John from Riverside Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Even with the Mario siging And not talking about bringing Bell back There are folks talking about taking a WR or a DE at 10.......what is your plan for protecting our QBs blind side? Have you not thought that through or do you have a plan for that. I would like to hear those thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Fitz was the least sacked QB in the league last year despite an unbelievable number of injuries and an absurd amount of OL rotation due to those injuries. Fitz doesn't get enough credit for how quickly he makes decisions. I think they like Hairston a lot but I'm sure there's another LT coming via the draft, free agency or cuts. Bell loss is really irrelevant because he was so often injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Fitz was the least sacked QB in the league last year despite an unbelievable number of injuries and an absurd amount of OL rotation due to those injuries. Fitz doesn't get enough credit for how quickly he makes decisions. I think they like Hairston a lot but I'm sure there's another LT coming via the draft, free agency or cuts. Bell loss is really irrelevant because he was so often injured. He makes quick decisions... but some of them aren't the right ones. Wish he was alot less gunslinger(with a pop gun arm). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Fitz was the least sacked QB in the league last year despite an unbelievable number of injuries and an absurd amount of OL rotation due to those injuries. Fitz doesn't get enough credit for how quickly he makes decisions. I think they like Hairston a lot but I'm sure there's another LT coming via the draft, free agency or cuts. Bell loss is really irrelevant because he was so often injured. Agree and disagree, Bell is a good T when healthy and I hope we get him back, you can never have enough good tackles imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) Fitz was the least sacked QB in the league last year despite an unbelievable number of injuries and an absurd amount of OL rotation due to those injuries. Fitz doesn't get enough credit for how quickly he makes decisions. I think they like Hairston a lot but I'm sure there's another LT coming via the draft, free agency or cuts. Bell loss is really irrelevant because he was so often injured. What you fail to realize is that is exactly why we struggled to get the ball down field. Our OL was grossly overrated because Fitz got rid of ball so fast, but that doesn't allow our receivers enough time to run deeper routes or get open and makes our O very easy to defend. We need an OT big time if we don't resign Bell and should draft one at 10. Other wise it will just be another year of excuses for Fitz struggles being blamed on poor protection as to why we struggle to move the ball consistently down field. Edited March 17, 2012 by Alphadawg7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
808 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 i been saying the same thing and agree completely. im think itll be martin/rieff at 10. i see bell actually coming back tho. he hasnt gotten the FA money or buzz he was expecting. so if he comes back on a 1 year deal and stays injury free he can hit the market again. so if bell does come back we can start rieff/martin over on the right side aka tyron smith style and then move the pieces after Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 No Doubt, this is a big question mark. I tried to hit on it a bit in my other thread about why I think we will go WR or CB in rds 1&2. I personally don't see Buddy or Chan valuing an LT this high in the draft. FA WRs and CBs are getting paid lots of cash and we are at a spot where we could grab one. Mike brings up the positives from last season and gives a few good reasons as to why it isn't "Critical". I think you can get by with tossing Chandler over there and maybe using an RB chip during the critical situations. With one of these WRs they get a big fast possession WR who can cover Fitzy's errant throws, stretch the field and make the plays to keep us out of the 3 & 20 situations where the D goes all out and pounds Fitz. I do think it is very important that it gets addressed as we need to keep Fitz upright and not injured. #10 just seems to high, with that pick we should get an impact player the huge WR or the shutdown CB. There seems to be good Tackle value at the end of Rd1. I would rather see us grab playmaker and 10 and hop back into the end of RD1 to grab a Mike Adams or other late first round tackle. Which would solve a couple issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStranger76 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Should OT not be the pick at 10 we could always target someone like Zebrie Sanders in the 2nd round. The dropoff from Rieff/Martin to someone like Sanders isn't very much. Just food for thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Should OT not be the pick at 10 we could always target someone like Zebrie Sanders in the 2nd round. The dropoff from Rieff/Martin to someone like Sanders isn't very much. Just food for thought. ^^^ This. On a side note, where has Jake Long gotten Miami since they drafted him? We have a solid interior line. If after the Mario signing we all billieve Buddy and what he says, he always talks about value. I just don't see a OL at 10. We could always possibly trade down, but I think that will depend on who is off the board by pick 10. We are all shocked by Spiller at #9 and we needed a LT back then as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPS Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Should OT not be the pick at 10 we could always target someone like Zebrie Sanders in the 2nd round. The dropoff from Rieff/Martin to someone like Sanders isn't very much. Just food for thought. Zebrie Sanders is an Eagle scout and plays the cello. Not sure that would fly in Bflo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AC4 IN ATL Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I believe we need to go OT at #10 as well. IMO two things contributed to the second half of the offense decline. Injuries to Freddy, Wood, numerous wide receivers, and yes Fitz. That coupled with defenses got smarter on how to defend our short pass game and dared us to go deep. Fitz did not have enough time to throw deep consistently. Occasionally when he did, I believe they were hoping protection could hold up long enough. With more consistent play at LT, it completely opens up our offensive playbook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Im all for drafting an OT at #10, IF the talent on the board dictates it. Part of the beauty of re-signing Stevie, and signing Mario, is it allows us to draft talent over need if it comes down to it. We got Hairston late in the 4th last year. If we found another OT who was just as good, we'd have a great Line. At this point, Im just trusting Buddy to address our needs whether it be at 10, or in the 5th round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStranger76 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 We DO need to add a OT, and while I believe it doesn't need to be at 10, it probably does have to happen at our 2nd pick at the latest. I don't wanna try and get too slick ya know? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Even with the Mario siging And not talking about bringing Bell back There are folks talking about taking a WR or a DE at 10.......what is your plan for protecting our QBs blind side? Have you not thought that through or do you have a plan for that. I would like to hear those thoughts This kind of implies that great offensive lineman can only be found in the first round.......................... a quick look at the starters around the league shows that argument is false. Playmaker at 10.......O-line in second or third because we won't be drafting as high as ten for many years to come. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I think that the Bills should make a legit play for Bell as I like Hariston as a plan B not plan A. If we are able to get Bell on a 2-3 year deal at 3-4 million a year with a low guarantee that would make a lot of sense for us. Once you lock up Bell that frees you up to take a WR at pick 10 or take a DE. Also the Bills could easily stomach Bell under the cap by cutting D.Edwards who makes 4 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 This kind of implies that great offensive lineman can only be found in the first round.......................... a quick look at the starters around the league shows that argument is false. Playmaker at 10.......O-line in second or third because we won't be drafting as high as ten for many years to come. YES! :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 This kind of implies that great offensive lineman can only be found in the first round.......................... a quick look at the starters around the league shows that argument is false. Playmaker at 10.......O-line in second or third because we won't be drafting as high as ten for many years to come. . Yes but LT's drafted in the 2nd and 3rd rounds do sometimes take a year or two to develop. We have sunk 3 seasons into D.Bell who has actually become a decent starter when he is on the field. I don't think that the Bills should over pay for the guy but at least make a legit offer (Not saying they haven't but just saying that the idea that they should let him walk without any resistance). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 This kind of implies that great offensive lineman can only be found in the first round.......................... a quick look at the starters around the league shows that argument is false. Playmaker at 10.......O-line in second or third because we won't be drafting as high as ten for many years to come. If you listen to what Buddy has said in the past, this is it. You need playmakers. This is where you get them. You can only tie up so many resources in the OL, we have the 3 top rated O Lineman from the 2009 draft - Wood was taken at like pick #28 & Livtre @ pick 51 (Urbik in the 3rd). The conversations and arguments we are having is ONLY because of Mario. This is what him signing with us has caused. Everyone sees our holes and others and there are a million ways to try to fill them. THis is where Buddy's belief in Value comes in. Look at the high priced positions in FA. Megatron got a huge deal to stay with Detroit. He makes that offense. Revis makes the Jets Defense. Just as Mario makes our D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cocktosten Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Even with the Mario siging And not talking about bringing Bell back There are folks talking about taking a WR or a DE at 10.......what is your plan for protecting our QBs blind side? Have you not thought that through or do you have a plan for that. I would like to hear those thoughts I posted this before: Starting left tackles the last 4 Super bowls and round they were drafted in: 2012- Light/2nd Diehl/5th 2011- Jonathan Scott(former Bill)/5th Clifton/2nd 2010- Bushrod/4th Johnson/6th 2009- Starks/3rd Mike Gandy(former Bill)/3rd The QBs on those teams? Brees, Brady, Manning, Warner, Big Ben, Rodgers, Eli. QBs make the Oline look better. Fitz gets the ball out of his hands quickly(where it's going is anyone's guess) and moves well in the pocket. Fitz got hit the least out of any QB last year and it wasn't because we had great tackles. The impact edge rushers on those teams: Mathews, Woodley, Harrison, Freeney, Mathis, Tuck, Osi, JPP..... impact plays off of the edge change games. If there is an impact edge rusher there, he will be and should be the pick. LT is the most overrated position in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Even with the Mario siging And not talking about bringing Bell back There are folks talking about taking a WR or a DE at 10.......what is your plan for protecting our QBs blind side? Have you not thought that through or do you have a plan for that. I would like to hear those thoughts Johnny, this has been said in like 4 threads already! I agree with you though. I just don't think Martin will be the BPA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) I admit that a starting LT or depth at LT concerns me but I don't see one at #10 that's worthy of that pick. You also have to go back and look at the starting WR's, TE's and OL in week 12. Don't forget, Stevie also played injured the entire second half. The problems we had weren't just because of our LT, the problems we had were increased exponentially because half our team was in the trainers room. What you fail to realize is that is exactly why we struggled to get the ball down field. Our OL was grossly overrated because Fitz got rid of ball so fast, but that doesn't allow our receivers enough time to run deeper routes or get open and makes our O very easy to defend. We need an OT big time if we don't resign Bell and should draft one at 10. Other wise it will just be another year of excuses for Fitz struggles being blamed on poor protection as to why we struggle to move the ball consistently down field. What you fail to realize is that it's likely that our QB had a couple of broken ribs for 9 games. That might have something to do with his ability to chuck the ball down field. That doesn't change the fact that Fitz is never going to be a QB that completes a lot of 40-60 yard passes. He doesn't have the arm strength or accuracy to be a consistent deep ball QB. For 6 weeks of the season he was rated the #1 or #2 QB in the league with the offensive line we had. It wasn't until Fletcher almost killed him that he really started to struggle. Edited March 17, 2012 by Mike in Syracuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I admit that a starting LT or depth at LT concerns me but I don't see one at #10 that's worthy of that pick. You also have to go back and look at the starting WR's, TE's and OL in week 12. Don't forget, Stevie also played injured the entire second half. The problems we had weren't just because of our LT, the problems we had were increased exponentially because half our team was in the trainers room. What you fail to realize is that it's likely that our QB had a couple of broken ribs for 9 games. That might have something to do with his ability to chuck the ball down field. That doesn't change the fact that Fitz is never going to be a QB that completes a lot of 40-60 yard passes. He doesn't have the arm strength or accuracy to be a consistent deep ball QB. For 6 weeks of the season he was rated the #1 or #2 QB in the league with the offensive line we had. It wasn't until Fletcher almost killed him that he really started to struggle. What are your thoughts on what position we should draft at 10 or what our priority should be Mike? BTW I agree with everything you said above... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) What are your thoughts on what position we should draft at 10 or what our priority should be Mike? BTW I agree with everything you said above... I think Buddy is looking for value at the LT spot but that doesn't mean he won't draft one. If you look at what they did with Pears last year I wouldn't be shocked to see them try and go a similar route. If they look to the draft, which they have been VERY quiet about, Kalil will almost certainly be gone which means they'd likely have to look to Reilly Reiff . I'm just not sure he wants to go with a rookie underclassman at the LT spot. Reiff is big and fairly agile so maybe that's what they've been thinking all along. I think they like Hairston but they're just not comfortable going into the season with just him. I believe they might also be looking at a vet that gets cut. That seems to be Whaley's specialty. I'm really torn on the #10 pick. With the signing of Williams it would seem that DE is off the board. You have to believe that Nix and Gaily are concerned with Merriman's ability to stay healthy and Kelsay isn't getting any younger. There doesn't seem to be a DE on the board at 10 that's worth that pick. Nix said they were out of the WR business in free agency and I'm assuming that he's basing that on the absurd contracts WR's have been getting. Still, they were willing to bring in Meachum so that gives us some insight onto where they think the holes are. That said, I don't have a clue what they're going to do. I wouldn't be shocked to see them draft a WR, CB or LB. If I had to bet my own money, I'd bet on Floyd. Edited March 17, 2012 by Mike in Syracuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealityCheck Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Fitz was the least sacked QB in the league last year despite an unbelievable number of injuries and an absurd amount of OL rotation due to those injuries. Fitz doesn't get enough credit for how quickly he makes decisions. I think they like Hairston a lot but I'm sure there's another LT coming via the draft, free agency or cuts. Bell loss is really irrelevant because he was so often injured. Are you excluding QB hits on purpose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yungmack Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Fitz was the least sacked QB in the league last year despite an unbelievable number of injuries and an absurd amount of OL rotation due to those injuries. Fitz doesn't get enough credit for how quickly he makes decisions. I think they like Hairston a lot but I'm sure there's another LT coming via the draft, free agency or cuts. Bell loss is really irrelevant because he was so often injured. I am not singling you out but using your comment about Bell's injury status because I keep seeing this sentiment turn up around here. While I quite agree he has been injured too often, if we're going to use that as an excuse to dump an otherwise effective LT, then shouldn't we also be saying the same about Eric Woods? For the record, I am concerned about his durability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Fitz was the least sacked QB in the league last year despite an unbelievable number of injuries and an absurd amount of OL rotation due to those injuries. Fitz doesn't get enough credit for how quickly he makes decisions. I think they like Hairston a lot but I'm sure there's another LT coming via the draft, free agency or cuts. Bell loss is really irrelevant because he was so often injured. It took one big hit to influence Fitz's play during the final 9 games of the season. While this wasn't because an OT missed their block, it shows that protecting one's QB is extremely important, especially considering their backup is Thigpen. Hairston may very well improve (he needs a lot of conditioning work) but this is a team moving away from hopefully to should make the playoffs. The NFL is about attacking and protecting the edge and OT's are a big part of it. Bell is gone and I would hate to depend heavily on a project player like Hairston who is more suited to being a RT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I am not singling you out but using your comment about Bell's injury status because I keep seeing this sentiment turn up around here. While I quite agree he has been injured too often, if we're going to use that as an excuse to dump an otherwise effective LT, then shouldn't we also be saying the same about Eric Woods? For the record, I am concerned about his durability. Fair question, but Wood had a guy roll into his leg. Where Bell seems to jam his finger, and go out for the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyC81 Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 He makes quick decisions... but some of them aren't the right ones. Wish he was alot less gunslinger(with a pop gun arm). Amen to that. Hopefully that's something they work on with him with a full offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Fair question, but Wood had a guy roll into his leg. Where Bell seems to jam his finger, and go out for the season. If Wood goes down for a leg again this season, by all means we need to be concerned. As of now they are just 2 freak injuries. I think Buddy is looking for value at the LT spot but that doesn't mean he won't draft one. If you look at what they did with Pears last year I wouldn't be shocked to see them try and go a similar route. If they look to the draft, which they have been VERY quiet about, Kalil will almost certainly be gone which means they'd likely have to look to Reilly Reiff . I'm just not sure he wants to go with a rookie underclassman at the LT spot. Reiff is big and fairly agile so maybe that's what they've been thinking all along. I think they like Hairston but they're just not comfortable going into the season with just him. I believe they might also be looking at a vet that gets cut. That seems to be Whaley's specialty. I'm really torn on the #10 pick. With the signing of Williams it would seem that DE is off the board. You have to believe that Nix and Gaily are concerned with Merriman's ability to stay healthy and Kelsay isn't getting any younger. There doesn't seem to be a DE on the board at 10 that's worth that pick. Nix said they were out of the WR business in free agency and I'm assuming that he's basing that on the absurd contracts WR's have been getting. Still, they were willing to bring in Meachum so that gives us some insight onto where they think the holes are. That said, I don't have a clue what they're going to do. I wouldn't be shocked to see them draft a WR, CB or LB. If I had to bet my own money, I'd bet on Floyd. There is nothing clear cut after the top 7-8 picks or so this year (If we only lost another game or 2 LOL). A trade out of that spot would only happen if someone falls, which I have no idea who that could be. De at 10 was still a stretch - Nix has even said he wasn't high that talent in that spot, I agree - there are too many concerns with those players. #10 should make their presence felt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 (edited) I think it's inarguable we could use a stud LT on this team. The fact is though, if Nix and the scouts do not think Reiff or Martin are studs, even though they are highly rated LTs, they are just not going to draft them. They may love both, they may love one, they may love neither. Edited March 18, 2012 by Kelly the Dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 I think it's inarguable we could use a stud LT on this team. The fact is though, if Nix and the scouts do not think Reiff or Martin are studs, even though they are highly rated LTs, they are just not going to draft them. They may love both, they may love one, they may love neither. What happened to fair and balanced? Are you unbalanced now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 This kind of implies that great offensive lineman can only be found in the first round.......................... a quick look at the starters around the league shows that argument is false. Playmaker at 10.......O-line in second or third because we won't be drafting as high as ten for many years to come. . This has been mentioned over and over here, yet these "franchise LT" threads never will go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 What happened to fair and balanced? Are you unbalanced now? Always been. The original name was Kelly the Dog, named after my favorite dog ever, a yellow lab I had named "Jim Kelly". After a few years I changed it temporarily to Kelly the Fair and Balanced Dog as a joke, mostly because Fox News called themselves fair and balanced even though they aren't. I should have changed it back a long time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mob16151 Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Should OT not be the pick at 10 we could always target someone like Zebrie Sanders in the 2nd round. The dropoff from Rieff/Martin to someone like Sanders isn't very much. Just food for thought. Second this. Outside of Kalil, this Tackle class is uninspiring. Theres Kalil, and then there's a bunch of guys. It kind of reminds me of 2007 at the top of the draft class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mEAz Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 I believe we need to go OT at #10 as well. IMO two things contributed to the second half of the offense decline. Injuries to Freddy, Wood, numerous wide receivers, and yes Fitz. That coupled with defenses got smarter on how to defend our short pass game and dared us to go deep. Fitz did not have enough time to throw deep consistently. Occasionally when he did, I believe they were hoping protection could hold up long enough. With more consistent play at LT, it completely opens up our offensive playbook. The problem with going OT at 10 is that there will not be a guy there who is worthy of that pick. Only top ten prospect at LT is Kalil, and he will be long gone...this is why drafting for need can cause problems....just take BPA that's not a RB or OG...trust your scouts Second this. Outside of Kalil, this Tackle class is uninspiring. Theres Kalil, and then there's a bunch of guys. It kind of reminds me of 2007 at the top of the draft class. And this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 I see them taking a LB. Just in case Merriman doesn't work out or to cover for injuries. If not LB then possibly a WR at 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 I'm picturing a draft heavy on LBs and CBs and I'm taking Nix's comment about wanting 10 picks to heart- as of now the Bills only seem to have about 4 real 4-3 LBs so they need at least 3 , and CB could be OK but could also be a disaster with McGee and Florence both 31 and McKelvin never showing more than flashes. Free agency - resign Bell, so OT is not an immediate need Draft Bills trade 10 to Cleveland for 22 and 37, Cleveland takes Tannehill 1. Stephon Gilmore CB 2a. Zach Brown OLB 2b Bruce Irvin OLB/DE 3. Mychal Kendricks LB 4a Jamell Fleming CB 4b. Russell Wilson QB 5a Demario Davis LB 5b Donald Stephenson OT 6 Marvin McNutt WR 7. Frank Alexander DE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Put on the ruby slippers. Click your heels twice and say "With the tenth pick in the draft, Buffalo selects Jonathan Martin, Stanford" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts