mjt328

Brandon Weeden. I liked him a bunch a couple months ago. At the time, I thought his biggest weakness was his age. After watching game film closer, I was very disappointed with his accuracy and decision making. He really had Justin Blackmon bail him out - on more than just a couple occasions.

Alshon Jeffery has been on my "steal" list for a couple months, but talk is resurfacing of him creeping into the first round. Somebody else said Marvin McNutt and I also agree. He could go as late as the fourth round. Doug Martin is another late-first, early second round pick that I could see being a huge star at the next level. Janoris Jenkins and Alfonzo Dennard will drop because of character issues, and justifiably so. But if they decide to clean up their lives, they could be huge steals. Whitney Mercilus was a one-year wonder, which makes him an obvious risk. But when all is said and done, I think Mercilus and Nick Perry will be the best pass rushers of this draft.

In 2011 Kuechly had 16 tackles against Clemson. 11 solo and 5 assisted. In 2010, he had 14 tackles against Clemson. 10 solo and 4 assisted. If that is "doing little" then I would like to see a good game.

I don't know if the rumor is true, but I would do that trade in a heartbeat. It's hard to believe the Vikings would trade down that far (making Claiborne and Blackmon unlikely) with a second rounder being the only compensation. Unless of course they are also really high on Gilmore or Floyd.

I've noticed a lot of random criticism over Kuechly. All I can assume is that these statements are being made by people that haven't actually watched Kuechly in game action (not highlights). Watch any Boston College game. If the opposing offense runs 100 plays, you will see Kuechly "in on the play" on at least 95 of those plays. By that, I mean he either makes the tackle himself, assists on the tackle, or he's within a couple yards of being the first guy there. It doesn't matter where he is on the field. His instincts and his relentless play are absolutely amazing. Also, His lack of sack numbers do not indicate an inability to do so. I've watched several games of his and NOT ONCE did the team ask him to blitz. He was asked to read/react to running plays and to drop into coverage. He did both of those things very-very well. The only legitimate concern about Kuechly is that you don't see him shedding blocks very often. But consider that we now have one of the league's best defensive lines. They will be occupying multiple blockers on every play. Imagine having a linebacker with his field range and ability to recognize where the play is going. Because of his speed and instincts, Kuechly would be a TREMENDOUS asset against the running game. As a three-down guy, his coverage abilities would also help us against guys like Rob Gronkowski. And unlike drafting a certain safety, he would wouldn't be a liability in the running game.

1. CB 2. WR 3. QB 4. OT 4. LB 5. OT 5. DE 6. LB 7. OG

Two weeks ago, the idea that either of these guys would be available at #7 was absolutely insane. But only a couple days away, it's actually plausible. - I've been inclined to think the Vikings are bluffing in hopes of a trade down. But their statement that "we play Aaron Rodgers, Matthews Stafford and Jay Cutler six times every season" is actually a legitimate reason to take Morris Claiborne instead. - If Minnesota takes Claiborne and Cleveland takes Richardson, that leaves the Bucs with a dilemma. They very likely could take the BPA in Kalil even though he isn't their biggest need. Or they could trade the pick to someone that takes him. But it's not crazy to think they reach for a bigger need like Luke Kuechly. Or a trading partner could move in for Fletcher Cox/Ryan Tannehill. Would it really be a huge stretch to see the draft go like this? 1 - Luck 2 - Griffin 3 - Claiborne 4 - Richardson 5 - Kuechly 6 - Cox 7 - Gilmore 8 - Tannehill 9 - Brockers

Question #1 Personally, I also think all three will be there. - I'm not hearing anybody talk about Mark Barron in the Top 10. So the only way I see him being gone is if somebody trades up. - Now that there is a chance Minnesota takes Claiborne instead of Kalil, I'm suddenly hearing talk that Luke Kuechly could end up on Tampa Bay. But I still think they take Matt Kalil (or trade out) if he's there. - The Jags supposedly like Stephon Gilmore, but I think they take the top reciever available (Blackmon/Floyd). Question #2 No doubt that I like Kuechly the most our of those three. I wouldn't mind taking a cornerback at #10, but I'm not a fan of Gilmore. As I've stated in other threads, I despise the idea of taking Barron.

Agreed. Kalil, no doubt.

Definitely not a positive sign for us drafting Kuechly, but I still wouldn't cross him off as a possiblity. I also agree that cornerback is a bigger need than linebacker, but I think Kuechly will be the best player available at #10. The comment that stands out to me is Riley Reiff. Our front office hasn't made a positive comment about him once during this draft process, without also mentioning his shortcomings. If we go tackle in the first, it's much more likely to be Jonathan Martin or Cordy Glenn. Nix seems to be very tight-lipped about Michael Floyd - and this is the second or third time I've noticed it. He hasn't been that way about any other player. It's also baffling (based on our needs and draft position) that Floyd was not in for a player visit. I think it's a smokescreen. It's interesting that Nix thinks there is a "no brainer" pick at #10, but he isn't sure that he will be there. Based on mock drafts all around the country, the only players that Buffalo has been seriously linked to, that also may be gone before our pick are Michael Floyd and Stephon Gilmore. Think about it.

I'm all for drafting Alshon Jeffery if he's there in the second round. If we wait until the third round, I like Marvin McNutt.

With today's NFL rules, I could care less about how hard a safety can hit. It's just going to get us a 15 yard penalty anyway. I care about how good he is in coverage and how good he is at wrapping up and bringing down the ball carrier. I'm not sure Barron is exceptional at either.

I also like Michael Floyd. Here is the problem with taking him at #10 though: 1) Our own GM stated that he doesn't think we have a capable starter at left tackle right now. We need a starter for opening day. 2) Left tackle is the hardest position to find on the offensive line, and probably the second hardest position to fill in all of football (after quarterback). Scanning the current NFl depth charts, you will see that more than half (53 percent) of starting left tackles in the league were taken in the first round. A whopping 75 percent were taken before the start of the third round. That's a small window. 3) This particular draft is considered very thin at offensive tackle, but very deep at wide receiver. If we pass on Floyd, we still could likely get a potentially starter like Alshon Jeffery, Marvin McNutt, Juron Criner, Rueben Randle or Mohamed Sanu in the second round. If we pass on Reiff, we are left with almost no options on the left side. Most of the remaining prospects like Zebrie Sanders, Bobbie Massie, Jeff Allen and Mitchell Schwartz are big projects that are better fits as right tackles. I'm with you. I don't think Riley Reiff or Jonathan Martin are spectacular prospects, and probably grade out more as solid starters. But with Demetrius Bell gone, I think we've backed ourselves into a corner.

You are nitpicking here. > I said that Marcel Dareus would be a "very good player" (direct quote). He's shaping up to be EXACTLY that. The reason I brought up statistics way back then, was because some people on this board were expecting him to be the next Bruce Smith. I wanted to point out that he was never going to be a player that racked up big sack numbers. By the way, Dareus played 3-4 defensive end most of last year (not DT), just like Bruce Smith. And his "excellent" 5.5 sacks was good enough for him to tied for 59th in the NFL. > I said that AJ Green would develop into a "regular Pro Bowler" (direct quote). His stats (65 catches, 1057 yards, 7 tds) were good - especially for a rookie, but not exceptional. Most of the time, those numbers would fall short of making the Pro Bowl. I guess the voters happened to like him this year. I still don't see him reaching his potential until about season three. So honestly, how can you say I was wrong about him? > My thoughts on Von Miller (saying he would only be "alright") were more of a reflection on him going into a 4-3 defense than on his talents as a player. That was stated in the original post. Why? Because Miller's talents were clearly in rushing the passer. And in most 4-3 defenses, the linebackers are responsible for stopping the run and dropping into coverage. I never said he was going to suck or be a bust. But since I didn't give a full explanation, you can go ahead and say I was wrong. > Cam Newton was ABSOLUTELY a bad call on my part. He was always going to be a high-risk, high-reward player. His mechanics were awful, he never progressed through his reads and he always looked to run first. Most of the time, those kinds of players have bust written all over them. I would have never expected Newton to develop so much in his rookie year. And I completely stand behind that comment about Mark Sanchez. I never called him a "big game quarterback" or suggested that he was some kind of stud. I simply pointed out that he seemed to play better in big games - specifically the playoffs. Which was absolutely true.

Wow. This page has gone about 4 pages longer since I checked it. I think I lost track of the conversation. To answer your question, I think Nix is a great judge of talent and YES, definitely a better scout than me. My problem with the original post was that I felt he was "suggesting" (maybe I took it wrong) that fans have no business ever criticizing Nix or his draft selections, because they don't know what they are talking about. Fans should just accept and trust whoever the front office selects, no matter what they think about his play. And I don't agree with that. I believe there are many knowledgable fans out there - including many on this board, who have proven they have a great eye for talent. It's not all done in RETROSPECT. And it's not all done with a draft magazine or because of an ESPN analyst. For instance, there were many on this board that were upset ON DRAFT DAY when Nix took Terrell Troup instead of Terrence Cody or Rob Gronkowski. Both would have been significantly better selections.

OK... > Spiller has NOT lived up to being a top 10 pick in any way. He is going into this THIRD season and is still a backup. So I was right about that. > Fitz hasn't done anything. Look at the Bills record with him at quarterback. Look at his stats. I was right about that. > Not sure the quote I made about Sanchez, but I don't think I ever called him a big game QB. Maybe I talked about how he came up big in big games (the Jets made it to the championship game his first two seasons). Can't really comment unless I know what I said. > Newton had dreadful mechanics in college. He was a risky pick that looks like it's going to work out. I'll admit that I was wrong about him. > Miller was tremendous in college. I made the mistake of over-analyzing how his size would limit his effectiveness, especially in Denver's scheme. > Dareus has been exactly what I said. Very good, but it doesn't show on the stat sheet. 5.5 sacks. I was right there. > Green has not reached his potential yet, but I believe I called him a future Pro Bowler. I was right about him. > Peterson looks EXACTLY like what I called. Good, but not great. He made more impact in 2010 as a returner. With the exception of Cam Newton and to a certain extent, Von Miller, I fail to see your point.

Who cares if the media does most of the work? I don't need to do all those things behind the scenes in order to form an educated opinion about a player's talent. All I care about is determining whether players like Ryan Tannehill, Trent Richardson or Justin Blackmon are worth the hype they are getting. Try doing these two things in your spare time: 1) Watch some games in college 2) Watch some actual game film (not highlights) of top prospects on websites like www.draftbreakdown.com and www.mainboard.com The point is, there are a lot of regular football fans that know what they are talking about. A lot of fans ON THIS BOARD were outraged when Buffalo took Donte Whitner instead of Haloti Ngata or Broderick Bunkley. A lot of fans ON THIS BOARD were dumfounded when Buffalo drafted Aaron Maybin instead of Brian Orakpo, Clay Matthews or Brian Cushing. This was not hindsight. In all of these cases, the Bills would have been better off listening to a regular fan instead of their high-paid scouts.

It's not about fantasy football. It's about common sense. For example, just last year with Blaine Gabbert. According to ESPN and most media outlets, Gabbert was very highly rated by most NFL GMs. Scouts loved his size and arm strength. He looked great in drills and spectacular on his pro day. There were times when they speculated Carolina would take him #1 instead of Cam Newton. There were plenty of people that thought WE should take him at #3 instead of Dareus or Von Miller. And sure enough, Jacksonville ended up taking him at the #10 spot. HOWEVER... There were PLENTY of people on this board (myself included) that wouldn't touch Gabbert with a ten-foot pole. Watching about 5-6 Missouri games, I felt it was obvious that Gabbert didn't have the skill to play at an NFL level. Apparently many others agreed with me. Despite playing in a pass-friendly offense, Gabbert spent most of his games checking down and throwing dump offs. He rarely tested downfield and when he did, the passes were way off target. A year later, the Jaguars are already prepared to give up on him. He looks like a complete BUST. So my question is... If none of the fans here know anything, why were so many right about Gabbert?

I think it's funny that you so easily discount the knowledge of football fans that have been watching this sport their whole lives. A lot of us live, breathe and die football. And just because we don't a career as a professional scout, it doesn't make us complete idiots. If the Bills traded Kyle Williams tomorrow for a seventh round pick, would you be upset? Or would you just trust the front office? OF COURSE you would be MAD, because you can see by watching the games that Kyle Williams is a very good football player. And based on the odds, you know that most seventh round picks aren't even good enough to make an NFL roster. You don't need to be a SCOUT to tell that it's a horrible-lopsided trade. Honestly, scouting the top college playes isn't much different. Obviously, fans don't have access to all the game film that top scouts have. And they don't have the time or resources to track every eligible player in the country. But they do have the time and resources to form educated opinions about the top group of prospects. You don't need a draft magazine to figure out that Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin and Justin Blackmon are top NFL prospects. All you need is a television tuned into the Stanford, Baylor or Oklahoma State games.

I would rather wait until the second round and take a shot at Alshon Jeffery (assuming he is still there).

I know I might sound cocky and arrogant, but I honestly don't think it's that hard to spot NFL talent. To answer your post, I haven't decided yet who I think the Bills should draft at #10. Some of the players I would consider at that spot are Dre Kirkpatrick, Michael Floyd and Riley Reiff. > Kirkpatrick reminds me of Antoine Winfield. He isn't going to show up on the highlight reel every week, but he's very solid in coverage and an excellent tackler. With all the dink-and-dunk offenses around the NFL, I think he would be a valuable addition. > Floyd is an excellent all-around recevier, who would be the perfect addition to this offense. I especially like his ability to go up high and get the ball on deep passes, but he's also good at short and intermediate routes. > Reiff's success in this league will depend on his ability to add strength and get better using his hands. If he can't do that, he's going to be a right tackle in the NFL. Some of the players that I don't like (who have been discussed as our picks at #10) are Ryan Tannehill, Jonathan Martin, Stephen Hill, Quinton Coples and Courtney Upshaw. > Tannehill is going to be a middle of the road quarterback in this league. Somebody is going to invest a high first round or high second round pick on him, and it won't be worth it. > Martin struggles to hold blocks at the second level and gets beat too easily by good pass rushers. He's got the frame scouts like, though, so he'll get picked somewhere on day one. > Stephen Hill has all the intangibles you look for - speed, size, hands - but he just doesn't have enough production. There has to be a reason that his college career was so unspectacular. > Coples doesn't have the speed or moves to get around the edge. He can be a solid 3-4 end, but he will disappoint as a 4-3 pass rusher. > Upshaw might have some success as a 3-4 outside linebacker, but I hate his overall effort on the field. He doesn't chase down plays and is inconsistent as a pass rusher. For the record, I'm torn on Melvin Ingram. I think he's an incredible athlete and decent pass rusher. I just wouldn't take him at #10 and I don't think he fits our defensive scheme.

As an amateur, I often did a better job scouting talent than Russ Brandon, Marv Levy and Tom Donahoe. So yeah, it's going to take some time for me to completely trust Buddy Nix and his decision-making. He's been a mixed bag so far. Honestly, I don't think it's that hard to spot talent - even if you are just a fan. I think these scouts and "experts" overthink themselves, when 95% of the time it comes down to production on the field. Not combine numbers, Wonderlic scores and pro days. Just some examples: > Coming out of college, I felt that Bryant McKinnie was a better LT prospect than Mike Williams. But our front office went for size over talent. I was right. They were wrong. > When we let Pat Williams go in free agency, I made the comment that it was "the beginning of the end" for our dominant defense. It's been downhill ever since. > I saw JP Losman as a first-round reach and Willis McGahee is a wasted pick that would force us to trade Travis Henry. I was right in both cases. > If I was drafting instead of Marv Levy and Russ Brandon, we would have grabbed Haloti Ngata and Brian Orakpo instead of Donte Whitner and Aaron Maybin. I also thought Patrick Willis and Adrian Peterson were two of the rare players worth trading up for. I hated Nix's first draft (Spiller, Troup, Carrington, etc.) and his first year of free agent pickups (Dwan Edwards, Andre Davis). Two seasons later, we've got almost nothing to show from those additions to the team. Last year, I felt Nix did a lot better job - particularly in drafting Marcel Dareus and nabbing Nick Barnett in free agency. Lo and behold, they were our two best pickups. For the record, I liked us drafting Aaron Williams and Kelvin Sheppard, but I preferred us taking Ryan Mallett in either the 2nd or 3rd round. We will see how that pans out.

I'm coming around to the idea of taking Michael Floyd. He's nowhere close to Justin Blackmon, but he does have a very good all-around skill set. And this stuff about Stephen Hill... This is exactly how major BUSTS come about in the NFL. He's done virtually nothing on the field. But then scouts start drooling over his physical attributes and combine numbers, and the guy shoots up the charts. I wouldn't touch the guy until at least Day 3 of the draft.

Agreed. Let's hope that Lloyd doesn't have much left in the tank. The Patriots could be more dangerous with a legitimate downfield threat.

Tremendous deal for the Bills. They take the majority of the cap hit this year, with the free agent market already dried up and their major players re-signed. After that, the number goes down considerably and opens up room for more moves in 2013 and 2014.