OldTimer1960

I concur. Just look at how little Tennessee got for LenDale White. I don't remember all the details but they traded White and some other player to move up 7 spots in the 4th round and about the same in the 6th round. They got the equivalent of about a 5th round pick for LenDale White. As much of a headache as Lynch is, he is certainly worth much more than a 4th or 5th round pick to the team and I would say that is about all that teams were willing to part with based on what Tenn got for White.

Someone please identify the great offensive tackles and QBs that they bypassed to take Easley. I don't see any that are obviously better than an athlete like this guy.

This is purely a size/speed pick at a position of need. Certainly Easly's 7 career starts in the Big-East conference don't justify a 4th round pick, but 6'2 3/4" and 210lbs with 4.42 speed generates interest. Bills definitely need WR help, but this pick is all about potential not production.

There is no question that Campbell's athletic ability is that of a high first rounder and should be enough to make him worth a pick in round 4. HOWEVER, there is definitely something about him that ALL 32 NFL teams don't like for him to still be available after 100 picks. It is a mistake to think that all the NFL teams that spent $ MILLIONS on scouting failed to find this guy when the draft publications and internet sites found him. There is at least 1, maybe more, big warts on this guy. We just don't know what they are - total speculation, but the could be among: injury, 'roids, attitude, legal/off-field problems, bad play in college, bad reports from his college coaches, etc...

Haven't they already said multiple times that they like Levitre at G much better than at T? I am pretty sure the conversation was something like "we don't want to weaken two positions by moving him to where he isn't as good".

I really don't get the sentiment that they must add yet another backup QB. Pike does not look like a long-term answer to be a good starting NFL QB, so why waste a 3rd on him? To me, if they don't like McCoy or Clausen as a likely starter, then they should stay away from QBs until the 5th or later.

Thank you! This point seems to be lost on a lot of people.

I don't understand the Charles Brown love. Admittedly based on what I've read, he is very athletic, but is underpowered and doesn't play aggressively and is perhaps a bit of an underachiever. Unless the Bills think more highly of him than that, he isn't really worth a high 2nd round pick. Now, sure if they think that all that he needs is some strength improvement in a pro program and they are sure that his body can get stronger and he is willing to put in the work, then maybe. But, I have to imagine that USC has the best weight facilities and coaching in the country, so why isn't he already strong?

I am not a big fan of Clausen, but I could live with him in the 1st. I HATE the idea of Charles Brown in the 2nd. From everything that I've read, he is an underpowered underachiever who would be a significant reach in the early 2nd. On top of that, how could you draft Charlie Brown that early - he has never even been able to kick that damn ball!

Most important reason they won't take a QB in round 1 is because there isn't one worth the 9th pick. I could imagine them taking Clausen, but I would not be very enamored with that pick.

I completely agree. It isn't that Williams is a BAD player, it is that he'd be a pretty big reach at 9. This is a big strong guy, but he didn't even play NT at Tennessee and the reports I have seen say that while he has very good power, he gets pushed off the line due to losing leverage too often. Now, perhaps that is a "coachable" point, but he did play for former NFL defensive coordinator Monte Kiffin at Tenn and if he couldn't correct it, then why would we expect that he'd be better in the NFL.

Not 5-10 picks too early, an entire round too early. I have not seen ANY one touting Brown as even remotely a 1st round candidate, much less top-10 pick. I HAVE seen him compared to major bust Winston Justice from the very same USC Trojans. I just don't like Brown at all. If the Bills pick him, obviously I hope that I am wrong. However, based on what I've read from my favorite sources (ProFootballWeekly and GMJr/SportingNews), Brown is a maybe-2nd rounder with considerable upside, but considerable questions, too.

I think Dan Williams would be a horrible pick at 9. The only place I see him rated as a top 15ish pick is Pro Football Weekly (who I respect), but most others have him as a late 1st - or later pick. 1. Williams has not even played NT in college. 2. He did not stand out prior to his senior year - red flag. 3. He has his weight under control now, but he has had signicant weight problems in the past. 4. For as big as he is, he doesn't bench much and he reportedly gets pushed off the line a lot because he doesn't play with leverage. I would see Dan Williams as a Donte Whitner type pick that high. Maybe he is an OK player, but not what you want in a top-10 pick. (all IMHO).

I think the OT options are really going to be gone by pick 41 and they'd be looking at a 3rd or 4th round caliber player at OT if they were to force a pick there. Somebody like Charles Brown would be simply a bad pick at that spot. (I don't think Saffold will be available and I don't think Ducasse is really an OT, especially not a LT). I don't really like any of the QB options after Bradford and Clausen - and I don't much like Clausen, either. I really think taking a QB in the 2nd or 3rd will just be adding yet another backup quality QB to the roster. I admit that I like Colt McCoy's attitude, effort, leadership and dedication, but I think his arm-strength says NFL backup. I like the same things about Tebow, but I think he is such a project that I'd be very reluctant to take him at 41. You can flat have any of the other QBs in the draft - I don't want them in any round, the Bills already have enough backups. NT is another problem area that looks to be a problem to fill in round 2. Cam Thomas, Linval Joseph, Torell Troup and the lot are more 3rd round guys from what I've read, but they will likely go a round earlier than they should due to the need for NTs in the NFL. I am afraid that the best ploy for this year is to mostly ignore need and take the best player available in each round with need being only a minor consideration when choosing between players of nearly equal ratings. The only caveat there is that I would not take a DB or TE regardless of rating. Just my $.02 worth...

OK, here is one negative thing about Graham: He is very short for a DE or LB. Many (most?) OTs will have 5" in height and considerable arm length advantage over Graham in the NFL. Now, I am not saying that he may not be able to overcome that disadvantage, but that is a concern. Just like Bulaga's lack of prototypical arm length is for him.

I'm no Kiper-apologist, but it is hard to take DL players when value doesn't line up with need. Clearly, the Bills need a NT, but somebody PLEASE show me a NT worth a top-10 pick in round 1 or 2. Realistically, if they spend either their 1st or 2nd on a NT, then it will most likely be a "reach". Dan Williams shouldn't be a top-10 pick and Terrance Cody, Cam Thomas, Linval Joseph, Torell Troup, Jeff Owens, et al should probably not be taken 41st overall, either. I understand that the 2nd round pick becomes more of a crap-shoot. I guess Cody at 41 is not bad (but, he'll probably be over-drafted before that) and *maybe* Cam Thomas isn't too much of a reach there. The other NT prospects would be major reaches there, but are not likely to be available at the Bills 3rd pick. I think it is reasonable to expect that they might not be able to acquire DL help, even though they clearly need it. Remember, they aren't going to solve all thier problems this year....

You're suggesting that they'll get Clausen then a good LT in round 2 and a starting calibre NT in round 3 and a starting LB in round 4? That would be a hell of a draft, but I don't see it. Unlike many, I think the starting calibre LTs will be gone by the end of round 1. I don't know if I like Clausen enough to use the #9 on him. I think they might be able to get a rotational NT in round 3 (someone who might eventually become a starter). I've no idea where they'll find a starting OLB in round 4 or later.

I was with you up until you said they could get a comparable talent at OT in the 2nd. I am sorry, but I don't see it. Who do you see that has a chance to be a good starting LT in round 2? I don't think Ducasse is a LT (or even RT) and I think Saffold will be gone by pick 41.

I am not a fan of taking Iupati at 9. Everything I've read recently says that he is mainly a G and not a LT or even RT. I love his toughness, strength and aggressiveness, but how many Gs can you spend 1st and 2nd round picks on? (They already have Wood and Levtre from last year). G's are kind of like safeties on D where it is tough to spend a high pick on. I'd be OK with Tebow or McCoy, but only if the team thinks one of those guys can be a top-10 QB in the NFL. I don't think McCoy would do well in Buffalo's wind with his marginal arm. Tebow is interesting, but I am a little leery of taking him as high as the 2nd round. I am not a big Terranc Cody fan, but I'd consider him in the 2nd. I don't think he'll make it to the Bills' 3rd round pick.

Well, on the plus side, Clausen is used to getting pummelled behind a bad ND OL. Clausen has shown good accuracy, fire and an ability to keep coming back in spite of a bad ND defense. On the downside, if his teammates can't stand him and he is a prima-donna, he will fail in the NFL I'd have little real quarrel with taking Clausen at 9, but still, I'd prefer a very good LT if available. I do think that there is quite some likelihood that any QB will get scrambled and ruined with no viable LT and a very marginal RT in Green. I know that they could come back in round 2 to take a LT, but I don't like who will be available. Not a Charles Brown fan and I don't think Saffold will be there. There are precious few other legit LTs that might be available in round 2 ( don't think Ducasse is one).

There were precious few really top-quality free agents who weren't getting old. Specifically, whom should the Bills have gone after, price be damned, in FA? Sure, I'd like them to sign every top available FA and trade the 5th-7th round draft choices for young-up-and-coming-already pro-bowl players, but that is just not all that reasonable to expect. Yes, the Jets have made a splash this off-season. They've traded for a highly talented CB that SD didn't want because he was a head-case and didn't tackle. They've signed LT on the down-side of his career and they've trade for a very troubled (and suspended) Santonio Holmes. Still, I like how they built the core or their team with draft picks on the OL and defense, only filling in a QB when most of the holes were filled....

He might be the top-rated NT in the draft, but that doesn't mean that he is worth a top-15 pick. Based on what I've read by my favorite draft guides (Pr football Weekly and GM Jr), Williams is a "late bloomer" who didn't play particularly well until his Sr. year and is a marginal 1st round pick mainly because there is such demand for NT and such a short supply. Please note that I am not saying that he is bad, just that he is a stretch at the 9th pick.

I've been accused of being a shill for Russ Lande before, but I've been a draft fanatic for 20+ years and BY FAR the best draft coverage I've ever seen is his GMJr draft guide - available instantly by PDF. The current guide is 400+ pages with full-page very small font reports on the top prospects at each position. Lande is a former NFL scout for the Rams and Browns and, in my opinion, that gives him excellent credibility. Plus, his writeups on each player clearly indicate that he has watched signifcant game tape (not highlight reels) of the top prospects. For the $20 it costs to download, I'd highly recommend it over any 3 or 4 of the draft mags. My 2nd choice is Pro Football Weekly's draft guide which is really excellent, too.

Well, I just disagree with the "too much young talent on the team at that position" part of you post. I do agree that LT, NT, QB and LB trump the need at WR because each of those positions is more important than WR. Just the same, if there is a much higher rated WR available at pick 41 than at any of the positions listed above, then I would be on-board with taking the WR - regardless of the QBs, LTs, etc on the roster.

Word!