Cash

Thanks again for that link! I've seen you post it before, and it's phenomenal. You're certainly not the only person saying this, so sorry if it seems like I'm picking on you, but I just don't see it. Carrington is a third-round talent who barely saw the field last year, and didn't really do anything when he did get on the field. Now we can just pencil him in as an above-average starter in year 2? I don't dislike Carrington or think he sucks or anything, but I just don't know where all this faith comes from. Most third-rounders don't become reliable starters in year 2, especially after getting a total of about 200 snaps in year 1. I hope Carrington becomes a stud, but hope is not a plan. I don't see him as someone who can be counted on as a solid starter. My only problem with this logic is the bolded part. I don't trust George Edwards to build any kind of successful NFL scheme. I was unimpressed by our scheme last year, and Edwards' only previous year as a defensive coordinator was the 2003 Washington Redskins: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/was/2003.htm 24th in points allowed, 25th in yards allowed, 28th in first downs allowed, 26th in yards per pass, 21st in yards per run, 28th in total rushing yards allowed. With some solid talent on his defense, particularly at LB, and Champ Bailey in his prime. Not so hot. This will be only Edwards' third year as a defensive coordinator, so there's a real chance that he turns it around, but I have no faith that he will until I see otherwise. Having said all that, I agree that personnel-wise, we're not really served by trying to pick up a new NT. Williams is a good player, if not a fit for every scheme, and Troup needs PT to develop. If Troup doesn't develop, then we'll need another NT, but that's not a problem for this offseason. One reason I have no confidence in George Edwards is that Kelsay continued to play LB in the base 4-3 defense once we moved to the hybrid. (At least he was playing DE in nickel and dime packages.) Maybe that's not Edwards' fault, but the bottom line is that whoever's in charge of who plays on D thought it was best for Kelsay to start at LB and play the majority of snaps both in a 3-4 (where he was awful) and in a 4-3 (where he was laughably awful). That is just terrifying.

The only problem with your argument is that the previous 3 QB picks were made by the John Fox regime. Ron Rivera has no loyalty to any of those QBs, and won't be held accountable for their failures. Plus, since it's Rivera's first year on the job, he's not under a ton of pressure to win this year, so he does have the luxury of drafting for the future in 2011. If John Fox hadn't gotten fired, I think a defensive pick or AJ Green would've been a mortal lock. But under Rivera, I could see them going any direction, including QB.

I'll go with Da'Quan Bowers. I could definitely see the "we're gonna run a hybrid for now, but long-term, we're running a 3-4" Bills drafting a guy who can only play 4-3 DE, then insisting that he fits into a 3-4, then being shocked when he's not productive as a 3-4 DE, then being equally shocked when he's not productive as a 3-4 OLB. Or maybe switch those last two. I don't really want either Newton or Gabbert, but there's no way they go 1-2, and if we're going to draft a QB, I'd rather they at least get the guy they like. None of the 3 would be my first choice, but I could live with Peterson, Green, or Fairley. Fairley strikes me as a guy who could be really successful on the right team. Probably not our team, but he could pan out. Peterson looks as likely to become the next Champ Bailey/Charles Woodson/Nnamdi/Revis as any CB I can remember. That's one of the extremely hard-to-get, extremely expensive, and extremely helpful positions. Not #1 corner, lockdown corner. And Green, actually I hope we don't draft Green. Our WR corps is weak (look at our passing #s once Evans got hurt), Evans is getting old, and David Nelson/Donald Jones/Naaman Roosevelt are not the answer. But Green's kind of a knucklehead, and I just think there are other guys I'd rather have on my team. I'm hoping for Marcell Dareus. I'd be okay with Quinn or maybe Von Miller.

What changed is that Brohm wasn't cut, his contract expired. I doubt the Bills would have cut him if he had another year on his deal. But tendering Brohm (if the tenders even hold up next year) would be too expensive for a player who clearly can't cut it on your team.

People just love talking about smoke screens when it comes to the draft. Has anyone claimed that the new unis are a smoke screen yet?

Nice!! I really like Wilson, whether as a starter or a reserve. If you believe in building through the draft, it's extra critical to re-sign your own guys. Even if the RFA tender holds up, Whitner's probably gone. If Wilson went as well, we might have seen a 2nd or 3rd round pick spent on a new starting SS.

Yeah, it's a little surprising that the Pats signed him. I know our D was run by a first-time NFL D-coordinator who didn't run very good defenses in college and may have been in over his head, but Stroud still looked bad. I don't know how much of that can be attributed to poor coaching or a poor scheme. I'm not sure if Stroud is an upgrade at DE when the Pats run a 3-4. However, they've run a lot more 4-3 the last 2 years, and signing Stroud may be an indication that they intend to keep running 4-3. Keep in mind, Stroud was horribly miscast as a DE when our D switched to 4-3 last year, but he can probably still play DT in a 4-3. The Pats usually like guys who are versatile enough to fit into whatever they run, though, so maybe they think they can play Stroud at DE in the 3-4. It'll be interesting to see how he does.

Thank you. I don't get the crippling fear of losing out on the guy you've targeted. You can't tell me Spiller was the only player in last year's draft worthy of a first-round selection. Marv said similar things after drafting Whitner (he admitted they had an offer on the table, but they thought the team was trading up to get Whitner, so they said no). Now, I get it if it's one just spectacular talent that you can't believe is there. In that case, go ahead and sprint up to the podium, like Washington did when they drafted Orakpo. But if you're going to do that, you'd better be right. Washington looks smart for sprinting to draft Orakpo. Buffalo looks dumb for sprinting to draft Spiller (not to mention Troup and Carrington). And if it's just the top guy on your board, it doesn't hurt to take 5 minutes and see if the phone rings, or even make a couple of calls yourself.

Pretty sound logic, but keep in mind that Cam Newton is tall, good-looking, just won the national championship, has unbelievable upside, and every football fan in the country knows who he is. All it takes is one GM in the first round talking himself into Newton, and there's a lot to like there. And as much as the NFL is "win now", it's also "sell season tickets now", and not many draft picks will do that as well as a QB that all of your fans saw win the national championship. Gabbert may be the better prospect (or may not, I don't know), but outside of Missouri or whatever, he's not very well known amongst NFL fans. I had literally never heard of him until he declared for the draft. I'm no college football buff, but I know there's a lot of NFL fans who follow college even less than I do, and most NFL fans don't religiously read pre-draft stuff either. I'll be pretty surprised if Newton doesn't go in the first round. In fact, I'd be surprised if he lasted as long as Tebow (who I thought was a mortal lock to go in the first round, for many of the same reasons as Newton). I would be surprised if anyone else, except maybe Gabbert, goes in the first round.

Bingo. I'm very frustrated by the Bills' Steamboat Rebuild they're running. Scrapping the defense set us back at least an additional year. And on top of that, we have a GM who publicly says: 1.) We have tons of needs and not much talent. 2.) He doesn't like free agency or trades as ways to acquire talent. 3.) He doesn't like trading down to pick up additional draft picks. So the plan is to go 8-for-8 this year and next, and have 16 good new starters? How many impact players does Nix really think he's going to find in the draft? As a fan, I appreciate the front office finally acknowledging the lack of talent on the team, instead of the "we're so amazingly close to the Super Bowl" BS we heard in the Jauron Era, but I get the feeling that it's just the team telling us fans what we want to hear. Because if we're really that bad, we should have traded down in nearly every round last year, and picked up an additional 5-6 picks between last year's draft and this year's. And we should be *aggressive* in free agency, not passive. Targeting lower-priced players is fine, but don't just sign 3 of them and call it a day. You have needs all over the field. And I don't buy the "they needed last year to see what they had" argument. If they really couldn't tell what they had from watching game tape, they're not qualified to be running an NFL team. Go to college or high school if the only way you can evaluate a player is by seeing him in practice. Anyway, getting a little more directly on topic, it seems to me that Nix and Gailey both fell for the same common trap when evaluating O-lines: letting the quality of the QB influence your assessment of the line. Peyton Manning is awesome, therefore he must have an elite O-line. Trent Edwards sucks, therefore the O-line is horrible. Fitzpatrick is a lot more effective than Edwards; looks like the line is improving! I disagree. A QB (like Fitz) with pocket presence, who is willing and able to get rid of the ball quickly and/or elude pass-rushers, will always make his O-line look a lot better than a QB with no pocket presence (like Edwards). But Fitz was under pressure as much as Edwards was, he was just competent at dealing with it. Our run game regressed from 2009 to 2010, despite investing the #9 overall pick in a RB who was supposed to make our offensive linemen better somehow. (Excluding QB and P runs, 4.0 yards/carry in 2010, 4.3 in 2009.) Injuries maybe caused some of that regression, but how good were the guys who got hurt? And what are the odds they (Bell) stay healthy going forward? I would rate our line about the same now as I did last year: Bad, but not the worst in the league. Luckily, it's pretty young, so most of those guys should probably get better. But I don't think the path to the playoffs is paved with Demetrius Bell, Erik Pears, and Ed Wang as our top 3 tackles.

First off, great post! Thanks for the research! As to your questions, from the pre-draft comments, it sounds like the pick's either a DE or QB. (As long as Ralph keeps mentioning getting a QB every time he speaks, that has to be considered a frontrunner.) As much as people like to throw around the word smokescreen, Nix & Gailey's comments last year made it fairly clear that they were targeting Spiller. So far this year, there's been a lot of talk about needing 1 or 2 DEs. Plus, the Bills frequently do the move of cutting or trading the high-priced vet, then drafting his replacement in the first round. As for whether they'll pick the right one, I doubt it. It's too early to declare anyone a bust, but none of last year's top 3 picks have really shown anything yet, and 2 of those were on the D-line. Neither Troup nor Carrington showed anything last year. D-linemen frequently take a while to develop, so no judgments yet, but also no reason for confidence/faith. Out of last year's draft, only Moats showed something to suggest he's a good pick, and he didn't do that until he was moved to OLB. He was drafted to play ILB. Now, obviously some of those guys were hurt, and some others might turn it around, and that's fine. But I'm just not seeing anything (other than blind faith or extreme optimism) to suggest that Nix is the guy who will reverse the Bills' horrible draft record. Hope I'm wrong, though.

Walter hated the Maybin pick: http://walterfootball.com/offseason2009buf.php "I don't understand this. The Bills need a left tackle, the second-highest position of value in the NFL. Michael Oher was a no-brainer. But even if Buffalo didn't want Oher, what about Brian Orakpo? Did the Bills forget he was on the board? Aaron Maybin had only one year of production at Penn State. He's way too unproven to be selected over solid prospects like Oher and Orakpo. (Pick Grade: D)" If you check out his overall Bills' draft grade (too long to quote here), he specifically mentions Todd McShay and Trent Dilfer as having high praise for the Bills' draft. McFraud was very bullish on Maybin. Can't find the ESPN clip of when Maybin was drafted, but here's McShay's pre-draft breakdown of Maybin: http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4094460 I personally remember McShay gushing over Maybin when the Bills drafted him, calling him the best pass-rusher in the draft. I'm not sure of that, but that's how I remember it. Mayock was less enthused:

My prediction: no OL drafted by the Bills with a top 100 pick. I don't see anything new about the front office rhetoric this year. OT is always talked about as a priority, and addressed via marginal free agents and late round picks.

I was clapping and cheering very loudly when Bruce announced Marshawn Lynch as our first-round pick. I was very confused and disappointed when Donte Whitner was announced as our first-round pick.

But if QBs take 2-3 years to develop, shouldn't we grab one now, so that he's developed by the time we've filled all those holes? Personally, I don't want either Newton or Gabbert, both of whom I think will bust. But if QBs truly take so long to develop, you can't afford to wait until all your holes are filled before drafting one.

So Richardson is trying to form an NFL-only Tea Party? I'm all for it. Right now it's just basic stuff like, "we need to take back our league," but pretty soon he'll be making up posters with a Hitler mustache drawn on Peyton Manning, comparing Drew Brees to Stalin, etc. Should be entertaining. The owners have more leverage, because they're better equipped to handle the loss of revenue a lockout brings, but I think they're overestimating how much leverage they have. I also think they're overestimating their ability to control the message. Most fans typically lean a little bit towards the owners in labor disputes (including me), but this one is different. For the first time in any sport, I'm squarely on the side of the players. They're willing to give up money to make a fair deal, but it's not enough for the owners. These guys are already filthy rich, making money hand over fist, but their greed apparently knows no bounds. Plus they keep claiming to have secret data that shows fans want an 18-game schedule, when every poll shows the opposite. Not to mention the base hypocrisy of claiming that head injuries/player safety is a major priority, but also we'd like to expose them to two additional weeks of vicious hits. Screw the owners. I can live without football for a while. I hope their hubris kills casual interest in the game, so I can get some cheap tickets in 2012.

And the league knew that there were problems with the seating, but didn't make any call like that. They just crossed their fingers and hoped that everything would magically be fixed in time. They gambled and lost, now they have to pay up. It's not just that people got displaced, it's the crappy and arrogant way the NFL tried to handle it.

But hasn't that been kind of our problem? Maybin's the only real BUST in the past decade. Whitner gave us mid 1st round solid production. The problem was, there was an impact star-level player available at a position we needed (Ngata), and we passed on him to take the solid guy who could play right away.

Great post, thanks for the research! But this is the think tank that drafted CJ Spiller at #9 last year. Von Miller at #3 wouldn't surprise me at all.

Any idea what Reggie Corner did to more than double his salary?

How can you say that? They do it all the time, especially when they have an extra pick in one of the middle rounds. They have Seattle's 4th this year. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if they packaged their 3rd and their 4th to move up into the middle of the 2nd round. 2006: Had 2 3rd-rounders. Used 1 plus their #2 to trade up for John McCargo. 2007: Had 2 3rd-rounders. Used 1 plus their #2 to trade up for Paul Posluszny. 2008: Had 2 4th-rounders, used them both. 2009: Had 2 4th-rounders. Used 1 plus their #3 to trade up for Andy Levitre. 2010: No extra picks until 6th round. No trades. Nix publicly admitted they tried to trade back into late 1st round (but not for Tebow). 2011: Have 2 4th-rounders, we'll see what they do. But "no way" is an overstatement.

Great post! I'm also a bit concerned about Von Miller. The other day, Adam Schefter tweeted that he was hearing Von Miller as a top 5 pick. It sounded to me like he might have had a source with the Bills saying that they're in love with Miller. And it does kind of seem like a Bills-style pick. But if Nix's season wrap-up comments are to be believed, he thinks we're okay at OLB with Merriman in the fold, and wants to focus on ILB, plus he thinks we're too small at LB and need to get bigger. That would suggest he's not enamored of Von Miller. Great name, though. I'm also very high on Casey Matthews. If his father and brother were/are that good, chances are he won't be a bust. And I know he's undersized, but he seems to fly around the field and make tremendous plays. I'd love to grab him, as long as it wasn't at #3 overall. Chris Brown's reports from the practices make Baylor's Phil Taylor sound like BJ Raji. Anyone got a strong opinion on Taylor?

Nice strawman. Who is suggesting we cut Spiller? We're just trying to point out that he's been a terrible, horrible pick so far. All the pre-draft arguments against drafting Spiller have been largely spot-on to date. It's not that Spiller is a bad player who doesn't deserve a roster spot, it's that he's done nothing to justify being picked ninth overall. Last year, he was a decent return man and a mediocre backup running back who touched the ball about 11-12 times a game, including returns and fair catches. That's a major disappointment even for a 2nd-round pick, much less a top 10 pick. Especially when the pro-Spiller arguments around draft day were based around instant impact, excitement, gamebreaking plays, and BPA. We didn't get a lot of that, especially from scrimmage. Now there's some revisionist history going around, saying that he needs time to learn how to run in the NFL, there's a learning curve, etc. Awesome. I hope he figures it out. I don't *want* the Bills to draft poorly, I'm just past the point of making excuses for their sh***y picks. Spiller made no sense in foresight and hasn't made sense yet in hindsight. And he's going to have to make the All-Pro Team to wind up as the BPA. Sometimes teams flout the conventional wisdom and have great success, like the Jaguars with Tyson Alualu last year. But when the Bills flout the conventional wisdom, they tend to end up looking foolish. Whitner. McCargo. Bringing back Jauron in 2009. Cutting Bledsoe to start Losman. Drafting McGahee. The jury's still out on the hirings of Buddy Nix & Chan Gailey, the draftings of Spiller & Troup, and the signing of Merriman, but we're not off to a great start with any of them. I really hope they turn it around, but I need to see some proof before I start buying it. And for the record, if we stink again next year (which I also expect), I would tend to *not* want to fire Gailey, unless Bill Cowher was willing to come here (he's expected to return to the NFL in 2012). But since Cowher and Gailey are good buddies, I doubt Cowher would have much interest in getting his buddy fired, or joining the moribund team with no franchise player that fired his buddy. So realistically, I would say keep Gailey, assuming the team plays hard for him.

No, we don't know where Modrak had Maybin rated. But according to Ralph in Gaughan's article, Modrak is the one who sets the board. Do you really think there's any way that Maybin was something like #108 on the board, but Jauron picked him at #11, and that flew? That's ridiculous. Sure, I'm willing to buy that Modrak had other available players ahead of Maybin on the big board. But realistically, it couldn't have been many. And it seems pretty likely to me that Modrak had Maybin as his #1 rated DE, ahead of Orakpo. It's just hard for me to believe that Jauron would overrule the draft board within a position. I totally get the idea that Jauron wanted DE, so he overrode Modrak's recommendation of a LB, but it's far-fetched to think that Maybin wasn't still very high on that draft board. And that's not the only example, either. What about John McCargo? Is there any way that the Bills traded up to get him if he didn't have a first-round grade on the draft board that Modrak put together?

I don't get how anyone can logically defend the Bills on this one. They were 29th in the league in total payroll (which suggests cheapness), and 30th in the league in cost per win (which suggests incompetence). Of course, a more thorough analysis would include front office costs (GM, scouts, coaching staff, etc.), but I imagine the Bills would get slightly worse if those were added in. Now, there is one caveat: Due to the restrictions on free agency in the last year of the CBA, there was an unusually limited pool of free agents available last year, so it's possible the Bills were willing to spend money, but (correctly) figured that no one out there was worth spending it on. But I'm not taking it on blind faith that they're going to start either: 1) Opening up the checkbook, or 2) Spending money wisely. They haven't done either one in a couple years now, and our GM has said publicly that he doesn't view free agency as a major way to build the team. His comments were to the effect of, you should spend your money on re-signing your own players. They've done some of that (Chris Kelsay and Shawne Merriman, and hopefully Poz), but not enough to significantly increase the payroll next year. Let's face it, to get better, this team needs to either start bringing in outside talent while not blowing their draft picks, OR start nailing their draft picks and never ever let a talented player leave in free agency. Unlike some people, I'm fine with the second option, I'm just not confident it's going to happen.