Where are our holes now?

[Mr. Miyagi]

This offseason we've re-upped a lot of our own and brought in players to fill our positions of need. Our defense has gone from our weakness to now our strength. Plenty of depth at DB and DE, and a good list of players with lots of potential at LB. With Kyle Williams back our DTs are fine with still decent depth with Troupe and Spencer. Offensively, we filled the hole at OT with Cordy Glenn, kept Freddie and with Spiller getting better and re-upped with Choice our RB depth is good. Vince Young fills the #2 QB spot and we still have Brad Smith if he really does know how to throw the ball though we've never seen it yet (bye bye Pigpen). Chandler will still be the huge target at TE and with Stevie resigned and Graham drafted our WRs are decent, maybe that's where the hole is.

What do we still need now? Whatever position we still need, we now have a premium at DBs so maybe we can dangle McKelvin as trade bait. Does Detroit have any decent #2 WR we want, other than Megatron of course? I know they desperately need a CB.

[Pinkerton Security]

I'd say we're still pretty thin on talent at LB - we have potential at 2 spots but no guarantees whatsoever other than Barnett.

[OpIv37]

#2 WR is the most glaring hole. Graham is completely unproven.

Tackle/OL depth is probably #2. Again, you can't count on unproven rookies.

DB is looking up, but once again, relying on rookies. DL is by far the strength of the team, so hopefully that will make life easier for the DB's and the LB's.

I do think the D is significantly improved, but the O is a couple of injuries away from a disaster.

[justasportsfan]

until Gilmore and Williams prove anything , there are holes at cb due to youth.

Kyle and Wood's health are still questionable .

Fitz's consistency is still a questionmark.

We still don't have and established no.2 at wr.

lb'ers aren't proven. Barnett is moving to a new position.
No Established LT

[OpIv37]

If Graham and Easley both come through, and Glenn can start from day 1, we're in good shape, but that's a lot to ask.

[Historian]

#2 WR is the most glaring hole.

But we have Easley....duh!

[Jan Reimers]

until Gilmore and Williams prove anything , there are holes at cb due to youth.

Kyle and Wood's health are still questionable .

Fitz's consistency is still a questionmark.

We still don't have and established no.2 at wr.

lb'ers aren't proven. Barnett is moving to a new position.
No Established LT
I'd add TE to that list, or at least better depth behind Chandler.

[ServoBillieves]

When reading the thread title... I had so many childish answers...

But as stated numerous times before, depth is our issue. Starters seem very solid, even foolproof, but with the Bills injury history those who have to fill in for said starters will be the question mark.

If you had talked to me in the offseason before FA and the draft, not only me but we all would have said pass rush. FA starts, BAM, there it is, and not even rookies it's proven vets. LB, we address in the draft and we have an experienced second year guy in the middle. Aside, We have Barnett (the best LB we have) and other young talent on the outside and Morrison as a stop-gap if one goes down.

Safety is set. Scott as a rover is set. At CB, Op already said that the inexperience will be the issue. It's a few first rounders and some decent depth, but against great QB's they're unproven.

A line of Hairston - Levitre - Wood - Urbik - Pears, that seems pretty good to me. The only replacement to that 3-0 start last year is Hairston, who proved worthy after Taco-Bell went down. Behind that we add Cordy Glenn and Zebrie Sanders who can both swing, and when inevitably Wood tweaks something, we at least have PS insurance in Asper.

We still have the epitome of said "no names" at WR. We have Chandler, who fell silent mid season, and behind him at TE we have a dog scrap-fight for #2. I'm pulling for my buddy Dorin but it really just seems like a dogpile and the first person who grabs the disc that says "#2" wins.

Fred, CJ, Stevie, Scott, David, and Graham (unproven, but will be primarily a distraction) are weapons.

To answer the question, the holes are at WR and TE depth. I'd say a bit more with LB, but we have a myriad of vets and untapped talent.

[ddaryl]

nobody knows until they put the pads on and injuries start to mount.

on paper were in solid shape. No team in this league has no holes, they just find creative ways to minimize holes and compensate for weaknesses they do have

[madness]

Oh well, this thread started off in the right direction...

[psubills62]

I wouldn't say we have a premium at DB. Don't be surprised if they draft another DB highly next year.

IMO, here's our needs in tiers:

Tier 1: WR, LB, TE
Tier 2: QB, OT, S, C
Tier 3: OG, CB, DE, DT

That's just my opinion (and one that frankly, I didn't spend a lot of time thinking about). QB will become a Tier 1 if Fitzpatrick doesn't show well this year, and CB could also move up depending on our young players.

WR is absolutely a need, and I think we'll take one in the first couple rounds next year. LB and TE are both in big need of playmakers, IMO, but in the end, neither positions is really all that important (especially 4-3 LB's). A couple of key signings/re-signings and one more good draft and Buffalo should be stocked for a run.

[psubills62]

Tackle/OL depth is probably #2. Again, you can't count on unproven rookies.

For depth? You absolutely can count on them.

Feel free to name one team that doesn't count on rookies for at least depth purposes. That's kind of why you draft players - so they can contribute, whether that's starting or depth.

[DraftBoy]

Depth, Depth and more depth.

One or two injuries would still cripple this team.

[PromoTheRobot]

#2 WR is the most glaring hole. Graham is completely unproven.

Tackle/OL depth is probably #2. Again, you can't count on unproven rookies.

DB is looking up, but once again, relying on rookies. DL is by far the strength of the team, so hopefully that will make life easier for the DB's and the LB's.

I do think the D is significantly improved, but the O is a couple of injuries away from a disaster.

And yet rookies are where tomorrow's Pro Bowlers come from.

PTR

[Meathead]

When reading the thread title... I had so many childish answers...

so where are they

[DrGraves]

Depth, Depth and more depth.

One or two injuries would still cripple this team.

I completely agree. Can never get enough depth at O-line. I also think we could use another playmaker at WR but it is probably to late at this point to find one.

[Joe Fo Sho]

When reading the thread title... I had so many childish answers...

When I read the thread title, I was actually impressed with how well everything was spelled. Nowadays, I'd expect the title to read...

WEre r R whOles know? ?

[acehole]

3holes at sabs house.
:lmao:





QUOTE=Mr. Miyagi]This offseason we've re-upped a lot of our own and brought in players to fill our positions of need. Our defense has gone from our weakness to now our strength. Plenty of depth at DB and DE, and a good list of players with lots of potential at LB. With Kyle Williams back our DTs are fine with still decent depth with Troupe and Spencer. Offensively, we filled the hole at OT with Cordy Glenn, kept Freddie and with Spiller getting better and re-upped with Choice our RB depth is good. Vince Young fills the #2 QB spot and we still have Brad Smith if he really does know how to throw the ball though we've never seen it yet (bye bye Pigpen). Chandler will still be the huge target at TE and with Stevie resigned and Graham drafted our WRs are decent, maybe that's where the hole is.

What do we still need now? Whatever position we still need, we now have a premium at DBs so maybe we can dangle McKelvin as trade bait. Does Detroit have any decent #2 WR we want, other than Megatron of course? I know they desperately need a CB.[/QUOTE]

[Ed]

I would say SLB is probably still our biggest hole. I think Morrison is decent vet depth, but inadequate as a starter. I really like Bradham as a prospect, but it's unrealistic to expect him to be able to start as a rookie. Same for Carder.

[Mr. Miyagi]

When I read the thread title, I was actually impressed with how well everything was spelled. Nowadays, I'd expect the title to read...

WEre r R whOles know? ?
Not from me. I'm a spelling and grammar snob.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Depth, Depth and more depth.

One or two injuries would still cripple this team.
Yes but clearly we can't keep 90 people on our roster. If we have a glaring hole at one position and a premium at another, we should try to even it out a bit. We're not going to be 6 deep at every position.

[YardRat]

Just IMO...

As far as addressing needs that were identified this off-season, the only ones we failed to do so with are a back-up center/swing guard, and free safety.

As others have mentioned, the other holes (OT, LB, CB, DE, b/u QB, etc...) were filled with warm bodies, but whether or not those bodies will plug the holes remains to be proven on the field.

