buffletucky Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 maybe vick and tebow could be roommates......that would be a test of wills......lol LOL, maybe they should buy a dog for the apartment for bonding purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grelit Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 We should be the team that hungry for a QB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Kelly Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 If, and this is a big if, Claussen is there at 9 or Bradford, and we decide we want to go OT (most likely either one of Davis, Bulaga, or Campbell will be there too), a team hungry for a QB with a more NFL ready line might be willing to swap picks with us. This way we add a high pick, AND get the OT that we so desperately need. Thoughts? Judging from our history of first round picks. We will draft a "No Need" position and take a guy higher than he is evaluated. So I'm feeling it will be Cornerback from Alaska or to that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBaroo Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 Mike Williams bust was awhile ago - we can't screw up twice! Get back on the horse and draft the best Off. Tackle available - if we get another safety I am going to lose it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBaroo Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 Judging from our history of first round picks. We will draft a "No Need" position and take a guy higher than he is evaluated. So I'm feeling it will be Cornerback from Alaska or to that regard. "He was the best guy on the board" - Donte Whitner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 Sorry, but you are flat out wrong. The [Colts] used a #1 on LT Tarik Glenn and a #2 on RT Adam Meadows in the year immediately before they got Manning. This is how to build an offense Good point, but it raises a good hypothetical: If the Colts had been in serious need of a LT in 1998, should they have passed on Manning in favor of a LT? Given that the top 2 tackles drafted that year were Kyle Turley and Tra Thomas, the obvious answer is yes. But I think it's still equally obvious even if Jonathan Ogden had been in the draft that year. I'll take my chances with the Tony Ugohs of the world over the Elvis Grbacs of the world. I'm curious as to your opinion on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 This year I think we are better off staying at #9 and drafting the best OT on the board. Like other people have said this draft is deeper at OT than at QB. We must take a OT first, we would have been in a better position to take a QB if we had drafted Oher last spring, but OBD did not. I also think that the crop of OT's in the first at #9 is far better (Remember we passed on Oher). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimer1960 Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Its not an all or nothing proposition. They would still have eight more picks to work with. That's true of the QB position as well, but I think this is a much, much better draft for OTs than QBs and that they stand a much better chance of getting a quality LT prospect in R2 than they do a QB. IMHO, the ONLY big need on the OL is for a very good LT. There are not 5 very good LTs in the draft. I also don't believe that there are more than 3 LTs worth a top 15 selection. Given the premium on the position, I'd guess that the good ones will be gone leaving the Bills to reach for a non-first round caliber LT or a non-first-round calidber QB. I'd much much rather that they get a good value and strengthen another area of the team - particularly the defense. Just drafting a LT or a QB at 9 does not make that player worthy of the pick, nor does it necessarily solve a problem at LT or QB. If the guy is much better than D. Bell or Fitz/Edwards , then OK, but just throwing a pick at a position doesn't make it a good move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 Good point, but it raises a good hypothetical: If the Colts had been in serious need of a LT in 1998, should they have passed on Manning in favor of a LT? Given that the top 2 tackles drafted that year were Kyle Turley and Tra Thomas, the obvious answer is yes. But I think it's still equally obvious even if Jonathan Ogden had been in the draft that year. I'll take my chances with the Tony Ugohs of the world over the Elvis Grbacs of the world. I'm curious as to your opinion on the matter. You question is fair, as is the anology (Ogden or Manning). I will not duck the question, but I think that other variables do exist. Before making this sort of decision, I would consider: 1) Climate Does my team play a lot of games in the elements? Do my divisional opponents play outdoors in similar conditions? If so, I would think that a LT becomes more important than he would be to a dome team. Many times passing is extremely difficult in WNY, and running the football becomes more of an issue. 2) Other Members of the OL It is very hard for a team to win with one gaping hole in their OL. Last season, the Bills had 3. Think about this for a moment if you will. All of the OTs sucked, and when Wood went down there was no decent RG (until PERHAPS Incog). I consider Hangartner to be good, but even Levitre (who I think will be very good) had to go through a learning process. In other words, this OL was putrid even by the Bills extremely low standards. When you have to start asking yourself if Demetrious Bell is worse than Marcus Spriggs it becomes a moot point. Wouldn't you agree? 3) Current QB and LT This is obvious. If my LT was Demetrious Bell, I would opt for Ogden. If my LT was average to good, I would want Manning, with the same being true at the QB position. I hope you are satisfied (not that you are supposed to agree mind you) with this response. It was a very hard question to give a simple answer to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 i've been thinking about this and think that a trade down to 15 with the giants if Mclain is there when we pick. we trade down to 15 and still take the tackle we need and could prob get a 2ns rounder back...two 2nds will be nice where we could get a mlb and a d tackle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts