BillsVet Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Last year, Buddy failed to show after his team got out to an 0-5 start. He finally appeared for a short interview after a Sullivan article needled him, though whether the piece hastened Nix' short Q and A is not certain. That said, I have to give credit to Nix for not riding out in front and taking credit after Buffalo's 3-0 start. It's important at this stage to allow the team and HC to be the focal point of all press. GM's aren't typically the face of their franchise and Nix has remained true to this idea. And while I still see most of the play-makers on the team as being acquired before Nix became GM, the team has some very good players found in unconventional ways. I would hope Fitzpatrick, Stevie Johnson, Levitre, Wood, and perhaps Fred Jackson are re-signed in short order to provide some certainty for future seasons. That's something I do expect the GM to be working on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shibuya Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 70% roster turn over in 2 years... Most of the players were definitely brought in here by Nix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Last year, Buddy failed to show after his team got out to an 0-5 start. He finally appeared for a short interview after a Sullivan article needled him, though whether the piece hastened Nix' short Q and A is not certain. That said, I have to give credit to Nix for not riding out in front and taking credit after Buffalo's 3-0 start. It's important at this stage to allow the team and HC to be the focal point of all press. GM's aren't typically the face of their franchise and Nix has remained true to this idea. And while I still see most of the play-makers on the team as being acquired before Nix became GM, the team has some very good players found in unconventional ways. I would hope Fitzpatrick, Stevie Johnson, Levitre, Wood, and perhaps Fred Jackson are re-signed in short order to provide some certainty for future seasons. That's something I do expect the GM to be working on. It's about who you keep as well as who you get... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 What I am trying to understand vet is why you equate the quality work of a GM to soley be the players that HE DRAFTS..... Keep in mind that a GM does a lot of things besides draft players....there is also evaluation of players that he already has on the roster and whether they stay or go Point in case - Stevie Johnston. - A holdover player from another GM's time - A SEVENTH ROUND PICK out of a non powerhouse Kentucky - Sat on the bench behind Hardy, then Terrel Owens Yet here he is...the number 1 option on our team putting up numbers that Lee Evans didn't match....and about to get the big payday. The current GM has a big hand in the fact that Stevie actually got his shot....and you can say that with just about every other "holdover" player......the GM along with HC input decides who stays and who gos. It looks to me like they did a pretty good job evaluating their own talent before they even drafted any. Just Sayin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cocktosten Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) What I am trying to understand vet is why you equate the quality work of a GM to soley be the players that HE DRAFTS..... Keep in mind that a GM does a lot of things besides draft players....there is also evaluation of players that he already has on the roster and whether they stay or go Point in case - Stevie Johnston. - A holdover player from another GM's time - A SEVENTH ROUND PICK out of a non powerhouse Kentucky - Sat on the bench behind Hardy, then Terrel Owens Yet here he is...the number 1 option on our team putting up numbers that Lee Evans didn't match....and about to get the big payday. The current GM has a big hand in the fact that Stevie actually got his shot....and you can say that with just about every other "holdover" player......the GM along with HC input decides who stays and who gos. It looks to me like they did a pretty good job evaluating their own talent before they even drafted any. Just Sayin Conversely, then there is Trent Edwards. Why draft CJ when you have Freddy Jackson? Soooooo just sayin. Edited September 29, 2011 by John Cocktosten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 What I am trying to understand vet is why you equate the quality work of a GM to soley be the players that HE DRAFTS..... Keep in mind that a GM does a lot of things besides draft players....there is also evaluation of players that he already has on the roster and whether they stay or go Point in case - Stevie Johnston. - A holdover player from another GM's time - A SEVENTH ROUND PICK out of a non powerhouse Kentucky - Sat on the bench behind Hardy, then Terrel Owens Yet here he is...the number 1 option on our team putting up numbers that Lee Evans didn't match....and about to get the big payday. The current GM has a big hand in the fact that Stevie actually got his shot....and you can say that with just about every other "holdover" player......the GM along with HC input decides who stays and who gos. It looks to me like they did a pretty good job evaluating their own talent before they even drafted any. Just Sayin Good points, John. BV just doesn't like much at all about the FO, from RW right on down the line. I give him credit for being consistent in his criticisms, though. But it's funny how he criticizes Buddy for staying behind the scenes last season and yet lauds him for doing it this year. It's all a matter of the perspective that 0-8 vs. 3-0 brings; Buddy should have been out front while winless but should remain behind the scenes now. Still the same old Buddy, regardless, but not in the eyes of his critics. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Conversely, then there is Trent Edwards. Why draft CJ when you have Freddy Jackson? Soooooo just sayin. Um, because you need more than 1 RB? PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cocktosten Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Um, because you need more than 1 RB? PTR So you're saying that as good as Freddy is, Buddy needed to pick Spiller 9 overall? Come on PTR, you can't even believe that one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Nix definitely deserves credit for the turnaround since Gailey was his hand-picked coach. I was skeptical of the Gailey hire but he has turned out to be a perfect fit for the modern era of NFL football in which the rules cater to passing offense. Of all the decisions Nix has made in his tenure as GM, the head coaching hire was by far the most important. And he knocked it out of the park. A good head coach is worth several first-rounders, imo, so even if you count Spiller as a negative mark on Nix's record, I would say he is still firmly in the black. And Dareus is a stud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 So you're saying that as good as Freddy is, Buddy needed to pick Spiller 9 overall? Come on PTR, you can't even believe that one! Spiller was considered the best player available at the time. Look at the mock drafts. Considering Gailey's offense Spiller was a no-brainer pick. But Gailey is not Nostradamus either. Maybe he didn't see Jackson rise to the occasion like he did. But so what? Is having two solid RBs such a problem? You have this expectation that every GM has to know how every player will work out, that there never can be any surprises. I don't get it. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 So you're saying that as good as Freddy is, Buddy needed to pick Spiller 9 overall? Come on PTR, you can't even believe that one! Smart GMs pick players for the short term as well as the medium term and the long term. Especially #1 picks because at that time they had up to 6 year contracts. They also spend #1 picks on the best player available to have that player pay dividends for the entire length of his contract, not just the first year, which will be into 2015. Revisit this pick in three years. I still think Spiller is going to win us a couple games this year. The reason he hasn't been playing much has about ten elements to it, only one of them being that it has taken him some time to adapt to the speed of the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cocktosten Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Spiller was considered the best player available at the time. Look at the mock drafts. Considering Gailey's offense Spiller was a no-brainer pick. But Gailey is not Nostradamus either. Maybe he didn't see Jackson rise to the occasion like he did. But so what? Is having two solid RBs such a problem? You have this expectation that every GM has to know how every player will work out, that there never can be any surprises. I don't get it. PTR The Bills needed an impact player with that pick. They got a guy who just scored his first rushing TD in his 18th NFL game. You can spin it any way that you want, it was a bad pick. It would still be a bad pick if CJ was starting and performing. How about the rest of the draft? How's that working out? Chan and Fitz are the reason why this team is sitting at 3-0. Chan built his offense to beat the 3-4 and Fitz gets the ball out of his hand quickly so the O line looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 So you're saying that as good as Freddy is, Buddy needed to pick Spiller 9 overall? Come on PTR, you can't even believe that one! The reason Spiller was taken now is exactly the same reason it was when he was drafted - Marshawn Lynch was a infraction away from being suspended for the year.....there was some thought that he might hold out.....and he didnt fit what Chan wanted to do on offense (Lynch CANT CATCH).....so they moved him for what they could get - Spiller was the best talent available on the board at that time.....we dont know if trade down was really an option....but Buddy doesnt move around too much anyway and tends to pick where he is slotted to pick.....there was no offensive linemen worth of the 9th overall... They went best available player (in their evaluation) at a position of need.....you cant fault them for taking CJ Spiller then Freddie Jackson end up bing a top 5 RB in the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cocktosten Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Smart GMs pick players for the short term as well as the medium term and the long term. Especially #1 picks because at that time they had up to 6 year contracts. They also spend #1 picks on the best player available to have that player pay dividends for the entire length of his contract, not just the first year, which will be into 2015. Revisit this pick in three years. I still think Spiller is going to win us a couple games this year. The reason he hasn't been playing much has about ten elements to it, only one of them being that it has taken him some time to adapt to the speed of the NFL. Stop it Kelly, GMs and coaches want a guy to play and have an impact immediately. Life is to short in the NFL. Buddy would tell you himself that the pick wasn't his best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) The Bills needed an impact player with that pick. They got a guy who just scored his first rushing TD in his 18th NFL game. You can spin it any way that you want, it was a bad pick. It would still be a bad pick if CJ was starting and performing. How about the rest of the draft? How's that working out? Chan and Fitz are the reason why this team is sitting at 3-0. Chan built his offense to beat the 3-4 and Fitz gets the ball out of his hand quickly so the O line looks good. Didnt Buddy hire Chan? And the two ,Chan and Buddy, work well together it seems. Sorry but Buddy is playing a big role in this teams progress, to say a GM isn't a big reason why a team is succesful or not, is silly. look at the Bills GM over the last 10 years previous to Buddy. Oh wait you can't cause they didn't have one!!! and look where that got them!! No way to say yet if Spiller was a bad pick or not this early. We are starting to see signs he has play making ability. Chan is holding him back, wouldn't be surprised to see an increased role later in the season for him. Edited September 29, 2011 by atlbillsfan1975 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Stop it Kelly, GMs and coaches want a guy to play and have an impact immediately. Life is to short in the NFL. Buddy would tell you himself that the pick wasn't his best. I very much doubt it. What I said was they pick them for short, mid AND long term. That includes short term. That doesn't mean they expect them not to be good for three years, it means that is an equal consideration and Buddy would without question tell you that. I'm sure he wanted Spiller to come in and explode right away. he may have even expected it. But building a team through the draft is a long term process, and they said it from the start. It's not only about winning it is about continuing to win. The major reason Nix is not bringing in quick fix solutions to trouble spots is the same theory as drafting. He wants players that are going to stay here and grow with the team and be here three years from now. Spiller was chosen as a 5-6 year player, hopefully who paid dividends immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Stop it Kelly, GMs and coaches want a guy to play and have an impact immediately. Life is to short in the NFL. Buddy would tell you himself that the pick wasn't his best. I very rarely do this....but I would be willing to lay money that you could get Buddy to say that the Spiller pick wasnt the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 One starter in first two drafts is not exactly a tribute to his drafting ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D521646 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 How is Spiller not a good pick, and the BEST pick at 9? Once he figures out that RB's in this league don't bob and weave, he'll be fine. He can catch, he can run as fast as anyone in the league, and he only needs to work on things that are coachable, like blocking, and reading defenses. One cut then downhill. I think a lot of people thought he had the Barry skillz, and maybe so coming out of college, but I dare say that even Barry Sanders wouldn't have put up Barry Sanders numbers in today's NFL..?? Tim- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts