I_want_2_BILL_Lieve Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 I haven't seen this posted and was wondering if others had thought this through. If there is an extended lockout, and drafted players are barred from ANY contact from the clubs, does this change the overall draft strategy? Specifically, doesn't this mean that quarterbacks should be avoided like the plague? They would have no exposure to the minicamps, OTAs etc. With a limited preseason their worth will be almost zero for the first year. What other positions would be so affected? So, do you go heavy on positions that don't require a lot of film study and reps? And what positions would those be? Or, do you live with the fact that as rookies, a QB (and other identified positions) are not going to help anyway, regardless of the lockout? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllsNation Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 QB. he would sit a year anyways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billnutinphoenix Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 If you are a team with a QB already, why pick one in round 1?...I am not the biggest fan of Fitz but you can't pick a QB #1 with the uncertainty of the lockout... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agardin Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 I haven't seen this posted and was wondering if others had thought this through. If there is an extended lockout, and drafted players are barred from ANY contact from the clubs, does this change the overall draft strategy? Specifically, doesn't this mean that quarterbacks should be avoided like the plague? They would have no exposure to the minicamps, OTAs etc. With a limited preseason their worth will be almost zero for the first year. What other positions would be so affected? So, do you go heavy on positions that don't require a lot of film study and reps? And what positions would those be? Or, do you live with the fact that as rookies, a QB (and other identified positions) are not going to help anyway, regardless of the lockout? I would say that you draft with future production in mind, which I what I believe NFL teams do anyway, so I don't think draft boards would change too much one way or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hplarrm Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 No one knows for sure which is what makes this so difficult. It really depends on what happens next. You can pretty much ignore any predictions which claim to be based on what WILL happen because no one knows what WILL happen. Basically no one saw the NFLPA threat to decertify as a likely possibility in 1987. In fact it was an effective tactic by the players exactly because no one expected this unlikely move. The team owners were smug in their victory at that point as they had totally smashed the traditional AFL=CIO tactices of the NFLPA under the leadership of Ed Garvey. What the team owners did not calculate was that they got hoist on their own petard of sponging off colleges and taxpayers to train and develop their young athletes (which is unlike other pro sports such as MLB and the NHL which invest significant money in contracting with minor league teams and pay huge speculative deals to 16 year old talents). The NFL got the immediate advantage that tax payers and others paid their training and development costs, but in the longer term ended up negotiating with adult players to sign deals. Most players are steroid infused athletes who have been coddled and ordered around since high school. However, there also was a talented tenth of MFL athletes led by folks like Gene Upshaw, Troy Vincent, TKO Spikes etc who spent their off-seasons getting Ivy League business degrees. This talented tenth have run the NFLPA and hired smart NYC lawyers who helped them develop and sale to the players )who were ripely disaffected with traditional union models after Garvey got their butt kicked by he owners) the CBA of the late 80s and early 90. This talented tenth cadre led negotiations of the last CBA which brought the players the vast majority of total revenues in the deal. They now are organizing things such that my guess they are moving to actual replace (really supplement actually as they do not want to kill the owners just create competition and more money for them) the NFL owners with what I am calling the NEWFL. To answer the question directly, my GUESS is that what the draft will do is put the nail in the coffin of the current NFL. Since they have lost the NFLPA as a co-conspirator, what the draft will do is stop individuals from selling their services to whatever team bids highest. The Un-American restraint on individuals by assigning them to only one team will founder and the players will be siding with individual rights in court. I am not sure how the NFL even works without a draft so overall I think that draft strategy is going to not correspond to reality. We will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 No change in strategy. I'll still watch the first couple rounds from my couch. QB. he would sit a year anyways I don't think you quite grasp the concept of 'sit for a year'. Not that the Bills should be picking anyone that isn't ready to play pro football right now anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Bills should pick up all any talent that drops. They're not going to compete for anything next year so benefit from other teams possible consertive drafting. It doesn't matter if they take a guy that needs two or three seasons to develop later in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 I haven't seen this posted and was wondering if others had thought this through. If there is an extended lockout, and drafted players are barred from ANY contact from the clubs, does this change the overall draft strategy? Specifically, doesn't this mean that quarterbacks should be avoided like the plague? They would have no exposure to the minicamps, OTAs etc. With a limited preseason their worth will be almost zero for the first year. What other positions would be so affected? So, do you go heavy on positions that don't require a lot of film study and reps? And what positions would those be? Or, do you live with the fact that as rookies, a QB (and other identified positions) are not going to help anyway, regardless of the lockout? You pick the players you want regardless of the lockout, they wont be locked out forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 Yeah. The Bills will draft Mark Ingram. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 QB. he would sit a year anyways I'd go against that. He's not going to be practicing and sitting on the sidelines. Imagine if the a QB entered the draft with a 'year away' from Football. It's not a positive imo. I'd adjust my draft strategy and go O / D Lines. This gives them a year to hit the weights and ensure they are physically prepared for the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 (edited) Unless you are a contender, week 1 matters little. If you are a contender you don't have glaring holes. Either way you should be drafting for a year or two out ideally. Any contribution before should be considered lagniappe. That's why drafting for need and not BPA is silly for most cases. 2 years from now, between injuries and free agency, you don't know much about your needs. Take your guy - regardless of position this year. The one exception being immature guys that'll get into trouble left alone for a summer ala lynch. That said, you avoid that when possible anyway. Edited March 13, 2011 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Blizzard Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I haven't seen this posted and was wondering if others had thought this through. If there is an extended lockout, and drafted players are barred from ANY contact from the clubs, does this change the overall draft strategy? Specifically, doesn't this mean that quarterbacks should be avoided like the plague? They would have no exposure to the minicamps, OTAs etc. With a limited preseason their worth will be almost zero for the first year. What other positions would be so affected? So, do you go heavy on positions that don't require a lot of film study and reps? And what positions would those be? Or, do you live with the fact that as rookies, a QB (and other identified positions) are not going to help anyway, regardless of the lockout? I draft for my needs. Even if there is no season, the needs will still be there next year, and depending on the outcome of this mess, there may be even more needs that haven't been identified yet. This is gonna suck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 You don't alter your strategy just do your best to fill the most amount of needs and add depth. Then you alter your free agency strategy around what needs you filled in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 No change in strategy. I'll still watch the first couple rounds from my couch. That's what I am thinking. I do not get how "OUR" draft strategy changes..."WE" are not drafting anyone. The Bills are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 (edited) If you are a team with a QB already, why pick one in round 1?...I am not the biggest fan of Fitz but you can't pick a QB #1 with the uncertainty of the lockout... Every team has a qb. Not every team has a franchise qb. We don't have a franchise qb. We need a franchise qb. If nix and co think there's a franchise qb in this draft, we draft him. It's pretty simple That's what I am thinking. I do not get how "OUR" draft strategy changes..."WE" are not drafting anyone. The Bills are. The bills aren't "your" team? They're "my" team. You're on a buffalo bills forums, with buffalo bills fans, discussing the buffalo bills. It's most definitely WE. Fo sho Edited March 14, 2011 by NewEra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 (edited) Every team has a qb. Not every team has a franchise qb. We don't have a franchise qb. We need a franchise qb. If nix and co think there's a franchise qb in this draft, we draft him. It's pretty simple The bills aren't "your" team? They're "my" team. You're on a buffalo bills forums, with buffalo bills fans, discussing the buffalo bills. It's most definitely WE. Fo sho +1 That was just a non needed post by jboys. Plus its very likely that in his 3400+ posts he referred to the Bills in second person plural at some time. Edited March 14, 2011 by Why So Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 The bills aren't "your" team? They're "my" team. You're on a buffalo bills forums, with buffalo bills fans, discussing the buffalo bills. It's most definitely WE. Fo sho Shirley, you know what I mean - We have nothing to do with the decision to draft a player. When it comes to games, etc, I feel we is applicable because we are the 12th man. When it comes to things we can be a factor in...it is we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts