SouthernMan Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Here's something we can pretty much count on.... For the 2013 draft, the rules committee will realize that head-to-head match-ups should carry more weight than the strength of schedule setup currently used. This year however, Miami (who should be picking behind Buffalo, based on their 2-game sweep of the Bills) will draft a perennial probowler at # 9 whom the Bills coveted, and the Bills will then reach at #10 for a defensive back or pass rush specialist who will struggle to get on the field and will become a journeyman NFL player when the contract is up. see: Patrick Willis/Marshawn Lynch, 2007 draft to see how much that one change in draft position can effect the outcome The "strength of schedule" over "head-to-head" draft slotting rule seems convoluted to me. Using that line of logic, why not have playoff teams seeded according to strength of schedule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Here's something we can pretty much count on.... For the 2013 draft, the rules committee will realize that head-to-head match-ups should carry more weight than the strength of schedule setup currently used. "Pretty much count on"? What are you basing this on? Do you have a link to some comment from a member of the rules committee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernMan Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) "Pretty much count on"? What are you basing this on? Do you have a link to some comment from a member of the rules committee? I was being facetious. In other words, "wouldn't it just figure...". Kind of like when the Colts were able lure star tackle Will Wolford away with a offer that was anything but fair to the Bills. If I remember, the Bills had to match their offer. The problem was that he was offered a contract that would match the highest paid player on the Colts team, or something to that effect. The Colts didn't have anyone with Jim Kelly numbers, so what they offered wasn't exactly apples to apples. I don't remember the exact details, so don't jump up my ass if I didn't get it exactly right. But the bottom line is that it was a screw job, and the Bills lost their starting tackle. Of course, the following year, the rule was changed so that that sort of underhanded negotiation was eliminated. Too late for the Bills. Edited January 12, 2012 by DML2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts