OldTimer1960

"They could have gotten him 20 picks later" "he was a tremendous value at that pick" Truth is, none of us knows what the NFL teams think, no matter what draft pubs/web-sites/NFL Network analysts say.

I hear you and realize that you listened to Bill Polian's interview on GR. I kind of agree, though that a coverage LB won't have a huge impact. However, I think the odds of any of the players available at 10 will have a huge impact are low. My view, is that if all players were equal, I'd take a good-quality LT. However, I don't think one is available. Next, I'd look to improve the defense. I think that Mario Williams and Mark Anderson improve the pass rush significantly. However, that D was BAD and there were more problems than just the pass rush (though, hopefully fixing that will help A LOT). With the expected improved pass rush, a good DB could improve the turnover ratio. Is there one available? I don't know. I hear mixed opinions on Gilmore and I am not completely sold on Barron, though he is highly rated by everyone I've seen and he has shown that he can make INTs (7 as a soph which led the SEC). I can't see Kuechly or Barron as a bad pick, unless you can convince me that Glenn or Reiff can for sure start and be a good starter at LT.

I am in the camp that the team's number 1 need is LT, but I just don't see one available that is a good bet to be a starter at LT (not RT or OG). In my opinion, they could go defense as the pass rush added with Mario Williams and Mark Anderson did not fix everything. Like many, I'd love for them to be able to trade down up to 7 picks and get an additional mid-round pick. However, I don't see that happening.

Actually, Fina was not awful (IMHO). He had an OK career and was a decent starter for several years. I would just hope that the Bills could get a very good starter at #10.

If you aren't old enough (like I am) to remember John Fina, then you'll get to see his twin if the Bills' select Martin. Very smart, under-powered and not a bad athlete but not great either. Fina played "OK" for many years, but he was never what you'd hope for if you are picking 10th in the first round.

That would be a good pick, in my opinion. I could also say the same for Barron and Floyd. I am not sure about Cordy Glenn or Stephon Gilmore.

Do you really think that Gailey is holding this offense back? This team has a serious talent deficiency on offense. At QB, Fitzpatrick hasn't yet proven to be a top 1/2 of the league starter. They don't have a very good LT. They have one starting caliber WR in Stevie Johnson and one good 3rd WR in David Nelson. Scott Chandler was a very big upgrade over the TEs the Bills have had for years, but he is still a bottom 1/3 of the league starting TE (all of this in my opinion).

You're right. I wrote Sheppard when I meant Gilmore - not even sure where that came from. (After 25 years of following the draft closely, sometimes names run together). At any rate, Gilmore scares me a bit in that he might be the 4th rated CB behind Claiborne, Jenkins and Kirkpatrick, but he is being elevated above Jenkins and Kirkpatrick because he doesn't have the off-field red-flags. He is big and fast, but there are some that think he isn't as good in coverage as advertised - but that he does have potential to get there.

