ColdBlueNorth
-
Posts
1,064 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ColdBlueNorth
-
-
not taking Orakpo, Cushing, or Mathews makes it worse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MjSu8wCXDE4
I hate looking at some of these old drafts
-
I have two moves.
1) Trade down. We aren't going QB at #8 with Kolb on board. The team spent a ton of time with him before offering him a contract and he feels the Offensive system will fit him, plus I have been convinced from the start the next QB is Nassib, with a trade back into the first round.
2) Lane Johnson LT Oklahoma. Will be a stud for years AND we can move Glenn inside giving us one of the better interior lines in the NFL.
Probably mentioned somewhere else in this string, but your subject is misleading if you are asking who you take at 8 and then talk about trading down.
If the Bills stay firm at 8, I would like to see them take Chance Warmack if he is still there. I know the argument about taking guards early, but there are guards and then there are guards. This kid does not miss games and has dominated his competition...and fills the Levitre hole nicely.
If he is not there there are a few stud linebackers that we could nab, if Star Lutulelei drops I think you take a shot at him...a consensus #1 or #2 pick till questions came up about his heart. With the all clear he has gotten from cardiologist it is hard to ignore his productivity in college.
-
I already wrote that article here.
Funny.
And a good call - I don't think anyone is fooled into thinking Kolb is the answer at QB for the Bills. He is a bandaid, till they can get a talented prospect behind center.
-
And as has been said here a gagillion times since the Week 1 NYJ Debacle: Wanny's defense was an absolute joke. Listen to what the players are saying now, and try and extrapolate how they felt about their station during the season last year.
So what you are saying is that the players blame the coach? Not exactly original, but in this case I agree that whatever magic formula Wanny had back in the day to make his defenses competitive did not translate over in today's NFL against today's offenses.This is still one of those "show me the baby" situations for me. I love this team, but following them as long as I have you really start to feel like Charlie Brown with Lucy holding the football when it comes to moves that translate into better results on the field.
I do not think it is that unusual for me to hold some reservations regarding Pettine and his ability to transform our defense. He certainly has the pedigree, my only concern is that he has always been in Rex's shadow and I hope he was not just channeling Rex's game plans these many years. It is a small reservation as I do think he will get more out of the players (Wanny set the bar pretty low) - and I am actually hopeful that our defense will finally crawl out of the cellar.
If we select a rookie QB this year or next year and try to groom him with a defense that cannot get off the field and is giving up points, it really tends to put too much of a load on a rookie's shoulders to try to keep up. I do hope they patch up the defense before we throw some kid into the fire. At least if your defense keeps giving your offense the ball back, a young QB will be more inclined to take what he is given, throw the ball away when nothing is there and have less worries about going 3 and out, then punting to keep the D in good field position.
-
The Bills can't win with some "fans".
If they don't sign anybody, they are cheap and don't want to win.
If they do sign somebody, they either overpaid, signed garbage noone wanted or are just "trying to make a splash"
Fixed.
I am like any other fan, if the team ownership and management puts a competitive team out there more often than not I am less critical of how they run things. If they don't, then all bets are off and every move they make can and should be scrutinized.
No apologies.
-
remind me which picks he cost us?
Keeping me honest:)
I think we would have been in line to receive some compensatory picks in this draft if we had not spent the farm on Mario and Anderson. At a minimum the spooky formula that somehow always gives Baltimore a ton of picks should have coughed up something for the loss of Bell; Although I think Philly would gladly ship him back for a can of Genny Cream Ale after they inked him in 2012 to a 5-year 34.5 million dollar contract and he was terrible.
-
Mario is good enough and versatile enough that he will be just fine this year. I have full faith that Pettine will make him sing.
You're right, Mario was signed PARTLY to add a marketing boost. But you're wrong to suggest he "does not really move the team forward."
Last year he did not play a significant role in moving the defense forward, and he cost the team picks in this years draft and occupies a significant chunk of cap space - that is why I made the comment that he does not move the team forward.
Remember that he was given the largest contract for a defensive player in NFL history.
Does anyone feel he played up to that level?
I could very well be wrong - I really hope I am, because this defense needs him to get back to being "Super" Mario. I do believe he is or was a rare player and I am optimistic that Pettine is creative enough to get more out of his skillset and the defense as a whole this year. A lot of it depends on where his head is at. Many players tank after getting huge contracts, I hope he is not one of them.
-
Who chaps your ass? The policy? Or the FO?
Pretty much both, because the Mario move (to me) stank of FO desperation to do something quick to please the fan base. It is the glossy marketing move that creates buzz, but does not really move the team forward.
The formula that I have seen that appears to work best is stock piling as many picks as possible and never over-paying for veteran help to temporarily plug holes. At least that formula (and Brady) has kept NE in the top of the standings each year where they are known for trading out of the 1st and getting as many 2nd and 3rd round picks as they can get though they seem to find less willing partners the last few drafts.
The problem with this seemingly constant 3-4 year turnover in coaching is that the personnel is never ideal for the schemes they try to run (particularly on the defense) and just as they finally get some of the parts in place we go in another direction. The Bills end up with a hodgepodge of high-priced puzzle pieces that do not quite fit into any cohesive defensive scheme.
My hope is that Pettine is a smart enough coach to be creative and find ways to make the different pieces that we do have on the roster work best, instead of the wall-bashing "one scheme to rule them all" approach that Wanny seemed locked into ignoring all evidence to the contrary that it was not working on the field.
So does this make us smart for not giving Levitre a massive contract? We will most likely get a comp pick for him next year.
I liked Levitre a lot, but if he was looking for a fairly large payout then it was smart to let him walk.
-
This still chaps my ***, I was going to say "butt".
Those that whine and B word every year wanting our team to spend to the hilt on free agents have to read this and understand how a team like the Texans (that did so well last year with a dominant defense) can jettison a high-priced veteran, free up cap space, and still get treated to a banquet of draft picks as if they were struggling.
Not only does Mario take up a large chunk of the Bills cap space (cap they could use to sign and keep players they need), but we are still paying for that move in our ability to draft players to fill the holes in our current roster.
-
One thing this thread has made me curious about: anyone think that Bradley's possible usage of the Leo package puts Dion Jordan in play for Jacksonville at No. 2 overall?
He'd make a heck of a Leo lined up alongside Alualu, Roy Miller, and Sen'Derrick Marks.
I also think that Jacksonville is not done with the Gabbert experiment and they have too many holes on defense to reach for offense in a draft that is flush with defensive players that can fit their new scheme.
They will not take a QB high this year. This may actually be the year that all the trumped up QB projects actually go into free fall, I would not be overly surprised if the first QB is not taken till the end of the 1st round or very beginning of the 2nd round. There is always one team out there that sees something in a QB that they feel they cannot pass up on and reaches...I hope it is not us.
-
agreed on pretty much all fronts. i think you will see elements of that at times in our defense. due to our switching back and forth, were almost forced to create some sort of weird hybrid 34/43.... and not in the sense most discuss of switching back and forth, but incorporating principals of each into a singular base defense, kind of like this.
We have used premium resources on guys that dont really fit together in one of the more traditional schemes but due to (believe it or not) an abundance of raw talent along our line and edge rushers, we may be able to piece something really effective together... or we could flop. im very curious about the defense this year.
I do think we have the elements in place on the defensive line to play a more traditional 3-4 with all the variations one would expect. As everyone who has watched the Bills has noticed, the major flaw in our current defense is the play of the linebackers and the lack of a playmaking DB opposite Gilmore. The Seattle defense is interesting in that if the Bills can pick up another 2-gap wide body in the draft and can get Troup on the field we could certainly incorporate elements of it into our defense.
One of the benefits of their defense is that it creates simple reads for the linebackers. With the way the front loads up the strong side teams are very tempted (particularly in the 4-3 over alignment) to run at that weak side and the Leo but they find that with the NT playing a 2-gap 1-technique he is occupying the center and the weak side guard, the tackle is occupied with the Leo, and you have the middle and weak side linebackers able to come up clean to stuff the running lanes. What looks like a weak point ends up being a numbers game that the defense wins. However, I have read and the some of the plays they gave up last year seem to prove that with the linebackers coached to come up hard on those runs, this defense is very susceptible to giving up big plays with screens.
Is there a question anywhere in this thread?
Not really:)
I think it started out asking if you can have a defense where just two guys have their hand on the ground and it has kind of taken on a life of it's own for those of us who love talking about the defensive side of the ball.
-
Nice Cold Blue - I understood about half of what you wrote...but very interesting. You think Dareus could be that man that lines up head on? Might make sense why they brought Branch in...he has learned how to adjust in this scheme and Pettine may modify it a bit.
Dareus fits that 2-gap NT mold nicely. Branch and Troup (if he is ever off of IR) could fit the other 2-gap DT roles, but Kyle, Mario, and Carrington are not ideally suited for either the 2-gap DT roles or the Leo role in that defense. Mario may be able to pull the Leo role off, but it seems to me to be more of a speed rush role vs the arsenal that Mario brings to the table which is his strength, leverage, and using his hands to get free of blockers up close and personal. He is still a freakish athlete and the one I would play in that position if I had to fill it with our current roster.
-
well, really its not distinctly different as much as one of the dozens of variations. the terms 34 vs 43 are incredibly huge umbrellas that contain a ton of variations based on gap assignments, and coverage shells. the first thing that pops to mind reading your post is it sounds like it has a lot in common with a basic 34 with a "jack" or "joker" linebacker, but with a hand on the ground. while im sure that he has plenty of his own wrinkles, using 3 big bodies to stop the run and create a matchup advantage for an edge passrusher isnt totally revolutionary either. just a bit of a hybrid in philosophies with a few of his own terms to describe it.
i dont think it would be crazy to see some of those fronts with branch, KW, and Dareus eating space(or even Mario as he can play 34end, 43end, 34 olb) getting an edge rusher (mario or anderson) premium pass rushing matchups on the outside.
Sorry for the long read folks - I kept coming back to this over the course of my boring work day and it kept growing and growing...
I have read some on the Seattle defense ever since they beat the Patriots when they were hot last year.
I think the thing that is maybe not revolutionary but evolutionary about Seattle's Leo defense is the way they line up and attack the gaps with their down linemen and their adaptation of a DT into a more traditional NT role via their off balance fronts. It really does resemble most of the 3-4 defenses folks have seen where an extra linebacker is brought up to rush from the edge, but with the Seattle defense the extra rusher is always there lined up wide on the weak side of the formation and he can have a hand on the ground or not - there seems to be a lot of flexibility in that Leo or Elephant role.
They also have a twist in that their down linemen with the exception of the Leo are ideally big wide bodies with the primary role of filling gaps, occupying two blockers, and not giving up ground rather than the normal gap penetration roles used in a traditional 4-3.
From what I have read they base most all of their defense off of 3 primary alignments the "4-3 Under" the "4-3 Over" and "the Bear". There are a lot of subtle differences in these alignments, but the easiest way for us amateurs to spot their base alignments is to understand that there are two somewhat static roles "the Leo" and the "the NT". Remember that traditional 4-3 defenses do not have a NT, but in the Seattle defense one of the defensive tackles always plays over center in either a 2-gap 1-technique, or a 2-gap 0-technique (heads up on the center). The Leo is always lined up wide on the weak side - against a balanced formation (two-TE set) the strong side is the QB's natural throwing side - not sure where the Leo would line up in that formation but probably a wide-9 technique.
Either way, in the "4-3 under" the NT is lined up in the strong side gap in a 1-technique and there is a DT lined up in a 3-technique on the weak side between him and the Leo. In the "4-3 over" the NT is lined up in a 1-technique on the weak side gap and there is no DT between him and the Leo. Their "Bear" formation looks like a traditional 5-man front with a NT, 2 DT's , and 2 DE's (Leo and SLB).
Carroll has to have just the right personnel to pull off this defense, but I think it can be effective with the right personnel. At the end of the day the defensive line play depends a great deal on having those stout wide bodies that do not give up ground and against this pass-happy league the Leo has to be able to generate pressure when he is isolated against the weak side tackle.
I personally thought the physical play of Seattle's safeties and corners had more to do with their win against NE as they gave up a lot of yards in the first half but kept hammering the receivers. But it was also apparent in the second half of that game that the non-traditional defensive fronts caused a good deal of confusion with NE's protection schemes. We all know when Brady gets hit, he becomes very human very fast and Seattle was able to stop NE on 4 consecutive possessions (twice I believe in the red zone) and intercepted Brady twice.
Teams that lack the right personnel would really expose themselves trying to force this scheme, but if a team finds that it lacks pass rushing DE's but have an abundance of 2-gap D-linemen then they should seriously consider incorporating elements of it into their playbook.
-
i was thinking of giving coldblue the nelson ha-ha but really what more can i do
oh wth
It was definitely one of those moments I guess we all have had with this team, and as another poster mentioned it was a game where we already had Wood out, then I think Urbik who was filling in got dinged and I believe Levitre ended up playing center. I would have to go back and do a bit a research to be sure and I am not inspired to do that.
Whatever the personnel grouping was, that o-line was in a shambles and Jared Allen had a field day out there padding his stats.
-
I do not have a strong working knowledge of football schemes but, for obvious reasons, I enjoy watching the game and this Board immensely. That being said, I was wondering why it is required that a defense always show at least three down lineman. Is it possible (and feel free to tell me this is absolute craziness) to have 5 or 6 linebackers (two of smallish stature but fast as drop back coverage LB's, two of larger stature as run stuffers, and two that are quick and strong as pass rushers).
This obviously means Marcel Dareus, Branch and Kyle Williams have no home...but perhaps something like 2 down lineman (hole cloggers) and 6 various sized LB's is something that is new and unheard of?? We don't have the LB's at this point but I could see this type of formation screwing up QB's from time to time. Mario Williams could still rush the passer but play off the line about two yards...he would be a linebacker rusher, whereas Lawson would remain off the LOS by 4 yds as a run stuffer, Kelvin as a drop back type LB and Bradham as a drop back or rusher.
Like I said, flame away, I can take it, but just putting it out there. Perhaps Pettine will incorporate this somehow and call it the "anti-Stache"
There is no rule as to how many defenders have to be on the line, as long as they are behind the neutral zone a coach could have all of his defense standing up.
Not completely unheard of for teams to have two linemen with their hands on the ground, and a linebacker who starts with a hand on the ground but backs off into a shallow zone at the snap. The most common place for that kind of formation would be when protecting a lead, with little time on the clock and no timeouts for the opposing offense, where the defense is just trying to keep the passes in front of them and away from the sidelines. Basically, making them dink and dunk their way down the field.
Someone like Pettine may also do something like this to confuse a QB into throwing into coverage if he is pretty sure the opposing team is in passing mode, but I think he is more of the school that you bring pressure in those certain passing situations. You may see a situation where they bring a corner or safety blitz and drop that linebacker or end with his hand on the ground into a QB's most common zone or first read to take away the hot read and dump.
I went back and took a look at the official NFL rule book to see if there was anything new, there wasn't. What I did find really interesting was the restrictions on offensive substitutions and that by rule officials are supposed to allow defenses to match substitutions by the offense. I guess I always assumed it was a best effort scenario for the defenses and if they got caught with too many men on the field it was their problem. Turns out it should be called as an unsportsmanlike penalty on the offense - go figure.
Sort of takes the fun out of the hurry-up offenses, but I guess teams can achieve similar results by using multiple formations with the same personnel to create the mismatches.
-
We can't listen to anything Kiper says about O-linemen, remember last year when he was adamant that Cordy Glenn couldn't play tackle and that the Bills reached for him?
I caught that too...and even later when he graded each team's draft I think he still was saying the jury was still out on Glenn. I have seen a lot of rookie left tackles come in and be brought along slowly only to fail miserably. Cordy was thrown right in and did very well.
At first glance he does look like your prototypical guard, but he plays with good bend and leverage, has long arms, and most importantly has surprisingly great footwork. The good news is that I think we have not seen his best yet, as I believe there is still areas of his game he is growing into. If he can stay clear of the injury bug I think our scouts earned a solid grade.
Mel needs to get over himself,
-
I was at that game...what a joke.
Went with a friend of mine who is a Viking fan, and in typical Bills fashion I had a moment of being on top of the mountain when Moats blew up Favre giving my bud the business, only to have T-Jack come in and he and Peterson tore up our defense. If I had to hear the "Skol Vikings" song one more time I was going to puke, with my friend chanting in my face and saying I should know the words by their 3rd or 4th score.
McKelvin was a turnover machine fielding punts and I think he had coverage on two of the TD passes with Donte coming over late (as usual) - they were awful.
All that being said, every Viking fan knows that T-Jack had either great games or terrible games, but he could never string the good games together, that and the Bills defense was and has been no great shakes for years.
-
definition of reach is taking a guy higher than he grades out
You make a good point, and I have to concede that the "reach" concept is subjective. Based upon an agreed consensus grade for the prospect any player taken well before they are slotted (allowing for some standard deviation of grading error) would be technically a reach.
QB's that are graded as 1st round talents traditionally go earlier in the 1st round than where they are actually graded. Personally, I accept that a QB that is graded on the lower end of the 1st round could and probably would be taken within the first 16 picks of the 1st round. Same thing with those graded as early 2nd round talents going in the later portion of the 1st round. I would much rather see a QB prospect that grades out high in the 1st round being taken early in the first round as more of an ideal draft scenario.
-
Everything you say is accurate BUT, (I guess it's my turn to mention) that players at other positions also bust or underperform.
The Bills particularly have had a hard time identifying non-QBs worthy of a first round pick. Looking back on past drafts, many non-QBs first rounders bust out of the NFL.
Unpredictability being the case, isn't it better to take a player at the most important position in football?
Especially when it's an acute need?
BTW, there are a few QBs in this draft I like so that might shade my position in this discussion.
I agree that players at other positions bust, but they bust in a different way than a QB that has to handle the ball all the time. If you have a defensive lineman that busts ala Troup (I know he hasn't officially busted yet, but he is damn close) or we could just insert John McCargo, you just limit or keep the player out of the rotation and go out and try to plug the holes on the line, same goes for defensive backs who do not develop like our 1st round punt returner...
At QB a franchise traditionally feels compelled to justify their reach and 1st round grade so they stick with the experiment long after it becomes clear that the prospect does not have the makeup needed to perform at an NFL level. It sets them back more than any other whiff on a draft pick. The hope that something will "click" and the QB will transform and take the next step just sets the whole rebuilding process back.
Don't reach for QB's, if the talent evaluators feel there is one that is deserving of a 1st round grade you take him - maybe even higher in the first than where he grades out. That being said, you do not reach for a QB where the consensus grade has him as a second or 3rd round talent. Folks seem to get cause and effect confused, just because a team makes a crazy grab for a player early in the 1st does not mean that the player is a 1st round talent - just that some team is crazy enough to ignore all the evidence and tape to the contrary.
None of this crop of QB's really led or carried their respective teams to stellar seasons. Those with a stronger supporting cast should have done more, those with weaker supporting cast may deserve a closer look, but this whole draft is WEAK in regards to QB....nothing changes that. I do however agree with Nix, that one or two of these projects will make it in the NFL - at least long enough to be a solid starter for a while - they need to find that QB and take him at the right spot.
With a veteran behind center in Kolb, they have more time to develop a project, but will need to take a QB that does not have a ton of ego...think on that.
-
If he was taking advice from Gailey that is his own fault (he was a terrible Nix-hire anyway).. Nix is the architect of this team and the responsibility absolutely lies at his feet. Yes Chan had some say but Nix is the final decision maker...
I'm tired of people defending Nix, he hasn't taken this organization forward at all..
Clarifying how GM's generally prioritize team needs is not defending Buddy, rather it is explaining the process. What I was saying is that he is not the cause of world hunger, a weak economy, and terrible draft picks at QB for the Bills. To the best of my knowledge he and Whaley have not made QB a priority of a draft till this year - at least not openly. I believe that is because they felt that some of Fitz accuracy issues could be corrected, and with a strong defense around him he could be good enough to get this team into the post season.
I think there is a tendency for revisionist history to creep into the dialogue; To take all the crappy QB draft and FA mistakes at OBD since Kelly retired and lay them all at the feet of the current GM and that simply is not reality.
In regards to listening to the idiot Gailey, yeah he should never have listened to him when he insisted we take Spiller. Looks like genius advice now with Fred over the magic 30 yr. mark and unable to complete the last two seasons without getting injured. I think most fans would agree he is an impact player that we all wanted to see used a heck of a lot more last year.
If you wanted to argue about the Chan hire I would say what I have said before - that I think Chan was a good, if not great OC. He obviously did not make the best HC and upon reflection one has to say that Buddy failed getting the right coach in here to turn the franchise around. There, we have beat that horse to death...again.
We all know Buddy is on his way out, I just do not see a need for all the pessimism around the evaluation and selection of a good QB by Buddy, Whaley, and the scouting department as they have not focused on QB as an area of need till the Fitz experiment crapped out. The fact is that when Nix has focused on drafting a top tier QB his selections have been: Drew Brees in 2001, then Eli Manning (who they then packaged to the Giants for picks and Phillip Rivers a few picks later - rumors were that Eli wanted to play for the Giants not San Diego.
I don't know folks, but that does not look like a lot of misses when he has evaluated and drafted QB's, but by all means throw the baby out with the bath water.
-
It also needs to be said that they need to move on once a guy has proven he isn't "It". JP, Trent, Fitz all lasted way too long... They should have been drafting QBs early the past 3 seasons. That is a giant failure of Buddy Nix.
Buddy has missed on a few picks, but it is a mistake to lay any QB draft mistakes at his feet at this point. GM's take the feedback from the coaching staff at the end of each season to evaluate areas of strength and weakness on the team that they want to address, they prioritize that list, then set about evaluating free agents and then BPA draft prospects that they feel meet those needs. It is not exactly drafting for need, but neither is it an exercise of going into the draft and picking random quality players at positions where the coaching staff feels the bench is already deep.
Gailey trusted Fitz, they bankrolled him and found an adequate veteran backup in Thigpen. I think it is obvious that Buddy and the scout team was never tasked with the priority of finding a QB via the draft to replace Fitz till after last season when Gailey's Fitz experiment fell flat and the flaws in Fitz game proved they could not be addressed by a highly respected QB coach or by Chan either. Chan has a history of getting the most out of bad QB's and early on it looked like he had performed a similar miracle with Fitz...hence the $$$ and the lack of addressing the position in the draft.
The only QB that Buddy took a flyer on since being with the Bills organization was Levi Brown in the 7th round of the 2010 draft and then they released him after the 2010 season - he is now the QB for the Saskatchewan Roughriders. Give him and the scouting group a chance folks... let's let them screw up first before we light the torches and sharpen the pitchforks.
-
The more I think about it I dont draft a QB at all this year. Lets address other areas go 2-14 and grab a top notch one next year.
This is what people said last year. And the year before. And the year before that.
What happens if Bridgewater and Manziel both stay in school? The idea of waiting another year is dumb. Take a guy every year if you have to. We can't keep ignoring the QB position hoping that an elite one falls in our laps the next year.
We all slant the truth a bit to get our points across, but last year many people here felt we were OK at QB with Fitz because our "improved" defense would keep us in games and he would not be asked to do too much. I also wondered if perhaps that cracked rib was the reason his play tailed off so badly towards the end of the year and if it was healed why not give him another shot.
This year is completely different in that the new HC let Ryan walk (which I do not see as a problem, Fitzpatrick had his shot at being THE guy), the Bills front office knows we need a QB. The only debate is simply is there one worth taking at 8 overall in this draft? It is like going to the grocery store needing apples and all the have is lemons - we can talk up the prospects all we want, but the truth is that no one in this class of QBs really stands out in the way that they led their respective teams - not even Smith who barely gets a 1st round grade (and I am not talking about where all the mocks have him going).
Going the Indy route of tanking one year (where your team is obviously rebuilding on both sides of the ball under new coaching) to have a better shot at a more highly touted QB prospect next year is not crazy talk. It seemed to work out well for Indianapolis just when they were needing to get a new QB that could be groomed to take over the house that Peyton built.
There is merit in trying to load up on picks and getting a late round QB that has upside and playing him behind center this year, and take another one that is more of a 1st round talent/lock next year. They would push each other and one would separate himself as the best and the other would be a backup. You would not help your team or cap by paying 1st round money each year reaching on a 2nd or 3rd round QB talent.
-
I'd rather get someone's #1 pick and an extra second rounder for our #8 pick.
This.
-
Glennon and Nassib should be there @ pick 71. Manuel should be gone before pick 41
I'm going with the over on this. I
know, every year QB's go earlier than projected, but I am wagering that this is the one year that the question marks and players ranked much higher at other positions actually make GM's blink on the reach pick.
Gino will go fairly early (he is moving up the board less on talent and more as a reflection of how desperate some mock analyst have teams that are needing an answer at QB), after that I dunno... If they don't go early QB's could sit till the 3rd or 4th round, but there will be a run for the bums at some point there always is.
Bill Polian's top 4 qualities in a franchise QB
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted · Edited by ColdBlueNorth
Chucky can go a bit over the top, but I am sure he is reminded that he has to be entertaining. Sometimes he does pull off that interview feel with the players he brings in and you get to see how they respond to that kind of pressure and criticism.
I watched his review with Zac Dysert and I felt sorry for the kid. First Gruden said that he had all the tools you look for in an NFL QB arm, accuracy, touch, including the ability to make plays on the run (avoiding the rush) then put him on the spot with how many sacks he has taken. Anyone that watched any of the Miami Ohio games knows that they had probably the worst O-Line and receivers in NCAA football and I could not help but think that Gruden was trying to see if Dysert would throw them under the bus.
Dysert said that they had changed offenses often, and had young players on the O-Line, Gruden quickly dismissed those as excuses and pushed him some more. As one would expect from a kid who was voted team captain 3 years running he said ultimately it was his fault if he held onto the ball and took a sack.
Really good character kid and tough as nails - I am sure he will get picked up. If he does not get picked up by the Bills (I think that they are targeting Tyler Bray mainly because Buddy focuses on the SEC, Bray has arguably the best overall tool set of that group of QBs and the argument could be made that the defenses a QB faces in the SEC have featured some of the best players and competition for years - thinking of the SEC and its history as an NFL draft factory: LSU, Georgia, Florida, Tennesee, and Bama have many if not the most players drafted into the NFL... Buddy focusing on those schools is an understandable scouting strategy)
Either way, I still think I will keep tabs on how he does in the league.