Draft 3 Offensive Tackles in a row

[BILLS #1]

We should go WR with the 10th pick ( FLOYD) 41st pick we take a CB OR LB . 71st pick we take a CB or LB whichever we dont take with the 41st. Then we take 3 offensive tackles in a row starting with both of our picks in the 4th round ( 105 124) then we take another OT with our first 5th round pick ( 144) . Buddy nix has said he would like to draft 2 tackles so i think taking 3 tackles in a row will serve us some good luck. we cant miss on all the 3 pick at offensive tackle right?

 

 

then with the rest of our pick we go QB CB LB WR

[uncle flap]

We should go WR with the 10th pick ( FLOYD) 41st pick we take a CB OR LB . 71st pick we take a CB or LB whichever we dont take with the 41st. Then we take 3 offensive tackles in a row starting with both of our picks in the 4th round ( 105 124) then we take another OT with our first 5th round pick ( 144) . Buddy nix has said he would like to draft 2 tackles so i think taking 3 tackles in a row will serve us some good luck. we cant miss on all the 3 pick at offensive tackle right?

 

 

then with the rest of our pick we go QB CB LB WR

 

THIS IS (almost*) EXACTLY WHAT I WANT TO SEE HAPPEN! :thumbsup:

 

Assuming Floyd is there, he will have more of an impact on the Bills, than any other player likely to be available at 10.

 

We need guys to compete at OLB and CB, and the odds of success are better the higher the pick (duh).

 

Chan has shown he can work with a patchwork line. Obviously, there's room for improvement, but I don't think their priorities are in line with many of the fans clamoring for LT at #10.

 

If Floyd is gone - get a CB first, then OLB or WR and vice versa the next round.

 

*Although I'm not high on Thigpen, I don't think they need to pick a QB for the sake of picking a QB. They might be better served targeting a guy in the 1st or 2nd next year (for grooming as the starter, not just as a Thigpen replacement).

[Johnny Hammersticks]

We should go WR with the 10th pick ( FLOYD) 41st pick we take a CB OR LB . 71st pick we take a CB or LB whichever we dont take with the 41st. Then we take 3 offensive tackles in a row starting with both of our picks in the 4th round ( 105 124) then we take another OT with our first 5th round pick ( 144) . Buddy nix has said he would like to draft 2 tackles so i think taking 3 tackles in a row will serve us some good luck. we cant miss on all the 3 pick at offensive tackle right?

 

 

then with the rest of our pick we go QB CB LB WR

 

And which OT's do you predict being available in the 4th and 5th round?

[uncle flap]

And which OT's do you predict being available in the 4th and 5th round?

 

 

There's a list here: http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/04/06/pfws-exclusive-draft-value-chart-7

[Astrobot]

There's a list here: http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/04/06/pfws-exclusive-draft-value-chart-7

PFT is one opinion. I find some of the placements humorous. Bobby Wagner lasting until mid-3 or getting Juron Criner in RD5 is laughable.

 

RD4, I think the best LT prospect is Matt McCants. I'd look at Nate Potter in RD3, though.

 

The RD5 LTs, Compton and Reynolds, are IMHO inferior to Hairston in terms of LT upside.

[ieatcrayonz]

I am almost certain we will be trading one of our 4ths for Casey Matthews.

[Astrobot]

I am almost certain we will be trading one of our 4ths for Casey Matthews.

Casey Matthews is awesome!

[Since 1972]

Matthews sure does have the lineage.

[cody]

We should go WR with the 10th pick ( FLOYD) 41st pick we take a CB OR LB . 71st pick we take a CB or LB whichever we dont take with the 41st. Then we take 3 offensive tackles in a row starting with both of our picks in the 4th round ( 105 124) then we take another OT with our first 5th round pick ( 144) . Buddy nix has said he would like to draft 2 tackles so i think taking 3 tackles in a row will serve us some good luck. we cant miss on all the 3 pick at offensive tackle right?

 

 

then with the rest of our pick we go QB CB LB WR

 

Not a bad idea, get as many tackles as you can and bring them into the off- season program. Hope that at least one will work out and cut the rest.

I guess the downside would be, does your position coach have enough time to evaluate all of the players, identify the best one and get that guy ready to start? It is one thing to focus on one guy, but dividing your attention between 3-4 may hurt them all.

[playman]

and grab another 3 off the streets

[atlbillsfan1975]

they just may do that, but i would not be suprised if they tried to move one of them inside. Unless they think Jasper will be a viable back up option this season. Bills are thin on interior guys, especially given Woods injury history. No i do not think Woods is a D Bell, but sometimes a player has bad luck and can not stay healthy.