The Bills have significantly upgraded their talent-base this off-season with the addition of Mario Williams and Mark Anderson as pass-rushers. Along with the expected return of Kyle Williams and Marcel Dareus heading into his 2nd year, I think the DL is in good shape and the pass rush will be MUCH improved. Befitting of a team with a losing record last year, they still have a lot of needs. In my opinion, the needs are (not in order): LT, WR, CB, LB. Unfortunately, the George Edwards 3-4 experiment put them behind the 8-ball. They drafted heavily for a 3-4 defense and it isn't totally clear whether Troupe, Carrington and Sheppard truly fit a 4-3 that Wanny will run. The following candidate "fit the need" according to what I've read. LT: Cordy Glenn: There is no doubt that he is huge and athletic. There is question whether he can play LT, RT or G in the NFL. Early on (when the scouts who watched his college games weighed in), he was considered a RT/G candidate. Unless Kalil falls to 10 (Unlikely), there is little to like (imho). Riley Reiff: Almost universally now, a stretch for a LT and questionable player at RT. At WR: Justin blackmon: There is little question that he had great production against very good competition. However, he isn't as big as many thought and he isn't particularly fast. If he is Keyshawn Johnson, is he worth the 10th pick? WRT Floyd, if the front-office is convinced his 3 years worth of alcohol problems are in the past, then he is probably worth the 10th pick. At CB: It seems a sure bet that Morris Claiborne will be gone. I think that Janoris Jenkins is a bad idea and I worry about Dre Kirkpatrick due to off-field problems. Sheppard is clean off-field and athletic, but has holes in his game. He has been pushed up draft boards because Janoris Jenkins is a total terd. I think that 10 is a very big reach for him. LB: EVERY trusted source (IMHO) has Kuechly as a safe and very effective pick. Now, I agree that a non-passrushing LB is hard to pick at 10. However, if the Bills think he can help cover Hernandez and Gronkowski, then I think he is worth the pick. I think that Hightower and Upshaw don't fit in the 4-3. At positions of lesser need (and highly rated players): S: They have Byrd and Wilson with Searcy in resereve, but Wilson is 31 and Barron is highly rated. DT: They have Dareus who had a good rookie season and Kyle Williams coming off injury. In reserve they have the oft-injured Troup and Carrington along with Spencer Johnson. Fletcher Cox has "risen" and Dontari Poe is an athletic freak. If they think either is a long-term answer at DT, it might be the surprise pick. DE: I personally like everything that I've read about Melvin Ingram, however the Bills seem set for the short-term there with Williams, Anderson and Kelsay. QB: Fitz is a fan-favorite and an extremely smart player. If Tannehill is available, there isn't a strong argument against him (IMHO). It is a crap-shoot, in my opinion. To me, the safest pick to provide help is Luke Kuechly followed closely by Michael Floyd and Mark Barron.

Interesting anonymous Scout/Front Office comments on several of the players in this year's draft. Of course, we know that many things said now are lies, so you be the judge of how much to believe: http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/04/22/insider-gilmore-grades-as-second-rounder

Yes, well I meant the only other safety besides Byrd and Wilson, but you are right. I think Byrd will be re-signed for next year and he is fine. I am not down on Wilson, either, but he is getting older and Searcy is the only decent backup and not sure how he'd do as a starter.

I wouldn't be upset with the pick, either. You make the point that WIlson is 31 and I'll add that there is only one other safety on the roster of any pedigree and that is Searcy -last year's 4th round pick. Barron is good against both the pass and run and could help in coverage against those damn NE TEs that the Bills see twice a year. He is smart, hard working and a leader, too. Now, given all things being equal, I'd rather have a LT, but if the Bills have him rated much higher than Glenn, Reiff, Matin etc then I'd rather them take Barron than Floyd (not that Floyd would be a horrible pick). I think both Barron and Kuechly would be very good options, but would be the "famous BPA" route rather than grabbing a lower rated player for need.

Don't Miami, Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina and Virginia Tech play in the ACC? They are pretty good.

Because A. Samuel will cost A SH*T LOAD!

Or not!

I'd like for them to find a very good starting LT, however I am not sold on any of the OTs anywhere in round 1. Reiff seems to be a better fit at RT or maybe even better G which isn't a fit. Martin would be a STRETCH (based on what I've read) anywhere before late round 1 and may not be a starter anywhere. In my history following the draft, he seems like John Fina to me - smart and we WANT him to be good (but he just isn't that good). Glenn is a very risky pick, IMHO. He IS HUGE with ideal arm length and height - BUT he is over-weight and, while nimble for his size, probably would struggle blocking elite pass rushers. Maybe he can help the running game, but (from what I've read), but equate his size with power. At CB, I don't know if I like anyone after Claiborne. I might prefer Barron at S over the CBs, even though they already have WIlson and Byrd. I would strongly consider Ingram as a pass-rushing threat wherever they play him. I would consider Cox as a potential difference-maker at DT, even with Dareus and Williams for starters. I would consider Kuechly as a versatile very good starter with a high "floor", especially given how weak our starters are at all 3 LB positions. I would consider DeCastro, despite him playing positions where Levitre and Urbick seem to have a lock on the starting jobs. I would consider Tannehill, as Fitz is a stop-gap and Tannehill (while very raw) has a lot of things to like about him in terms of physical skills, smarts, leadership and work-ethic. Now, I concede he is no sure thing - however, if none of the above are sure-things, either, would it make sense to try to find the answer at a much-higher value position?

I could see why the Bills might take Fletcher Cox in round 1. I don't think they'll take Floyd because of his off-field issues (and I'll concede that he cleaned up his act as a senior) and because of the "depth" at WR. I don't think that any of the possible LTs are "worry-free" and the consensus of those "in the know" is that none of them are sure-fire LTs in the NFL - a lot of risk for the 10th pick, IMHO. I think that there are enough questions about Gilmore and Kirkpatrick to persuade the Bills to go after a player at a lesser position of need, if they rate them much higher than Floyd, OT and CBs.

Why do you think you won't have a job that cares about marijuana? FWIW, I don't care one way or the other if someone smokes pot once in a while and I'll agree that it isn't any worse than alcohol. However, I am in a reasonably highly paid profession (not a doctor or lawyer, though) and I can assure you that if I change jobs, I will have to submit to a drug test.

I would be very leery of either Floyd or Jenkins. That being said, Floyd did reportedly clean up his act for his final year and reportedly has stayed out of trouble, which is encouraging. Jenkins, on the other hand, reportedly kept smoking pot at Northern Alabama after being kicked out of U of Florida ( a major feat in an of itself - how much of a problem would a top athlete like Jenkins need to be to get kicked out of U of Florida?) Note that I am not making a distinction between problems with alcohol or pot, just that one guy seemed to be making good decisions in his last year (after poor decisions earlier) and the other kept on making poor decisions as if they couldn't affect his future.

Actually, he is BIGGER than most LTs, which can be a pro (if he is as nimble as others) or con (if his size detracts from his movement skills). I think that the knock on Glenn is more than experience, I think the big questions are: 1. Is he athletic/quick/nimble enough for LT against the top pass rushers in the NFL (also, does his size/long-arms mitigate any quickness limitations) 2. Why didn't he play LT for longer at Georgia, where he presumably was the better athlete than the guy that did play LT?

I think the question is: "what is the probability that Jenkins will melt-down and not be available to my team because of suspensions, jail-time, or not "tending to business" as an NFL player? If you are SURE that he'll be a great NFL player, if he can stay out of trouble and be available to your team AND if you think his probability of staying out of trouble is about 50%, then it is an interesting question regarding drafting him in round 2.

You are assuming that 31 other NFL teams - with highly paid scouting staffs, spending MILLIONS, all fell in line with the "pundits". Let's look at a specific example. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. If he was picked in the 4th, by a team that had an INKLING that he'd be awesome, would he have been a "reach"? Nobody knows how other teams have a given player rated. Just because Nolan Nawrocki (my favorite) and Russ Lande (former NFL scout) say a guy "should" be available in round 3, does not mean that the player will not be picked in round 1 or 2.

I have to ask, how do you know that there aren't 5+ teams in the top 15 that think much more highly of Glenn than the "draft experts". To be clear, I LOVE reading all of the "experts" - indeed I've done it for the past 25+ years - BUT, I recognize that the highly paid NFL scouts/GMs evaluate players based on their own criteria. I can assure you, that if you were to be able to survey all 32 NFL teams as to their player ratings that their would be 32 different ratings of 1st round caliber players. This is no where near as black-and-white as the pundits wish it to sound.

I respectfully disagree with your premise that #1 draft choices have to start as rookies. I think that you have to take the long-term view for these guys. While we all would like to see them pick a player who has tons of college experience and is "NFL ready", I think that there is room for discussion about a player who has a high "ceiling" and "hasn't reached his potential yet". Some guys, particularly DL, take a year or two to acclimate to the NFL/get big/strong-enough to play major roles. If I recall correctly, I don't think that Eric Moulds had a big impact/started as a rookie (nor even as a 2nd year player), but I think we would all agree that he was a very good draft pick. Tom Brady started 0 games and appeared in just 3 as a rookie. Now, I admit that you could argue that he wasn't a 1st round pick, but he has had a "pretty good" career in spite of not starting and making an impact as a rookie - any NFL team would happily retroactively use their #1 pick on him, even knowing that he wouldn't start as a rookie.

He could be if he had a full deck to play with on offense. He had to cover for a giant hole at LT and several OL injuries, as well as lacking a top level WR and TE (beyond Stevie Johnson).