Cash

Pretty happy overall. Dareus alone makes this draft a win in my book. Very pleased with the Sheppard pick as well, and like everyone else, I'm way over-excited about a guy we got at the end of the 7th round. (Although I was also excited about getting Steve Johnson in the 7th, so it's not like we're ALWAYS wrong.) Drafting 3 DB's (2 pretty high) bummed me out a bit, but I'll live with it. It's not nearly as egregious as the Spiller pick last year. I would've preferred more attention to the O-line, and maybe a bit earlier than the 4th round as well, but at least they took a tackle before the 5th round (first time since Mike Williams). I don't mind the lack of a QB, because I disliked every one in this draft. I wouldn't have minded a pass-rusher in the 2nd or 3rd, but I guess the plan is to see if Merriman can come back (or one of the young guys develops, or Kelsay finds a genie who grants him 3 wishes), and if he doesn't, then make pass-rusher a prime need next year. And I'll admit, that idea has some merit. Moats, Coleman, and Batten (assuming he gets moved back outside) need PT to see if they can play or not, just like Steve Johnson & James Hardy needed PT to see if they could play or not. On the whole, we look to have done a lot less reaching than last year, which is a great sign.

I'll go pick-by-pick: McKelvin - C-. 22 starts in 3 years in not what you're looking for when you draft a CB this high. And he's shown flashes, but hasn't played consistently well either as a starter or a nickel back. Was awesome as a return man 1 year, then horrible last year. Can still turn it around and improve this grade, but right now, it's closer to a D than a C. Remember, he was the first CB drafted that year, and #11 overall. If that guy doesn't become a solid starter for you, he's a bust. Hardy - F. Not much to say here. Chris Ellis - F. Everyone who was riding on the Alex Carrington bandwagon before we drafted Dareus needs to remember that people were equally confident about Ellis after an almost equally non-productive rookie season. Doesn't mean Carrington will bust, too, but sometimes people let their optimism run a little wild. Corner - B-. Has been a pretty solid contributor, but entering year 4, he's not a starter and looks like he never will be. Good, not great, pick. Fine - F. 2 years, 18 games played, 11 starts, 19 catches, 1 TD, now out of football. Was panned by the experts as a major reach at the time, and they were right. The Bills claimed that they loved him because (unlike most of the TEs in that draft) he could both block and catch. Turns out he couldn't do either. Small, slow, and old (25 years old as a rookie) is not a good recipe in the NFL. Bowen - D. Never did anything, but it's not the Bills' fault that he got hurt, and maybe he might have made the team if he didn't get hurt. Omon - F. Even in preseason, the guy looked terrible. Bell - B. Toughest grade for me. He's been our starter at LT for the last 2 years, but mostly just by default. He certainly hasn't been a *good* starter at the position, and he hasn't been able to stay healthy, either. Still, he belongs in the NFL (I think), at least as a backup, and given how raw he was when drafted, he's still got time to become a good starter for a number of years. If a 7th-rounder is still on the team 3 years later, that's automatically a good pick, the question is just how good. Johnson - A+. This is one of the extremely rare 7th-rounders that 1.) I had heard of before the draft, 2.) I specifically thought would/could be successful for us, and 3.) actually was successful for us. So glad he finally got the opportunity this year. Cox - D. Didn't make the team, but has stuck in the NFL as a deep backup, so doesn't get an F.

"CB & S *are* need positions" "You can't fill every hole in one draft" "It's important to go BPA, especially this early" "It's important to go BPA, especially this late" "How can anyone B word about a late rounder?" "It's not like there were impact players available at other positions this late" Those are all valid points, and I think I even left off a couple. But we've heard them all before. My point isn't that any of these picks is a bad pick in and of itself, it's that the Bills (new regime or not) appear to be obsessed with drafting DBs, and IT HASN'T BEEN WORKING. We've had an above-average to elite secondary most of the last 11 years, and missed the playoffs every year. I'd like to see a draft where we take O-linemen at 34, 100, and 206, rather than DBs at those spots.

Epic win. So glad he fell to us. Exactly the guy we need to start turning it around on defense. Did anyone else catch something Nix said about scenarios at #3? "We wanted to take the best player in a position that we needed." So glad to hear that, particularly after the Spiller pick last year, when the rhetoric was more along the lines of "best player regardless of position." In this case, best player regardless of position also happened to fill our biggest need (and help with another major need), but I think that quote of Nix's bodes very well for the rest of the draft. Let's keep it rolling!

Nice! I always liked 99 on a big D-lineman. Dareus will definitely be in the mix when it comes time for me to get a new jersey.

I tend to agree. Ngata is another massive and nimble guy who alternates between the nose and 5-tech (in both cases, Ryan Pickett & Kelly Gregg are big factors in pushing Raji/Ngata to end). I see Dareus as that type of player, but spending more time at DE. If we draft him, I think he starts at LDE from day 1 in the 3-4, and at DT in a 4-3 look. To the OP's point, Kelsay shouldn't factor into this discussion much. If last year was any indication, Kelsay will only play DE in nickel or dime situations - never in a base 3-4 or 4-3. And I'm sure Carrington would be given an opportunity to win the job over Dareus or Edwards, but I imagine the coaching staff would be pretty surprised if Carrington did win it. He's a 3rd-rounder (not exactly guaranteed starter in year 2) who got like 100 total snaps last year. That's not a guy who can just be penciled in to play 40 snaps a game. I would expect Carrington to be part of the D-line rotation, but strictly as a backup. Same thing with Spencer Johnson. I would think Troup would also come off the bench, but with a bit of a bigger role, since he'd be part of probably any goal line package.

Bingo. Dareus is exactly the type of grinder who doesn't put up numbers, but enables the guys around him to put up numbers. Look at successful 3-4 defenses around the league, and you'll find a lot of high picks at DE that don't put up sacks or tackles on their own.

Count me in as one of the many who's psyched about this. These are basically the exact unis I was hoping for the last time we had a change (and I've been pining for them ever since). Now the question becomes, whose jersey do I buy?

I'd say these are the quotes we're thinking of: Followed almost immediately by: So Locker's alleged inaccuracy is excused because he was in "a low-percentage offense," but God forbid a coach justify something by blaming the scheme. Huh? I really liked a lot of what Razzano had to say, but I think he's making the same excuses as everyone else, just for Locker instead of Newton or Gabbert.

I don't totally disagree. But keep in mind that his FO also drafted Manning & traded him for Rivers when they had Brees on the roster, and Buddy compared that situation to our current situation. My best guess is that Newton is tops on his board, and Miller is #2. If the Panthers pass on Newton, we grab him, then go D in round 2. If (as expected) the Panthers take Newton, we grab a Miller, draft Von Miller, then go for a QB at #34. I'm guessing either Dalton or Colin K. For some reason, I don't think the Bills are high on Dalton. Maybe just because I like him, and my QB judgment is horrible (my moronic pro-Clausen posts last year are proof of that). I'm guessing that Miller is above Dareus on their board, although I doubt it'll come into play, since Denver probably takes Dareus no matter what. I feel like Miller exactly fits the profile of a Nix/Gailey pick. Nix has said our biggest need is stopping the run, but last year, he said our biggest need was O-line, and didn't address that till round 5. Nix and Gailey both are among the most forthright decision-makers when it comes to the draft. Or they were last year, anyway.

Wait a minute... There's a Cameron Jordan and a Jordan Cameron in the same draft? I hope the first one to get drafted has his name written directory style on the card. That should cause some confusion.

I dunno, he seemed very enthused about the prospect of winning with Fitz while grooming a guy on the bench. I think at least 1 of the QBs is #1 on their board. What I have no idea on is whether both of them are above Miller or Dareus, and which QB they like better. If I had to guess, I'd say Newton is tops on their board, but who knows?

Nix should be coming on in the next segment, maybe around 12:45p? Florio is interviewing Dolphins GM Jeff Ireland right now. Florio is confirming how dumb he is.

Does anyone else vehemently disagree with the bolded statements? I mean, besides Buddy Nix. Yeah, there's needs in the back 7, and the pass rush needs to get better, but the biggest defensive need is clearly stopping the run. And with Marcus Stroud gone, there's a bigger hole at DE than anywhere in the back 7. Can't say I'm a fan of Nawrocki, especially after his column about Cam Newton.

1) Yeah, technically, but the draft makes a ton of money, and neither side has discussed eliminating it. Even if the season gets canceled, there will almost certainly be some sort of college draft before the 2012 season is played. 2) Yes, big time. In fact, the more we address the lines this year, the less likely we are to stink enough to get Luck. And I'm with you on not wanting to go 1-15 next year, anyway. 3) Meh. In the classroom, Luck is a rising senior, and will graduate next year. I guess he could decide getting a Master's is worth putting off the NFL for one more year, but I don't really see that happening.

Who has ever called the lockout insurance a sham? What a weird take that would be. I guess it would mean that the TV deal had provisions on paper for the networks to continue paying the NFL, but in actuality, the NFL wouldn't receive any payments? That would be a sham, but I don't think that was the case. The lockout insurance was certainly a negotiation tactic, and would've proven a very effective one if it didn't expressly violate the terms of the old collective bargaining agreement.

The head coach of the Buffalo Bills disagrees: http://blogs.buffalobills.com/2011/04/11/chan-on-von-miller/ Zero percent is a little low. No, I don't think it's a lock, but coupled with Nix's comments about how the need at ILB is much greater than at OLB, and Chan's comments last year, I think it's a pretty good possibility.

Merriman and Kelsay are the current starters at OLB. Both were signed to new contracts in the last 7 months, which means that the front office considers them part of the solution. Given Chan Gailey's comments, I think Miller starts at ILB from day 1, moving to OLB or DE on passing downs (depending on the defensive formation). Then I guess he'd probably play WLB when we play a 4-3 base, although I wouldn't be shocked if they put him at MLB.

I had the same reaction. Right off the bat, I was like, "this kid's a moron." Then he gets up to the dry erase board, and I'm like, "I take it back. He's like a completely different person now." I'm a pretty big Dalton fan; I just wonder if he has the requisite physical tools to be an NFL QB. He passes pretty much every metric there is for college QBs (starts, wins, passing stats, Wunderlic score, leadership), but he's not seen as more than maybe a 2nd-round pick. That makes me think the scouts don't think he's physically good enough for the NFL. I'm pulling for him, though, and I'd be pretty happy if we drafted him.

Agreed. Miller fans love the Mathews comparison, but Mathews is himself undersized, and succeeds despite that. If Mathews hadn't been considered undersized, he would've been drafted higher. Sometimes undersized players do well in spite of their size, like Mathews. Sometimes undersized players don't do well because they're too small. It's hard to say for sure which way Miller will go until he actually gets in the NFL. I thought Buddy Nix's recent comments on Miller were interesting, where he talked about how Miller might play ILB on 1st and 2nd down. ILBs are generally smaller (and less valuable) than OLBs. I guarantee you that if Miller played at 260+ lbs. in college, Nix wouldn't be talking about whether he'd play OLB or ILB in the base defense. Personally, I could live with Miller, because there's only one risk with him (size), and it's not necessarily a dealbreaker. But I don't see him improving the run D, don't see him playing more than half the snaps as a rookie if Merriman stays healthy, and I'd prefer either Dareus, who is a safer pick and fills a bigger need (and is much bigger!), or to roll the dice with the tremendous upside potential of either QB. (I actually don't like either QB, but if you want to get a franchise guy, you have to take a risk. Not even Peyton Manning was a sure thing.)

Keep in mind that before last year's draft, Buddy Nix identified O-line as our #1 need, then proceeded to ignore it until the 5th round. I don't think Walter's scenario is that far-fetched.

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.