AKC

The Bills draft 11th. You're promoting a guy who might be a 2nd or 3rd round quality player, who is going to go higher than that because talent levels at the position are poor this draft. So the question is, do we want to take your Detoit Lion-like approach and draft him there anyway, or draft someone who will help the team out more by being vastly more talented at their own position, as the better teams in the league would do. I'll go with the better team's strategy and leave you adoring the Lions.

I get your proposition- "If a receiver is the 2nd best receiver in any draft class, then he MUST be a 1st round talent". The Dolphins and Ted Ginn like your assessment. Koren Robinson feels the same way.

I understand that Fantasy "Managers" wouldn't notice the lack of DTs in the span you've chosen above, but it's there for anyone who can grasp what the better teams in the league have been doing. Most of the top team spend substantial amounts of their top pick equity in their defensive interiors. You see a list of picks, the trend for anyone not obsessed with the offensive side of the football is that there is not a commitment to the DL by Detroit or Buffalo, as we see among the best tesm in the league. Now feel free to get back to your inane conversation about which 2nd round talent WR you insist is our best choice at the 11th spot of the draft. And make sure to sign on with a couple of your 2 and 3 post aliases to convince yourself that there's someone else out there as daft as you are.

So if there's a top 10 talent available at our 11th pick, you "wouldn't be upset" if we pass on a 2nd or 3rd round talent and take the better football player? I always figured FFL would end up turning fan brains into mush. Some prophecies are more disturbingly fulfilled than others.

He was a 2nd rounder.

San Diego has solid talent in the middle of their DLine- they suit 5 interior guys on Sundays and don't overlook either the talent quotient or numbers inside. Pitt is a real wild card when it comes to their drafting and the quality of their D play- but since they play a true 3-4 they carry 2 NTs and then 3 other DLinemen in the 300 pound range. The anchor for that line though (Casey Hampton) was taken 19th overall. Indy is the only one who has really subpar talent in the middle. They were a top 5 D overall, but they were 15th against the run. They're a team like us who would become a much better overall team the moment they bring in another good DT to stick in their rotation. And you're 100% right- you better be good when you make the selection; I'm just thinking that if the Bills succeed at doing that this year there'll be a lot of unhappy fans.

The last two top picks used on DL go way back- to Bruce Smith. Flowers was the other. Over that span, we've been CB and WR slap-happy. Our more capable competition seems to have figured out a better approach. The question in April will be- are we paying attention?

Since the Buffalo Bills have taken DLinemen with our top pick in two drafts, we've used our top pick for Wideouts 4 times and Corners 5 times. Since the Detroit Lions have taken DLinemen with their top pick in two drafts, they've used their top pick for Wideouts 4 times and Corners 3 times. The Super Bowl teams, who not coinicdentally led the NFL in sacks this past season, broke down this way: Wide Receivers: 4 Buff 4 Detroit 0 New England* 0 New York Cornerback 5 Buff 4 Detroit 1 New England* 2 New York If we continue the trend, I'm guessing we'll be looking for a new GM in 2009- Matt Millen should also be available and what a great fit that might be!

Thanks for sharing; I would never have realized Taylor's filming schedule for "Dancing With The Stars" conflicted with the Super Bowl broadcast without this information.

Good teams average about six 300 pound or bigger DLinemen. They understand that someone is bound to be hurt each week so sure, maybe only 5 get suited. That's why they carry 6. But if you look at both Super Bowl teams, teams that not coincidentally also were the top 2 teams in sacks last year, they both had 5 or 6 guys active playing inside on their Dlines during the 2007 season. One real eye-opener is how early and often some of the best teams have been willing to take DTs in the draft versus the perennial losing franchises of the league like Detroit and Buffalo.

Most of the best defenses have 5-7 DTs, and the real trend is that among their rotations will be a number of high draft picks. We're one or two DTs shy of a quality rotation at this point, and one of our two high draft pick DTs is on the end of his career. We're ripe to find another quality DT if we'd like to be competitive this season. We've really used the Chicago model, with a NT and UT, we just haven't had the body for NT until now. Kyle will be an asset to our DT rotation until he leaves us in free agency, and there are teams who he would be better on than in our scheme. He has a tremendous natural ability to play low- but in our D he's asked to get up after contact to look to take away passing lanes with his hands. In another scheme, where he can simply play to hold his gap, he'll end up having a good career IMO. I like him a lot, but this is just not a perfect D for him. Hence, unless we get him to take a long term RFA contract, I think someone else will pony up better money once he's a UFA.

Outside of an aberration like the Herschel Walker to Minnesota trade that took place during the NFL season, the closer to "real-time" in a draft a deal is made, the better it should be for the team trading down. On draft day, a team in love with a specific player is far more likely to become "over generous" in pursuit of that player. At the top pick the dynamics are different, but down the board a team willing to move down should gain an overall advantage by waiting based upon pick valuation. Of course, the actual picks may not turn out to fulfill any valuation prophecy at all since there's the element of teams wildly misjudging talent, but if we're going to trade down it's hard to imgine that thaking place until we're within hours of the draft- or more likely within a pick of 11.

I emailed them about tickets- I'll see what the situation is and post info here: You can purchase day tickets for entrance to the grounds via the ticket office on your arrival, or advance via phoning the ticket office at 716/357-6250. The day ticket is good from 7 am -8 pm and is 16.00 . Unfortunately that is the only ticket that gets you into the morning lectures. Thank you. I'm happy to sponsor a TSW representative-

I've got an inclination to burn some frequent flier miles to show up and represent the concerned fans of the NFL at his little tea party.

True, that term is not the best to describe the cost of the 11 pick- Lynch at 12 last year got I think 19 mill with 11 guaranteed? If that's close, the thing is that we've got a commitment to that money and player for the next 5 years. Even if Lynch had turned out to be Lawrence Phillips, you're not cutting someone you just paid 11 mill in guaranteed money to. That guaranteed money is counted against the team cap for the life of the contract unless he's cut, and then it's accelerated into the current/next seasons- no?

I was thinking about how the use of a first for Lynch made perfect sense- a position where most guys have done their heavy lifting by their 6th or 7th season, and you get to have a majority of their best years with that big rookie contract. They also are stepping off the bus and walking right into a starting role. At WR, so few are able to do anything like this- the role is just too much to jump right into. TE and WR are difficult commitments that early, unless, as you've pointed out, your team is flush across both lines and you have have no obvious hole. I'm amazed that the link between specific positions and the cap ramifications of a #11 pick don't click with most fans. I get the feeling most fans recognize that we don't need a top 5 Corner playing our D, yet there's still a lot of chatter about the position as an option this draft. I think putting #11 money into a corner this year, in our situation, would suppress our growth for at least a few years. Now, as some wise old hands at this have pointed out in other posts, we could have a whole new coaching staff in here in 2009 who might throw the Cover 2 out, and that corner might then become a good use of #11 money- but for the place we are and hoping to compete in 2008, Corner does not seem responsible to me. On the WR side one conclusion that seems fair is that if your guy does turn over the course of his rookie contract to be a keeper, there's a good chance he'll be "kept" by another team via FA. You get to pay for him to learn to play in the Bigs, then he bolts to a team with better upside or some monster contract we're not inclined to match.

The average NFL player career is 3.5 seasons. I doubled that and included every team in the NFL. You appear to feel there's a benefit in exanding the years beyond 7- but to focus on only one team would be an error IMO. To focus on trends, you have to look at the league overall. I think 7 years of the more succesful teams clearly favoring using their opportunities in the top half of the first round on DL does offer some insight, and adding a few more years won't change the numbers in any dramatic fashion.

I had them in my orginal title- somewhere in editing they were lost. In the frame I used (first 15 picks), they do have a record over that span of 4 picks, including 2DTs and a WR. Note that I also showed the other teams who had made the same picks, even where they were Playoff teams. I'm in no way saying there's a hard, fast rule about NEVER taking a Wideout or Corner up high in the draft, in fact if we played a traditional D it might make sense to look at CB this year. Not with a Cover 2 though- it'd be irresponsible to put #11 money into a Corner since we're playing in a Cover 2. At the same time, Wideouts clearly can be had in other ways- and there IS a clear trend for the better teams to focus more with top of the draft picks on "other than" WRs, while at the same time the teams who treat the draft like Fantasy Football managers (Lions, Bills, etc.) get caught up in the love of ball touchers. I'm just hoping that, since for the first time in 4 years we COULD make a big step forward defensively, that we actually do it if the opportunity presents itself. As much as it will cause waves of our Message Board bretheren to stampede the ocean cliff, it is the way to build a team. The evidence looks very clear to me- the vast majority of the teams who play well year after year STARTED their runs with high round DT picks, and for the most part premium DTs. We have an old one now, and possibly an up and coming, but the good rosters in the league aren't stopping at 4 of mixed quality DTs- they're at least at 5 and in many cases 6 with a solid dose of premium talent there. As I've pointed out, there's a difference between the financial commitment made to a #11 WR in the draft versus the commitment made to the FA WR. The draft is where the foundation of the team is built, which is why smart teams tie up a lot of their early draft commitment in their lines versus with easily interchangeable players like WRs available every year in FA, and with more management options availble to handle the financial commitment. That #11 WR is going to eat a nice chuck of cap space for the coming 5 seasons- whether or not he pans out to be a good player. The FA, who the league has already got a book of league film on him, has a contract the team can likely move with only an extra year of pain. I'm all broken up that you don't approve of my demeanor; maybe you'll find one of the Hamden threads more to your satisfaction. If you want to begin threads in here to stimulate football conversation, you'd hope that the responses will have a little more depth than "That can't be right". I'm not in the habit of promoting contribututions from the "that can't be right" crowd. Just because I give out a great map doesn't mean everyone will arrive at the destination. But clearly following the rule of using early picks on DL has been an incredibly frutiful strategy for most of the top teams in the NFL today. Why did I "cherry pick" the last 7 NFL draft classes? If you really have to ask Dave; I didn't figure the draft classes of the 1950s would offer as much evidence about today's game ;-)

We'll be selecting in the top 15 this year. You will want to go back and check where these QB's you are calling "great" were actually drafted- guys you've identified like Brady or Favre. I can't see how your premise is supported when you factor that reality into it. Garbage is the inability to recognize that the best teams in football have some positions thay are far less likely to draft with a pick carrying the financial ramifications of a top 15 selection. Garbage is what Detroit, Arizona and unfortunately our Bills have become on draft day, approaching it all like a Fantasy Football draft and leaving the better teams to vie over the best DLinemen without the bad teams messing up their party.

Following the current draft predictions, that's how it will play out. The wild card will be someone moving up for another position and kicking the Chiefs or Bengals behind us. Considering the Chiefs OL needs, this might not be out of the question. With our offseason moves, teams with bad front offices won't see us as much threat to go DT at 11. Our best scenario may just include another team's error on letting someone with a different need move up.

Just looking at the money side, there is a major difference between a FA and a top 15 draft pick. That top 15 pick will tie up a good chuck of money against the cap for the next 5 seasons, whereas the FA contract on average will impact the cap for a lesser time period. There's a natural tendency for fans to look at the game from the player side- like "we need a running back"- without considering how the better teams look to bracket a running back for the money required.

You should go back to the title of the post- it's about drafting WRs/CBs early in the draft, who does it and who doesn't. You used Pitt and the Cowboys, and between them they only have one WR either of them picked up that early. Your examples provide support for my original point. Making the playoffs sporadically is a whole lot easier trick than doing it consistently. You'll also notice among the teams listed are the franchises considererd the worst at running a team.

This doesn't look like the year for us to fill our DT rotation in the first since the air is so thin at the top of the DT class. It's too bad, because we look to have the first 4 pieces. One more premium talent there would give us a quality and competitive rotation IMO, with the flexibility to play Johnson in the "Tuck" role. But it may have to wait- I should float a trial question past someone like the FootballOutsiders to see if they'd spend the time to analyze the overall cap numbers at the O and D level. I'd be very interested in seeing how the numbers come out- and no doubt there are some exceptions to the overall trend- Indy at first glance would appear to skew the $ ratio while the Steelers skew the DTs rotation numbers- but overall the consistent teams, and especially the teams consistent on D, have put a much higher poriority on premium DLine talent than the Lions/Bills/Jets of the NFL.

You can't reach that conclusion with the examples you offer- Driver's a 7th round pick, Ward a 3rd and Dallas didn't draft either of those receivers.

Considering the poor percentage of early round TEs who ever live up to expectations, and with the underwhelming results of the current TE class at the combine, I can't imagine finding any way to get excited about the Bills risking an early pick at the position. I agree the offense needs help- but I'm pointing out that losing franchises are the one's spending top picks there. We shouldn't even THINK about a WR until the first round is over. We're talking about giving the offense a bigger target as a #2, and the thought of putting #11 money towards our #2 Wideout would cripple this team IMO beyond any chance of recovering from that kind of cap misapproppriation for at least a few seasons. The idea is to get the money laid out the way the league's winners do it- and that means get your defensive house right and the rest will come together. In the coming draft, we might be best served with 2 defenders day one and spending the balance of our picks on the offensive side of the ball. Our D needs remain at DT/CB/FS and I believe once we address those, our offense will see a lot more chances. More chances will result in the offense playing better as a unit much earlier in the season. We already have a top WR making first round money- adding a second WR getting the money the 11 spot will require just looks to me to be the kind of thing that the better managed teams don't do. The general opinion on this class of WRs being as low as it is, I just hope there's some way to wait to get help at the position until at the earliest our second pick. I used the 15 spot because I needed some window to frame the numbers. 15 seemed like a natural- but there's no change of course if I go to top 11- the winningest teams year in and year out still favor defense when they get the rare opportunity to pick that high. One study I'd love to find is one showing the ratio of D salary to O salary for each franchise. I'd be surprised if it didn't show some real connect to won/loss records.