OldTimer1960

I like your reasoning on everyone, except Glenn. It is not a good enough (IMHO) if he "fills a need, even if he doesn't start" I very strongly disagree that the #1 pick has to start as a rookie, BUT it isn't good enough to find a good backup for the entire OL with the 10th pick of the draft. If they can't project any OL as a sure-starter, then they need to go in another direction.

He also never started consistently, even in college. I am not saying he couldn't be a useful NFL player, but it is a BIG concern to me that he wasn't able to crack their starting lineup.

In my opinion, the Bills' clear number one need is to find a good starting OLT. I disagree with those that say that Chris Hairston showed enough to warrant starting this year. I am not suggesting that the team does not also have a crying need for another NFL starting-caliber WR and for 1-2 starting-caliber OLBs. It looks to be a particularly bad year to need to find an OLT. We've been through the suspects ad-nauseum: Reiff looks more like a RT or even a G to many. Glenn looks like a RT on a good day and a G to many others. NFL Network's Mike Mayock recently said that he didn't think Glenn should go until round 2. Jonathan Martin is not well-regarded by many and may be a stretch to eventually start at either OT position. Mike Adams is a very talented under-achiever. While I strongly believe that the offense will be grounded without a starting-caliber OLT, I don't particularly want to take my chances on any of the iffy players available who MIGHT be able to play that position. However, I am not much higher on any of the prospects at the Bills' other positions of need. I am leery of Michael Floyd's off-field problems, however I am heartened by his year of trouble free behavior. I am not totally sold on Luke Kuechly at OLB, but he seems a safe pick with a high floor. The best-bets, in my opinion (based on my reading of Pro Football Weekly and Russ Lande - former NFL scout, as well as NFL Network's Mayock) are mostly defensive players: DT Fletcher Cox is pretty highly regarded by many, but the Bills' seem pretty set at DT with Dareus and Kyle Williams. DE Melvin Ingram looks like he could be a highly productive pass rusher, but I don't think he can play 4-3 OLB. Where does he play with Mario Williams on-board? Pick-your-favorite CB among Kirkpatrick and Gilmore - Gilmore has less baggage, but Kirkpatrick has a bit better ability (again, based on what I've read). S Mark Barron is highly regarded, but I think the Bills are pretty OK there with Byrd and Wilson. This guy is a dark-horse candidate for the 10th pick IMHO To me, this is a very shaky year in terms of talent in the draft. I've been following the draft very closely for 25+ years and I don't ever remember being so under-whelmed with the possible Bills' selections in round 1. Now, I know that there might be some depth in the mid-rounds 2-4, but it's hard to make up for it, if the first round pick doesn't pan out. I've flip-flopped all over the place on this, but at the moment my view is that I'd strongly consider Kuechley and Floyd at 10, with some consideration for Gilmore/Kirkpatrick and Barron. I think the OTs are all way too questionable to invest that high of a pick on, unless the Bills think that Erik Pears also needs to be replaced at RT. If that is the case, then Reiff/Glenn look a little more attractive as their fall-back position would also be considered a position of need. Lastly, I am not in favor of this, BUT with the questions surrounding the top candidates at the Bills' main positions of need, it might make sense to take a chance on Ryan Tannehill. Finally, I talked myself off the LT ledge by looking at the starting LT on last year's playoff teams. DO NOT read this to say that I don't believe that a good-very good LT is not an important part of a good offense. However, many teams last year were successful without pro-bowl caliber OLTs: Hou: Duane Brown - drafted late first/early 2nd can't remember, but he wasn't ultra-highly regarded Pitt: Max Starks - not a highly drafted guy Balt: Bryant McKinnie - high draft pick who didn't live up to his status and wasn't in particularly good shape (reportedly) last year. NE: Matt Light - 2nd round pick, who has done a good, not great job for the Pats Jets: D'Brickashaw Ferguson - high number 1 pick who is good. Den Ryan Clady - high number 1 pick who is good. GB M. Newhouse - Don't know ANYTHING about this guy Det Jeff Backus - career over-achiever whom they would like to replace Atl Sam Baker/Will Svitek - Baker has disappointed and Svitek is a journeyman NO Jermane Bushrod - nothing special Giants: William Beatty - lightly regarded mid-round pick who wasn't considered tough enough 49ers: Joe Staley - wasn't highly regarded in the draft - OT/G tweener. With all that in mind, maybe it is OK to take a chance on one of the OTs at 10 and hope that they are adequate at LT. Constructive opinions welcomed.

How did the point production compare between the first 8 and second 8 games? In the first 8 games they averages 27.75 points/game. In the last 8, the Bills averaged 18.75 points/game. Additionally, 230ish yards/game passing isn't much to write home about, especially with lots of that rolled up in garbage time at the end of games they trailed by 2 TDs or more. I am not necessarily arguing that the Bills must draft offense over defense, particularly in round one. I am arguing that the offense was not very good.

While I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of further bolstering the defense - and I like Kuechly, too, I can't agree that the Bills' offense wasn't that bad last year. They had a pretty hot start, but if I remember correctly, that was fueled by a lot of turnovers provided by the defense in the first several games. Once those turnovers dried up and Eric Wood and Demetrius Bell got hurt, the offense was awful. There was no time at all for Fitzpatrick to throw anything but a very short pass. In my opinion, by far the number one need on this team is to find a viable starting LT (I don't believe that Hairston was"not that bad and will be so much better this year". That being said, I don't know that any of the available OTs are really good enough to play LT at a good level in the NFL. If not, then I support the idea of continuing to build the defense.

I don't see where two 4ths would net a 2nd, even a late 2nd. Two 4th round picks might get you into the latter third of round 3, but hey if you can get it - great!

Depends on who's ratings you look at. ProFootBallWeekly thinks he'll be available in round 2 and, while they don't do a ton of their own scouting, they are very well connected with "league sources" and seem to know about where guys will be picked.

If it cost a 3rd or less, I think he is FAR better than any other player that the Bills are likely to get at 10. I *might* be willing to consider even trading our 1st and 2nd to move up to get Kalil. I am in the camp that thinks that LT is a critical position on the OL (and offense overall). I think after Kalil, that there is only a 50-50 chance that any of the remaining OTs can become starting NFL LTs. Some are much higher bets at RT, but still, that isn't what you are looking for in the top 10 of the draft. I know that the Bills have other needs including WR, OLB and CB with no position beyond any question of being fortified (except maybe RB and DT), but I am of the opinion that LT is more important than any of those positions except maybe CB.

This whole concept of "developmental" players is way overblown here, in my opinion. Yes, there are players that have starter caliber physical ability that might be found in the mid and late rounds of the draft. Heck, we can all identify starters on most teams that were not even drafted. However, again my opinion, if teams thought "Max Jones college LT" was a down-the-road starter at LT and all it would take was a bit of coaching and weight training - I can assure you that he'd be off the board by the 2nd round for sure. Same is even more true of the proverbial "developmental QB". If teams knew that they had a shot at a guy that would develop into a good starting NFL QB, there is NO WAY that the player would make it out of the second round and would probably be taken in round 1 even if the team thought it would take 3 years to "develop" him. The truth is, these mid and later round picks all are missing something that the NFL sees as an impediment to them being good players at the NFL level. That might be lacking desired height/weight/speed/strength/arm length/arm strength etc. It might be a significant injury history. It might be a history of off-field problems. It could be a lack of track record of conditioning or studying the playbook. There are MANY reasons why a player isn't picked until the mid-late rounds, but be assured it isn't because a team thinks that they have everything to be a surefire good starter but they need "development". The mid-to-late round guys that have become good starters have found ways to overcome the limitations that the NFL saw in them and they have beaten the odds. That does not imply that all mid-late round draftees will overcome their limitations/questions and become starters if given enough "development".

Is this the garage-sale approach to filling the important LT spot? If you buy enough stuff that nobody else wants, maybe you hit it big? I would argue that LT is far more important than OLB or WR and maybe CB is close. Now, that doesn't mean that they should force a LT pick in round one if they don't think there is a player there worth taking, but the fill other needs and hope to find a viable player for the most important OL position by sifting through mid-late round picks doesn't sound like a good plan to me, either. If the Bills don't see any LTs worth taking in round 1 or 2, I understand that, but I wouldn't say then that they must throw 2 4ths and a 5th at it just to get players. I'd rather they picked players in those rounds that they think are among the best left at any position with a slight nod toward needs.

Johnson is getting up in years, though and probably is making considerably more than Troup or Heard. I am not saying that he will or won't make the team, but I think his age will work against him in comparison to the younger guys.

To me, the key phrase in your response is "as long as it does not affect his performance". I am in general agreement with you, but I do believe that having an alcohol or drug problem (if it is serious) can affect a player's performance and definitely these problems can lead to suspensions which bring the player's performance to nil.

Congratulations on your sobriety. I don't understand how your experiences translate to giving potential draftees the benefit of the doubt. By your own story, you have washed out of several jobs and it hasn't been until you are 31 that you've got things together. Given that a NFL player's time ends about when they are 31ish (yes, I know that some play longer - others play a shorter duration). If I were GM of a NFL team, I would be very wary of guys who have had drug and alcohol problems. Note that I am not saying to discount any player who was once caught for under-age drinking or possession of a small amount of marijuana. I am saying that if a guy is a multiple offender, I'd steer clear of him until at least the 4th round.

Well, I agree that the teams that are better have generally drafted better - guess that stands to reason. But I don't think that even the best drafting teams are immune from mistakes, even in the first round. For instance, Green Bay drafted Justin Harrell at #16 (they've cut him) and they drafted AJ Hawk at #5 (they cut him and re-signed him recently to a lower contract). Hawk has been OK, not great and Harrell hardly played at all. Baltimore does have a pretty impressive record, but they did draft Kyle Boller in the middle of the first round, so they aren't perfect either. Still, I agree with your general premise that better teams draft better, but I still argue that the draft is not an exact science.

I can tell you that I have over 25 years of following the draft very closely including purchasing at one time or another (most several times) the following draft publications: Kiper (many years), ProFootballWeekly(one of my favorites), Ourlad's, GM Jr (by former NFL scout - extremely detailed), Draft Scrapbook and I am sure there are others I am forgetting. The "experts" almost universally have similar ratings to where (round) players end up being picked at. They are all duped just as much or more often as the actual NFL teams. This is a great thread because it addresses the unrealistic expectations that some have of "every first round pick must be an "impact" player or the team has failed" or "you shouldn't just target solid starting caliber players in the top 10". The reality is that even in the top 10, a team has done a pretty good job if they manage to get a good solid long-term starter.

For me, the concern about potential draftee's character is more about bust-factor than just that I want to root for a "good guy". Players who have shown poor off-field judgement or poor work habits or extremely selfish attitudes (IMHO) bring an increased probability of not panning out at the pro level. I am completely aware that some of the best players in the NFL also carry these characteristics, but there is a history of draftees failing at the NFL level because of these traits. All things being fairly equal, I'd prefer the equally talented or slightly less talented draftee with the drive and work ethic to maximize his potential over the more talented guy that has baggage or poor work habits. Of course, I find it easier to root for try-hard, high-character guys like Fred Jackson and Kyle Williams, but at the end of the day, I am cheering for production at the NFL level and can over-look a certain amount of "terd-ness" in players just as many of us still watch movies by certain actors or love the music of certain musicians even though they may exhibit horrible behavior.

That is very encouraging (regarding David). I do hope that there are some good 4-3 OLBs in this draft because it is sure that the Bills need some!

I don't really see a lot to like in a 4-3 system beyond Kuechly and only if he can play outside. The guys that fit the 4-3 OLB are 3rd and 4th round kind of guys (based on what I've read). They are all quite undersized and the Bills would likely be passing better players at other positions to take any of them in the 2nd and maybe 3rd rounds. I know some here like David, but I don't get a warm fuzzy reading about him - undersized and stiff is what I remember reading. Hopefully, some of these guys will pan out if the Bills take them, but I would stay away from the position in the draft in spite of the great need that they have there. I should make one note, I think that Melvin Ingram might be able to play SLB in the 4-3, he is extremely athletic.

I'm not a Hightower fan for a team that is playing mostly 4-3. In the pass-happy NFL, I am not sure that Hightower is a good fit unless he is essentially used as an inside pass rusher from the 3-4. Others may see something that I don't, but I just can't imagine him as a 4-3 OLB trying to cover any NFL back, TE or WR on any occasion. I am not a big Mike Adams fan, either. I just think that there are way too many unanswered questions, but the guy sure does have size and talent. It just seems like there has been a pattern of him not working hard to develop those talents to the fullest. If the Bills agree with that assessment, I wouldn't touch him until the 3rd at the earliest (and he won't be available then - someone will think that they can get him to work harder).

Now, I am NOT saying that a team should NEVER draft a player with off-field concerns. There is a point where a very talented player's upside exceeds his downside due to off-field problems. However, heed the lesson that the Lions are paying now. Two of their top 3 picks in last year's draft are in trouble and face potential suspensions for drug use. They ignored the red-flags and are (maybe) paying the price. Here is an article from ProFootballTalk about this: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/04/lions-looked-past-character-concerns-in-last-years-draft/

Unless Notre Dame campus police frequent Minneapolis, I don't the the "citation" was an on-campus issue. I am not saying that Floyd should not be considered, only that you can't dismiss 3 incident involving the law as a complete non-issue. Each team needs to evaluate his talent level and risk level and determine at what point in the draft his talent outweighs their perceived risk.

I *want* to like Upshaw a lot. He has the work ethic, makeup and production at a high level of competition in college to really say: great prospect. BUT, I just don't see a star player in him. He's short for a DE, not fast or flexible for a pass rushing DE, probably can't play OLB in the 4-3, but might be a good rush 'backer in a 3-4. I just don't see a position for him on the Bills that warrants the 10th overall pick.

I think Wright will not go in round 1 after his combine and pro days. He rans very slow for a "speed" WR at the combine. He did post a better time at his pro day, but managed only 4 reps at 225 and isn't that big, either. Now, I am not saying that Wright won't be a good player, but his size, lack of strength and the fact that he isn't as ultra-fast as advertised may not have him go as high as many thought initially.

I get your points and I agree to some extent. I am reacting to the "it's no big deal at all - nothing to consider" point of view. It IS something to consider. Each team must make their own assessment of the risk and his talent level. Each will determine at what point in the draft his talent outweighs the risks with him - and that, of course, depends on how big of a risk any team sees it as (as well as how great they see his talent) . I do suspect that there is more to it than 2 under-age drinking arrests. While I don't have any better true knowledge of the situation that you do, I have to wonder if police really went into a party and saw star football player Michael Floyd peacefully having a beer and decided to arrest him - twice. Now, maybe it happened that way and, if so, you are right that those are not great cause for concern to me. However, I wonder if there wasn't maybe more to it than that. I haven't been on a college campus or at a college house party in > 20 years - do police regularly bust those and arrest every under-age drinker there?

Or maybe he was able to stay out of trouble for one year because he realized that millions of dollars were on the line. Will he stay out of trouble AFTER he has those millions (he will be extremely rich the minute that he signs his rookie contract)? I don't know the answer and neither do you. I agree it is encouraging that he stayed out of trouble last year, but I don't think that is a reason to completely ignore the 3 earlier issues, DUI being quite significant. My point is not to argue that he is or is not worth taking at the 10th pick. It is just to say that all of his history and potential needs to be considered. I am not a big risk-taker, so for me, I'd avoid taking the risk, but certainly other view-points are valid, too. It is a risk-reward question.