Brandon

Yep. I'd tell him that we drafted him to play football, not to be a politician, and that if he didn't like that, he could hit the road.

BTW, would this be the time to also mention John McCargo?

Its all the same, though. The pick was used in order to draft Losman.

That's probably a bad example, because in that same 2004 draft, Donahoe burned a 2nd, 5th and a future #1 to move up to select JP Losman.

I'm in agreement with their assessment. Risk management is a hell of a concept, isn't it?

I'd prefer that they stay at 9 and take Zack Martin. I think they're going to try to trade down and will probably end up with Ebron, Odell Beckham or my choice as the upset special in R1, Calvin Pryor. In R2, if you want a decent LDE, that's the time to pick one. Scott Crichton would be my first choice, with Kareem Martin very close behind. If they do happen to go defense in R1, though, I'd want them to take the best OT on their board here.

That would be ideal, but I think there's a high risk of losing him if you trade back. The Giants are good possibility to take him at 12 and the Dolphins might have interest in trading up to get him. If I were sold on him, and honestly, I'm more sold on Martin than any of the players likely available at 9, I'd just go ahead and make the pick.

They took the 4th best OT??? I don't care if he turns out to be an all-pro, he was the 4th best OT!!!! Or the other variant of this... OMG!!! They took THIS guy at #9??? He was rated by ______ as the 14th best prospect in the draft!!! Reach!!!!

If they stay at 9, Zack Martin If they trade down, Eric Ebron or Odell Beckham I may be wrong, but I don't see them moving up in R1.

I expect that by mid afternoon tomorrow, the rumor will be that they've written off the trade up as too expensive and that Beckham will have emerged as their supposed top choice at 9. I think its all bull. Its Tavon Austin all over again. I believe they intend to trade down if they can. If they can't, they actually might take Beckham (with Ebron or Martin probably more likely), but given how many teams seem to have a high interest in him, I don't think they'll have any trouble trading out of that spot if that's what they intend to do.

I may be wrong, but all these rumors of the Bills trading up leads me to believe that their real intent is to do the exact opposite and trade down.

I thought it was a mid round possibility before this issue with Dareus. I believe Dareus will be a free agent after 2015 and both Williams and Branch will be on the wrong side of 30, so it was never a bad idea to bring in a decent prospect at the position to develop over the next couple of years as a contingency plan. And it never hurts to have another guy in the DL rotation, anyway, and as others state, its not like the Bills couldn't use some help with their run D.

I think its just that most people don't want a safety, so they're not talking about it much. I think its a valid possibility, though, especially if they trade down. As I said yesterday, I think they're going to want a run defender in the first two rounds, and while I think LDE is more likely, a run support safety isn't out of the question in R1 if they think he's clearly better than what they have. If they do pick one, though, I think its more likely to be Calvin Pryor.

Definitely not my favorite pick, but if they can trade down and acquire another 2nd round pick in the process, its not so bad.

I don't think it is. The resource allocation at that position would be enormous, and there are no guarantees of success. Just in this draft and the last one, we've already invested 2nd, 3rd and 6th round picks. Now, we're talking about two #1s and a #2 in addition to that. That's way too much, IMO, especially when your OL is falling apart, you can't stop the run defensively, and your QB could still go either way regardless of what you do with this pick. Maybe if you can make that move up for a 3rd this year or 2nd next year, you consider it, but if the price is any steeper, I'd have to decline.

It sounds like your entire philosophy towards this draft is based upon desperation and impending doom. If they're approaching it that way, I suspect it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I don't think the situation is quite so dire. While they may not have an elite 'playmaker' at WR, and I'm not opposed to them adding one, I also look at this as a solid, capable group of WRs. Now the TE position? That IS a problem and has been for years, but I don't see this team making a big investment there. They've never shown an interest before. As for the LDE position, I think they're going to want to make a significant addition to their run D in this draft. With limited options on the roster and with the positional value falling in the R2 area, that's where LDE makes the most sense to me. Clearly they could use a LB, too, but with Spikes and Alonso, and the fact that you're in nickel and dime packages so much, that third LB isn't as important as it might have been a decade ago. That can wait until round three or four. That leaves safety as the other potential defensive need, and the reason I think an elite run support safety like Calvin Pryor might be on their radar as well. But in some way, shape or form, I expect them to address their run defense in the first two rounds, and it may well be their only defensive pick this year.

They could certainly stand an upgrade at WR, but its not going to matter one bit if he misses half the year again because the OL can't block anyone. Further, I think it serves a dual purpose of not only helping EJ by keeping him on his feet and off the injured list, but it also gives him a more effective running game to rely on. And to be honest, while the Bills may not have a true elite receiving threat, they're not devoid of talent by any means.

And you're absolutely correct in that thinking. The idea that a player is the best, 4th best, or 14th best player at a position doesn't necessarily tell me anything. You still have to evaluate the individual player on his own merits.

That's how I see it playing out. They solidify their OL in R1 and follow that up with a LDE prospect in R2. I like both of those players in those spots. I differ on the direction after that. I can see them adding a CB, but not as likely a WR, and I think the RB talk from the front office is just that: talk. As far as TE is concerned, after years of saying they need to add a good one and watching them ignore it, I'm taking the old 'I'll believe it when I see it' approach. I expect them to take someone like Marcel Jensen in R4 or 5. That said, I'm not convinced that Ebron is all that great, anyway. Now if they trade down, all bets are off. If that happens, I think my choice for a surprise pick is more in play. That surprise pick? Louisville safety Calvin Pryor.

After watching some of their games the last couple of days and focusing on Martin, I can understand why they do. I like this guy a lot. He's an excellent player and I strongly suspect he will be one in the pros as well, wherever he ends up on the OL. I have no issue with drafting him 9th overall, especially given the other players most likely available when we pick. If they can trade down, so much the better, though I'm not sure I'd risk it.

I'd be a lot more concerned if he were sitting on his butt all through the offseason. This may or may not help him, but I'm not going to criticize a guy for making an effort to improve.

And that would have been the Saints' problem, not mine. I'm not saying the current system is perfect, it certainly isn't, but I don't think allowing a 7th team in is the solution. In most years, its just going to add a mediocre team to the playoffs and diminish the importance of the regular season.

I can't say I like the idea. It just increases the odds of a team with a losing record making the playoffs. It kinda sucks for the Cards, but the solution to their problem was to win more games. Its not Green Bay's fault that the Cards finished 3rd in the NFC West and went 2-4 in their division. The current system isn't particularly good, but this alternative stands a decent chance of giving us an 8-8 vs 7-9 Super Bowl matchup at some point down the road. I don't think anyone wants to see that.

I could live with that. I think you may be selling Steve McNair short. I wouldn't make the argument that he was a great QB, but he was a solid starter for a long time and his teams won a lot of games. He wasn't much statistically, but that was due at least in part to the run-oriented, ball control offenses that he played in. They could do a lot worse...and have in the last 15 years.