OldTimer1960

I would love to see them be able to trade down 5-10 spots for an extra 2nd rounder, but I don't see anyone wanting to trade up for any of the available QBs. Mallett, Newton and Gabbert are guys that will get picked in round 1, but the teams will have to convince themselve to take them rather than being excited to do so. Who among those 3 is worth a top 10 pick? Is there any difference among them even? Still would love the Bills to trade down, but I don't see the trade involving someone moving up for one of those QBs. Barring a trade, I would also like to see the Bills pass on QB in round 1 - again because none of the QBs strike me as can't miss prospects. I could be wrong of course, but that's how I see it.

Excellent post. I do believe that they are trying to build a winning team, especially Buddy Nix and Gailey. I know that Russ Brandon (the Marketing guy and VP) wields a lot of power, or has in the past, but I really believe that Gailey and Nix are going to take tough solid football players in the draft and augment that with some mid-level tough FAs to shore up the D. I don't like any of the first round QBs at #3 (at least from what I've read and seen them play), but I am confident that if Nix picks one early then it is because he thinks he is going to be a good pro QB, not to sell tickets. How many tickets do you think the selection of NT Torrell Troup and DE Alex Carrington sold in rounds 2 & 3? Not many, but they played reasonably well as rookies and given an offseason of NFL weight training will hopefully be better next year. I concede that you could look at the Spiller pick as splash, but as the previous poster pointed out, had they really wanted splash they could have taken Tebow or Clausen or Dez Bryant and made BIG headlines. Spiller didn't generate as much buzz as any of those 3 would have.

I think that Jeff Fisher in Tennessee was a pretty firm hand and that didn't work out so well for Young. I don't want Young brought in other than on a low contract try-out basis. The ONLY thing this team has going for it is teamwork and chemistry and Young could destroy that in a short time if he was brought in and handed anything. He might destroy it even if he has to compete for a spot.

I am in the camp that don't believe that Fitzpatrick is a top-level starting QB, but I also think that he can be pretty good. I acknowledge that he doesn't have the strongest arm and that some of his passes are flat awful, but there is more to playing QB in the NFL than arm strenght and pretty passes. He is very good at directing the offense, getting the OL blocking scheme set, checking out of bad plays, moving in the pocket and making some plays on the run. I don't know if he can continue to improve - I don't think he is that old, but he might have reached the limit of his physical skills - I don't know. On the flip-side, he played behind a weak to awful OL which he made look considerably better than it is with his movement skills, running and quick decision making. Just look how much worse the OL looked with Brohm at QB. He played with maybe the weakest (at least the least experienced) WR group in the league. Evans is a very good NFL WR who is consistently double covered, but for all of Stevie Johnson's success this year I don't think other teams feared him. With Parrish out and then Evans too, Fitzpatrick had only Johnson (7th round pick), David Nelson, Naaman Roosevelt, Donald Jones and Paul Hubbard (all undrafted) to throw to. He was also handicapped by having no decent TE receiving threat. Other QBs routinely have 2, 3 or 4 completions a game to a TE who also opens the field up for other receivers. The Bills don't have any such weapon. I agree that it would be great to draft a true "franchise" QB that could be at the level of Manning, Brady, Brees and Rivers, BUT I also know that just drafting one in the first round doesn't guarantee that the QB will develop to that level. There are as many or more misses as their are hits when drafting QBs high. I REALLY hope that if the Bills take a QB in round 1 this year that they know what they are doing. I am not an NFL scout, but I've watched a lot of football over 50 years and I've seen a lot of good college QBs fail in the NFL. I wasn't that impressed with what I saw of Ryan Mallett and while it is hard not to be impressed with Cam Newton's play at Auburn the fact is that he has done it only one year, has relied more on running than passing (which won't translate as successfully to the NFL) and hasn't had to learn to read a defense. Anyway, while it would be wonderful to be able to pick the next Manning or Brady this year, I could easily live with trying to improve the D and OL and watch Fitzpatrick again next year. If I were convinced that Mallett, Newton, Gabbert or someone else was the next top level NFL QB, I would certainly advocate using the #3 pick on them - BUT they HAVE to be damn sure...

I am no Fitzpatrick apologist, but I just don't see where the desire for a better QB means that there IS a better QB to take at #3. No question, Andrew Luck would be great to have, but he will surely be gone and I don't feel that this team can afford to trade away a ton of picks to move up for him. I really don't want to over-spend on a "consolation prize" QB at 3. The gap between Luck and the rest of the pretenders at QB is huge. Luck is smart, talented and a leader groomed by an NFL QB father and played in a pro-style offense. None of the other guys fits that profile at all. Newton's main weapon is his running ability which won't translate to success in the NFL - at least not at the Brady, Manning, Brees level that we are wanting. Newton has only 1 year of Div 1 experience and played in a run-based spread offense so his NFL learning curve is HUGE. Add in the questionable judgement off-field and I am not interested until round 2 where he won't be available. Mallet is big and has a really outstanding arm, but can he read a defense? Is he a leader? Is he smart enough? I don't know, but I'd rather not gamble that high of a pick on him. I don't know a lot about Blaine Gabbert yet, but I haven't read much that suggests that he'd be worth the 3rd overall pick. As for the argument of having Fitzpatrick "groom" one of these guys for a year or two - does that really ever pan out? How did that work out for the guy Jim Kelly, Dan Marino or John Elway "groomed"? I can't think of many (any?) QBs that benefitted significantly from "learning" under a mentor. I think that they either "have" or "don't" the ability to play at the NFL level. They have to be born leaders and be able to visually process information very quickly to make quick decisions. They have to be tough and dedicated and smart. Again, just because there are a bunch of touted QBs a 2 tiers below Luck doesn't make it a good idea to draft one of them when better prospects at other positions will be available. Just my opinion.

I think Locker would be a reach at the top of the 2nd. I know that his team was bad around him, but he failed to elevate them at all and he was flat out horrible in some games. In two games against Nebraska (a regular season and a bowl game) he was a combined *get this* 9-36 1TD and 2INTs That is just BAD. Now, also let's put to rest his "great athleticism". Not that very many running QBs excel in the NFL, but Locker wasn't a great runner either - at least he didn't put up great rushing totals (except for a 110 yard game against a poor USC team). Cam Newton doesn't excite me much at the 3rd pick. He had a decent completion percentage, but he did most of his damage running - and that rarely translates to success in the NFL. I know that Mike Vick has had a very good year and he is a "runner", but he miraculously learned to be a good passer this year. Before Vick, the last really good "running" QB that I can remember having success in the NFL was Steve Young. Look at Vince Young. I am not saying that Newton will necessarily lack the leadership skills that Young is missing (though we don't know), but Young was also a GREAT runner in college and NFL teams have really stifled that.

Word brother! Newton has done a great job in one year at Division 1. He played JuCo the previous year and before that couldn't beat out Tim Tebow at Fla. I know that Newton has shown a good arm and throws a pretty ball, but he hasn't done ANYTHING that an NFL QB needs to be proficient in. Now, I don't know that he can't do those things, BUT with the 3rd pick in the draft, I want a guy who has shown over multiple seasons that he can excell at the college level doing mostly what an NFL player has to do. I think Newton is too much of a gamble for the Bills.

You are correct, sir!

Yes, that's true, but the Bills don't get a chance to draft Sam Bradford and the only other QB worth a crap (if he comes out) is Andrew Luck and he'll be gone before the Bills pick. I have no interest in ANY of the other QBs in this draft in round 1. I don't want project QBs like Newton , Gabbert or Locker. Those guys are 2-3 years away from being decent NFL starters, if they ever make it.

All that I can say to this topic is that I'd rather watch Fitz and the current offense TRY to move the ball next year than watch that PATHETIC, POS, Pile of Cr*P defense give up huge chunks of yard to mediocre RBs every week. NOTHING could be more frustrating than watching backup RBs run for 150 yards against a horrible defense. That's just my bias, but it's the way I see it.

I haven't seen an arm like Mallet's since JP Losman (yes, he had a great arm).

While I agree that the Bills should take a top QB if one is available, I don't think that they have the margin of error to take Cam Newton in round 1. Yes, he is a tremendous athlete. No, I am not terribly worried about the fact that he or his father tried to make financial gains during his recruitment. What has me concerned with Newton is the following: 1. He has only played 1 year of Division 1 football. Is he a one-year wonder who would not have played as well next year when NCAA defenses devise better ways to handle him? With the one-year wonder bust of Aaron Maybin fresh in our minds, I'd just as soon stay clear of Newton in round 1. 2. He plays in a non-traditional spread offense and rarely took a snap under center. Does he have the foot-work and ability to read NFL defenses that will be needed to excell? I know that he does not have that today, and I am not sure that he can develop it. Too much of a gamble (IMHO) in round 1 for this team. 3. NCAA QBs who make their living primarily as runners don't often pan out in the NFL. I look at Newton and see Vince Young, if the team that drafts Newton is lucky. How much of a running threat is Young in the NFL? Not much of one. Teams take away his running ability through scheme and dare him to beat them passing which he hasn't yet shown he can do. (And Young has a GREAT RB playing with him). I'd much rather see them take someone who has produced for several seasons at a high level in college. I also would LOVE to see defensive help first. I can take watching a bad offense much more easily than I can watch a defense that can't stop the run at all. This defense is world-class bad and is painful to watch.