[OldTimer1960]

Is this the garage-sale approach to filling the important LT spot? If you buy enough stuff that nobody else wants, maybe you hit it big?

 

I would argue that LT is far more important than OLB or WR and maybe CB is close. Now, that doesn't mean that they should force a LT pick in round one if they don't think there is a player there worth taking, but the fill other needs and hope to find a viable player for the most important OL position by sifting through mid-late round picks doesn't sound like a good plan to me, either.

 

If the Bills don't see any LTs worth taking in round 1 or 2, I understand that, but I wouldn't say then that they must throw 2 4ths and a 5th at it just to get players. I'd rather they picked players in those rounds that they think are among the best left at any position with a slight nod toward needs.

[Haplo848]

We should go WR with the 10th pick ( FLOYD) 41st pick we take a CB OR LB . 71st pick we take a CB or LB whichever we dont take with the 41st. Then we take 3 offensive tackles in a row starting with both of our picks in the 4th round ( 105 124) then we take another OT with our first 5th round pick ( 144) . Buddy nix has said he would like to draft 2 tackles so i think taking 3 tackles in a row will serve us some good luck. we cant miss on all the 3 pick at offensive tackle right?

 

 

then with the rest of our pick we go QB CB LB WR

 

This is one of the dumbest things I've heard in a while on here. You're locking onto position regardless of the players available. You want three tackles no matter what in rounds 4 and 5, yet the highest rated OT on the board at that point could have 6th round grade or lower before you even start, yet we "have" to take an OT there. What if there isn't any value for CBs or LBs when we pick in rounds 2 and 3? Force that position anyways?

 

This is why I'm so glad fans aren't in charge of drafts.

[Dorkington]

We won't be drafting Floyd.

[NewEra]

I agree. He'll be off the board.

[Herb62]

We should go WR with the 10th pick ( FLOYD) 41st pick we take a CB OR LB . 71st pick we take a CB or LB whichever we dont take with the 41st. Then we take 3 offensive tackles in a row starting with both of our picks in the 4th round ( 105 124) then we take another OT with our first 5th round pick ( 144) . Buddy nix has said he would like to draft 2 tackles so i think taking 3 tackles in a row will serve us some good luck. we cant miss on all the 3 pick at offensive tackle right?

 

 

then with the rest of our pick we go QB CB LB WR

 

That's just how Donahoe used to do it:) Funny how people forget what a bad offensive line can do to an offense. Go OT in round one.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Herb62

[3rdand12]

we have great scouts. if we landed one who would project to be starter in two or three years at either side really and a reasonable swing prospect and one who converts well to play guard in the 4,5th rounds it would almost be as effective as picking tackles in the 1st second and third rounds this year.

Edited April 10, 2012 by 3rdand12

[Johnny Hammersticks]

There's a list here: http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/04/06/pfws-exclusive-draft-value-chart-7

 

4a. Brandon Mosley (rising up draft boards....might have to look at him in the 3rd)

4b. Nate Potter

5. Zebrie Sanders

[uncle flap]

This is one of the dumbest things I've heard in a while on here. You're locking onto position regardless of the players available. You want three tackles no matter what in rounds 4 and 5, yet the highest rated OT on the board at that point could have 6th round grade or lower before you even start, yet we "have" to take an OT there. What if there isn't any value for CBs or LBs when we pick in rounds 2 and 3? Force that position anyways?

 

This is why I'm so glad fans aren't in charge of drafts.

 

Man, when you put it like that it does seem stupid.

 

I agreed with the OP earlier, and my main reason is that WR, OLB, and CB are all much more important to the Bills than OT. That, and I really want Floyd to be the 1st round pick.

 

I guess what I really meant is that I'd be happy if the draft turned out that way, not that I want Nix to follow a script dictating what position to take in each particular round.

 

So while I'd love to see the Bills maximize "value," I'm more interested in filling more important positions with better players. Within reason, I'm totally okay with reaching for a player that might not be the BPA, but is the BPA in a position of need.

[tennesseeboy]

We at the moment do not have an even adequate prospect to start the season at left tackle. Assuming we aren't trading for one, I would think our first pick would be to get the best one available and not count on a round 3,4 or 5 to carry the offense, as that is what the left tackle does at least as far as a legitimate passing game goes. The first round pick should be the best left tackle prospect available, be that Reiff (my choice) Martin or Cordy. I like McCants if he makes it to the fourth or fifth round and think we might want to draft him as well.