Richard Noggin

A thousand pardons if posted. Fun Brobible compilation of Elam-is-awesome content (thinly veiled as a draft interview process piece). https://brobible.com/sports/article/kaiir-elam-nfl-draft-interview-bills/ Includes the combine interview clip many have already seen, where he busts out his Growth Mindset notebook, but has a couple other little nuggets. I hadn't seen this:

Difficult to disagree with anything here. Maybe it's about what you're omitting, then? For starters: Bates. He's a fine young starting-caliber IOL piece with tons of flex and plenty of athleticism to fit the zone-heavy scheme he'll be in. Next: Saffold. We can sidestep his pro bowl status last season in favor of something like this: aging LG with history of high-end zone run blocking and declining average-ish pass blocking. Probably a solid one-year stop-gap on-the-field and a vital resource for installing Kromer's wide-zone scheme. Depth is underwhelming with respect to starting pipeline management, but we shouldn't ignore Ford's adequate replacement performances late in the season, or Quessenberry's value with RT/RG flex. Of course we'd prefer a 3rd starting-caliber OG. I don't know much at all about Mercz (or even if I'm spelling his name correctly). And Boettger would represent SOLID OG depth if he hadn't torn his achilles last year.

This seems like an uncharacteristically..."concerned" post from you. You're ignoring Ford and Quessenberry (and of course I recognize that many fans don't rate these two favorably). Something tells me you're concerned about the level of investment in the IOL (lol)? Thing about investing is, it's judged primarily by the return. If it works, that's the bottom line. We can presumably see the Bills taking a leaner approach to the IOL portion of their roster portfolio than we'd prefer, but it doesn't actually mean we're staked to a losing position. Maybe they believe in the horses they have, and believe in them enough at least to allow for the more aggressive allocation elsewhere. After all, it's about how the overall product performs. (I think I effing HATE this extended metaphor. Apologies.) Nevertheless, Bates and Saffold are, at the most skeptical end of the spectrum, average fits for an outside zone scheme (I think, and have thought for more than a year, that Bates is a hidden gem). That's fine if your LT and C are above average fits, and your RT has potential to be average-to-above-average. Would one more high-end IOL prospect be better? Eff yes. But maybe we can wait for one more year and then replace Saffold with Bates and replace Bates with a TALENTED G?

You beat me to it by 2 minutes.

Right. CBA practice time restrictions have essentially forced the shift from backup QBs to Ps being the holders. The holder has to be available to practice with the ST unit. The only two positions who field snaps as a necessary function of their jobs are QB and P. Nowadays, STs batteries (LS and P or holder + K) practice separately while the O and D work (with some full team STs segments sprinkled in, of course). Just the way it is.

Bernard's RAS is actually MUCH better than Davis (9+ vs 6+). They're essentially the same size coming out of college, similar straight line speed, but Bernard is a stronger and more explosive athlete. For what it's worth.

Whether his hand is in the dirt, or he's in a 2-point stance doesn't matter much. He's on the edge in an even front (predominant 1-gap scheme). I don't think the old 4-3 and 3-4 definitions are as applicable as they once were. A rush OLB in a 3-4 translates to a DE in a 4-3. A DE in a 3-4 is usually equivalent to a DT in a 4-3. Even in the Bills D, you've probably noticed Jerry Hughes and Mario Addison standing up over the years.

Even without signing another veteran DB, the Bills might have to make a difficult roster decision or two in the secondary when the time comes. I see Johnson and Neal both being roster locks. CB locks: White, Elam, Jackson, Johnson S locks: Hyde, Poyer (ignoring contract-based complications), Johnson, Hamlin "DB" locks: Neal That lineup matches last year's except for Elam replacing Wallace. We should probably anticipate the likelihood of this. If Benford is really enticing as a flexible ST/DB contributor, then maybe he sneaks into the final 53 somehow.

Glad to see you weigh in at this point. The internet would be PAINFULLY BORING if everyone using it strived to be this objective and rational. So here we are, navigating obviously hyperbolic (emotional) takes with dull pleas for reasonable discourse. And while I agreed with you about Parham representing better value, I'm like immediately ready to abandon my own derivative assessments of these prospects in favor of an ego-less, balanced inquiry into their potential fits on the Bills.

It's obviously a SCOREBOARD argument: the Pats no longer have Tom Brady (who they LUCKED into late in the draft), while the Bills very intentionally acquired Josh Allen (and also turned over their entire roster/organization)...and we can see the wisdom of these executive decisions in the recent, undeniable Bills dominance on the field/scoreboard. I hear an even weaker version of this angle from Pats fans all the time; as soon as they feel threatened they invoke Superbowl ring tallies. What's dooshier than wagging gaudy bling from past accomplishments to counter current criticisms?

Totally agree with the bolded observation. It was BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS that Josh Allen was in the ***** zone and should have been leaned on to bring it home sooner. Once they just unleashed him the Bills became unstoppable. But it was too late. However, that is not exactly a smart, sustainable model to pursue intentionally. It's HUGE to have that gear, but can Josh Allen hold up under the strain of being our EVERYTHING for 17 regular season games, plus 3-4 playoff games, year in and year out?

I also agree they want to run the ball more, and don't love that as a hypothetical shift in offensive philosophy. Luckily, there is PLENTY of room between the Bills recent run/pass imbalance and something more...balanced. They can run more and still not run a lot. Consider the load management benefits for Allen if beating the 2-deep shells doesn't fall solely on his body. Consider the strategic benefits for Dorsey if defenses can't just sit back and take away the intermediate and deep zones (which Allen has also shredded with his better performances).

Of course. The scare quotes are me absolutely seeing Beane draft for need in the first round, and only thereafter living the need-less principles of BPA, except...not really, most of the time. *Basham is the obvious counterpoint that comes to mind. I'm not immediately seeing others.

Good thing the draft isn't "supposed" to be about immediate needs.

Best part is, with hard work, you can make that happen all on your own! Let me know if you'd like some pointers from a pro.

It's a Belichickian reach, in that there was trusted insider intel on the prospect (his college coach and McD are tight), and the team is therefore confident in the fit. (The traits are there, too.) Again, while it doesn't maximize draft value, nabbing Logan Mankins at the end of rd 1 to the ridicule of everyone on the outside, worked out pretty well for BB back when. (And of course Brady is a HUGE part of that. Luckily, we've got a guy, too.)

Way to pick a safety without pissing off Rachel Bush -some guy commenting on the Cover 1 broadcast

"My man...*looks down at a name he's never seen before*...Terrel Bernard!"

Bob Kraft.

God the Patriots are the worst. Donny effing Osmond.

More like a tough FF

Ford's performance against WFT is perhaps the worst I've EVER seen from an OG. How many pressures did he surrender? Without looking it up, I want to guess...12? Something historically bad. That being said, he had a couple decent games as well. As a backup OG, he's meh. I'd be willing to guess Mancz is better. But players obviously can, and sometimes do, improve over time. So who knows the future?

Can't invoke Aaron Maybin when criticizing a LATE 1st round reach who could very well end up being a SOLID player. Does anyone else remember how puzzling the Logan Mankins reach was? People reacted similarly to that pick. Very similar vibes here. Terrible relative draft value, but mitigated by real world results (in the case of Mankins; we'll see about Strange). Maybin was both a reach AND a bust. And much higher in the 1st round.

Again, some consistent values at positions of need available in the early rounds.