I am not a C.J. Spiller "hater", but I am concerned by his inability to earn playing time. His ball security has been poor and he has shown little as the receiving threat that he supposedly is. Does that mean he is a bust? No, but it is a concern. I like what I've read about his attitude and effort, so I think that there is hope and he certainly has physical tools, so I'll try to remain optimistic.

First, Ngata will be franchised by Baltimore if they have any sense at all. The ONLY hope the Bills have of getting Ngata is calling "the Doc" from Back To The Future and going back in time and taking Ngata instead of Whitner in that draft.

I think to do as suggested risks undoing a lot of good that Chan Gailey has done this year. This team is seriously lacking in talent, yet has been surprisingly competitive in most games. I believe that this is due to one big thing that Gailey has done: He has played veterans ahead of rookies until the rookies are better RIGHT NOW than the vets. This has kept the vets engaged knowing that they'll play as long as they are the best option and teaches the rookies that they must EARN their playing tim - a valuable lesson that they would have to learn sooner or later anyway. I think the above also does some other important things such as: 1. teaching that the expectation is to win NOW, not suffer through growing pains where possible. 2. shows the team who is in charge (Gailey). With regard to the young players mentioned: * I wonder how many fumbles Spiller would have if he had 20 carries. Only being partially sarcastic there, but he hasn't earned the touches and it would undermine what I described above. * I don't think Troup has played that poorly and he is getting a fair number of snaps. Playing more snaps this week won't help him as much as a full offseason of weight training and more coaching on the nuances of leverage and cheating in the NFL trenches. * I think Carrington has earned his playing time and also had it defaulted to him by injuries. * Wang was injured for a long time early this year and may still lack the conditioning from that time. At least, we should hope that is the case. It DOES typically take OL longer to "get it" than most other positions, so there is still hope. * Too bad David Nelson and Shawn Nelson are too injured to play. David surely earned more playing time and I don't know about Shawn. I was disappointed that he missed a lot of time this year to injury and suspension - he never really recovered from that (and his fumble late against (?). * Regarding Brohm, I don't think that you can consider sitting Fitzpatrick after that disasterous game unles you have ZERO thought of him being your starter next year. If there is any doubt at all that they will take a QB at #1, then Fitz HAS to start this game to try to rebuild some confidence (for him and his teammates). * Maybin and McCargo aren't even worth discussing other than hoping that the scouts who advocated drafting them are riding out of town on the same bus as them.

The Pats have also been the MASTERS at trading "this year's" round X pick for next year's round x-1 pick. That is, trade a 2nd this year for some team's 1st next year. They have 2 picks in each of the first 3 rounds this year. The extra first is from fleecing the Raider's first pick for an aging and injured Richard Seymour. I don't remember where the extra 2nd and 3rd came from, but it was likely from trading a 3rd last year for a 2nd this year and a 4th last year for a 3rd this year. Of course, that is easier to do when your team is already very good, but that's how it is done.

While I do agree that Fitzpatrick isn't an elite QB, I agree that the defense is SO woeful that almost every pick should be spent there again. The only LB on the roster that could start for a good Division 1 college team is Poz and maybe Moats. I have hope for Carrington at DE, but Stroud is miscast at DE and is past his illustrious prime. This team has ZERO pass rush and no identity on defense. They can't play the 3-4 that they want to play, yet still suck (just a little less) when they play 4-3. They can't stop the run to save their lives and with no pass rush they are wasting some talent in the defensive secondary. I know that there are better QBs that Fitzpatrick and I know that the team needs a RT, perhaps a LT, a good TE and maybe another WR, but for my money, I would try to build a solid defense and live with Fitzpatrick again next year at QB. I just don't see a QB worthy of a top 10 selection and that will improve the Bills. I LOVE Andrew Luck's game. I think he is the next great QB, but he will be long gone by the Bills' pick. I don't like Mallet - thinkhe has a great arm, but is missing those intangibles that Fitz has. Now, if you could take Mallet's physical tools and Fitz' mind, THEN you have a QB! I also am afraid of Cam Newton. I just feel that there is too big a chance that he is the next Vince Young to pick him that high when our defense is so abysmal. I wouldn't mind if they wanted to spend a middle round pick on a smart QB like Moore from Boise St, but realistically, those guys don't pan out very often either, so I'd rather spend the top 3 picks shoring up an embarassingly bad defense. Just my $.02 worth...

He is far more valuable to the Bills than the 3rd or 4th round pick that they might be able to get for him - unless they decide that he just isn't worth the big money that they'll have to pay him. Evan's trade value just isn't very high, so they are better off keeping him (IMHO).

I would certainly like to see Spiller earning more carries and be a target for a pass or two a game, but he really hasn't done poorly at all when he has gotten chances. 4.1 ypc is pretty respectable, especially behind an OL that has *maybe* one starting-calibre OT and has had a lot of injuries lately. I wouldn't write Spiller off yet, but I think there is cause for concern that he isn't getting many opportunities. That is usually a sign that the coaches don't like what they see in practices and meetings, however, I think it might be that Gailey is adament about making rookies earn their playing time over the vets. I think that is a good strategy for building good teamwork and will help the rookies be accountable and learn to work like a pro- an important lesson. I think that if Gailey had just tossed the rookies in ahead of vets that were better at the time (due to their advantage in experience), this team wouldn't be showing the fight that it has shown.

My opinion is that they need significant upgrades at: 1 OLB - I think Moats might be a starting caliber player, but nobody else on the roster should be starting in the NFL at OLB 1 ILB - There needs to be another good ILB next to Poz if they are staying w the 3-4. TE - There is ZERO threat from the Bills TEs. The D doesn't even need to cover them. OT - MAYBE Demetrius Bell can be an OK starter at LT or possibly RT, but they must find a good starter for the other T position. DE - Stroud may not be back next year and I'm not sure that he is playing that well anyway. Maybe Carrington can be one DE with Dwan Edwards on the other side. I can live with Fitz at QB next year, but I still haven't seen enough from him to believe that he is an upper-eschelon starting QB in the NFL. Maybe he'll continue to develop - he's the kind of guy that you want to pull for, but he may not have enough natural talent to be a top-flight starter.

My opinion only, but the challenge to scouting QBs is that most of the guys that look good in college are playing on great teams (because they were top recruits to begin with). Their OL is superior, their WRs are open by 5 yards instead of the few inches separation that Pro receivers often get, the run game that supports them is usually very good. Because of the above, you often can't get a good feel for how they read defenses, how quickly they can make decisions and go through their progressions. You can't tell if they have the mental game, etc.

Ah, I remember J.D. Williams too. Not a bad comparison really. I am still hopeful that McKelvin will continue to improve. He really has tremendous athletic ability and he isn't afraid to tackle even though he isn't that big. I don't think he will ever be a great CB, but I think that he can be a good-very good starting NFL CB.

Leodis McKelvin has had his share of struggles, but I still see flashes of a good player in him. I do think that he is a tremendous athlete and that he tries hard. I think that he usually has good coverage, but doesn't seem to sense the ball in the air to make pass breakups - but there are decent/good CBs in the NFL that are the same way. I don't think that he'll ever be the star that they were hoping that he'd be when they picked him high in round 1, but he isn't awful either (but I admit that when he makes a mistake it is often a BIG mistake).

I don't understand why so many are attacking the original poster. You may not agree with his assessment that Fitzpatrick is too inaccurate, but the post was articluate and stated an opinion. I haven't completely made up my mind regarding Fitzpatrick, but I do think that he throws a lot of passes that aren't really where they should be. He has a lot that sail high and some are pretty wide of their target. That isn't to say that he never throws dead-on accurate passes (as he did to Johnson in the end zone in OT). Is Fitzpatrick the reason that they are losing this year? No. Is he the answer going forward? I don't know, but if he is, unless he improves his accuracy he will be at best the 3rd best QB in this 4 team division (behind Brady and Sanchez).

**MAYBE** on offense they aren't far away from respectability, but they are woeful on defense, particularly against the run. Perhaps 3 new LBs and hopefully the maturation and improvement of Troup and Carrington will be enough to get them to respectability on D. The pass rush is also abysmal, so at least one of the new LBs needs to have very good pass rushing skills.