Listening to Buddy today regarding LT...

[K-9]

He started 4 games at OT as a sophomore I think, and 14 games as a LT as a senior, his entire senior year. So 18 games at tackle, and 28 starts at OG.

 

Thanks for the clarification. He may have a ton of upside.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Malazan]

You get more than 1 pick per year. You need to maximize the value of all your picks - it make no difference if the guy you take is a Hall of Famer - if you took him a round before you had to, it's still a reach because you screwed up an opportunity to ALSO take someone else with the earlier pick.

 

This logic basically makes every first overall pick who isn't Peyton manning a reach.

[papazoid]

"About what you want at #10,an IMPACT player that doesn't necessarily mean you have to start year one."

 

 

you usually don't hear a LT described as an "impact" position.....

 

 

"impact" to me means on offense someone who scores.....and on defense someone who gets sacks or turnovers.

 

 

up til now i was thinkin we take at LT (REIFF)...but after hearing that....

 

 

"impact" players at #10 would be Floyd (WR) on offense and Ingram (LB/DE)on defense.

 

 

taking into consideration that i think ingram will be gone and the bills tipped their hand with free agent WR meachem...

 

i say FLOYD is the pick at #10........and they hope like hell to get a LT with their 2nd pick.

[TPS]

I don't agree with that. Just read Buscaglia's article on WGR55 on "deciphering" Buddy Nix. Buscaglia thinks #10 could be a corner or Glenn, the college guard, for Buffalo's new LT.

 

I think Buddy is getting to be very crafty with his remarks

Another reason to believe this, Whaley mentioned wanting to have a roster where if someone goes down, the drop off from the player coming in is minimal. Right now there is no other LT on the roster. They have decent depth at CB and WR. Several weeks ago Nix said he thought there were 3 LTs that were worthy at 10. I think Buscaglia has it right.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

If they want Glenn they'd be wise to trade down a good bit, because he is a big reach at 10. They could likely trade down ten spots and still be guaranteed to get Glenn, and a move like that would get them at least an extra third. Then I could see making that move. Otherwise Glenn at 10 is a bitter pill to swallow.

He is? Thanks for that.

 

I can appreciate Buddy and Co. projecting Glenn to tackle. But why didn't Glenn play tackle in college? My understanding was that he was always a guard.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

He started 4 games at OT as a sophomore I think, and 14 games as a LT as a senior, his entire senior year. So 18 games at tackle, and 28 starts at OG.

 

Thanks for the clarification. He may have a ton of upside.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Also Glenn was named First Team All SEC by both the coaches and the players.

 

And in spite of what our boy from Tennessee (the Reiff fan) has been frequently repeating, Glenn is not lazy.

 

I doubt his teammates would have voted him a team captain had he been lazy. In fact he went in front of the NFL Draft Advisory Board after his junior year and they advised him to stay in school and work hard.

 

That's what he did. He learned a new position and improved dramatically over the course of the season to the point where he was often dominating in the last month of the season… and was named the top left tackle in the best conference in college football.

 

 

[Lurker]

Another reason to believe this, Whaley mentioned wanting to have a roster where if someone goes down, the drop off from the player coming in is minimal. Right now there is no other LT on the roster. They have decent depth at CB and WR. Several weeks ago Nix said he thought there were 3 LTs that were worthy at 10. I think Buscaglia has it right.

That's why Glenn makes sense to me--he's a bigger (and IMO, better) version of what Hairston was in his draft year. Their playing styles are similar. If Glenn's the day-one starter and gets hurt at some point, inserting Hairston at LOT could be done without missing a beat/changing the gameplan...

[White Linen]

“You'd think at 10 you'd get a starter,” Nix said this afternoon during a discussion with reporters regarding the draft at One Bills Drive. “We want to get a difference-maker, an impact guy, a playmaker.”

 

Who does this sound most like? It just doesn't have the feel of a LT.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

"You'd think at 10 you'd get a starter," Nix said this afternoon during a discussion with reporters regarding the draft at One Bills Drive. "We want to get a difference-maker, an impact guy, a playmaker."

 

Who does this sound most like? It just doesn't have the feel of a LT.

I agree.

 

A good follow up question would have been "do you believe that a left tackle can be "a difference maker, an impact guy, a playmaker?"

 

 

 

 

[White Linen]

I agree.

 

A good follow up question would have been "do you believe that a left tackle can be "a difference maker, an impact guy, a playmaker?"

 

Yeah that's kind of where I was going with "Who does this sound most like?". I could see those tags being put on Floyd, one of the CB's or Kuechly.

[Lurker]

A good follow up question would have been "do you believe that a left tackle can be "a difference maker, an impact guy, a playmaker?"

To which Buddy said:

 

At the end of the 45-minute session, Nix returned to the quesiton of getting a difference-maker as it related to an offensive tackle. Said Nix: "I guess I was thinking a big play maker, which a tackle is not. But a difference maker is a guy that makes youre team better and can do things to make you be able to do more, like throwing down the field more. So I think in that light, certainly a left tackle fits that need."

[San Jose Bills Fan]

To which Buddy said:

 

At the end of the 45-minute session, Nix returned to the quesiton of getting a difference-maker as it related to an offensive tackle. Said Nix: "I guess I was thinking a big play maker, which a tackle is not. But a difference maker is a guy that makes youre team better and can do things to make you be able to do more, like throwing down the field more. So I think in that light, certainly a left tackle fits that need."

Awesome quote, Lurker. That does clear things up a bit.

 

I interpret that clarification to mean (and again it's still guessing) that they are not leaning towards offensive tackle at #10.

 

 

Thanks for the link, too.

 

 

[Cash]

“You'd think at 10 you'd get a starter,” Nix said this afternoon during a discussion with reporters regarding the draft at One Bills Drive. “We want to get a difference-maker, an impact guy, a playmaker.”

 

Who does this sound most like? It just doesn't have the feel of a LT.

 

 

I agree.

 

A good follow up question would have been "do you believe that a left tackle can be "a difference maker, an impact guy, a playmaker?"

 

 

To which Buddy said:

 

At the end of the 45-minute session, Nix returned to the quesiton of getting a difference-maker as it related to an offensive tackle. Said Nix: "I guess I was thinking a big play maker, which a tackle is not. But a difference maker is a guy that makes youre team better and can do things to make you be able to do more, like throwing down the field more. So I think in that light, certainly a left tackle fits that need."

Buddy's quote is at about the 1:52 mark of the "Nix on Bills Left Tackle Situation" video on buffalobills.com (sorry, can't figure out how to get a direct link right now). It's a bit confusing in some ways. Nix and Whaley (in discussing other positions) really stressed depth, competition, the next guy being able to come in and play w/ very little dropoff, etc. And Nix had his whole spiel about how the only backup OT on the roster is Sam Young, who 1.) has never done anything in the NFL, 2.) is coming off knee surgery, and 3.) is considered a RT only, not a candidate for LT. None of this is news. Given that, it made sense a couple weeks ago when Nix seemed to imply that the team was looking to draft a "start from Day One" LT at #10 and also a developmental tackle in the mid/late rounds.

 

But Nix doesn't have a history of drafting linemen high, especially tackles, and now I'm thinking he won't this time, either. The quote that really sticks with me is, "...I guess I was thinking a big playmaker, which a tackle is not..." which is referring back to his earlier quote, "What we'd like to get is a difference maker, or a playmaker, an impact guy." That was one of his more unguarded moments that I saw, and I think tells us that going LT is not Option 1 at #10 overall. I do think it might be an option if the "playmaker" they want isn't there, in which case they'll talk up how much they love whichever LT they pick and say they wanted him all along, but inside, they'll be disappointed. And yes, I realize Nix started and finished the full statement by saying that a left tackle can be a difference maker, but that sounded like Nix just speaking extemporaneously. Same with the comments about top LT's drafted in the top 8-10 picks: He was just talking in abstract terms about the league/football in general, not talking specifically about the Bills. Which is a good way to answer a question without either lying (which Nix doesn't seem to do) or blatantly showing your hand (which Nix also doesn't do -- there are much more hints and tips with Nix than other GMs, but never any outright admission of who he wants to draft).

 

We'll see what happens in just over a week, but I'll say this in advance: Given all the non-Bell injuries on the O-line last year, I'll be very disappointed if the Bills decide that they need to worry more about McGee & Florence's age and McKelvin's contract situation than about the literal void they have at backup LT. They think they struck gold with a 4th-round OT last year (who was actually declared an RT, not an LT, when he was drafted), and that's awesome. But counting on doing it again is really stupid. Most mid-round picks can't come in and be effective starters as rookies. And the odds are pretty good that Hairston will get hurt at some point. Maybe I'm overreacting and lumping Nix's comments in with a bunch of fans' comments unconsciously -- it seems like I've seen a bunch of posters here who think there's no problem with Hairston and Levitre being our only LT options next year, but are terrified that 7-year NFL starter Kirk Morrison is slated to start at a position that only plays half the defensive snaps. Posters who insist (to the contradiction of Nix) that LTs can easily be found in the later rounds, but on the other hand, a linebacker who reminds people of 5th-round pick Zach Thomas MUST be the pick in the first round. Don't get me wrong -- I have no idea if any of the LTs will be any good, and won't be upset if the Bills go in a different direction; I just don't like the logic some fans are using to justify picking the guy they like. If the Bills think Kuechly or Floyd or one of the CBs or whoever is a true difference maker, then that's all the justification they need, and let's hope they're right.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Great post, Cash.

[biggerdaddynj]

There is a new video at Buffalo Bills.com wherein Buddy talks about our left tackle position and makes me think Buddy will not pick a LT at #10.

 

He talks about Chris Hairston saying that Hairston can play the position and win. By that I think he meant that Buffalo can win with Hairston at LT. Buddy said that Hairston does not have "pretty feet" but his arm lenght is so long that he can protect the blind side.

 

It's an interesting statement. I've been an advocate of selecting Reiff because he is such a good athlete. He is tough and determined and has played a lot of LT at Iowa. Buddy seems to be saying that Buffalo does not need that supeerior athlete. Very long arms can significantly compensate for lack of athleticism. Regarding Reiff, Doug Wiley did say the Bills think he can step in at LT and start immediately. But, on balance, I now think Buddy will look for a tackle later in the draft and #10 now looks to me as it might be Floyd or possibly Kuechly.

I had that same epiphany 2-3 weeks ago. Hairston is our LT for now. That means Floyd is our pick. If not Floyd, then a CB at 10 and then a WR (e.g., Sanu) at 41.

Edited April 19, 2012 by biggerdaddynj

[3rdand12]

Very good postings gents. That Buddy is darn good with words and a lot of fun to decipher. He is very consistent but always makes me want to think harder on what he says. He is even more intrigueing to watch. Its a good time to be a Buffalo fan IMHO!

[CSBill]

Very good postings gents. That Buddy is darn good with words and a lot of fun to decipher. He is very consistent but always makes me want to think harder on what he says. He is even more intrigueing to watch. Its a good time to be a Buffalo fan IMHO!

 

that is very true . . . I'm thinking a WR or Corner, or wildcard - the Tight End from Stanford? Cody Fleener

[Hanoverbills]

So what has Buddy Nix said about Cordy Glenn ,that everybody thinks its Glenn. I read things that he said about Martin and Adams and also Kalil, but I must've miss what he said that makes Glenn the pick. So please let me know, so I can get on the Glenn bandwagon.

[Cheddar's Dad]

Buddy's quote is at about the 1:52 mark of the "Nix on Bills Left Tackle Situation" video on buffalobills.com (sorry, can't figure out how to get a direct link right now). It's a bit confusing in some ways. Nix and Whaley (in discussing other positions) really stressed depth, competition, the next guy being able to come in and play w/ very little dropoff, etc. And Nix had his whole spiel about how the only backup OT on the roster is Sam Young, who 1.) has never done anything in the NFL, 2.) is coming off knee surgery, and 3.) is considered a RT only, not a candidate for LT. None of this is news. Given that, it made sense a couple weeks ago when Nix seemed to imply that the team was looking to draft a "start from Day One" LT at #10 and also a developmental tackle in the mid/late rounds.

 

But Nix doesn't have a history of drafting linemen high, especially tackles, and now I'm thinking he won't this time, either. The quote that really sticks with me is, "...I guess I was thinking a big playmaker, which a tackle is not..." which is referring back to his earlier quote, "What we'd like to get is a difference maker, or a playmaker, an impact guy." That was one of his more unguarded moments that I saw, and I think tells us that going LT is not Option 1 at #10 overall. I do think it might be an option if the "playmaker" they want isn't there, in which case they'll talk up how much they love whichever LT they pick and say they wanted him all along, but inside, they'll be disappointed. And yes, I realize Nix started and finished the full statement by saying that a left tackle can be a difference maker, but that sounded like Nix just speaking extemporaneously. Same with the comments about top LT's drafted in the top 8-10 picks: He was just talking in abstract terms about the league/football in general, not talking specifically about the Bills. Which is a good way to answer a question without either lying (which Nix doesn't seem to do) or blatantly showing your hand (which Nix also doesn't do -- there are much more hints and tips with Nix than other GMs, but never any outright admission of who he wants to draft).

 

We'll see what happens in just over a week, but I'll say this in advance: Given all the non-Bell injuries on the O-line last year, I'll be very disappointed if the Bills decide that they need to worry more about McGee & Florence's age and McKelvin's contract situation than about the literal void they have at backup LT. They think they struck gold with a 4th-round OT last year (who was actually declared an RT, not an LT, when he was drafted), and that's awesome. But counting on doing it again is really stupid. Most mid-round picks can't come in and be effective starters as rookies. And the odds are pretty good that Hairston will get hurt at some point. Maybe I'm overreacting and lumping Nix's comments in with a bunch of fans' comments unconsciously -- it seems like I've seen a bunch of posters here who think there's no problem with Hairston and Levitre being our only LT options next year, but are terrified that 7-year NFL starter Kirk Morrison is slated to start at a position that only plays half the defensive snaps. Posters who insist (to the contradiction of Nix) that LTs can easily be found in the later rounds, but on the other hand, a linebacker who reminds people of 5th-round pick Zach Thomas MUST be the pick in the first round. Don't get me wrong -- I have no idea if any of the LTs will be any good, and won't be upset if the Bills go in a different direction; I just don't like the logic some fans are using to justify picking the guy they like. If the Bills think Kuechly or Floyd or one of the CBs or whoever is a true difference maker, then that's all the justification they need, and let's hope they're right.

 

So; you're as confused by Buddy's remarks as the rest of us?

[Armchair GM]

I tend to agree with you, but don't forget the part where he says that the Bills have only 2 healthy tackles and 1 more coming off an injury, and he wants 2 additional tackles. I got a vibe that they're hoping a solid prospect falls to the 2nd round, and they'll probably grab one in rounds 4-7 whether they get one high or not.

 

After those words from Buddy,I'm not entirely convinced they take 2 OT's in the draft...I WAS, up until I read this...Anyway, come late August, there is going to be some quality veteran depth for the picking. I can see it if they think there's a couple studs that slip through the cracks, but I think they'll focus on WR, CB and LB, maybe even a couple each.

 

Also, I think this info almost eliminates a trade down. What we have to look at here @ 10 is who stands out as being above the level of competition in the NCAA...a real man amongst boys. The kind of player that makes it look easy. IMHO, that is Melvin Ingram. The guy can play outside either tackle, line up as a DT, or even up in a 2 as a LB. All of this, with no drop off anywhere on the field. He gets to the passer and ball carriers in the backfield and has been working at both DE and LB during his entire career. Biggest gap would be picking up coverage skills, but he's already got them. He's got great field vision and good hands. For pushing 280, he can fly, as in the mid 4.6's...thoughts?

Edited April 19, 2012 by Armchair GM

[Sisyphean Bills]

But I think Buddy's point is if they trade down and then miss out on Glenn, then that is a more bitter pill to swallow.

It's not really a good thing to fall in love with a particular player before the draft.