bobobonators

Obviously the core of your team is built through the draft. But if the Bills could get McNabb for say Whitner and a 2nd rd. pick...I think it would be insane not to do it... Especially with this team's luck in the draft the past few years... =/

LMAO. seriously. People think you can just plug in a fatboy at NT and he'll be effective.

What's the hatred towards McNabb. The guy has done literally nothing but win in this league. Even since his draft, this guy has heard nothing but negativity directed at him. Sure, he hasn't won the super bowl...those are just the breaks sometimes. The eagles will soon miss him after he's gone imo. I would personally give up anything (draft pick wise) to get him. This is a win-now league, and he can give us at least 3 outstanding seasons imo. With a pro-bowl QB under Center, all our other needs are much easier to address.

we could technically move to a 3-4 tomorrow. the question is, will it be effective. And the answer is: no..at least not immediately. Mitchell is not best suited for a 3-4lb. Stroud Wilfork Williams? Who's pass-rushing? That is the main problem with the Jets D (for as great as it is), is that they can't generate a pass-rush w/o blitzing 2LBs every play. And what happens to Schobel/Kelsay? Do we just cut them? A lot of money on those two..they have to start. I think our secondary is probably the best equipped for the 3-4 b/c McKelvin and McGee are so athletic we'd be playing to their strengths..however, we could do the same in a 4-3 w/o cover 2... I'm really not sold on having to switch to a 3-4...I'd much rather change our philosophy re: the 4-3 and play a more aggressive defense with less zone coverage...get the right personnel in here for our defense (another pass-rusher and another LB)..and I think we'd be set. Remember, our defense was not the problem last year..i don't know why everyone is just dying to switch to a 3-4

what the hell is the fascination with Jake Locker? The guy has done absolutely nothing in college football. And that's a FACT.

Locker and Mallet will have 0 effect on this year's draft or any decision on who to draft at 9. There are WAYYY too many factors that can occur for the bills to think "hey, we may land locker next year, so lets pass on bradford/clausen"..no way. btw, i would have those players in that order as well.

A-!@#$ing-men

i like Davis as well, but I think he may be better suited for the guard position in the NFL. I'm a rutgers alum and watched him play every single game at Rutgers...he's superbly talented, but he never really reached his full potential here..he still may though. But from me watching him, he was more dominant as a Guard than as a tackle. I'd love for him to be on the Bills so I can continue following his pro career closely, but not with the 9th pick...

i would trade down as per my signature. if we can't find someone to trade down with, then I would simply take the best available player (not position)...which to me, would hopefully be McClain. I don't really like any of the OT's other than Okung at 9.

haha..i didn't see your post. I would do it for McNabb as well.

to some, this may sound absolutely insane, but I would trade our number 9 pick for McNabb. Obviously this isn't going to happen, but I would be willing to do it...he has several years of high-caliber play left imo.

Ya, maybe on a scouting report coming out of high school. Every official listing i've seen has him no lower than 220...and they're typically all 223. The only thing I can possibly think of is that 1 year out of foobtall, he may have lost some weight which he would easily put back on..but i'd need to see this scouting report you're talking about (and it better not be from a draft board made by Joe Schmoe in his mom's basement). I used to be a full-time personal trainer and did a lot of work with athletes at my university (now I only do it p/t)...and I can tell you that for Bradford to be 197 at 6'4, he would be a rail. I'm 6'1..and I'm a rail, and I weigh about 193 w/o the muscle tone of Bradford.

Other than one of these geek draft boards, i've never seen Bradford listed at 197..maybe coming out of high school. And i wasn't referencing his injury, just the posts re: his height/weight. Obviously his shoulder is a more legit topic/question...but if doctors clear him, it shouldn't be an issue at all. Before the shoulder injury he never missed a game. Jim Kellys shoulder injuries really hurt his career in the NFL too.

dude, he may not have the strongest arm in the draft, but it's not weak for crying out loud. People on here are like parrots - they hear one thing and then just keep repeating it over and over again w/o any thought process of their own. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w-gL0PSvNk He probably would've gone number 1 overall if he came out last season. Arm strenght concerns my ass.

lmao. Bradford, dink and dunk? It's becoming quite apparent that maybe 4-5 posters on this board watch college football.

Tom Brady: 6'4 225 Sam Bradford: 6'4 223 Peyton Manning: 6'5 230 "paper thin" People need to get a clue. I didn't realize a QB had to weigh 400lbs to be ready for the NFL.

my thoughts exactly. defense really wasn't our problem last year

Drafting a NT in the later rounds wouldn't cut it for a 3-4. every dominant 3-4 has a dominant NT. you're not going to get that in round 5. I don't think Stroud has ever played in a 3-4 defense and he's more of a 1 gap DT, especially at this point in his career..we would need a dominant 2 gapper for a 3-4..and that player is not on this roster...not to mention that Schobel is NOT a LB..and mitchell and Poz really aren't suited for a 3-4. IMO, we simply don't have the personnel, and that's clear. We would need a major overhaul in the defense, and that would be a mistake in my opinion, b/c defense was NOT our major problem...if you think about it, we're about 2 defensive players away from having a pretty outstanding defense: another pass-rusher (hopefully Maybin) and an upgrade at LB. I think that instead of switching to a 3-4, working with what we already have, and improving upon it is a better option...not to mention that the new coaching staff may be a little more aggressive on defense..which could automatically be a bit more productive.

this sounds like something madden would say. As for the 3-4, i'm not really sure it would be the answer here. Remember, the Jets had the 3-4 before Ryan arrived, and they were nowhere nearly as good. Our defense could be just as good in a 4-3 if we have the right coach who brings in the right personnel, and who draft/sign the right players for that scheme. All of these components have to be on the same page..which is what we don't have here, and what the Jets have with Ryan and co.

lol..your example isn't really suitable and comparable.

listed at 223lbs: http://espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=188934 listed at 223lbs: http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footb...ford_sam00.html and for the same fools who thought he's 197, you might as well take a look at his collegiate stats, since I'm sure you never watched him play to begin with.

bradford is not 197lbs. and anyone who is dumb enough to think that, has either 1. never watched him play; 2. or simply does not watch much college ball.

i wouldn't be thrilled with this. I'd much rather trade down than settle for Bulaga at 9. the only OT that warrants a top 10 pick in this draft (IMO) is Okung.

Who says the QB we draft in the first would have to start from day 1? We can continue to build the O-line and let them gel before we put him in there. If a stud like Bradford is there at 9, we'd be silly to pass him up b/c of our O-line.

Golden Tate is OK, but do we REALLY want another WR under 6'0 with all our other needs? I wouldn't have much of a problem with Clausen..though I would prefer Bradford.