BADOLBILZ

Nah, his browser just became incompatible

We are half in agreement: I am on the Liam Eichenberg, Gregory Rousseau and Terrace Marshall bandwagons for this reason..........they have both produced when on the field and have upside and play premium positions. To me, they are all off the board by #30........but as we get closer the big draftniks start getting fed more realistic info and it seems that generally it's believed at least one of them will make it to #30 so not giving up hope. Regarding high floor players at lesser positions.......you can still add players who can just give you good floor production in those spots in free agency..........look at recent signing of Forrest Lamp.........very good upside but also started all 16 games last year. I wouldn't abandon ship on high floor, premium positions just yet. It's not a good draft but it really doesn't change my approach much. The only real change would be that I'd be more amenable to trade a pick for a good player. Having a "Diggs trade" type option come available this year would be an opportunity for a potential Win-Lose trade scenario where the bird in hand could be worth a lot more than the draft pick in the bush. I don't mind win-wins like the Diggs trade but it's definitely more fun when you pants the other team.

Agree but even if Epenesa turns into a great player he's still just a rotation player in this system. The other guy(s) gotta' be good too. Whatever we assume Epenesa will be doesn't really lessen the need there. It's a long term and short term concern. Addison and Hughes are very old, Bam Johnson hasn't produced yet and Obada had almost all of his success rushing from a DT position.

I consider this group of available players as mediocre..........but I will accept bad as a correct answer also because IMO the difference between mediocre and bad is the fact that I think some of the opt outs are going to be good.......and it's hard to tell without having 2020 tape on them. Anytime you have so many unproductive, underachieving or disappointing players projected as first or second round picks....... based heavily on track #'s.......you are probably looking at a poor class.

I think if people were a little more realistic and accepted that there is a very good chance that the teams first and second round picks will not have a major impact on the field as rookies.........then there would be more acceptance of the concept of picking the players who provide the best long term benefit. The reality is that at least half of first round picks fail to meet expectations..........as evidenced by the 5th year option data. It isn't going to be any better in round 2. The objective should be to come out of the annual process of drafting with the most long term value to your organization. If you are trying to fill a position in round 2 with a player that only plays 2 downs or gets taken off the field on obvious passing downs.......on either side of the ball.........then you are definitely doing this the wrong way.

He's been a college and pro LB for 6 years now. Inexperience shouldn't be an excuse for uninstinctive play at LB at this point. The "but he's a young player" crowd reminds me a lot of the people who were insistent that CJ Spiller was going to rush for 2,000 yards after he had just his second 1,000 yard rushing season in 7 seasons of college or pro football. You reach a certain point where it's kinda' foolish to keep expecting a player to turn into something different than what he has been. (which in Spiller's case was the laughable expectation that he was going to become a 350+ carry RB.) Edmunds was raised by a pro football father........he isn't one of the wave of "athletes" we see every draft who weren't exposed to football until late in High School.........he was raised to be a pro football player. The fact that the mental part of his game is what is lagging is a concern.

The Chiefs went 17-2 and the Bucs went 15-5........and KC beat them in Tampa during the season. Too much is made of one game. The Chiefs were favored for a good reason, their OL injury issues were just too much to overcome. You are just wrong about the necessity of roster balance. It's nice to have but hard to get and harder to sustain. NE, Seattle, Denver and KC.......the majority of recent SB winners ............didn't win all of those SB's and go to all those championship games because they had roster talent balance............every "on paper" weakness was not prioritized at the expense of areas where they were strong.

The question was about 2021..........and IMO defenses will adapt to what the Bills did offensively in 2020. They already did in the playoffs. It will be harder to run it back. I personally loved Dawkins at guard. He is an adequate LT but his ceiling at guard was very high. I was a big Mario fan though. They definitely could use that. And I think the scheme change and poor stewardship of Rex Ryan hastened his demise. I remember @Kevin becoming furious with me for saying I thought the Bills were going to make a run at him in free agency. 😄

Fans get overly focused on patching "on paper" holes in the offseason. The Chiefs CRUISED to 15-1 with basically no LB corps and their CB1 was a replacement level player who is still unsigned in free agency. And they probably win their second straight SB if not for the OL injuries. Being undeniably great on offense........threatening defenses over the entirety of the field......... is more important than some sort of perceived personnel balance on both sides of the ball.

I want the Bills to come out of this draft with a stud player at a key position (pass rusher, LT, CB1, WR1). It's always that way. This is primary purpose of the draft. They pay the directors, scouts and coaches to find and develop players at part time positions like DT1T. As for what I think would be in the big picture, best interest of the team..........getting a player who can help make Josh Allen much more effective downfield.........a big, fast, huge catch radius WR. I don't see it happening unless it's a 5th round or later flyer but IMO that is of long term importance for the trajectory of Allen.

It's not true though. The Bills 1 tech position was a defensive weakness in 2019 as well. But they had a ridiculously easy schedule and great health. Still, there was much lamentation about the loss of Harrison Phillips.......who was indeed off to an excellent start in 2019. Lotulelei played the lowest % of snaps in his career and the Bills cut his pay after the season. The issues on defense last year were a MUCH harder schedule with much better QB's........injuries, especially to the LB corps...........and teams reacting effectively to the Bills increasingly predictable scheme. A lot of fans want to sum up the Bills shortcomings by the result of the AFCCG...........but the real indicator was the Colts game. A tired, veteran QB was able to thoroughly dissect a predictable scheme.....his waning physical ability just couldn't cash in a number of golden opportunities to put touchdowns on the board. And the inability of the Bills offense to push the ball downfield against the worst deep pass defense in the league turned what looked like a lopsided matchup into a struggle that only a huge individual effort from Allen saved them from losing.

No. Everyone knows what the Bills defense is trying to do. That's become part of the problem. The scheme and same personnel in the back 7 have been together for a relatively long time now and teams have adjusted.

It would have to be down to Mario Williams or Jason Peters. Peters was incredibly dominant for 3 seasons(prior to his holdout season).........and of course was the much greater player than Williams. Williams had two great seasons with Buffalo........he'd help a lot. But it's easy to look on paper and say the team is more needing of a pass rusher.........but likely having the best OL in football satisfies job #1 which is to maximize the potential of Josh Allen.......your biggest factor in winning and losing actual games. I think one of the mistakes fans make is to try to even out the talent on both sides of the ball. That's not actually how most SB winners have done it.

That works both ways though. With a team that is perceived as a SB contender you can't just assume that a guy who put up 1 sack on the season will improve dramatically or be good as your primary RDE. He also had a couple head injuries last season so basic availability has to be taken into consideration. When your production is terrible at a key position like that.......it rightfully should be a priority.

You lost me at 5th year option. You are mixing eras.....those didn't exist back then. The 1st round rookie deals were 5 years when Spiller was drafted(5 years $25M for Spiller). That was down from Whitner's rookie deal when they were still 6 years long. The flip side of excuses why he only had one exceptional season is that Gailey designed the system around his limitations to get the most out of him. Spiller was a very slow thinker on the field.......he literally couldn't understand play calls in the huddle as a rookie.......which is why he didn't play much as a rookie. He clearly never knew where the play designs were supposed to take him.......a direct contrast to the cerebral Fred Jackson. Spiller was very, very limited intellectually........as Sean Peyton found out.......he was unplayable in any kind of complex system. In summation, he was sold as Marshall Faulk 2.0 to justify picking him when RB was one of the few positions that they didn't need. For a top 10 pick........yeah he was a bust.

Yeah he's not an athletic freak. The majority of TE work is still blocking and boxing out coverage in the pass game so smaller TE's tend to disappoint, IMO. Evan Engram is an example......his numbers aren't great but even the numbers he does put up are hollow in their impact.......... and he's obviously much more explosive than Jordan. The other primary Miami TE, Will Mallory, is more of a big, lumbering conventional TE.........but IMO due to his size he has actually been more of a big play guy.

Physically, he's a day 3 pick. Small target for a TE. Very slow for a modest 6'2" receiving target at any position. Decent blocker and feel for coverage. But guys like that really gotta' grind to make it.....like Jonnu Smith did. He's not lazy but he has always been treated like the mega-recruit he was and a lot of excuses have been made for why he hasn't played like one. His pro day was a perfect example of my concerns with him. He ran like a near 4.69 and swore in disbelief that he always runs a 4.3 and jumps 6" higher than he did. Confidence is usually a plus but c'mon dude.

Ted Washington was not part of the "lost years". He only played for the Bills while Wade was the DC/HC.........which was a winning time(5 playoff appearances) with the exceptions of 1997 and 2000. He was cut in the first offseason that began the cultural decline of the Bills. In fact, he was easily the deepest cut that Donahoe made when carving up the Bills winning culture. They lost their heart and got soft as baby sh*t when they cut Big Ted. Mario would have been a great fit. Winfield would have been great too. A lot of the "big nickel to stop TE's" is nonsense..........trying to find a unicorn when the right CB will do........the tiny Winfield could and did shut down Tony Gonzalez because he could cover him and transition and play the run. Tre did well against Gronk in that role too. The Bills just don't have enough matchup corners. Disagree on all the rest for various reasons........mostly because they weren't good team players. Jason Peters was by far the best player of the GW and beyond years and he would be the best addition to this team...........the only lock HOF'er the Bills have developed since the 1980's.

People tend to forget that Pat Williams was not a guy who excelled at nose or 1 tech. He wasn't good at it because he had no interest in being that guy. He wanted to shoot thru gaps and get in the backfield. Once the great Ted Washington left, the Bills run defenses were mostly awful. Even when they went out and got another huge player in Sam Adams the two of them bickered about who would maintain the gap integrity and line up to draw the double and often NEITHER of them would. Fortunately they had a Takeo Spikes behind them. PW was a great player but he would not have been a complement to Oliver he would have been competing with him for snaps.

So because the Chiefs wasted a first round pick on a RB in round 1 last year you think that it is good strategy to select one this early?😉 RB's are still pretty easy to find.........especially in the Bills preferred outside zone blocking scheme which famously turned a lot of not highly regarded, one-cut runners into big producers..........blocking is always more important than the guy carrying the ball, but especially in this system. And needs change fast. The Chiefs had none last year but now they have some pretty big holes at OT and CB........two premium positions. It's never the right time to select a RB that early anymore.

So you are saying his fit would be at MLB in the McDefense?

These names both appeared in a lot of mock draft first rounds. Key was at one point considered a potential #1 overall.

Gotta' add the Dick Jauron moment that Aaron Boone provided the other day............when asked about his terrible offense thru 11 game his excuse was "it's hard to hit".😆

Agreed.....almost none at all definitely falls in the range of not enough.😉 I also agree that they will pick up his option. If they did not they would look pretty foolish having traded up to get him and defended ad nauseam his play in the position they moved him to 3 years ago. Same with if they moved him outside now. At this point I think the only way to right the wrong might have to be by accident.........have Edmunds go down for 4-6 games early.........have another LB fill in and actually make plays........and then have Edmunds come back as an OLB and do the same.

This take reminds me of the old "80% of the work is done by 20% of the people........and 80% of the people think they are the 20%" adage. You and Rico probably aren't the fans of sport to the level you think you are. The numbers do not support the idea that baseball and or basketball have ever not been popular over the last 30+ years. Even after strikes they've drawn fans and done well enough in ratings to keep getting bigger and bigger rights deals.