Shoutbox Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I'll start: Here's the 5 who I assume will be on everyone's list: Luck, Griffin, Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne. Now here's the 5 where I think there will more debate: Richardson, Glenn, Ingram, Kuechly, Gilmore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjmac Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I'll start: Here's the 5 who I assume will be on everyone's list: Luck, Griffin, Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne. Now here's the 5 where I think there will more debate: Richardson, Glenn, Ingram, Kuechly, Gilmore Top 6, gone before our pick: Luck, Griffin, Kalil, Richardson, Claiborne, Blackmon Next 4: Reiff, DeCastro, Kuechly, Floyd, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloRebound Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Top 6, gone before our pick: Luck, Griffin, Kalil, Richardson, Claiborne, Blackmon Next 4: Reiff, DeCastro, Kuechly, Floyd, Luck, Griffin, Richardson, Claiborne, Kalil, Blackmon, Cox, Barron, Kuechly, Ingram, Gilmore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sllib olaffub Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 You know, I think this is the best way to make an accurate guess/prediction at who the Bills will be taking. Chances are Nix and Co., are going to have a list of 10 players, in order of either the 10 very best players from best down, or the 10 best choices for Buffalo, if they could choose any player in the draft. Now, thinking of it like that it gets pretty exciting, and there are different ways to make up the list. As I said, there is a difference between the top 10 players and the top 10 best fits/choices for Buffalo. However, I think Nix is pretty much a BPA kind of guy, regardless, so I'm thinking the way to go about this is to make a list of the 10 BEST PLAYERS from BEST down, and the highest one left available come pick 10 is the guy we end up with. Another exciting thing - there's a very, very strong chance that Buffalo ends up with, talent-wise, maybe the 6th or 7th best player in the entire draft! Because, we know there will be a few teams reaching for players. I cannot, rightly judge which are the best 10 and so on, since I don't follow the college game enough to determine those rankings accurately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep2evans Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 to me, there's a difference between BPA and BPA at a reasonable position. i think there's no way in hell we draft Cox or Barron, even if Buddy rates them as high talents. Here's my guess: Luck, RGIII, Kalil, Richardson, Claiborne - duh group Blackmon, Kuechly, Floyd, Glenn, Gilmore - next wave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 6 obvious one's - Luck, RG3, Kalil, Claiborne, Richardson, Blackmon... 4 others - Floyd, Kuechly, Glenn, Gilmore... Just my guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peanuts Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Buddy only drafts ACC-SEC Players, look at his other drafts .. For Kuechly, he doesn't fit into Buddy's southern approach to drafting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimer1960 Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I'd like for them to find a very good starting LT, however I am not sold on any of the OTs anywhere in round 1. Reiff seems to be a better fit at RT or maybe even better G which isn't a fit. Martin would be a STRETCH (based on what I've read) anywhere before late round 1 and may not be a starter anywhere. In my history following the draft, he seems like John Fina to me - smart and we WANT him to be good (but he just isn't that good). Glenn is a very risky pick, IMHO. He IS HUGE with ideal arm length and height - BUT he is over-weight and, while nimble for his size, probably would struggle blocking elite pass rushers. Maybe he can help the running game, but (from what I've read), but equate his size with power. At CB, I don't know if I like anyone after Claiborne. I might prefer Barron at S over the CBs, even though they already have WIlson and Byrd. I would strongly consider Ingram as a pass-rushing threat wherever they play him. I would consider Cox as a potential difference-maker at DT, even with Dareus and Williams for starters. I would consider Kuechly as a versatile very good starter with a high "floor", especially given how weak our starters are at all 3 LB positions. I would consider DeCastro, despite him playing positions where Levitre and Urbick seem to have a lock on the starting jobs. I would consider Tannehill, as Fitz is a stop-gap and Tannehill (while very raw) has a lot of things to like about him in terms of physical skills, smarts, leadership and work-ethic. Now, I concede he is no sure thing - however, if none of the above are sure-things, either, would it make sense to try to find the answer at a much-higher value position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I think you have to drop Richardson off of the list. Even if he is available at #10...i cant see us picking him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Buddy only drafts ACC-SEC Players, look at his other drafts .. For Kuechly, he doesn't fit into Buddy's southern approach to drafting. Boston College is in the ACC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts