by Night Train
                              Kueckly played OLB until his Soph year, when Mark Herzlich went down with Cancer and he took over the middle. He can play ANY LB position.

                              The few BC games I saw showed him dominating. Laugh at the people that wave a broad brush and compare him to Poz. He is NOTHING like Poz. Much faster, breaks early on the play, covers downfield. I wouldn't be upset at all if he was selected.
                              A Poz comparison would be a good thing, despite what the stubborn think.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X