Does drafting defense make sense?

[ieatcrayonz]

I'm going to skip over the octopus analogy and try to extract a point from the thread.

 

Balance becomes an issue when you're stocking talent in a way that you can't fully utilize. If we had a great defense with a mediocre offense and drafted all defensive players, we'd be putting good players on the bench while we had poor talent starting on offense. This is not the case; the offense was mediocre while the defense was terrible.

 

 

A thought about talent priority:

 

It seems wise to fill a defense with all 'good' players, so that there is no weak point to be attacked. An offense can succeed with poor talent at a position that is not fully utilized because they can create a gameplan to take advantage of their better players. Defense has to use all 11 players to react and stop the opponent. Offense is reliant on scheme and a handful of elite talent. Based on that logic, it would have been more productive to take elite offensive talent at the #3 pick this year, then focus on the draft with the remaining selections, as well as hour hopefully lower 1st round pick next year.

I'm just saying if our defense gets too good then our defense is going to stink out loud.

 

I understand what you are saying but I think maybe you skipped over my last sentence about the ink. While you might argue (and I hope you don't) that the discharge of ink could further affect chromosomal levels, I think that factor is outweighed by the confusion that the ink would cause the opponent. Ask yourself this:

 

Is a team really "swimming around freely" if it can't see where it's going?

 

I think when you factor in the ink atop the stickem and extra arms that you're probably looking at a team that finishes with a 7-9 record. Next year the Bills draft some barracudas or possibly moray eel-type players. You can't stock a reef tank in one year.

 

I know you and I have gotten into it from time to time in the past and I'm not trying to be a deutsche but I'm really just trying to find some common ground. We can agree to disagree though and I don't really want to get into a pissing match.

I thought the ink in your first comment was hyperthetical. If you are talking about actual ink I think that would be illegal in the NFL and if we take too many fifteen yard penalties and have a superb defense that will make our defense ultra crappy. I know the Patriots do stuff like that but I doubt we would. Maybe in our first home game and our first road game we can get away with it because we have new uniforms this year and we can say they weren't all the way dry yet.

[thebandit27]

I'm just saying if our defense gets too good then our defense is going to stink out loud.

 

 

I thought the ink in your first comment was hyperthetical. If you are talking about actual ink I think that would be illegal in the NFL and if we take too many fifteen yard penalties and have a superb defense that will make our defense ultra crappy. I know the Patriots do stuff like that but I doubt we would. Maybe in our first home game and our first road game we can get away with it because we have new uniforms this year and we can say they weren't all the way dry yet.

 

I think what your missing in San Jose's octopus analogy is this idea of balance. It's hard to balance under water, since the gravitational dynamics are so much different, and thus it makes your desired outcome much more difficult to come by.

 

Since that's the case, it's probably best--as an octopus--to just strengthen the tentacles during your downtime, and spend your active time learning to balance under water, rather than waste your down time trying to invent a new way to balance under water...we're not that innovative. Not to sound like Dick Jauron, but it's hard to balance under water in the NFL.

Edited May 16, 2011 by thebandit27

[BUFFALOKIE]

It appears that you've given this idea a great deal of thought and I find your musings to be both poignant and astonishingly rich.

 

I would look at it this way and I hope you find this helpful.

 

A great defense is like a large octopus but with more than 8 arms. It can stifle its prey because its prey (the other team) simply cannot defend itself from such a multi-pronged attacker. Each arm on the octopus has tentacles which have a sticky, adherent quality, much like stickem. This is where the analogy gets a bit rough because stickem has been outlawed by the NFL…but just forget about that for a minute and pretend that the use of stickem is still permissible. So you have a great defense (an octopus with more than 8 arms that wears stickem) and an offense which is simply overwhelmed by the defense… to the point that the offense will panic and give the defense the opportunity to score points. In other words, the defense is so superior to the offense that it will actually be able to outscore the offense by scores of 8-3 (safety plus defensive TD) or 2-0 (safety). Because of this, even though our offense sucks, we might still be able to outscore the other team occasionally by virtue of scoring defensive points.

 

Of course we would still lose games also by scores of say 10-9 or 3-2 or even sometimes 6-4…but the point is a great defense allows us to suck less not to mention that octopi also have the ability to squirt ink to confuse their opponents.

 

Wow So you eat crayons too, huh?

[John from Riverside]

To me its all about drafting the player with the most talent at the time that you pick......

 

I will use the 1st two picks as examples

 

Marcel Darius......truthfully was there another player on the board at that time that had to potential of Marcel? This is a guy who is going to ANCHOR this defense for the forseeable future......he is simply a talented player that will probably go to multiple pro bowls when it is all said and done. WE WERE FORTUNATE THAT IT WAS ALSO A SPOT OF EXTREME NEED

 

Now go to the second pick....Williams.....I would not have been upset if they went in a number of different directions here.....Dalton was still on the board, there were Tight Ends, etc etc etc

 

But they decided to go with the best TALENT on the board and Williams was widely considered a 1st round talent.....ranked right around where Winfield was ranked when he came out as a matter of fact.

 

 

If the talent is on the defensive side of the ball in a particular year.....you go defense especially in the early rounds.

[PDaDdy]

There have been a lot of arguments on here about whether we should draft DL or DB and what each does for the team. I have my opinions on the matter but was wondering about a different topic.

 

Is drafting defense so prominently a good idea?

 

Think about it. If you have the best defense in the history of football then your highly drafted players will only be on the field 3 plays at a time. The other team will be 3 and out a lot. While this sounds good, it leaves you with a bunch of lesser offensive players because they were drafted so low. You get what you pay for and the offense will go nowhere. Sooner or later your superstar-laden defense will tire and give up some points. It will result in slow boring games where we lose 3-0 or 7-3.

 

If we drafted offense, the players would stay on the field longer and score. The defense, although not as talented would be well rested. They might give up some points in the beginning but by the end they would be getting turnovers.

 

I was happy after the draft but now that I have had time to think about it I am getting worried.

 

I'm not sure what this has to do with the Bills situation. We don't have the best defense in history. In fact we had one of the all time worst. I guess I just don't understand what it is you are asking. If your defense sucks like ours .....the answer is a resounding YES. Drafting defense does make sense.

 

If you have the best defense in history drafting offense probably makes more sense. That is an academic question to be sure as there is only one best defense in history. Who that is and by what metrics you determine that are up for argument.

[ieatcrayonz]

I think what your missing in San Jose's octopus analogy is this idea of balance. It's hard to balance under water, since the gravitational dynamics are so much different, and thus it makes your desired outcome much more difficult to come by.

 

Since that's the case, it's probably best--as an octopus--to just strengthen the tentacles during your downtime, and spend your active time learning to balance under water, rather than waste your down time trying to invent a new way to balance under water...we're not that innovative. Not to sound like Dick Jauron, but it's hard to balance under water in the NFL.

Yes it snows a lot in Buffalo and yes snow is technically water, but it is really only in the second half of the season and you really can't swim in snow anyway and if you were an octopus you couldn't breathe snow and would freeze.

[PDaDdy]

So it's bad to draft defenders who are so good they create three-and-outs?

 

If we draft the best Offense in the history of football, they'll hardly be on the field because it will be One-And-Done with a TD! So then all these high offensive draft picks will be wasted because they'll never be on the field. And the defense will tire out because they have to return to the field so quickly.

 

Not to mention the offense will continually play from behind and have to become one dimensional and pass all the time allowing the opposing defense to blitz all day long.

[ieatcrayonz]

I'm not sure what this has to do with the Bills situation. We don't have the best defense in history. In fact we had one of the all time worst. I guess I just don't understand what it is you are asking. If your defense sucks like ours .....the answer is a resounding YES. Drafting defense does make sense.

 

If you have the best defense in history drafting offense probably makes more sense. That is an academic question to be sure as there is only one best defense in history. Who that is and by what metrics you determine that are up for argument.

I am saying that if our defense gets too good it will stink and then we will be back where we started. Under your way of thinking that would mean we would have to draft even more defense and that would make us even worse and I'm not sure when the cycle would end.

[K-9]

... not to mention that octopi also have the ability to squirt ink to confuse their opponents.

 

Bill Belichick squirts ink, too.

 

Just thought you should know that.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[ieatcrayonz]

Bill Belichick squirts ink, too.

 

Just thought you should know that.

 

GO BILLS!!!

I really have no interest in how you acquired this special knowledge of yours but there are other forums for it.

 

 

Like Penthouse Forum.

[Scrappy]

Our offense was good enough last year that if we had the #1 defense in the league instead of the # 24 defense (#32 against the run) we would have been a playoff team and perhaps even won a game or two. Defense needs more help. Smart moving by drafting for D.

 

I actually think that this is the case, I'd just like to see it translate on the field first before I crown any team playoff bound.

[thebandit27]

Yes it snows a lot in Buffalo and yes snow is technically water, but it is really only in the second half of the season and you really can't swim in snow anyway and if you were an octopus you couldn't breathe snow and would freeze.

 

You make an excellent point, but since the team is replacing the field turf right now anyway, why not just install some steam-piping underneath to thaw it out?

 

If you ask me, the idea has legs...or tentacles, as the case may be.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Yes it snows a lot in Buffalo and yes snow is technically water, but it is really only in the second half of the season and you really can't swim in snow anyway and if you were an octopus you couldn't breathe snow and would freeze.

This is a good point. It reminds me of the fact that Detroit Red Wings fans throw a dead octopus out on the ice rink…although I honestly don't know if the octopus is already dead… if it died upon impact with the ice… or if perhaps it froze to death. The ink might then freeze also. I think the analogy still holds water… but not necessarily in cold weather or in a terrestrial setting.

[PDaDdy]

I am saying that if our defense gets too good it will stink and then we will be back where we started. Under your way of thinking that would mean we would have to draft even more defense and that would make us even worse and I'm not sure when the cycle would end.

 

Not trying to be a jerk but....ROFLOL....let me know when our defense "gets too good" and then we can have this discussion again.

 

Our offense was good enough last year that if we had the #1 defense in the league instead of the # 24 defense (#32 against the run) we would have been a playoff team and perhaps even won a game or two. Defense needs more help. Smart moving by drafting for D.

 

Great point let's also not forget the yin and yang nature of offense and defense. If we had the #1 ranked defense your offense automatically becomes better because of the play calling you can make when you know that you have that kind of defense ready to shut down the opposition. More 3 and outs on defense means better field position, more attempts, rhythm and continuity on offense. You are also never "forced" to abandon the running game because you are being outscored by large margins.

Edited May 16, 2011 by PDaDdy

[Max997]

There have been a lot of arguments on here about whether we should draft DL or DB and what each does for the team. I have my opinions on the matter but was wondering about a different topic.

 

Is drafting defense so prominently a good idea?

 

Think about it. If you have the best defense in the history of football then your highly drafted players will only be on the field 3 plays at a time. The other team will be 3 and out a lot. While this sounds good, it leaves you with a bunch of lesser offensive players because they were drafted so low. You get what you pay for and the offense will go nowhere. Sooner or later your superstar-laden defense will tire and give up some points. It will result in slow boring games where we lose 3-0 or 7-3.

 

If we drafted offense, the players would stay on the field longer and score. The defense, although not as talented would be well rested. They might give up some points in the beginning but by the end they would be getting turnovers.

 

I was happy after the draft but now that I have had time to think about it I am getting worried.

 

 

I cant believe Im responding to one your topics but how did that scenario work out when the Bills played the Giants in the Super Bowl?

 

end of story

[Delete This Account]

why draft defense at all? if you would fill your entire roster with offensive players, then you would have a better chance of scoring whether you had the ball or not as they are more accustomed to finding the end zone and, thus, producing points.

 

jw

[ieatcrayonz]

why draft defense at all? if you would fill your entire roster with offensive players, then you would have a better chance of scoring whether you had the ball or not as they are more accustomed to finding the end zone and, thus, producing points.

 

jw

It is really the same thing as the original post only the opposite. If you draft all offense the offense will be great and control the clock and scoreboard but also tire themselves out leading to turnovers and the defense will be unable to stop anyone and the tired offense would be back on the field dropping the ball again. You would see a lot of blown 4th quarter leads. You need balance.

 

In a perfect world a good team would alternate drafting players for O and D. In even numbered years they could draft O with their even numbered picks and in odd numbered years they could draft D with their odd numbered picks.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

In a perfect world a good team would alternate drafting players for O and D. In even numbered years they could draft O with their even numbered picks and in odd numbered years they could draft D with their odd numbered picks.

For some reason this reminds me of the fact that the original 1949 Crayola Crayon set included both Blue Green AND Green Blue.

[Delete This Account]

It is really the same thing as the original post only the opposite. If you draft all offense the offense will be great and control the clock and scoreboard but also tire themselves out leading to turnovers and the defense will be unable to stop anyone and the tired offense would be back on the field dropping the ball again. You would see a lot of blown 4th quarter leads. You need balance.

 

In a perfect world a good team would alternate drafting players for O and D. In even numbered years they could draft O with their even numbered picks and in odd numbered years they could draft D with their odd numbered picks.

no, you miss my point. if you stock your entire team with offensive players, it should thus give you an altogether better chance to score points, as you'll always be on offense even if you don't have the ball.

 

offensive players are trained to produce points, so it would be instinctive for them to score whether they were playing on offense or defense. just look at what George Wilson did when they moved him over. he had more catches as a DB than he did as an WR.

why can't they do that with other players.

 

i'm actually somewhat agreeing with you, though suggesting that you didn't go far enough with your argument. teams should stock their rosters with offensive players, that way they don't have to be defensive when it comes to fans criticizing them for their picks.

 

jw

[thebandit27]

For some reason this reminds me of the fact that the original 1949 Crayola Crayon set included both Blue Green AND Green Blue.

 

I'm told that in San Jose they refer to this as "Teel", and even selected it for their hockey jerseys...