Shaw66
-
Posts
9,736 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Shaw66
-
-
19 minutes ago, JP51 said:
but I would say lots of folks that I am reading seem to be more excited about this pick up than me, thinking he is really going to change our offensive dynamic... he might... but I dont think so... Conversely, I am seeing a lot of he just isnt that good... etc.. To that I am simply saying look maybe his one or the other... but likely he will be a fair pickup that will give us modest production he will likely not be either extreme and I don't mind taking a shot with players that may come in and over produce... like lets say a Jerry Hughes (better example than Lofton) ... who at pick up I never thought you would get that kind of production out of him.. every now and again it works...
Meaning no disrespect, I think you're misperceiving, more or less completely, what signing Moore is about. The Bills signed him to be part of their receiver-by-committee approach. They don't expect him to be a 1000-yard receiver - if that happens, great, but that's not what they signed him for. They signed him to play maybe 30-40% of the wide receiver snaps, get maybe 500-600 yards - just like the receivers did last year.
The way we all used to think about receivers is that the team had three wideouts - like, for example, Diggs and Davis and a slot guy, and the other guys were backups who played only when the Bills went four-wide or when someone got injured. That isn't how they play any longer. Now, they want to have, essentially, five starting wide-outs, all of whom play, and all of whom can play pretty much any of the wideout positions. The Bills put them on the field in all kinds of different combinations and different formations. It all changes from play to play. They challenge the defense to get the right personnel on the field, play after play, to match the Bills personnel, and even then the defense doesn't know what positions those receivers will be playing. It's almost impossible to adjust the defensive personnel to be ready for everything and to get the defensive matchups they want everywhere.
So, there's a lot of reason to be excited about Moore, because he certainly could be exactly what the Bills expect - an upgrade to the total talent on the wider receiver committee. I'm excited, because every player who makes the committee better makes the Bills better. If he turns out to be Valdez-Scantling and gets cut, okay, but that's always a risk.
He's a good candidate to improve the committee. How do I know that? He was a second-round pick, which means he has the athletic skill set to be a threat on the field. So, I'm excited.
They aren't expecting the equivalent of Jerry Hughes. I'm not sure why you didn't think the Bills would get production from him - he was a first-round draft pick who didn't fit the Bears' scheme. I was hoping he'd be a solid player for the Bills when they got him. But Hughes is irrelevant in the discussion of Moore, because the Bills don't particularly need Moore to be anything like the equivalent of what Hughes became.
-
6
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, SCBills said:
Why do so many people have to think of him as a cut candidate or the next best thing?
Right. Especially because it's obvious that Bills have very little interest in signing the next best thing.
All the Bills are looking for is reliable receivers with decent speed, decent hands, and solid blocking skills. Plus, the standard for all Bills players: intense competitor, team player, growth mindset.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
I see this as the analog of Chase Claypool last year. A talented athlete who hasn't been able to figure out the NFL game and has had questions about his attitude. I'm fine with it because he upgrades Shenault and Shavers but I don't have a ton of optimism.
The voice of reason. I agree. You really have to wait and see.
However, I'm recalling the thread last year about whether the bills would have a receiver go over a thousand yards, and we could have the same thread again this year. Five guys with 800 yd each wouldn't be a bad thing! All that has to happen is four or five guys have to do their share. Beane in McDermott obviously still are looking for the best four or five.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:
I said it up thread, but appreciate that it is a lot to wade through.... part of it is scheme fit. I think he has to play in a 4 man front that use bigger ends at the 5 and the 7. I think right now there are more 3-4 teams given the proliferation of Fangio copycat defenses knocking about and even among the 4-3s there are some teams - like Houston and Cleveland that run a lot more wide 9 concept stuff where you want your ends to be fast and bendy.
In fact rather than me repeating it I've found the link to the earlier post:
Thanks for this. Really good stuff.
It makes me think of something I've been noticing lately. The Bills have a really good, solid roster. They have no holes. They have some positions they'd like to improve, for sure, but no holes. Beane and McDermott have built the team like this, year after year, and (but for the disruption of last season's housecleaning) it's gotten to the point where there is nothing to be truly concerned about.
And that means that when the draft comes, when you have the DT group you have, you can be more comfortable betting on the upside guys like Sanders and Jackson and Walker bring. Having a strong roster to begin frees you a little in the draft to go after the sleeper special player.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, buffaloboyinATL said:
He was originally projected in the 2nd round, so slipping to the top of the 3rd round was not much of a slide. I think his not getting picked sooner, was more about teams evaluating value at positions of needs at the time of their pick, etc.
He was already pretty productive at Arkansas, but I believe he is still considered a raw prospect in many ways who needs to continue to develop counter moves, get comfortable with his recently added weight etc. It is his potential upside that makes people say he is a great value in the 3rd round, because If he hits his full potential, he would be a first round player.
We all know that there is no guarantee that he will reach that potential, but even his current production (6.5 sacks last year, 2nd team all SEC etc) combined with his elite combine performance, make him worth the pick, in my opinion. It is if and when he gets closer to his ceiling that he will become a true "steal".
Thank for this. Great summary of what makes him interesting. Sort of great upside with a floor that means he's probably still going to be useful.
Appreciate it.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:
With Sanders, it was simply the owners didn't feel he's worth the aggravation for a day 1 or 2 pick.
So I wouldn't say he was a 5th round steal, he's a "I don't mind wasting a 5th on him, lets see if he changes"
That makes sense, but I'm interested in Jackson. He didn't fall because he might be a problem like Sanders might, right?
-
Sorry, I haven't read this thread, and I'm sure what that some part or all of the answer is in it somewhere, but can someone explain this to me:
I know everyone says that Landon Jackson was a steal or a great value in the third round, but that just means that people saying that think he should have been drafted higher. I generally don't buy that argument, because the professional GMs obviously thought other players were greater values. Was Sherdur Sanders a steal for the Browns, or is a fifth round grade actually a measure of how good he is?
So, what I want to know is why people think Jackson is so good. If Bosa weren't in Buffalo, would Jackson take Epenesa's starting role? I understand that he's tall and athletic. What else is it about him that makes everyone so excited? Did he dominate SEC offensive tackles?
-
40 minutes ago, balln said:
the problem w McDermott and Beane - is they get comfortable / settle. We’re good enough here ….
This is really ridiculous and contrary to everything they always say. Beane's JOB is to get better at every position, all the time. He certainly does not say to himself, "well we're good enough, so I won't look for others."
It's completely obvious that the Bills make very careful decisions about how they want to play the game, on offense and on defense, and then they acquire players who can play the way the Bills want. And those decisions are based in part on how they want to spend their money and their draft capital.
In this case, the Bills clearly do not think it's necessary to spend a lot of money on wideouts to play the way they want to play.
They didn't spend a lot of money or draft capital this season, just like they didn't draft a running back or pay Cook what he wants. They don't think they need to spend money to get the kind of players they want.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
But they did that when they traded for Cooper last year off the heels of two games where having no vertical threat directly led to losses. They met with all of the vertical WRs in the pre-draft process this year too. Beane and McDermott have both openly stated they think adding more speed on offense would be valuable. So on one hand their actions and words tell you they know it is an important role, on the other hand the role remains unfilled as of now. I don't understand the plan, but hopefully they at least get a baseline option in the room.
The Cooper I saw last season was no more of a vertical threat than the other guys they were putting on the field.
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, HappyDays said:
So despite my frustration with the continued underinvestment in WR, I'm at least glad that everyone is in agreement that the defense now has the necessary talent to perform at an above average level in the postseason. You can't give all of these resources to a defensive head coach and then come back later making excuses that the talent wasn't good enough. This has to be the year KC's offense doesn't walk all over us in January. I think a realistic standard should be keeping them below 24 points and they need to punt at least 4 times. Otherwise, what was the point of this offseason?
Yes, except it might not all come together this season. It might, if they hit on some of these rookies. It's possible that these guys they've acquired will emerge as quality starters this season, but many of them may be a year away. Which in my mind is okay - they're always building for continuous improvement. And given their draft position, they simply aren't likely to find an instant defensive stud in the draft.
There are, in my mind, two players who have the potential to cause a major turnaround on the defense: Hairston and Bosa. If Hairston can start and Bosa can be Bosa, the defense will be a lot better.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, HappyDays said:
It's about getting a WR with a specific necessary skill set. I didn't need the Bills to spend a top 100 pick on a WR from this class or multiple picks. I just wanted a WR that could play outside and get vertical, that's all. The role is so important they got rid of MVS so they could trade for Cooper last year. As of right now we don't even have an MVS on the roster, the role remains unfilled.
But this is exactly why I keep saying what I've been saying. McDermott and Beane disagree with you, completely. It's totally obvious.
If they thought the role of a vertical receiver who can get deep is as important as you say, they would have acquired a guy or guys to fill that role. When they have a need, they fill it, and for two seasons (since Diggs left) they have done nothing to fill that role. If they cared about that role, they would have taken Worthy when they had him sitting there for them. Instead, they passed on Worthy and took Coleman.
McBeane's view of the offense is that the guy you're talking about is not necessary. They don't see a great need for that guy. He isn't critical to how they intend to run their offense. It couldn't be any clearer. Two years in a row, no meaningful effort to get the guy you think is essential.
I just googled 2024 explosive plays and found a chart that I can't copy. It's here: https://steelersdepot.com/2025/01/2024-regular-season-turnover-and-explosive-play-data/ What does it say? It says the Bills were seventh in the league in explosive plays. So, that would make me wonder how much better the Bills need to get in the big-play department, and how much better it's actually possible to get. Ravens 49ers Eagles Lions Bucs and Packers were better. Bills were also fourth or fifth WORST in explosive plays allowed. (Eagles were the worst!) So, that would make me wonder that if explosive plays are important, which would suggest having a burner to get deep is important, how much capital would I spend to get better at receiver to improve my offensive explosive play stat compared to how much capital I would spend to improve my defensive explosive play stat. Then I look at the draft, and - wonder of wonders - the Bills spent their draft capital on defense.
This whole receiver discussion should start and end with one sentence: The people who are running the Bills (and who are winning a lot of games) don't think they need a receiver who can get open 30+ yards downfield by outrunning the defenders. That's it. It isn't important to them. (Why not? Because guys with decent speed, like Shakir and Samuel and Palmer can get open downfield using schemes that leave holes they can attack.)
-
1
-
-
Good deal for Kittle.
If I were the niners, I wouldn't be chasing after him.
-
I've read very little of this thread, and I haven't heard much of the Beane interview. All I listened to was when he first came on the air and ripped into them about their (and other people's) constant yammering about what Beane hasn't done about the wideout position. I have a couple of thoughts.
First, I think it was bad form for Beane to do that, especially right off the bat. What I liked about it was that he didn't seem over-sensitive - it's not like his feelings were hurt. It was more like a barroom discussion where he came back strong in response to something stupid he heard. Still, there's a PR portion of his job, and embarrassing media guys in your market is something you should do only when they're really out of control, like Jerry Sullivan was several years ago. Beane should have kept quiet.
Having said that, I'm glad he spoke up for another reason, and that's because I and other people around here need more support in the argument about wide receiver that keeps raging here. People who think the Bills need a classic, burner, number 1 receiver simply are not paying attention. The Bills do not agree with you. They don't. They know what kind of personnel they need and want at wide out for the game they want to play. They collected a roomful of those players last season, they like that room, and they only tweaked it this year with the addition of Palmer.
How do I know they like what they have? Duh! - When they don't like what they have, they add players. Like they did on the d line this draft and in free agency.
Why don't they want the receiver so many people are begging for? I'd guess there are plenty of reasons. 1. They like the philosophy of spreading the ball around. They want to attack all over the field, in all different kinds of ways, and they don't want to have a player who demands the ball in order to make the offense work.
2. They don't want another prima donna, and star wideouts are prima donnas more often than most other positions.
3. They want guys who are good and aggressive blockers, and some, many, of the best receivers are not enthusiastic blockers.
4. They are ahead of the curve. A few months ago there was a thread here about how receivers are overpriced and their value is falling. It's the same phenomenon that I took so much heat for when I said running backs are a dime a dozen. The fact is that there are a lot of skilled receivers out there, so many that you can get them pretty cheaply. It's much better to spend your money on other positions and run a team concept in your receiver room, which is what the Bills are doing. For example, because they are dedicated to their rotation on the defensive line, the Bills essentially need 8 or 10 starter-caliber defensive linemen. To have 8 or 10 starters, you have to dedicate resources - money and picks - to that position. If you're going to do that, you need to underspend someplace else. The Bills think their team approach in the receiver room allows them to have a good passing game without spending outrageous dollars on the talent.
People will argue that the best receivers are so special, they make plays, etc. Well, yeah, and I get it, but they have a tendency to become the go-to guy in big play situations. That means that on third and twelve, he's always your best option, and the defense knows that, and the defense has schemed for that. The Bills play a different way. With their collection of decent speed, different sized, good blocking, reliable receivers, on third and twelve the Bills say to the defense, "Cover all of them." The defense doesn't even know WHICH receivers are going to be on the field until the Bills put their package on the field 25 seconds before the snap. All the defense knows is that it's going to be some assortment of one or two running backs, one or two or no tight ends, and a collection of wideouts, all of whom can get deep, all of whom can line up anywhere, all of whom can catch, and all of whom can block. It's completely obvious that that is how the Bills want to play.
McDermott's philosophy is that he wants his team to be able to play as many different ways as they possibly can. He wants players who can execute everything anyone has ever done successfully on a football field. In order to do that, he needs versatile players, not great players with limited skills. That's why all the defensive linemen they get have speed and quickness. Why did it take so long for them to go after a 340-pound defensive tackle? Because they've been waiting for one with foot speed and quickness. They believe they can teach a big guy with foot speed how to anchor the center of the line, but they can't teach a big guy who anchors naturally to run fast. In the receiver room, it's pretty clear. Samuel, Shakir, Coleman. They're not identical, they all have strengths that make them a bit different from the others, but what they share is versatility and commitment to team play. Palmer looks like another one. They seem to be hoping they can grow Shavers into that sort of role, .
or Prather - they both are in the Gabriel Davis mold, a different kind of versatile wideout.
I'm not saying Beane and McDermott are right when they take this approach. I actually don't know. However, I understand their approach, and where I agree with Beane in his rant is that it seems pretty silly for people to insist that the Bills should take a different approach when this approach obviously has been successful. The Bills score a lot of points and win a lot of games. It is very difficult to convince me or McBeane that they would score more or win more with a stud receiver who cost the Bills a lot of draft capital or cap room.
-
2 hours ago, Logic said:
To echo what others have said: I don't think you can do what Deone Walker did as a 19 year old in the SEC without having some serious talent.
At the same time, all of the concerns that accompany a man of his size, as well as his 2024 falloff (injury related or not) are valid considerations.
Put the two together -- his potential game-wrecking talent and the concerns on his tape and with his health/size/stature -- and you have exactly what the Bills got: a 4th round dart throw.
In my opinion, the risk-reward with Walker is worthwhile. If he hits, you have exactly what his new GM described: a 1st round caliber player and a steal and a guy who can impact games in a big way. If he flops, the cost was a 4th round pick. The potential negative impact of a 4th round pick busting is not, in my opinion, severe enough to warrant not taking the risk on a guy like Walker.
We all agree that the Bills need more difference makers and less "just okay to good" players around Josh Allen. Consider Deone Walker a definite swing of the bat with intent to hit a home run.I think this analysis is exactly right.
I'm one who's been calling for a difference maker. The Bills didn't have an opportunity to move up into the top 10 or so in the first round, where difference makers can be found, so they have to place a bet here or there.
Someone mentioned Spencer Brown. Brown wasn't the reach Walker is, but he was a reach. The Bills bet he could make the big leap from nowheresville U to the NFL. It wasn't always pretty, but betting on Brown has paid off.
Frankly, when I started reading about this guy, I didn't think Spencer Brown. I thought Jason Peters. A raw physical freak learning to play against the best in the world. Remember that Peters was a tight end, and the Bills tried him on kickoff coverage because of his mobility. It took a few years, but that raw talent, once focused, became a Hall of Fame player.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Gunner -
First, thanks for doing all this. It really is fabulous. I've gotten to the point where you are my online source for the draft! Great job.
Second, I know I'm a broken record, but I think we all have to put ourselves in the heads of Beane and McDermott. I know we all have trouble seeing and understanding it but really, could it be any more clear that Beane and McDermott don't see the need for the wideout so many of us, including you, think is obvious? For the second year in a row, the Bills have done essentially nothing to get a quality receiver with top-end speed. Last year they traded away from one (Worthy) to take Coleman. This year, nothing.
I'm the same as everyone else. Last night, in the thread evaluating this year's draft, I didn't give Beane an A because, as much as I liked the draft, there was no offensive skill play in rounds one through four.
Unless the Bills plan to convert Hairston to wideout, there will be no burner catching passes for the Bills again this season.
-
4
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, RyanC883 said:
Just terrible late round drafting. We need a safety. We also need a LB and took a CB right before Paul from Old Miss.
Not to pick on you particularly, but I dismiss comments like this regularly. I've always doubted that we know better than the coaches and GM, and it was completely confirmed a couple of years ago, after Bernard's rookie season, when all through the draft and into the summer many of us, including me, were screaming, "WE NEED A MIDDLE LINEBACKER." Then the season starter and we all started to see what Bernard actually could do. McBeane knew they didn't need a linebacker. Yes, for depth, maybe.
The fact that no safety was targeted either in free agency or the draft tells me that McDermott has the safeties he wants. I don't know what the plan is, and I don't like Rapp and Hamlin as the starters, but for sure there is a plan. Bishop's coming off his rookie season, and maybe McDermott knows already that Bishop will start. I've always thought Taron Johnson could start back there - maybe the Bills drafted his replacement at nickel over the past few days.
I don't know who the Bills' safeties will be, but at this point in McDermott's coaching tenure, I have complete confidence that barring injuries, the Bills have the safeties they want.
And in response to anyone who is about to say it, the same is true for wideout. Yes, we may look at the receiver room and see what we think is a gaping hole. McBeane disagree with us (and the perceived hole wasn't a problem last season).
12 hours ago, GASabresIUFan said:If I were Jackson, Ingram and Codrington I’d have my agent putting feelers out.
If you're an NFL player of the caliber of Jackson, Ingram, and Codrington, your agent always has feelers out. Each year in May, guys like that never know where they're going to be in November.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Pine Barrens Mafia said:
You mean the completely false accusations that caused the Bills to prematurely bail on the guy?
That incident?
In the modern media world, Bills had no choice. When something happens like happened with Araiza, you have to bail out to avoid the daily media distraction.
Ravens have a Hall of Fame place kicker who is the subject of allegations he denies. Just like Araiza. Ravens drafted a place kicker. For now, Tucker's on the team, but the Ravens will move on quickly if his story has legs.
-
1
-
-
A-
I'm editing my post and moving my grade to A-.
People have the endless debate about whether to draft Best Player Available or Need. Beane has always said he's a BPA guy, and I believe him. He tends to trade up when the BPA also is a need.
I think the draft fell to Beane perfectly, with BPAs sitting high on his board who also were need picks.
I like the like the guys they got. It seems they got good value and solid athletic ability in the mold they're looking for. And I think the Bills like the guys they got.
For it to be an A from me, they would have gotten an offensive skill player in second, third, or fourth. A credible receiver who might challenge for a spot. Prather seems like a project, if they can keep him on the practice squad. Doubtful he gets ahead of Shavers in the project category, and Shavers has a tough road to make the 53.
Still, I'm happy.
And, Beane has been masterful since the playoff loss. Extending guys who needed to be extended, really solid talent, adding some quality free agent talent, with the potential for a big win with Bosa and with guys who will fit in.
And now this draft. It's really an impressive job that he's done.
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
I agree with this…but let’s also remember it’s a lot of youth too, so raised expectations are warranted but also some patience will be needed to let these guys get their feet wet and develop too as the season goes on.
With vets like Tre, DQ, Oliver, Groot, Bosa, etc here don’t be surprised if none of them open week 1 as the starter at their respective positions and see their roles grow as the season goes on. Collins and Sanders are assured healthy snap counts as we run a heavy rotation, but it’s not out of the question that if Tre looks good in camp he opens at their starter.
I think your caution makes a lot of sense. Not all of these guys are likely to make it. It's more probable that one or two of these guys flop, so right now the depth is more perceived than real. And, as you say, some will need time to develop. Few will start out of gate - maybe Hairston if he's really smart and a quick learner. Maybe one defensive lineman will be a regular in the rotation, possibly two.
What would be nice would be by the end of the regular season to be getting reasonable participation in the defense by four of them. That would be great, because it would mean there's some seriously improved talent on the field.
The thing that intrigues me the most is the point that Dawg made - that Hairston could be an amazing player, and he could succeed as a rookie. Most season there's a rookie corner sensation or two in the league, and Hairston has the skill set to be one. Some of the other guys may project to be solid starters, and maybe a little more. Hairston could be a guy who allows McDermott a lot more creativity on the defense. If Hairston is that guy, and makes it as an impact player as a rookie, then the Bills have gotten the player they needed - a difference make on the defense.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, The Jokeman said:
You forgot we signed Hoecht too in the Dline.
Right. I knew there was someone else.
As much as many of us, including me, say we want the Bills to take a classic one-tech monster of a man, it's completely clear that that is not how McBeane intend for the this team to play. It's all about tough-minded athletic guys. They 8 or 10 of them to rotate, mix and match.
If that's the model, well, we have to live with it. And if that's the model, it looks like this year they've loaded up, better than ever, with guys who fit the mold.
58 minutes ago, finn said:Right. Trying to define athleticism is like defining pornography (according to Lewis Powell): You know it when you see it.
I'm not so good evaluating football talent. I'm pretty good at pornography.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, finn said:
I always wonder about that term. His RAS score is elite (speed, jumps, etc.), but he's universally described as "stiff," with little ability to bend or dip around the corner. To me, an athlete is someone who is fast and quick but also able to move effortlessly, like Bruce Smith or Von Miller. This guy reminds me more Phil Hansen. That's no insult, either. A nice player, but "athletic"? We need a term for "fast and quick but not particularly supple."
I hear you, but in another sense, it just is very difficult to quantify great athleticism. I was in a discussion a couple of years ago about what it means to be "smooth" and it's not easy to describe. On top of that, we're all familiar with the notion that players playing speed is often different from their time to speed in the combine or other similar environments. The reality is that at the end of the day some players play beyond their statistical measures, and other players don't play up to them. In every case, it's necessary just to wait and see what they do when they get on the field.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, BuffaloBill said:
The proof is always in the play but the Bills are better on paper. If this D-line comes together the Bills have the opportunity to be a shutdown d that ballhawks. Benford is a top 5 CB and Hairston has the ingredients to also be special. I suspect safety play will also improve for the Bills this year. Let’s hope this comes together.
We can imagine a truly dominant defense, but I don't think that's likely. I don't think a defense can be really dominant when the dline is built for speed and versatility. However, I think last season the defense was good enough to get the Bills where they went, and this season it's the same guys with some improvements:
1. Cornerback should be better, and possibly much better.
2. Bosa, Ogunjobi, and the two draft picks yesterday should improve the d line.
3. Rapp, Bishop, Hamlin all have another season under their belts.
We should see a tougher defense all around. And if one or two of the rookies is really good early, it could be really good.
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, Logic said:
I feel like every single year, there are multiple instances of players insinuating that X team told them they'd take them at pick X.
I'm not sure how much teams just lie, how much is players hearing what they want to hear, and how much is reality. There's really no way TO know.
If I had to doubt these assertions for any reason, it's simply that teams don't have a firm idea who will and won't be on the board when they pick. Why would they tell any player "we WILL take you at pick 30" if they have no idea whether a player they have ranked higher will be available when they pick? Seems weird.
Who knows?I think the pros - the GMs and the coaches - have learned over the years to be careful about what they say. They choose their words carefully. I think a 23-year-old guy who's never been through this process before is likely to hear things he wants to hear and isn't accustomed to listening as carefully to the words as the GM or coach chose them.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
I think they will take a receiver with their first pick tomorrow. Currently #132.... but I think they will use another day 3 pick to get up a bit higher in the 4th.
Yes, I expect them to burn some of those late rounders to make little moves to grab guys they like. A receiver makes sense.
Bills Offseason moves to date & Projected Roster
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I came here to say one thing, but now I have two:
First, thanks to @GASabresIUFan for doing this. It's fabulous. And thanks to the contributors here. I've just started looking through the thread, and there's really a lot of good discussion about particular positions and players. Great stuff!!!
Second, I didn't want to start a new thread to say this, and this seemed like a good place to say it: I'm quietly excited about this team. All over the roster. Safety troubles me some, and the linebacking feels a bit thin, but both the defensive line and corner back depth looks to be exceptional. I think we'll see some high level play out of the defense this season.
Offense has talent and depth on the offensive line (someone suggests Lundt will get cut, but he apparently is a talented and exceptionally motivated guy). Running back room is unchanged, and if it produces as well as last season, that's great. Receiving corps got the job done last season, and it seems to be upgraded nicely, with Palmer replacing the shoeless wonder and now Moore added to the mix. You know your team is good when an item worth discussing here is why an unknown quarterback will make the practice squad because his wife is a good social organizing force among the players' wives!
As I said, I'm quietly excited.