[BillsOverDolphins]

1. #2 WIDE RECEIVER



2. TE
3. LB



4. QB

[BillsOverDolphins]

Just IMO...

As far as addressing needs that were identified this off-season, the only ones we failed to do so with are a back-up center/swing guard, and free safety.

Asper could be that guard, but we definitely failed at upgrading WR

[Mr. Miyagi]

I think we're all overlooking Easley. I have a feeling he'll come through well as the #2 guy. Remember how we felt about him as a rookie before he got hurt? Tons of promise, tons of talent and potential. He's 2 years removed from his injury and 1 year from his medical condition now. Should be 100% and all his talent is still there, with ZERO mileage on him.

[BillsOverDolphins]

I think we're all overlooking Easley. I have a feeling he'll come through well as the #2 guy. Remember how we felt about him as a rookie before he got hurt? Tons of promise, tons of talent and potential. He's 2 years removed from his injury and 1 year from his medical condition now. Should be 100% and all his talent is still there, with ZERO mileage on him.
I'll believe it when I see it in regular season games...till then we still have a gaping hole at that position (outside of SJ13)

[psubills62]

I think we're all overlooking Easley. I have a feeling he'll come through well as the #2 guy. Remember how we felt about him as a rookie before he got hurt? Tons of promise, tons of talent and potential. He's 2 years removed from his injury and 1 year from his medical condition now. Should be 100% and all his talent is still there, with ZERO mileage on him.
You say mileage, I say experience. Tomayto, tomahto.

I do like Easley, but he's a guy we can't even count on to bring Ralph his slippers. I really hope he can step up, but I don't expect it.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Remember this?

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/search.php?searchid=1688033

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?t=192524&highlight=Easley

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?t=192830&highlight=Easley

[Mr. Miyagi]

but he's a guy we can't even count on to bring Ralph his slippers.
Why not? Because he had a heart condition? That makes him fragile and inconsistent?

[BillsOverDolphins]

I would say missing your first 2 years with injuries and medical conditions makes you fragile.

[psubills62]

Why not? Because he had a heart condition? That makes him fragile and inconsistent?
It makes it so that we can't count on him. Two years is a long time to not have played and to barely have practiced. I'd love it if he won the job, but at this point I don't even think he's officially made the roster of 53. We have no idea where he stands in the grand scheme.

[BertSquirtgum]

I have a hole in my butt.

[YardRat]

Asper could be that guard, but we definitely failed at upgrading WR

Maybe, but I was hoping for a true center that could swing to guard, not vice-versa.

[X-Era]

LB is now the biggest concern IMO. We have one quality established starter in Barnett. After that we have Shepp who hasn't shown he's a solid starter, Morrison who barely played, Merriman who can't stay healthy, and several green youngsters.

It's just too important a position. Especially when you want to seriously rush the passer. The short throws to the flats, and seems become critical. Even more so when the Pats main targets are Welker in the slot and the TE's.

That's Tier 1 to me.

Tier 2 would be WR and OT. Both lack quality depth and rock solid starters. I wouldn't mind Plax but many hate that idea. And I wouldn't mind Marcus McNeil if healthy.

Tier 3 would be depth and more depth. I'd like to see us still add veteran depth in many spots. OG, OT, WR, LB, and CB stick out to me.

[X-Era]

I think we're all overlooking Easley. I have a feeling he'll come through well as the #2 guy. Remember how we felt about him as a rookie before he got hurt? Tons of promise, tons of talent and potential. He's 2 years removed from his injury and 1 year from his medical condition now. Should be 100% and all his talent is still there, with ZERO mileage on him.He's most likely to earn the #2 spot this year IMO... Yes, over Donald Jones. But, he's far from proven so I can't claim it's a spot that's filled yet.

I wouldn't mind a vet still on the cheap and for competition.

[DraftBoy]

Yes but clearly we can't keep 90 people on our roster. If we have a glaring hole at one position and a premium at another, we should try to even it out a bit. We're not going to be 6 deep at every position.

We have depth issues at nearly every position.

We have good depth at RB, and CB and that's about it.

Beyond our first team we are very thin on talent and skills.

[Mr. Miyagi]

We have depth issues at nearly every position.

We have good depth at RB, and CB and that's about it.

Beyond our first team we are very thin on talent and skills.
Can't argue with that but name one team that has good depth at every position. Go ahead.

[DynaPaul]

I still think the concession stand prices are a little high.

[BillsOverDolphins]

LB is now the biggest concern IMO. We have one quality established starter in Barnett. After that we have Shepp who hasn't shown he's a solid starter, Morrison who barely played, Merriman who can't stay healthy, and several green youngsters.

It's just too important a position. Especially when you want to seriously rush the passer. The short throws to the flats, and seems become critical. Even more so when the Pats main targets are Welker in the slot and the TE's.

That's Tier 1 to me.

Tier 2 would be WR and OT. Both lack quality depth and rock solid starters. I wouldn't mind Plax but many hate that idea. And I wouldn't mind Marcus McNeil if healthy.

Tier 3 would be depth and more depth. I'd like to see us still add veteran depth in many spots. OG, OT, WR, LB, and CB stick out to me.

LB is overrated these days tbh. Look at the Giants...even the pats have had subpar LB's lately.

[OpIv37]

And yet rookies are where tomorrow's Pro Bowlers come from.

PTR
Response #1:

That's great for tomorrow. What about today?

I'm tired of the Bills always preparing for a future that never arrives.

Response #2:
Pro Bowlers like Maybin, Poz, McCargo, Lynch, McKelvin, Hardy, Whitner, Youboty.... Need me to keep going back to Mike Williams, or did you get the point?

[jamze132]

Depth, Depth and more depth.

One or two injuries would still cripple this team.
I agree but I think Buddy has done a tremendous job of addressing that, especially through the draft. Obviously those 4th and 5th round picks at LB are unproven but I have high hopes for both being contributers down the line. I wouldn't expect much this year but hopefully enough to get us over the hump.

[X-Era]

LB is overrated these days tbh. Look at the Giants...even the pats have had subpar LB's lately.The Pats have had a subpar defense for years.

[ddaryl]

Response #1:

That's great for tomorrow. What about today?

I'm tired of the Bills always preparing for a future that never arrives.

Response #2:
Pro Bowlers like Maybin, Poz, McCargo, Lynch, McKelvin, Hardy, Whitner, Youboty.... Need me to keep going back to Mike Williams, or did you get the point?

Ok then name all those great FA acquisitions we made over the last 10 years under different regime that made that difference..

all those rookies were also drafted by a different regime.

The Bills problem was bad drafting and trying to fix bad drafting with FA's and it never worked.

Successful teams have solid drafts and develop most of their players only filling the holes left over with solid FA's.

[DraftBoy]

Can't argue with that but name one team that has good depth at every position. Go ahead.

The Pats, the Packers, the Giants, the 49ers...

[DraftBoy]

I agree but I think Buddy has done a tremendous job of addressing that, especially through the draft. Obviously those 4th and 5th round picks at LB are unproven but I have high hopes for both being contributers down the line. I wouldn't expect much this year but hopefully enough to get us over the hump.

Agreed there is some potential, but right now we have too many questions. And remeber Carder and Bradham are going to counted on to potentially be starters not necessairly depth. We have far larger issue at the LB position than just depth.

[Mr. Miyagi]

The Pats, the Packers, the Giants, the 49ers...
Do you know this for a fact or are you just rattling off good teams?

Name the CB depth for the Packers behind Charles Woodson.
Name their starting LT and his backups.
Do the Packers have running backs? Anyone? Who's Rodger's backup?

Who's 49ers' CB on the other side of Carlos Rogers?
Their OGs are Iupati (2nd year) and 5 rookies.
Who are their safeties? Whitner and who?

I don't need to go on. But so much for the good depth at every position theory. The point is, every teams is thin at something, so I wouldn't be *****ing about oh no we have no depth at these positions even though we have good starters so we're still going suck.

[Mr. Miyagi]

:tap:

[BillsOverDolphins]

The Pats, the Packers, the Giants, the 49ers...
Absolutely not the Pats. They have garbage starting on their team, but Brady's so effing good he masks most of it.

[Mr. Pink]

Absolutely not the Pats. They have garbage starting on their team, but Brady's so effing good he masks most of it.


Did Cassel mask it too? That team overall isn't any better now than it was when Brady was taken out for a year by Pollard.

[DraftBoy]

Do you know this for a fact or are you just rattling off good teams?

Name the CB depth for the Packers behind Charles Woodson.
Name their starting LT and his backups.
Do the Packers have running backs? Anyone? Who's Rodger's backup?

Who's 49ers' CB on the other side of Carlos Rogers?
Their OGs are Iupati (2nd year) and 5 rookies.
Who are their safeties? Whitner and who?

I don't need to go on. But so much for the good depth at every position theory. The point is, every teams is thin at something, so I wouldn't be *****ing about oh no we have no depth at these positions even though we have good starters so we're still going suck.

Sigh...

Behind Woodson the Packers have Tramon Williams and Sam Shields. LT is Sherrod and Newhouse though they may eventually try Bulaga over there too. Packers have former UB star James Starks as their starter with Saine behind him. Behind Rodgers is newly signed BJ Coleman along with Graham Harrell.

Tarrell Brown is opposite Rogers. Former Buckeye Alex Boone is opposite Iupati and 2nd year man Kilgore is behind him.

Behind Whitner is Trenton Robinson who can play both FS and SS.

Was this an excercise to prove that I can read a depth chart? Just because you (plural) may not know the names doesn't mean the players aren't good.

What in god's name are you even talking about? You asked for the holes, and now you are complaining because it was pointed out that we severly lack depth?

[Mr. Miyagi]

The point of the exercise is obviously not to prove you can read a depth chart, since you clearly had to look it up to answer my questions. The point however is that these teams have a bunch of whodats for depth in some positions just like we do, so your previous response of "the Pats, the Packers, the Giants, the 49ers..." to my challenge of which teams have good depth at every position is clearly proven inadequate. To further my point is that these teams have depth issue as we do, yet they are obviously contenders. So concluding that the Bills do not measure up to these teams based on the reason of not having good depth is probably a bit too blac and white and simple simon of logic.

[BillsOverDolphins]

Did Cassel mask it too? That team overall isn't any better now than it was when Brady was taken out for a year by Pollard.

:roflmao:

[OpIv37]

Ok then name all those great FA acquisitions we made over the last 10 years under different regime that made that difference..

all those rookies were also drafted by a different regime.

The Bills problem was bad drafting and trying to fix bad drafting with FA's and it never worked.

Successful teams have solid drafts and develop most of their players only filling the holes left over with solid FA's.

The point had nothing to with FA's.

The point is that PTR said that rookies are the next Pro Bowlers, but the reality is that they could just as easily be busts.

And as far as this regime's drafting, they are 1 for 2 so far (2012 doesn't count as it's too early). 2011 looks pretty good, 2010 was crap. If Spiller turns out to be the real deal, 2010 will go from crap to mediocre.

[DraftBoy]

The point of the exercise is obviously not to prove you can read a depth chart, since you clearly had to look it up to answer my questions. The point however is that these teams have a bunch of whodats for depth in some positions just like we do, so your previous response of "the Pats, the Packers, the Giants, the 49ers..." to my challenge of which teams have good depth at every position is clearly proven inadequate. To further my point is that these teams have depth issue as we do, yet they are obviously contenders. So concluding that the Bills do not measure up to these teams based on the reason of not having good depth is probably a bit too blac and white and simple simon of logic.

Only on SF SAF depth to be technical. GB's OT's and CB's are well known and I already knew SF drafted Kilgore from last year.

No the point is that you may not know those players and classify them as "whodats" when they actually aren't. For example I dont think Tramon Williams who was a Pro Bowler in 2011 is a whodat. Do you still want to assume the Packers have no depth at CB?

Its not proven inadequate, if anything it simply proves that many people don't have a great grasp for the players outside of their own team. Which shouldn't be a huge shock to anybody. Especially when it comes to offensive line or defensive play due to huge boom of fantasy football.

To your further point, you're attempting to apply logic that wasn't intended. I never said the Bills couldn't compete because they lacked depth, I simply answered your question. The Bills do in fact lack depth and nearly every position. They have some rookies who will come in and try and fill the void but that's a toss up proposition.

Again you asked where the holes were, Im not sure how to respond simply because you don't like the answer.

[psubills62]

I'm OK with our depth at OL, actually. I have an issue with a couple of the starters (who I think would be good depth, but are only OK starters). Overall, I'm OK with our depth there.

I'm not a fan of our LB corps overall. A lot of guys who just don't really fit the 4-3 D.

[psubills62]

GB has depth, but they also have some weak spots. They've been looking for an OLB starter for a while before drafting Nick Perry - most of the guys they had starting were UDFA's. They're more than good at CB. Safety is a slight issue, but Peprah played well last year. Interior OL is one area I'm not sure the Packers have much depth at. While they technically have guys who can play LT, there's been plenty of rumblings that Sherrod is not that developed, and I think they want to keep Bulaga at RT.

QB depth is worrisome behind Rodgers. TE depth is no problem. They've got depth at RB, but I wouldn't say they have anyone that stands out as a top starter. WR depth is obviously there as well. DE could be an issue - it was last year with injuries (many of them).

I'd say QB, OLB, safety, and OL are a few positions that GB doesn't have great depth at. JMO.

[DraftBoy]

GB has depth, but they also have some weak spots. They've been looking for an OLB starter for a while before drafting Nick Perry - most of the guys they had starting were UDFA's. They're more than good at CB. Safety is a slight issue, but Peprah played well last year. Interior OL is one area I'm not sure the Packers have much depth at. While they technically have guys who can play LT, there's been plenty of rumblings that Sherrod is not that developed, and I think they want to keep Bulaga at RT.

QB depth is worrisome behind Rodgers. TE depth is no problem. They've got depth at RB, but I wouldn't say they have anyone that stands out as a top starter. WR depth is obviously there as well. DE could be an issue - it was last year with injuries (many of them).

I'd say QB, OLB, safety, and OL are a few positions that GB doesn't have great depth at. JMO.

Harrell I think could do ok in their system as a spot starter. He knows the system pretty well sitting behind Flynn.

OLB and SAF they have some concerns but they did draft two SAF to held with that. They for some reason REALLY like their young OLB's behind Perry. Im not a huge fan but I know their org loves the potential of those guys like Brad Jones.

[BillsOverDolphins]

The Pats have had a subpar defense for years.

Agreed, but they were able to get away with it and win 13-14 games/year because of Brady and some great players on their D-Line (Seymour, Wilfork). Seymour's been gone for awhile, but that D-Line is still the most impactful part of their defense. Look at the Ravens game in the AFCCG this past year--Wilfork was hands down the Pats' MVP that night.

If our D-Line plays to their potential and the young secondary proves themselves, LB won't be as glaring a hole. If you can dominate with your front 4 then put my ass out at LB. Giants have proven that twice in the last 5 years.

[psubills62]

Harrell I think could do ok in their system as a spot starter. He knows the system pretty well sitting behind Flynn.

OLB and SAF they have some concerns but they did draft two SAF to held with that. They for some reason REALLY like their young OLB's behind Perry. Im not a huge fan but I know their org loves the potential of those guys like Brad Jones.
I don't think the words "could do OK" are ever associated with truly good depth. He very well might do alright, but I'd be pretty worried as a fan.

Forgot they drafted two safeties. The OLB's are really the main issue then. GB sure has built up great depth overall, though. Would love to have an organization run as well as theirs.

[DraftBoy]

I don't think the words "could do OK" are ever associated with truly good depth. He very well might do alright, but I'd be pretty worried as a fan.

Forgot they drafted two safeties. The OLB's are really the main issue then. GB sure has built up great depth overall, though. Would love to have an organization run as well as theirs.

True but going to any QB from Rodgers would make me worried as a fan. He's the best QB in the game today.

Agreed, outside of the OLB there really isn't any depth concern with that team. Where as the Bills outside of RB and CB have depth concerns almost everywhere.

[k-oneputt]

Don't try to kid yourself or anyone else, if Rodgers goes down in week -1 for the season Green Bay is done with those two backups.

[Mr. Pink]

Don't try to kid yourself or anyone else, if Rodgers goes down in week -1 for the season Green Bay is done with those two backups.


Basically every team in the NFL is done if their starting QB goes down for an extended period of time.

[SABURZFAN]

acehole and his mom have glaring holes.

[acehole]

acehole and his mom have glaring holes.


Umm yea...noo yea a....

[SABURZFAN]

Umm yea...noo yea a....


and a mouthful too....

[The last buffalo fan]

acehole and his mom have glaring holes.


Umm yea...noo yea a....


:crush:

[SABURZFAN]

:crush:


:aceholeandhismom:

[Mike]

I dont Believe it Counting Your Chickens Before they Hatch so here we go:

Offense
1. QB: Pur QBs are bottom half of the league as a result there will be a limit to what we can accomplish
2. Tackle: Both LT and RT are uncertainties. No one knows how the rookies will pan out or last year's starter.
3. TE: the TE position has been neglected for years. At best we are average to bellow average at TE.
4. WR: We lack a true number one WR. Steve Johnson is good, but not great. There is limitation to what he can do. To make matters worst, we dont have a legit #2 WR. Basically what we have is a good WR in Johnson and a bunch on #3 WRs.

Defense:
1. D-Line: Looks great, but might need time to gel. We are assuming that KW returns to form and that Anderson repeats his last season's productions. None of this is written in stone, none the less this unit has gone from a position of weakness to strength.
2. LB: definitely a big question mark. Very little debt and talent at LB positions.
3. CB: Relying on a bunch of rookies and second year players to perform. Veterans are getting to old, injury prone, etc... No definite here.

What Does this All Mean?
Bills are much improved however there are still many questions. Many players will pan out and many wont. Certain players will improve their respective units and others wont. This team can compete for a playoff spot however they are far from winning a SB.

[TigerJ]

I think the difference between the 2012 Bills and the Bills of 3 years ago is that our holes 3 years ago were widespread across the team and consisted of positions where we were hoping lightly regarded players could step up and give at least an acceptable performance. Now there are few holes and the holes we have are fairly shallow. Op cited the #2 receiver position as a glaring hole, but even last year we were hoping the likes of Donald Jones might be able to fill it since Easley had his heart ailment.

Now, while he's unproven as Op points out, we've got a third round draft pick competing for the spot. Easley's back healthy again (we hope). and there are a couple other persons competing for the spot, including Donald Jones. The point is we can't do any worse than Donald Jones this season, and we might be able to do a lot better. So, the hole is much less deep IMHO.

I agree that linebacker is still a concern. Morrison isn't bad as a two down option at SAM linebacker, but he's not going to be an all pro. Sheppard might be pretty good, but last season didn't give him enough playing time to say hes' proven in any sense of the word. We have some possible depth in Carder and Bradham, but since they're rookies we can't be sure what they can do. Our three top cornerbacks include a guy on the wrong side of 30 who gets hurt a lot, aguy who was a rookie last season and showed some promis, butt also made some mistakes, and a brand new rookie albeit one who's more higly regarded than Aaron Williams was last season. He'll probably make some rookie errors too. A hole? Depends on how you look at it. You don't have two veteran starters you can depend on to give you 16 solid games, but they might just be OK.

What we have in essence is a team that we think has a lot more talent than it did 3 years ago, but a lot of the talent is young and unproven. We think maybe they're ready to take another step forward over last year, but we don't know how big a step it will be because we don't know how good the younger players can be. I think that there will be a fairly significant turnover in the roster this coming season versus last season, but next year I think the turnover will start to be less and we'll have a much better idea whether or not the Bills are any good. That is, we will if we don't end up with another 20 players on IR again.

[Night Train]

Agree with TigerJ.

The Bills have to put faith in some of these draft picks from the last couple of years and play them. Most all contending NFL teams are in the same boat and if we plan on becoming one of those teams that can challenge for a playoff spot, our youth needs to produce. This is where solid coaching and playcalling come into play.

Every team in the league has some positional concerns. Draft picks are counted on more than ever.