TheBuffaloBills Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Not really. Care more about whether he can cover Tight Ends and Running Backs. It's a passing league. Rather have a guy like David from Nebraska than a tackling machine like Kuechly. You kinda contradict yourself. Kuechly is way better in coverage than David. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC in St. Louis Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 I want a dominating defense with a crusher in the middle. Take him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 From the clips of him that are out there, he looks to be a very hard working and disciplined player , but his athletic ability (including coverage) doesn't flash out at my like a top 10-15 pick should. I'd be scared to end up with him at 10. I think Glenn, in comparison shows flashes of un-coachable talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsrhody Posted April 12, 2012 Author Share Posted April 12, 2012 WR and LT and even CB are much higher need than MLB. Need to add a couple of LB's later in the draft but not at #10. Would rather have Decastro if going to go with BPA at #10 if people feel the LT's are reaches at #10. But if our options at those other positions are subpar, wouldn't you rather take a near "sure thing" at LB? I just think drafting WR Floyd, LT Reiff, Martin or CB Kirkpatrick comes with a whole lot more risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 It seems like a lot of posters think it would be a mistake for Buffalo to draft Kuechly at #10. There's a good article on Espn right now about the linebacker so see if this changes your mind? Kuechly Are you convinced? It doesn't change my mind as I was already convinced. The only problem is that he is listed at MLB. Wansted has already said that Sheppard is his guy at that spot. That being said I don't have much doubt Keuchly could play OLB with all of his speed and skill. Some have mentioned that we play nickel defense quite a bit but with a guy like this we might be able to stay in our base defense as he can cover TEs and defend the run. If we stay in our base defense more Keuchly might be able to cover the likes of Gronkowski and Hernandez considering our expected much improved pass rush. WR and LT and even CB are much higher need than MLB. Need to add a couple of LB's later in the draft but not at #10. Would rather have Decastro if going to go with BPA at #10 if people feel the LT's are reaches at #10. If we get him I assume he going to play OLB because Wanny likes Sheppard. WR, LT and "possibly" CB are just as big needs but we likely have a plethora of 3-4 LBs that might not fit in the new 4-3 scheme. As Nix said we need LBs and more than one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r00tabaga Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 And his birthday is 4/20. Just sayin'... I mean, so the draft is six days after his b-day. What better gift could a guy get than becoming a Buffalo Bill? If he is the coverage linebacker some say he will be, can't be a bad pick at 10. Me likey. Great, that's my birthday! Now I HAVE to like him. Hey, it is also Don Mattingly's bday. There was no greater feeling being s kid and flipping over your favorite player's baseball card to learn he has the same bday as you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 (edited) But if our options at those other positions are subpar, wouldn't you rather take a near "sure thing" at LB? I just think drafting WR Floyd, LT Reiff, Martin or CB Kirkpatrick comes with a whole lot more risk. I don't see much risk with Floyd on the field. If his alcohol issues, which any one of us on this board could have gotten caught for, are behind him. I not only have no worries about Floyd I would be ecstatic that he fell to us and we picked him. Give Fitz a real #2 not the bums we had playing the spot last season. I like Nelson and have big hopes for Easely if he can ever get on the field but Floyd is a day 1 starter at the very least a #3 and quite possibly a #2 if we have the same injuries we seem to have every year. The only guy on our roster that I feel is worthy of being a #2 is Easely and as mentioned he has yet to play a regular season down for us. Floyd would be such a good fit. Edited April 12, 2012 by PDaDdy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsrhody Posted April 12, 2012 Author Share Posted April 12, 2012 I don't see much risk with Floyd on the field. If his alcohol issues, which any one of us on this board could have gotten caught for, are behind him. I not only have no worries about Floyd I would be ecstatic that he fell to us and we picked him. Give Fitz a real #2 not the bums we had playing the spot last season. I like Nelson and have big hopes for Easely if he can ever get on the field but Floyd is a day 1 starter at the very least a #3 and quite possibly a #2 if we have the same injuries we seem to have every year. The only guy on our roster that I feel is worthy of being a #2 is Easely and as mentioned he has yet to play a regular season down for us. Floyd would be such a good fit. I just think its hard to predict a WRs success in general. It seems like there have been soo many "sure thing" wideouts that dont pan out. Mike Williams, Charles Rogers, Roy Williams (thank you lions), Ted Ginn Jr, Braylon Edwards, Michael Crabtree... just to name some off the top of my head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 From the clips of him that are out there, he looks to be a very hard working and disciplined player , but his athletic ability (including coverage) doesn't flash out at my like a top 10-15 pick should. I'd be scared to end up with him at 10. I think Glenn, in comparison shows flashes of un-coachable talent. If Glenn's talent isn't coachable, why would we want him? The last thing we need is a renegade LT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBills Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 I'd be very happy with Kuechly. He would be our best LB. Not entirely sold on Sheppard, either. Also, if we are talking about our weakest position on the team, I think it is clearly LB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 (edited) Not really. Care more about whether he can cover Tight Ends and Running Backs. It's a passing league. Rather have a guy like David from Nebraska than a tackling machine like Kuechly. Agreed. From the article: ******* The knock on Kuechly at the time was that he was a tweener -- too slow to play safety in college and too small to be an immediate starter at linebacker -- but he