Future of the Bills roster

[Orton's Arm]

IMO, the goal of this organization should be to have the most talented roster in the NFL in 3 years.

 

I bring this up because the process will run contrary to what many of you want.

 

It means drafting to build an organization that can compete for 10-12 years, not drafting to fill a few holes and hopefully create short term success.

 

I haven't been thrilled with lack of urgency of Buddy Nix but I have seen enough good things that he has done that indicates that he might see the big picture.

 

Drafting and roster building is a process. Specifically, the Bills have treated the draft like an event......a turning point.....where they have burned up high picks on flashy but limited impact prospects Willis, Roscoe, Lil' Donte, Leodis, Marshawn and Spiller.

 

Inarguably, sustained success starts at QB. Fitzpatrick is a decent QB, but not an elite one. He lacks the arm strength to command his deep throws and subsequently teams have been squatting on those short throws for two months now. He has been unable to stretch those defenses and keep them honest and the tight coverage has exposed his average receiving corps. Can he chuck the ball with velocity? Yes. But he has to hurl himself into it, and when he does that he loses control of his mechanics and subsequently is very wild on throws of 20 yards or more. Far too wild to keep a defense honest. I like him and I am comfortable with him short term, but that limitation will be hard to build long term success around.

 

If Barkley or RG3 are there, it's time to pull that trigger on a QB with the teams first selection for the first time in 51 years. No more RB's or CB's or other reaching for small players who promise to be able to step right in and play......but who will not be worth signing to a big second contract.

 

If the stud QB prospect is not there, take a big player at a key position who will likely be with the team for 8-10 years. That could be Matt Kalil from USC. He is not going to excite fans, but he has the potential to be a top performing LT for a long, long time.

 

If they go defense, go big. Look at the success of the Ravens defense. They have drafted players like Ray Lewis, Terrell Suggs and Haloti Ngata in round 1 and they have been the backbone of that defense. They've successfully spent high picks on DB's like Chris McAlister and Ed Reed, but the truth is the Ravens D is always good whether they have those DB's or not. It's great when the DB's are playing well, but that's what the secondary is....icing on the cake. Big fast guys are in much lesser supply than small fast ones, and if you just build your roster around that concept you won't end up with a shell of a team like the Bills have had for the past dozen years.

 

In subsequent rounds, draft players for value while keeping in mind that notion about big/fast versus small/fast. That doesn't mean reaching up a round or two to draft Torrel Troup or Alex Carrington because you need a couple lineman but keep in mind what has happened to a team like the Eagles. They used to value their line play and big players but were criticized for their DB's and WR's. The past few offseasons they have gotten stud CB's Asomugha, Asante Samuel and drafted tiny wideouts Jackson and Macklin early and the team is in a downward spiral in great part because of their abandoning the roster building approach that kept them in sustained contention.

 

But first and foremost remember that the draft is a process. Keep working to assemble the most talented players at key positions for three years, fill some needs in free agency and I think you have a team that can compete then and is poised to compete for a long time if the team sticks to the plan. That doesn't mean sacrificing next year, use free agency to patch some holes where you can. But don't lose track of the plan.

You were one of my favorite posters even before I saw this thread. Let me just say that I wholeheartedly agree with everything you've written here. You have gotten to the heart of what's been wrong with the Bills over the last ten years, and have been insightful and eloquent in expressing both problems and solutions.

 

Because you've covered this topic so well, it's hard to add to what you've written. But I will add this: over the last 40 years, the Bills have used their first pick of the draft on a RB on ten different occasions, and on a DB on another ten occasions. That's 50% of their highest draft picks going to DBs and RBs. Not once during that period did the Bills take a QB with their first pick of the draft. Only twice during the last 40 years, or 5% of the time, did the Bills use their first pick of the draft on an OT.

 

One way of implementing the disciplined mindset you've described in your post is to begin by identifying the key positions on offense and defense. There should be an effort to channel draft picks into those key positions, so that you can build a core of good players which will last for many years to come. The Super Bowl era Bills had such a core--a core which the post-Polian Bills have lacked.

 

On offense, I'd choose QB, LT, and WR as my three core positions. I'd be fine swapping the WR for a TE if need be, as long as the QB had at least one target who required double coverage. On defense, I'd use a Wade Phillips-style 3-4 (not a George Edwards style 3-4!), and my core players would be my NT, RDE, pass rushing OLB, and #1 CB. That's seven core players total, which seems ambitious but achievable. Of those seven, the QB, LT, and defensive pass rushers are the most important.

 

The Bills have done almost nothing over the last ten to fifteen years to build such a core. The quarterback position has either been neglected on draft day, or else first round picks were traded away to obtain aging second-string veterans from division rivals. Other than the Mike Williams pick, no first or second round picks have been used on OTs during the TD/Marv/Jauron/Nix eras. Even when the Bills somehow stumbled into someone who could have been a core player--like Antowain Winfield--they let him go first-contract-and-out.

[Gray Beard]

You were one of my favorite posters even before I saw this thread. Let me just say that I wholeheartedly agree with everything you've written here. You have gotten to the heart of what's been wrong with the Bills over the last ten years, and have been insightful and eloquent in expressing both problems and solutions.

 

Because you've covered this topic so well, it's hard to add to what you've written. But I will add this: over the last 40 years, the Bills have used their first pick of the draft on a RB on ten different occasions, and on a DB on another ten occasions. That's 50% of their highest draft picks going to DBs and RBs. Not once during that period did the Bills take a QB with their first pick of the draft. Only twice during the last 40 years, or 5% of the time, did the Bills use their first pick of the draft on an OT.

 

One way of implementing the disciplined mindset you've described in your post is to begin by identifying the key positions on offense and defense. There should be an effort to channel draft picks into those key positions, so that you can build a core of good players which will last for many years to come. The Super Bowl era Bills had such a core--a core which the post-Polian Bills have lacked.

 

On offense, I'd choose QB, LT, and WR as my three core positions. I'd be fine swapping the WR for a TE if need be, as long as the QB had at least one target who required double coverage. On defense, I'd use a Wade Phillips-style 3-4 (not a George Edwards style 3-4!), and my core players would be my NT, RDE, pass rushing OLB, and #1 CB. That's seven core players total, which seems ambitious but achievable. Of those seven, the QB, LT, and defensive pass rushers are the most important.

 

The Bills have done almost nothing over the last ten to fifteen years to build such a core. The quarterback position has either been neglected on draft day, or else first round picks were traded away to obtain aging second-string veterans from division rivals. Other than the Mike Williams pick, no first or second round picks have been used on OTs during the TD/Marv/Jauron/Nix eras. Even when the Bills somehow stumbled into someone who could have been a core player--like Antowain Winfield--they let him go first-contract-and-out.

I agree with most of what you are saying. I have a question... Many people go on and on about drafting the "best player available" whereas you are talking about drafting for need. I have never understood the BPA approach. If you need linebackers but the BPA is a waterbug back, some people (cough cough Nix and Gailey) choose the waterbug back. One argument is that you draft somebody higher than they are worth if you draft for need (such as Whitner). In that case, a player who could be a solid depth contributor leaves town because he thinks of himself as elite based on his high draft position and initial contract. Any response would be appreciated.

[SDS]

Not once during that period did the Bills take a QB with their first pick of the draft.

 

I have to say - I truly despise the semantics of this argument (DD used it too).

 

Kelly was drafted two picks after Hunter. Making a distinction between picking a QB at 14 instead of 12 is just game of words. Likewise, you could say they "drafted" Johnson with the #9 pick or Bledsoe with whatever # that pick was.

 

You can say your original claim is a fact, but it is one without context and it is more than disingenuous.

[3rdand12]

The waterbug pick is difficult for me to fathom, nothing against CJ. But Buddy was reaching way out there on that one. Even for someone who semi believes his philosophy has merit.

I hope he has learned from this. but he is rather old and might be set in his ways.

Core long term players are of course the heart of a team and should be the priority absolutely. and then work hard identifying them, rewarding them and building around them. Then add the frill to go over the top and have some fun. Thats when we coulda shoulda drafted a player like Spiller.

 

I quote the gentleman

"Because you've covered this topic so well, it's hard to add to what you've written. But I will add this: over the last 40 years, the Bills have used their first pick of the draft on a RB on ten different occasions, and on a DB on another ten occasions. That's 50% of their highest draft picks going to DBs and RBs. Not once during that period did the Bills take a QB with their first pick of the draft. Only twice during the last 40 years, or 5% of the time, did the Bills use their first pick of the draft on an OT."

 

Sir these numbers make me a believer in statistical analysis. When well presented at least as this bit of data might be. What i just read if true as i trust it to be, blows my mind.

Thanks for such an astounding and painful bit of insight to us younger? newer fans.

There is always more to the reasoning behind picks but Tthese results are astounding, I can see some room for improvement with our draft, maybe?

Edited December 10, 2011 by 3rdand12

[The AntiFin]

The waterbug pick is difficult for me to fathom, nothing against CJ. But Buddy was reaching way out there on that one. Even for someone who semi believes his philosophy has merit.

I'll never believe that Spiller was Buddy's or Chan's pick. That said, I'd be satisfied one day if they use him like -- and he produces like -- Darren Sproles with New Orleans.

 

I hope he has learned from this. but he is rather old and might be set in his ways.

I think that pick came from someone far older -- and far less wise.

[3rdand12]

who is older than Buddy?

Oh. i just got that. well played sir.

['64 Bills]

Gailey has proven he can win with talent. They are on the IR now remember. Edwards will be gone.

 

And I hope you mean BOTH Edwards. Dwan has been a huge, overpaid flop at DE.

[Orton's Arm]

I agree with most of what you are saying. I have a question... Many people go on and on about drafting the "best player available" whereas you are talking about drafting for need. I have never understood the BPA approach. If you need linebackers but the BPA is a waterbug back, some people (cough cough Nix and Gailey) choose the waterbug back. One argument is that you draft somebody higher than they are worth if you draft for need (such as Whitner). In that case, a player who could be a solid depth contributor leaves town because he thinks of himself as elite based on his high draft position and initial contract. Any response would be appreciated.

 

As I see it, there are three possible philosophical approaches to drafting:

 

1) Best player available.

2) Draft for need.

3) Draft for most valuable position available. This means taking QBs, LTs, RDEs, etc. early, while waiting until later to take safeties, OGs, RBs, and the like.

 

I think that an ideal drafting approach would combine elements from all three. If you take what you think is the best player available, regardless of need or the importance of the position, you'll wind up with a water bug back. If a GM drafts for what he (incorrectly) thinks are the most important team needs, without regard for best player available or the importance of the position, he'll end up taking Donte Whitner 8th overall. As you correctly pointed out, a drafting philosophy that leads either to a Whitner or a Spiller is deeply flawed.

 

As I see it, a first round draft pick should be justifiable under each of the three drafting philosophies. That doesn't mean he has to be the absolute best player available. But it does mean he has to be reasonably close in talent to whichever guy is the best available. Similarly, he doesn't have to play whichever position your team needs the very most, but there does have to be at least some need at whichever position he plays. Finally, he doesn't have to play the absolute most valuable position on the team (quarterback), but there does need to be a bias in favor of more valuable positions. (Especially when picking in the first round.)

[Orton's Arm]

I have to say - I truly despise the semantics of this argument (DD used it too).

 

Kelly was drafted two picks after Hunter. Making a distinction between picking a QB at 14 instead of 12 is just game of words. Likewise, you could say they "drafted" Johnson with the #9 pick or Bledsoe with whatever # that pick was.

 

You can say your original claim is a fact, but it is one without context and it is more than disingenuous.

I agree that there is little substantive difference between where Hunter was picked (12th overall) and where Kelly was chosen (14th overall). In that sense, one could argue that the Bills (sort of) had two first draft picks that year, one of which was used on a TE, the other on a quarterback.

 

I'll also go along with the first round pick traded away for Rob Johnson. Johnson was a young, unproven player when the Bills traded for him, so the pick used on him is somewhat analogous to a draft day trade.

 

However, I strongly object to the notion that the pick traded away for Bledsoe is in any way analogous to a first round pick used to draft a quarterback. There is a world of difference between drafting a young, unproven QB in the first round, and a 3-13 team trading away a first round pick for an aging veteran. The former represents a legitimate attempt to find a long-term answer at quarterback. The latter is a short-sighted attempt to trade away the future for the present, and is the precise opposite of using draft picks to build a long-term core that D.D. had described in his original post.

 

If it will make you happier, I'd be willing to go along with the idea that the Bills' "true" first pick of the 1998 draft was Rob Johnson (for whom they traded away their first and fourth round picks), not Sam Cowart (chosen in the second round of '98). Further, I'd be willing to go along with the idea that Hunter and Kelly were "tied" (or close enough to being tied) for the first Bills' draft pick of 1983. That means that out of 40 cases, there were 1.5 times when the Bills used their first pick of the draft to take a young, unproven quarterback. That works out to 3.8% of the time during the last 40 years, or 3.5% of the time over the last 43 years. Conversely, the Bills have used their first pick of the draft on a RB or a DB 50% of the time over the last 40 years.

[maddenboy]

 

Drafting and roster building is a process. Specifically, the Bills have treated the draft like an event......a turning point.....where they have burned up high picks on flashy but limited impact prospects Willis, Roscoe, Lil' Donte, Leodis, Marshawn and Spiller.

 

No more RB's or CB's or other reaching for small players who promise to be able to step right in and play......but who will not be worth signing to a big second contract.

 

If they go defense, go big. Look at the success of the Ravens defense. They have drafted players like Ray Lewis, Terrell Suggs and Haloti Ngata in round 1 and they have been the backbone of that defense. They've successfully spent high picks on DB's like Chris McAlister and Ed Reed, but the truth is the Ravens D is always good whether they have those DB's or not. It's great when the DB's are playing well, but that's what the secondary is....icing on the cake. Big fast guys are in much lesser supply than small fast ones, and if you just build your roster around that concept you won't end up with a shell of a team like the Bills have had for the past dozen years.

 

But first and foremost remember that the draft is a process. Keep working to assemble the most talented players at key positions for three years, fill some needs in free agency and I think you have a team that can compete then and is poised to compete for a long time if the team sticks to the plan. That doesn't mean sacrificing next year, use free agency to patch some holes where you can. But don't lose track of the plan.

 

Gosh. This is a perfectly reasoned post. I completely agree.

 

There seems to be no draft plan at OBD, except to patch holes. I'm sick of that. We arent winning the Super Bowl this year. Or next year. We arent 1 or 2 players away. So stop kidding ourselves.

 

Lets draft a few dominant players. Then after a couple years, we'll be able to build around them. Who do we have currently that we can build around? . . . Exactly.

 

The main point from the OP is so very true. The draft is a process. I say start with the linebackers.

[sllib olaffub]

I think Chan is soft. You are exactly correct. We got distroyed by the Jets and Patriots. Our roster lacks top end talent at every position except RB where Freddie is something special. I think Wood can be a top Center if he can ever stay healthy, and Levitre is not far behind him. After that, NOONE jumps out at you on the roster as being anything special. Teams that don't have top end talent need to be mean and ornery like a junkyard dog. Very difficult to play against. We just do not have that mentality, that we might lose, but we will definitely beat you up along the way. Look at our defense. Does anyone play like they really want to hurt someone? Noone does. Our d line is the most passive in the league. When do you ever see Dareus, Carrington, Edwards, Johnson, Heard or any of the linebackers just slam someone to the ground, get in someone's face, or just plain reek havoc on the other team? It NEVER happens. That is the coaching staffs mentality put on the players. Football is a violent game. The Bills do not play with any aggresion. Until the attitude of this team changes, we will be bottom feeders. Even though the Dolphins are 4-8, watch the attitude that they play with. It starts with the coaches and filters down to the players. Does anyone else agree?

 

 

Thank You! I can't agree more!!!

 

Attitude goes a long, long way in the NFL. I believe attitude, or style of play, heart - whatever you want to call it, is the intangible element that fans want to see more than anything else in sports. That is actually what we loved about Buffalo this year early on - although not the toughness, but the idea that a bunch of no names and left overs could rise above their limitations and win because of scheme and heart.

 

When it comes to Football, though, I want to see toughness, nastiness, aggressiveness! I want to see our team go out there and truly expect to keep the opposition scoreless, and if they happen to score on us, I want our Defense to make them regret it all game long. Punish them! Make them not want to come to our house, or face us, period! That part of it doesn't have as much to do with pure talent as it does with pure heart and pure intention. We, on the other hand, go out there and EXPECT to give up points in numbers. All this talk of, "getting better, trying, doing our part to let the offense succeed!" - It's all excuse, loser talk that has permeated this team for greater than a decade!

 

Give me a team that expects to be great, that fights until the last play, every game, that doesn't want to settle for anything but GREATNESS - and plans to be that way! COME ON!

[Gray Beard]

I think Chan is soft. You are exactly correct. We got distroyed by the Jets and Patriots. Our roster lacks top end talent at every position except RB where Freddie is something special. I think Wood can be a top Center if he can ever stay healthy, and Levitre is not far behind him. After that, NOONE jumps out at you on the roster as being anything special. Teams that don't have top end talent need to be mean and ornery like a junkyard dog. Very difficult to play against. We just do not have that mentality, that we might lose, but we will definitely beat you up along the way. Look at our defense. Does anyone play like they really want to hurt someone? Noone does. Our d line is the most passive in the league. When do you ever see Dareus, Carrington, Edwards, Johnson, Heard or any of the linebackers just slam someone to the ground, get in someone's face, or just plain reek havoc on the other team? It NEVER happens. That is the coaching staffs mentality put on the players. Football is a violent game. The Bills do not play with any aggresion. Until the attitude of this team changes, we will be bottom feeders. Even though the Dolphins are 4-8, watch the attitude that they play with. It starts with the coaches and filters down to the players. Does anyone else agree?

I agree completely. The Dolphins defense smelled blood. It was as if each guy was trying to hit harder than the last guy. They were flying all over the field. Swagger and confidence. And HARD hits. I always wonder why players don't hit hard when they have a chance. I linebacker should make a receiver regret that he ran a slant route 7 yards deep. London Fletcher didn't let up when he hit Fitz. The Redskins were getting creamed, but Fletcher hit him so hard he was barely able to play for the next two games. I don't see that aggressiveness from the Bills.

Aggressiveness doesn't have to be only on defense. Richie Incognito is a guard, and he is known as a dirty player. Maybe being known as dirty isn't what we want, but at least be feared and aggressive. I actually think Wood and Levitre have that capability. When Tebow has the ball, he runs over cornerbacks and safeties. He is not unique in that respect, but one reason that he is always in the news is because of that style of play. Why can't every tight end and fullback do that? I see it on other teams, but not on the Bills.

[8-8 Forever?]

How many times have we all heard the line "In three years" or "In five years"?

 

I am so sick of that BS as well as that stupid word "rebuilding"

 

We havent gotten better in over 10 years so obviously we need a new architect because our "rebuilding" sucks.

 

We need to think about now and not plan ahead 3-5 years.

 

Top FAs don't want to be with this franchise. Top draft choices get the heck out as soon as they can. The place is poison. When ownership and therefore the entire FO/coaching staff basically hang on each Ralph Wilson heartbeat, who would want to go work for someone who could be replaced anytime. Then schemes change and the whole thing starts over again. People like security. they want to know what they are getting. In the Bills, a top coach or player just does not know what they are getting. The team could easily relocate the season after Ralph dies. To another country potentially. If you were a player or a coach at the top of your game, would YOU want to join that franchise ? When 5 others will take you? Answer is no. So this team will be built on the draft, where the rookies are forced to play for the team for at least 5 years. So draft well Bills, that is your only hope.

[Webster Guy]

Your point about Fitz changing his mechanics for the worse on the longer throws was never more evident than the last throw of the Bills Jets game.

 

Unbelievably, Stevie Johnson was open AGAIN after his wide open drop, and Fitz dropped hhis front shoulder and stepped into the throw like he was swinging an axe. The ball sailed high and behind and the game was over.

 

Keep in mind he hit Stevie AND Brad Smith with very accurate throws on 2 plays earlier and they couldn't make the catch, but your observation is very legitimate. The biggest question facing Bills management now is can Fitz make the throws with coaching and mechanics improvement, or do we draft another QB this year.

 

History has shown that the true pocket passing QB's that can sling the long ball with accuracy are the ones that win championships. Our QB has all the qualities of a winner but that one.

 

Could we take JP Losman's arm and sew it on Fitzy?

[BADOLBILZ]

You were one of my favorite posters even before I saw this thread. Let me just say that I wholeheartedly agree with everything you've written here. You have gotten to the heart of what's been wrong with the Bills over the last ten years, and have been insightful and eloquent in expressing both problems and solutions.

 

Because you've covered this topic so well, it's hard to add to what you've written. But I will add this: over the last 40 years, the Bills have used their first pick of the draft on a RB on ten different occasions, and on a DB on another ten occasions. That's 50% of their highest draft picks going to DBs and RBs. Not once during that period did the Bills take a QB with their first pick of the draft. Only twice during the last 40 years, or 5% of the time, did the Bills use their first pick of the draft on an OT.

 

One way of implementing the disciplined mindset you've described in your post is to begin by identifying the key positions on offense and defense. There should be an effort to channel draft picks into those key positions, so that you can build a core of good players which will last for many years to come. The Super Bowl era Bills had such a core--a core which the post-Polian Bills have lacked.

 

On offense, I'd choose QB, LT, and WR as my three core positions. I'd be fine swapping the WR for a TE if need be, as long as the QB had at least one target who required double coverage. On defense, I'd use a Wade Phillips-style 3-4 (not a George Edwards style 3-4!), and my core players would be my NT, RDE, pass rushing OLB, and #1 CB. That's seven core players total, which seems ambitious but achievable. Of those seven, the QB, LT, and defensive pass rushers are the most important.

 

The Bills have done almost nothing over the last ten to fifteen years to build such a core. The quarterback position has either been neglected on draft day, or else first round picks were traded away to obtain aging second-string veterans from division rivals. Other than the Mike Williams pick, no first or second round picks have been used on OTs during the TD/Marv/Jauron/Nix eras. Even when the Bills somehow stumbled into someone who could have been a core player--like Antowain Winfield--they let him go first-contract-and-out.

 

Yeah let's be clear, the Bills problems on draft day date back to the beginning. That's how you end up with less than 40% winning seasons in your history. . It can't be any clearer than you point out......half of the top picks spent on RB's and DB's is a very large sample of 40 years.

 

RB is the easiest position in the league to stock with guys who can get the job done. End of story. There is no excuse for drafting 3 of them in the first round over 7 years and ending up with a UDFA starting for you. If the Bills never pick another RB in round 1 they would probably be better off.

 

It's not easy to find excellent CB's, but if there is one position on defense that can be covered up by strength at other positions, it remains CB.

 

I know it's an arguable point, but IMO even great CB's don't do much for your run defense. At lot of big plays are made on the perimeter, but those plays are made possible (or prevented) by what happens at the LOS and in the pocket. A great front 7 improves both the pass defense and the run defense.

 

No, you can't move Spencer Johnson to CB and cover him up. But IMO it's better to have average talent out there than it is to have average talent in the front 7. I'd even argue that it's easier to cover up a CB than a safety. Look at what the Bills did to the Chiefs in week one when Piscatelli had to step in for Eric Berry. You can exploit both run and pass defense in that case. The rub being that safety is probably the second easiest position to fill with quality, essentially the RB of the defense.

 

As for the QB.........it's the most impactful, most important position on the team. And it's not like they have had good QB play, which might have made them not want to venture their top pick on a QB prospect. They have probably had good QB play in about 20 of their seasons, or essentially, about as many seasons as they have had a winning record.

 

I have said this many times, the Bills could have used their top pick in the draft on a QB for the past x number of years (let's say 12) and not be any worse than they are now. I have been told such a move have killed their situation with regard to the salary cap? They had to pay all the other mediocre-to-no impact players they have selected so the answer is that it wouldn't have mattered a bit.

 

They currently have 1 starter (Marcel Dareus) on the team to show for their first pick in any of the last 51 drafts.

 

I kid, but it's true. CJ and Leodis aren't even starters. The next closest thing they have is Kyle Williams, a fifth round pick which was acquired in trade with Houston for 1996 first round pick Eric Moulds.

 

If that lack of impact using the Bills methods isn't proof that the draft needs to be treated like an ongoing process......then I don't know what is.

Edited December 10, 2011 by Dick Drawn

[BADOLBILZ]

I have to say - I truly despise the semantics of this argument (DD used it too).

 

Kelly was drafted two picks after Hunter. Making a distinction between picking a QB at 14 instead of 12 is just game of words. Likewise, you could say they "drafted" Johnson with the #9 pick or Bledsoe with whatever # that pick was.

 

You can say your original claim is a fact, but it is one without context and it is more than disingenuous.

 

"All in"

 

It might be semantics to some, but IMO the value of the first move and what it says about your decision making is very important.

 

If you are so unsure of Jim Kelly that you would take a TE prospect at 12 and risk not getting Kelly....then you either aren't all in on JIm Kelly as an NFL QB or you are just playing it too cute for your own good.

 

Trading for Johnson and Bledsoe were both instances of short-cutting for fear of taking a risk. Those guys had played in the NFL. It wasn't like Heath Shuler was going to show up at mini-camp. Again, not all in.

 

I would argue that the unwillingness of the organization to eschew their traditional CB/RB picks set the stage for those ill-fated trades.

 

It starts with using a second round pick on Todd Collins, then trading a third round pick for Billie Joe Hobert, then the Johnson trade which lead to the Bledsoe trade which lead to the Losman trade.

 

It started out all too casual....then with each move the urgency increased. The byproduct of impatience has been decline of the organization from the most talented roster in the AFC in the mid-1980's thru the mid-1990's to maybe the least talented one in 2010.

[billsfan714]

Yeah let's be clear, the Bills problems on draft day date back to the beginning. That's how you end up with less than 40% winning seasons in your history. . It can't be any clearer than you point out......half of the top picks spent on RB's and DB's is a very large sample of 40 years.

 

RB is the easiest position in the league to stock with guys who can get the job done. End of story. There is no excuse for drafting 3 of them in the first round over 7 years and ending up with a UDFA starting for you. If the Bills never pick another RB in round 1 they would probably be better off.

 

It's not easy to find excellent CB's, but if there is one position on defense that can be covered up by strength at other positions, it remains CB.

 

I know it's an arguable point, but IMO even great CB's don't do much for your run defense. At lot of big plays are made on the perimeter, but those plays are made possible (or prevented) by what happens at the LOS and in the pocket. A great front 7 improves both the pass defense and the run defense.

 

No, you can't move Spencer Johnson to CB and cover him up. But IMO it's better to have average talent out there than it is to have average talent in the front 7. I'd even argue that it's easier to cover up a CB than a safety. Look at what the Bills did to the Chiefs in week one when Piscatelli had to step in for Eric Berry. You can exploit both run and pass defense in that case. The rub being that safety is probably the second easiest position to fill with quality, essentially the RB of the defense.

 

As for the QB.........it's the most impactful, most important position on the team. And it's not like they have had good QB play, which might have made them not want to venture their top pick on a QB prospect. They have probably had good QB play in about 20 of their seasons, or essentially, about as many seasons as they have had a winning record.

 

I have said this many times, the Bills could have used their top pick in the draft on a QB for the past x number of years (let's say 12) and not be any worse than they are now. I have been told such a move have killed their situation with regard to the salary cap? They had to pay all the other mediocre-to-no impact players they have selected so the answer is that it wouldn't have mattered a bit.

 

They currently have 1 starter (Marcel Dareus) on the team to show for their first pick in any of the last 51 drafts.

 

I kid, but it's true. CJ and Leodis aren't even starters. The next closest thing they have is Kyle Williams, a fifth round pick which was acquired in trade with Houston for 1996 first round pick Eric Moulds.

 

If that lack of impact using the Bills methods isn't proof that the draft needs to be treated like an ongoing process......then I don't know what is.

 

 

Great post. You're not going to be a physical team by continually drafting backs whether they're corners or runningbacks. Totally agree you can find runningbacks without using a first rounder, its not that hard. Texans-Foster-free agent, Bills-Jackson-free agent, Broncos-McGahee-free agent, Seattle has a 4th and a 5th invested in Lynch, etc.

 

Just compare the Eagles and Steelers. I dont think the Eagles with Namdi, Samuel and DRC are in anybodys mind a great defense while the Steelers consistently are. The Steelers have Ike Taylor, Gay and Mcfadden at corner, no 1st rounders and no probowls there. But the heat the front 7 generate is the key. Someday the Bills FO may figure this out. Just think of all the great linebackers the Steelers have had over the years; Greg LLoyd, Levon Kirkland, Harrison, Woodley, Timmons, Joey Porter, Kendrell Bell, Kevin Greene, Chad Brown, Farrior, Jason Gildon and on and on. Most of them, not all, were drafted by the Steelers and a lot them in the first 3 rounds. Meanwhile Bills fans are counting the likes of Merrriman, Moats, Batten and DL turned LBs like Kelsay and Johnson. You give most NFL Qbs all day to throw they're going to find somebody open. It's why fans pull their hair out watching prevent defenses with 3 man rushes. While one sack can be the difference between a 30-40 yard completion and a 10 yard loss. One play and a 40-50 yard difference.

 

The Bills first three rounds should be all about finding guys who can bring some heat, we can get corner depth in the 4th and 5th rounds.

[BADOLBILZ]

Your point about Fitz changing his mechanics for the worse on the longer throws was never more evident than the last throw of the Bills Jets game.

 

Unbelievably, Stevie Johnson was open AGAIN after his wide open drop, and Fitz dropped hhis front shoulder and stepped into the throw like he was swinging an axe. The ball sailed high and behind and the game was over.

 

Keep in mind he hit Stevie AND Brad Smith with very accurate throws on 2 plays earlier and they couldn't make the catch, but your observation is very legitimate. The biggest question facing Bills management now is can Fitz make the throws with coaching and mechanics improvement, or do we draft another QB this year.

 

History has shown that the true pocket passing QB's that can sling the long ball with accuracy are the ones that win championships. Our QB has all the qualities of a winner but that one.

 

Could we take JP Losman's arm and sew it on Fitzy?

 

If the QB is there they need to pull that trigger. The upside is 10-12 years of good QB play........which is roughly half of the amount of good QB play the Bills have had in their 50+ year history. Can't pass on that.

 

As for your point about the long ball, it is definitely a separating point between QB's. Probably more now that the pocket is less dangerous and receivers can run more freely over the middle.

 

For all of the dogging of Cam Newton about his accuracy in the draft process......the tape did not lie, the man was dead on with throws of 20+ yards. That's in great part why he could come right in and be so effective.

 

RG3 isn't the dominating presence that Newton is in the pocket but he has the same type of downfield ability and a whole lot of other skills. Barkley is a very good prospect too and while he might not have the downfield skills of RG3 or Newton, he is not challenged by the deep throws like Fitz.

[BillsVet]

The old saying we hear ad nauseam is teams have to run the ball and stop the run. By now, everyone knows this is not as important in the pass-happy league the NFL has become. It stands to reason that teams would work on throwing the ball and defending the pass by finding players to support it. Dominant running teams from recent years like the 2009 Titans and 2010 Texans do not make the playoffs. But give me an excellent passing team with a little defense and you'll most likely see the post-season. GB and NE instantly come to mind, as neither is dominant defensively, but they do just enough and are always good in the aerial game. Not surprisingly, both teams have drafted OT pretty heavily in recent years, though GB put some resources into the pass rush beyond NE.

 

Having said all of this, it would make sense for this team to find a top shelf OLT who can be left alone against an opponent's top pass rusher. Then, work on finding the pass rusher who can get to the QB. It's not easy, but when have the Bills devoted the resources to filling either of these positions? I'd argue they haven't since 2001 when TD drafted Schobel and Jonas Jennings. The former was a very good rusher and the latter, while talented, struggled to play through injuries. Mike Williams was never seen as a OLT.

 

I don't think anyone sees an up and coming OLB on this roster, nor is there an OT who can be left alone. Pears and Bell are journeyman caliber and Hairston is just the latest incarnation of Bell at this point-much hyped but lacking physically. He's probably suited to be a ORT due to his physique.

Edited December 10, 2011 by BillsVet

[BADOLBILZ]

The old saying we hear ad nauseam is teams have to run the ball and stop the run. By now, everyone knows this is not as important in the pass-happy league the NFL has become. It stands to reason that teams would work on throwing the ball and defending the pass by finding players to support it. Dominant running teams from recent years like the 2009 Titans and 2010 Texans do not make the playoffs. But give me an excellent passing team with a little defense and you'll most likely see the post-season. GB and NE instantly come to mind, as neither is dominant defensively, but they do just enough and are always good in the aerial game. Not surprisingly, both teams have drafted OT pretty heavily in recent years, though GB put some resources into the pass rush beyond NE.

 

Having said all of this, it would make sense for this team to find a top shelf OLT who can be left alone against an opponent's top pass rusher. Then, work on finding the pass rusher who can get to the QB. It's not easy, but when have the Bills devoted the resources to filling either of these positions? I'd argue they haven't since 2001 when TD drafted Schobel and Jonas Jennings. The former was a very good rusher and the latter, while talented, struggled to play through injuries. Mike Williams was never seen as a OLT.

 

I don't think anyone sees an up and coming OLB on this roster, nor is there an OT who can be left alone. Pears and Bell are journeyman caliber and Hairston is just the latest incarnation of Bell at this point-much hyped but lacking physically. He's probably suited to be a ORT due to his physique.

 

I think your analysis of Pears/Bell/Hairston is right on. Bell has more potential than the other two but he is injury prone and rather soft. A lot of people just don't value quality on the OL and are more than happy to accept mediocrity over what the Bills have had at their worst(like Bell's first two seasons).

[BillsVet]

I think your analysis of Pears/Bell/Hairston is right on. Bell has more potential than the other two but he is injury prone and rather soft. A lot of people just don't value quality on the OL and are more than happy to accept mediocrity over what the Bills have had at their worst(like Bell's first two seasons).

 

During the great Peters debate in 2008-09, the standard response when people argued against re-signing Peters was that some SB teams didn't have great OLT's, ergo you don't need one. It was no coincidence those teams typically had great QB's who mitigated the lack of great offensive lines.

 

Amid all this OT talk, I can certainly see this team prioritizing the pass rush in the first round next year. I doubt they'll spend in UFA (they've steadily spent less every year since 2006), so once again the draft will have to provide most of the talent. It's just a lot to ask rookies year after year to fill major holes.

[Orton's Arm]

Yeah let's be clear, the Bills problems on draft day date back to the beginning. That's how you end up with less than 40% winning seasons in your history. . It can't be any clearer than you point out......half of the top picks spent on RB's and DB's is a very large sample of 40 years.

 

RB is the easiest position in the league to stock with guys who can get the job done. End of story. There is no excuse for drafting 3 of them in the first round over 7 years and ending up with a UDFA starting for you. If the Bills never pick another RB in round 1 they would probably be better off.

 

It's not easy to find excellent CB's, but if there is one position on defense that can be covered up by strength at other positions, it remains CB.

 

I know it's an arguable point, but IMO even great CB's don't do much for your run defense. At lot of big plays are made on the perimeter, but those plays are made possible (or prevented) by what happens at the LOS and in the pocket. A great front 7 improves both the pass defense and the run defense.

 

No, you can't move Spencer Johnson to CB and cover him up. But IMO it's better to have average talent out there than it is to have average talent in the front 7. I'd even argue that it's easier to cover up a CB than a safety. Look at what the Bills did to the Chiefs in week one when Piscatelli had to step in for Eric Berry. You can exploit both run and pass defense in that case. The rub being that safety is probably the second easiest position to fill with quality, essentially the RB of the defense.

 

As for the QB.........it's the most impactful, most important position on the team. And it's not like they have had good QB play, which might have made them not want to venture their top pick on a QB prospect. They have probably had good QB play in about 20 of their seasons, or essentially, about as many seasons as they have had a winning record.

 

I have said this many times, the Bills could have used their top pick in the draft on a QB for the past x number of years (let's say 12) and not be any worse than they are now. I have been told such a move have killed their situation with regard to the salary cap? They had to pay all the other mediocre-to-no impact players they have selected so the answer is that it wouldn't have mattered a bit.

 

They currently have 1 starter (Marcel Dareus) on the team to show for their first pick in any of the last 51 drafts.

 

I kid, but it's true. CJ and Leodis aren't even starters. The next closest thing they have is Kyle Williams, a fifth round pick which was acquired in trade with Houston for 1996 first round pick Eric Moulds.

 

If that lack of impact using the Bills methods isn't proof that the draft needs to be treated like an ongoing process......then I don't know what is.

Very strong post! Too often, the Bills have approached the draft looking for immediate results or quick fixes, instead of building toward a clear long-term plan. Even when they have had a long-term plan of sorts, it hasn't been a very good one.

 

Take the second half of the TD era for example. His long-term plan for the offense--such as it was, and what there was of it--seems to have been based on speed. Starting in 2003, TD used early draft picks to add the following players: Willis McGahee, Lee Evans, Roscoe Parrish, Kevin Everett, J.P. Losman. Each of those players represented a speed upgrade over the guy he was intended to replace. In addition, Losman's strong arm would allow him to connect on passes deep downfield. That plan failed for a variety of reasons, including the fact that mentally limited QBs typically fail in the NFL, and that it's hard to have a great deep passing game when you don't have an offensive line.

 

There is a better way to build a long-term plan than that! First, I would point out a regression analysis done by the New York Times, which demonstrated that passing offense is four times more important than rushing offense, and that passing defense is four times more important than rushing defense. (And no, there was nothing in the analysis to justify the "offense puts people in the stands, but defense wins championships" idiocy you hear so often. Offense and defense are equally important in winning games.)

 

It's been said that a QB's best friends are his running back and his defense. That's absolutely false! A QB's best friends are his offensive line and his receiving corps. The only reason coaches and front office people talk about surrounding young QBs with good RBs and defenses is because they have mixed feelings about trusting the shiny new QB they just drafted to make plays. The thought of putting the game into his hands makes them nervous, so they draft RBs and defensive players in hopes that they'll have to ask the QB to do almost nothing. Such hopes are ridiculous. Sooner or later the shiny new QB will be called on to make plays, regardless of how hard coaches and general managers work to avoid having that happen. When (not if) he's asked to make clutch plays, it would really help if he's given the tools he needs to succeed! Look at how much more Steve Young accomplished with the 49ers than he did with the Bucs. The 49ers gave Young a good OL and a good receiving corps. The Bucs focused their draft day resources on RBs and the defense, even though their OL was a joke and their receiving corps was mediocre.

 

If the three most critical components of a good passing attack are (in order) a good QB, a good OL, and a good receiving corps, the two most critical components of a good pass defense are a good pass rush and good pass coverage. Therefore, teams should focus their early draft picks on those five areas.

 

On the surface, the veritable ocean of early draft picks the Bills have poured out on DBs could be justifiable based on the above list, because they address one of the five key areas. But over the last decade, there have been 3.5 times when the Bills allowed their DB with the best combination of youth + proven accomplishment to leave via free agency. Those DBs include Antoine Winfield, Nate Clements, Jabari Greer, and Donte Whitner. Whitner is the 0.5, because it's highly debatable as to whether he truly represented the best combination of youth + proven accomplishment when he left, and because his play has since been eclipsed by Wilson and Byrd. The only reason he's mentioned at all was because when he left, most other Bills' DBs were either too old (McGee, Florence) or too young or unproven (Byrd, Wilson) to be considered both youthful and proven. The other only reason was because a 3.5 reference was clearly necessary!

 

If a team decides that its best DBs will be allowed to go first-contract-and-out, then any early draft picks it uses on DBs cannot be considered a serious attempt to build the long-term core of the team. I would also argue that, of the five items on the list, DBs are probably the least important. If it's a choice between Aaron Rodgers and Darrell Revis, you take Aaron Rodgers!!!!

 

Overall, I would rank the importance of the positions as follows:

 

1. QB

2. Pass rush

3. OL/pass protection

4. WRs

5. Pass coverage

 

I realize the above places greater importance on offense versus defense. My thinking is this: in order to win the Super Bowl, you almost have to have a franchise QB. If you're doing that anyway, it would make sense to give him the tools he needs to succeed. In previous years' playoff games, the Patriots' defense was often very effective at shutting down Peyton Manning and the Colts' offense, precisely because Manning's offensive supporting cast had been dominated by the Patriots' defense. There's no sense in letting a very valuable asset (a franchise QB) be rendered useless because of the lack of a sufficiently strong supporting cast!

 

The Bills have very seriously neglected the first and third items on the list on draft day. In addition, they have neglected the fifth item on the list when it's come time to extend DBs currently on the roster. Instead, they have chosen to squander their scant financial resources on overpriced and overhyped free agents from other teams, such as Lawyer Milloy, Derrick Dockery, Langston Walker, and others. They've let their best DBs go first-contract-and-out, and have used numerous first round picks on the replacements for those departed DBs.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the correct allocation of the Bills' first picks of the draft should be as follows:

 

1. QB: 20% of the time. (Current track record: 3.8%, if you count Rob Johnson and half of Kelly.) The only reason this number should ever be less than 20% is if the Bills are able to achieve franchise-level play while using fewer than 20% of their first picks of the draft. Obviously, the Bills have failed to find a franchise QB ever since Kelly hung up his cleats.

2. Pass rush: 25%. You want more than one good pass rusher, which is why this number is higher than for QB.

3. OTs: 15%. The focus here should be on OTs known for their pass protection, not necessarily their run blocking. Run blocking is a nice bonus, but pass protection is essential. (Current track record: 5%.)

4. WRs: 10%.

5. DBs: 10%. (Current track record: 25%.) Drafting one first round cornerback every ten years, and keeping him here the entirety of his career, seems about right.

6. Other positions: 15%. Most of this 15% should be used on players who can contribute to the pass offense or pass defense. Pass catching TEs, RBs who can be Thurman Thomas-like on third-and-long, interior OL who contribute to pass protection, etc.

 

The above does not represent a hard and fast rules set. Every draft day strategy needs to be flexible based on the quality of the players actually available. But the emphasis should always be on obtaining strength at the QB position first, OL and pass rush second, DBs and receiving threats third, and everyone else fourth.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Edwards' Arm

[Tcali]

Offensive keepers are Fitz, Jackson, Johnson, Wood, Leveitre, Hairston, and Chandler.

Defensive keepers are Kyle Williams, Dareus, Barnet, Byrd, and maybe A. Williams, Sheppard and Searcy.

 

Everybody else sucks !!

i agree w exc of sheppard. the problem is practically every other team has more keepers than we do. and two of our keepers--kyle and wood--lets hope their injuries are not chronic. so-with this p*ss poor organization-how do we make up that ground?

[Pass the Pipe]

Very strong post! Too often, the Bills have approached the draft looking for immediate results or quick fixes, instead of building toward a clear long-term plan. Even when they have had a long-term plan of sorts, it hasn't been a very good one.

 

Take the second half of the TD era for example. His long-term plan for the offense--such as it was, and what there was of it--seems to have been based on speed. Starting in 2003, TD used early draft picks to add the following players: Willis McGahee, Lee Evans, Roscoe Parrish, Kevin Everett, J.P. Losman. Each of those players represented a speed upgrade over the guy he was intended to replace. In addition, Losman's strong arm would allow him to connect on passes deep downfield. That plan failed for a variety of reasons, including the fact that mentally limited QBs typically fail in the NFL, and that it's hard to have a great deep passing game when you don't have an offensive line.

 

There is a better way to build a long-term plan than that! First, I would point out a regression analysis done by the New York Times, which demonstrated that passing offense is four times more important than rushing offense, and that passing defense is four times more important than rushing defense. (And no, there was nothing in the analysis to justify the "offense puts people in the stands, but defense wins championships" idiocy you hear so often. Offense and defense are equally important in winning games.)

 

It's been said that a QB's best friends are his running back and his defense. That's absolutely false! A QB's best friends are his offensive line and his receiving corps. The only reason coaches and front office people talk about surrounding young QBs with good RBs and defenses is because they have mixed feelings about trusting the shiny new QB they just drafted to make plays. The thought of putting the game into his hands makes them nervous, so they draft RBs and defensive players in hopes that they'll have to ask the QB to do almost nothing. Such hopes are ridiculous. Sooner or later the shiny new QB will be called on to make plays, regardless of how hard coaches and general managers work to avoid having that happen. When (not if) he's asked to make clutch plays, it would really help if he's given the tools he needs to succeed! Look at how much more Steve Young accomplished with the 49ers than he did with the Bucs. The 49ers gave Young a good OL and a good receiving corps. The Bucs focused their draft day resources on RBs and the defense, even though their OL was a joke and their receiving corps was mediocre.

 

If the three most critical components of a good passing attack are (in order) a good QB, a good OL, and a good receiving corps, the two most critical components of a good pass defense are a good pass rush and good pass coverage. Therefore, teams should focus their early draft picks on those five areas.

 

On the surface, the veritable ocean of early draft picks the Bills have poured out on DBs could be justifiable based on the above list, because they address one of the five key areas. But over the last decade, there have been 3.5 times when the Bills allowed their DB with the best combination of youth + proven accomplishment to leave via free agency. Those DBs include Antoine Winfield, Nate Clements, Jabari Greer, and Donte Whitner. Whitner is the 0.5, because it's highly debatable as to whether he truly represented the best combination of youth + proven accomplishment when he left, and because his play has since been eclipsed by Wilson and Byrd. The only reason he's mentioned at all was because when he left, most other Bills' DBs were either too old (McGee, Florence) or too young or unproven (Byrd, Wilson) to be considered both youthful and proven. The other only reason was because a 3.5 reference was clearly necessary!

 

If a team decides that its best DBs will be allowed to go first-contract-and-out, then any early draft picks it uses on DBs cannot be considered a serious attempt to build the long-term core of the team. I would also argue that, of the five items on the list, DBs are probably the least important. If it's a choice between Aaron Rodgers and Darrell Revis, you take Aaron Rodgers!!!!

 

Overall, I would rank the importance of the positions as follows:

 

1. QB

2. Pass rush

3. OL/pass protection

4. WRs

5. Pass coverage

 

I realize the above places greater importance on offense versus defense. My thinking is this: in order to win the Super Bowl, you almost have to have a franchise QB. If you're doing that anyway, it would make sense to give him the tools he needs to succeed. In previous years' playoff games, the Patriots' defense was often very effective at shutting down Peyton Manning and the Colts' offense, precisely because Manning's offensive supporting cast had been dominated by the Patriots' defense. There's no sense in letting a very valuable asset (a franchise QB) be rendered useless because of the lack of a sufficiently strong supporting cast!

 

The Bills have very seriously neglected the first and third items on the list on draft day. In addition, they have neglected the fifth item on the list when it's come time to extend DBs currently on the roster. Instead, they have chosen to squander their scant financial resources on overpriced and overhyped free agents from other teams, such as Lawyer Milloy, Derrick Dockery, Langston Walker, and others. They've let their best DBs go first-contract-and-out, and have used numerous first round picks on the replacements for those departed DBs.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the correct allocation of the Bills' first picks of the draft should be as follows:

 

1. QB: 20% of the time. (Current track record: 3.8%, if you count Rob Johnson and half of Kelly.) The only reason this number should ever be less than 20% is if the Bills are able to achieve franchise-level play while using fewer than 20% of their first picks of the draft. Obviously, the Bills have failed to find a franchise QB ever since Kelly hung up his cleats.

2. Pass rush: 25%. You want more than one good pass rusher, which is why this number is higher than for QB.

3. OTs: 15%. The focus here should be on OTs known for their pass protection, not necessarily their run blocking. Run blocking is a nice bonus, but pass protection is essential. (Current track record: 5%.)

4. WRs: 10%.

5. DBs: 10%. (Current track record: 25%.) Drafting one first round cornerback every ten years, and keeping him here the entirety of his career, seems about right.

6. Other positions: 15%. Most of this 15% should be used on players who can contribute to the pass offense or pass defense. Pass catching TEs, RBs who can be Thurman Thomas-like on third-and-long, interior OL who contribute to pass protection, etc.

 

The above does not represent a hard and fast rules set. Every draft day strategy needs to be flexible based on the quality of the players actually available. But the emphasis should always be on obtaining strength at the QB position first, OL and pass rush second, DBs and receiving threats third, and everyone else fourth.

 

Excellent analysis, I couldn't agree more; by the way who are the running backs in Green Bay and New England anyways? What I would really like to understand is how much money does Buffalo put into collegiate scouting and player personnel in general. All we see are bargin basement efforts around player contracts and free agents, I can just imagine what kind of money is being spent of football operations including fitness facilities; it has to be next to nothing?