[RD3, Pick #73: Preston Brown ILB, Louisville]

That last game of the year against the Pats was a horror show for the run defense. Blount looked like he was playing against a high school team. While Blount's now in Pitt, the AFCE still added Johnson and Moreno, and the Pats are going more and more run heavy the older Brady gets.

 

With Spikes and now Brown, Whaley seems to be doing a good job coming up with answers for the poor running defense.

 

I agree. I think Whaley et al wake up sweating with images of Blount in their heads. I don't blame them. That was an appalling display; reminded me of the last Super Bowl against Dallas. Unfortunately, they may not be fretting about Gronk anymore and the new generation of tight ends and pass-catching running backs. Rivers, Spikes, this kid... pass coverage is not a strength with any of them (I really don't like Rivers--he and Chris Williams=other people's trash, imo). I realize it's tough to find every-down players, especially in the third round, but we might be talking about needing another Kiko this time next year. Until then (of course they're not done yet), at least the Bills will be more ready for the Blounts of the world.

[Bills actively trying to TRADE UP.]

I don't put deliberate deception past the Bills; Whaley watched as Buddy loudly made Cordy Glenn out to be a guard two years ago, so he knows the value of smoke and mirrors. But what is the value of pretending to interested in moving up? Making rivals give up too much to land a player they assume we're interested in? That's sounds like a stretch. Am I missing something? If not, I'm inclined to believe the reports, especially since if they are working on moving up, it would leak out.

 

By the way, I'm with those who want to stay put or trade down in this deep draft. Someone pointed out that the Bills are starting depth players in several positions, including guard (yes), safety, right tackle and defensive end and we need quality depth practically everywhere.

 

Does anyone remember the Bills during the Butler era having like three or four second round picks? I always thought that would be a plausible draft strategy, at least in a deep draft like this one: keep trading down, down, down until you amass five or six second round picks. You can miss on two and you're still better off than most of the first-round teams.

[The wisdom of the wall]

I remember a lot of people here loved Jimmy Clausen. There was talk of Ryan Nassib at #8 too.

 

There are some very knowledgable posters here. Some fans' opinions are just as good as "experts" like Kiper and McShay. The problem with the majority of fans is they are too emotional. Some fans put 14 years of frustration on young players and would make emotional decisions. Guys like Spiller, McKelvin. Gilmore, Dareus would have been given up on. We are seeing this already with Manuel, who is learning the hardest position in sports and struggled with injuries. Patience doesn't exist for some fans and that kills team building.

 

I think you're right, but I've always been impressed by how savvy many (I want to say most) Bills fans are. For example, they know that an O-line takes time to build, in terms of both chemistry and individual player development. They're even pretty patient with quarterbacks. Fitzpatrick, Edwards, Losman, Rob Johnson... all of them got time to show if they had it or not. (Ironically, it was Flutie, arguably the player who could have taken us farthest, who got yanked prematurely.)

 

I realize we're talking about a pretty nebulous quantity: the wisdom of the fans in aggregate. It's a bit silly. In terms of the draft, JR in Pittsburgh nailed it: OBD might have fared better by selecting the board consensus just to avoid the impulse to get cute. (Sometimes I groan aloud when I think of Maybin.) No one has mentioned examples of the Bills--or anyone else--making a surprise selection (that is, a lot higher than expected) and being correct.

[The wisdom of the wall]

Oh yeah, how many posters had a 2nd round grade on Kiko Alonso? There's more to it than you claim brah.

 

I had the same thought, which is why I think the "collective wisdom" idea applies only to the first round. Still, you look at the Bills history of second round picks and you're not encouraged: for every Kiko it seems there are two Torrell Troupes.

[The wisdom of the wall]

Yes, it's why we are all being considered for GM jobs around the league. Fans always know more.

 

Yes, I expected snark. So easy, so useless.

 

My point is that potential first round picks are examined so thoroughly by so many experts whose informed opinion the average fan has access to that fan consensus has value, especially in a community, like this, where fans are unusually dialed in. Again, I'm talking about first-round picks only. My guess is that if franchises with a poor record drafting in the first round, like the Bills, may not perform as well as boards like this over time. There's a reason that virtually all players picked in the first round are expected to go in the first round, if not in the final order: a consensus has emerged that fans are in sync with. I'm not suggesting the Bills retire its scouts, or that consensus can't be dead wrong. I'm merely pointing out that they could do--and possibly have done--worse that follow the collective advice here.

[The wisdom of the wall]

I wonder if, collectively, this board might do a better job drafting than the Bills front office, at least in picking first round players. I'm thinking of especially the slam-dunk picks (to this forum) that the Bills brain trust passed over to get cute, picking Whitner instead of Ngata, for instance, Maybin instead of Orakpo, T.J. Graham instead of Russell Wilson. It wasn't just in hindsight that the Wall got it right but in real time, or so I recall from the cries of anguish here.

 

But think also of the times when the consensus here seemed to be trading down (yes, I know, you need partners) when the Bills picked a "wtf?" player instead of trading down for better value: McKelvin, for instance, and Losman. We don't always have consensus, of course, but often we do agree the choice comes down to a handful of players. For example, this year it looks like Ebron, Evans or Matthews, provided one of the top-five players doesn't fall to us. It's certainly NOT Ha-Ha Dix.

 

Anyway, I wanted to get a sense of the board: have we collectively--not individually, either way--done a better job identifying the best picks over the years than the Bills front office? Or does it just seem that way?

[Who believes in Manuel?]

Obviously, it's too early to tell, really. But what are the odds that he will be very good? Could happen but unlikely, since most qb's don't make it. My guess, fwiw, is that he'll be like J.P. Losman: just good enough to get people to make excuses for him for three or four mediocre seasons before it's obvious he'll never be very good. If I were GM, I would draft a quarterback in round one or two this year. The stakes are too high not to hedge their bets.

[Bills acquire WR mike Williams]

The consensus on this board is that the Mike Williams signing was a good one. Low risk, what do we have to lose, etc. I disagree. I also don't like some of the other signings and departures this off season.

 

Marv Levy disappointed us when he came back as GM, in part because he seemed to have forgotten the principles that helped build the championship years. Some of the key ones: Build through the draft, keep your own players and, especially, draft for character. The Superbowl Bills weren't just talented; they were tough. That famous resilience wasn't an accident: it was the result of the team's drafting and coaching philosophy. Talent is everywhere in the NFL. What's rare is team chemistry, the kind that brings out the best in the more marginal players (like Ray Benchley and Don Beebe), keeps the marquee players from becoming prima donnas and helps the team find the grit needed to win tough games and come back from tough losses.

 

No risk? Nothing to lose? You build your team with slackers, losers, criminals and there's no risk? No problem with the headlines about the latest charges, denials, accusations? No risk of locker room strife, sniping, feuds? No chance that the hardest-working Bills won't resent the work habits of perpetual underachievers like Keith Rivers and Chris Williams?

 

Yes, you can point to examples of shady characters who make good, and slackers making good with a change of scene. But the exceptions prove the rule that character DOES matter over time. These signings are cheap, and I don't mean money wise. They're the moves of a loser franchise trying to do it the easy way.

[Bills Free Agents Updates]

Corey Graham: a Buffalo native, FWIW.

[Best Tackle All Year]

Must be December.... By the way, am I the only one who can't bear to watch the playoffs with the Bills out of them yet again?

[9th draft slot puts Bills in action spot]

Oh really? If we totally give up on our first round pick last year and draft another QB in the first round the Bills are incompetent fools? So ignoring other positions of need after drafting a QB in the first round last year is actually a GOOD move? Holy crap, that's awesome comedy.

 

Please explain how 1) You are qualified to call EJ a bust after one year, including your years of scouting and pro football analysis, statistics, and understanding of Buffalo's offense. 2) Why bailing on a first round pick after one year and creating a quarterback controversy helps the team, and 3) Your professional assessment of Manziel's strengths and weaknesses, and how you think his personality will mesh with the Buffalo Bills, how he will overcome his douchebagginess along with his personality defects, massive displays of immaturity, and off the field issues.

 

I'd love to hear your analysis.

 

Oh, give me a break. This is chat forum, for god's sake, not ESPN. We all need a resume to express an opinion? Or, surprise, do your standards suddenly go sky-high when you disagree with the opinion?

 

What's more, GunnerBill (make that BuffaloBarbarian) might be right about the Bills needing another quarterback. The list of rationales for poor play ("he just needs more time to develop"; "he needs more weapons"; "his protection was lousy"; "he just needs a quarterback coach") all may have merit, but after 14 years--more like 30--they're getting old. If Manuel turns out to be yet another Losman/Edwards/Johnson/Fitzpatrick, et al., then another three or four years is wasted. Do we really want to be debating quarterback prospects (and never the top ones, never in a top year) in 2018?

 

I favor drafting Matt Hundley out of UCLA. He was considered a top-ten pick before he was injured, so he would be a good value in the second or third round. Because he needs time to heal, he won't be an immediate threat to Manuel, but if Manuel turns out to be another bust (but a good guy!) or injury prone, then Hundley will be there, all the more ready to play after a year in the system. If Manuel is adequate then we have a Frank Reich in Hundley. Drafting, especially quarterbacks, is not easy. I don't blame the front office as much as many posters here for drafting poor (in hindsight) QBs, but I DO blame them for not drafting more QBs. Is the prospect of a QB controversy so horrendous that it's worth risking another four years of talking draft in December? Is that speedy wide receiver or cornerback so essential that we don't take a flier on a Russell Wilson or Colin Kaepernick? Manuel may be fine, but he also may suck, and I'd like to see the Bills in the playoffs before I'm a grandfather.

 

Do I get to say this, Todd? Or should I get 30 years of NFL experience first and get back to you?

[When were you most wrong on a player?]

Carwell Gardner. He had his moments, but he was never as good as I expected.

[[please fix subject]]

Thanks for the replies. Sorry about the inaccuracies. Yes, some key things are different now, as "fanhood" pointed out, especially Wilson no longer intervening. Again, I'm optimistic. I always preferred the 3-4, since the Super Bowl days. Paup on one end at LB, Bruce on the other side, produced some of the most satisfying plays I remember ever seeing. I like the two new big WR's a lot, Duke Williams, Alonzo, the kicker... It looks like a very good draft. Insofar as it's fun to predict, I would say all these moves will turn out well. But I am pessimistic about Manuel. My sense is that this is the 2007 draft all over again: backups at best down the line. And I wanted Nix to take a guard. We've been down this O-line path before: keep plugging in journeymen, and pretty soon you have a mediocre line and the dominoes start falling.

 

(Admin's: what's wrong with the subject?)

[[please fix subject]]

I can't help feeling optimistic about the Bills every year. Like a guy on his second marriage, being a Bills fan is an exercise of hope over experience. Still, even I can see the same depressing patterns going way back. Exciting new coach enters, promising a new era, more aggressive, attacking football (no one promises passivity and meekness), and he promptly changes the scheme, always changing the scheme. If we have a 3-4, he goes with 4-3; got a 4-3? Well, back to a 3-4. Short passing game? We'll open things up. Opened up already? We'll move the chains, use short passes to set up the long game. Exciting changes afoot, fans!

 

I had mixed feelings about Marv Levy, but I admired how he chose the scheme to fit the personnel, not the other way around. I think it was Dick Jauron who cut Pat Williams in his prime (switching from a 4-3 to a 3-4, of course), which promptly dropped the Bills number two- or three-ranked defense to among the worst in the league. Wannstedt was an awful coordinator, a real has-been. But his move to a 4-3 made sense given his players' weaknesses (i.e., linebacker) and strengths, with Kyle Williams and Dareus at tackle and Mario at end; Carrington did nicely at tackle, too. (Too bad Wanny pretty much mailed it in after this change.) Now Marrone wants to change--you guessed it--back to a 3-4. Why? Let me guess: for an attacking defense?

 

Another Levy principle: Retain your own players. Others here have lamented the list of players cut since he left, including Antoine Winfield, Pat Williams, Paul Posluszny, Jason Peters and Nate Clements. Now Levitre's gone and maybe Byrd. When the front office does manage to draft well, they decline to pay the players when their contracts are up. Then they draft a replacement, and we get all excited. I'm fully aware that they couldn't retain everyone, ridiculous salaries, small market, etc. But, c'mon. You have the best safety in football. Pay the man. It's always two steps forward, two steps back.

 

Let me mention one more pattern: drafting for potential instead of production, despite all the rhetoric to the contrary. E.J. Manuel may be great. Who knows? But am I the only one who is thinking of Jamarcus Russell, Vince Young, Daunte Culpepper (yes, they're all black)--big, athletic, fast, cannon arms, etc? I felt ill when I heard Nix stressing repeatedly that Manuel is "tall." That kind of myopia is what led him to pass on Russell Wilson. Why draft an talented AND productive quarterback when you can draft one that is merely talented (but tall!)? Same with speed over production: neither T.J. Graham nor Marquise Goodwin were particularly productive in college (Goodwin didn't even start--in college!), but both are speedsters. Fine, maybe they can contribute on the odd end-around. But does that justify picking them in the THIRD round, when you want a starter? When you're looking at swapping your Pro Bowl guard for a journeyman, the third on the line? It's like the little kid comes out in Nix. "Oooh, he's fast! He's tall!"

 

To close my rant, I am still optimistic, still excited, still pumped--and still reading this board every day, as I have been for twenty years. We're a pathetic bunch, aren't we? But we do enjoy ourselves. Go Bills!