still impressed people as a football player. ******* If he's too slow to be a college safety, how is he supposed to cover NFL TEs one-on-one? I'll grant that he's a good tackler, has great instincts, a good competitor, and a good football player. I'd like to see him in a Bills uniform. But 10th overall is much too high a price to pay for what he can provide on passing downs. When deciding what to do with the 10th overall pick, you need to think with your head, not with your heart. However much I may like the guy and the attitude and competitiveness he brings, I just don't see how he could possibly provide 10th overall value to the Buffalo Bills. Edited April 12, 2012 by Edwards' Arm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 These feel good stories you could write about any player in the draft. "Captain Hindsight never worked hard enough in school but in hindsight he says "I should have studied more"" Draft this guy! hes learned from his mistakes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 I sure do prefer him to Ingram who was THE darling here a few weeks ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eMoulds Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Agreed. From the article: ******* The knock on Kuechly at the time was that he was a tweener -- too slow to play safety in college and too small to be an immediate starter at linebacker -- but he still impressed people as a football player. ******* If he's too slow to be a college safety, how is he supposed to cover NFL TEs one-on-one? I'll grant that he's a good tackler, has great instincts, a good competitor, and a good football player. I'd like to see him in a Bills uniform. But 10th overall is much too high a price to pay for what he can provide on passing downs. When deciding what to do with the 10th overall pick, you need to think with your head, not with your heart. However much I may like the guy and the attitude and competitiveness he brings, I just don't see how he could possibly provide 10th overall value to the Buffalo Bills. He ran a 4.58 at the combine which was 4th fastest among LBs. He's considered the best LB in pass coverage of the past few drafts. How is his speed still a concern? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haplo848 Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 WR and LT and even CB are much higher need than MLB. Need to add a couple of LB's later in the draft but not at #10. Would rather have Decastro if going to go with BPA at #10 if people feel the LT's are reaches at #10. Why do people keep making this mistake? He ended up in the middle at BC but he can play ANY LB POSITION IN A 4-3. Your right, we don't need a MLB, but OLB is a much higher position of need, and he could very well be the BPA when we're on the board. Just because it's not a position of need, doesn't mean we won't take him. See the Spiller pick. Agreed. From the article: ******* The knock on Kuechly at the time was that he was a tweener -- too slow to play safety in college and too small to be an immediate starter at linebacker -- but he still impressed people as a football player. ******* If he's too slow to be a college safety, how is he supposed to cover NFL TEs one-on-one? I'll grant that he's a good tackler, has great instincts, a good competitor, and a good football player. I'd like to see him in a Bills uniform. But 10th overall is much too high a price to pay for what he can provide on passing downs. When deciding what to do with the 10th overall pick, you need to think with your head, not with your heart. However much I may like the guy and the attitude and competitiveness he brings, I just don't see how he could possibly provide 10th overall value to the Buffalo Bills. Too slow for a safety normally means not fast enough to match up against WRs. All too often these days, you see a safety lining up over a WR and is expected to cover him. If he has the cover skills of a corner, but plays like a LB, then I honestly don't see any problems with him covering any TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HornellBillsFan Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Not really. Care more about whether he can cover Tight Ends and Running Backs. It's a passing league. Rather have a guy like David from Nebraska than a tackling machine like Kuechly. You obviously don't know much about Kuechly. I really hope the Bills take him. Chris White Version 2.0. LOL!!!!!! What can you say to this kind of stupidity?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 There have been rumors that the Bills were looking for a hybrid LB/ safety to eventually replace Scott. This guy certainly appears to fit the Bill (no pun intented). I sure hope that he's not the Tim Tebow of LB's.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdogtim Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Does the Tim Tebow of linebackers genuflect with the other knee?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 I sure do prefer him to Ingram who was THE darling here a few weeks ago. Wait until next week, there will be another can't miss prospect everyone is raving about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Long Beach Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 Agreed. From the article: ******* The knock on Kuechly at the time was that he was a tweener -- too slow to play safety in college and too small to be an immediate starter at linebacker -- but he still impressed people as a football player. ******* If he's too slow to be a college safety, how is he supposed to cover NFL TEs one-on-one? I'll grant that he's a good tackler, has great instincts, a good competitor, and a good football player. I'd like to see him in a Bills uniform. But 10th overall is much too high a price to pay for what he can provide on passing downs. When deciding what to do with the 10th overall pick, you need to think with your head, not with your heart. However much I may like the guy and the attitude and competitiveness he brings, I just don't see how he could possibly provide 10th overall value to the Buffalo Bills. The comment about him being too slow for safety and too small for a LB was a _perception_ when he was an incoming HIGH-SCHOOL player, before he even played a single college game. He obviously proved he was large enough, and fast enough to excel. Not just excel but get 158 tackles for SECOND in the nation as a "too small, too slow" freshman! You can doubt him (I've never seen him play) but don't rely on that quote for your justification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts