John from Riverside Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Adding toughness and youth to an very average secondary... I dont consider that "need" need is finding a NFL starter not depth...Barron probably is a good player....but we HAVE safeties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 If there are fans that truly think safety is a "pressing need," then it only affirms that people can talk themselves into anything if they think about it long enough. "Hey guys, one of our running backs is 31 - we got another pressing need there!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamOnDan Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 You do know Wilson is 31 and would not be on anyone's "top 5" list of safeties in the NFL, right? Barron has that potential, and would bring some big time hitting to the table as well. He fits everything Buddy looks for in a draft pick -- consistent performance against big time competition -- and also fits the "impact player" requirement of a #10 pick. He is certainly a top 5 SS in my eyes. Name 5 you would rather have Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 If there are fans that truly think safety providing better run support, TE coverage is a "pressing need," then it only affirms that people can talk themselves into anything see the forest, not the trees if they think about it long enough. Let's agree to disagree... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Either way.. Wilson is a better player than what we have at linebacker. Kuechly is a significant upgrade over the player he would replace (Morrison or Sheppard) and Barron is not. Why would you take a good player off the field to put a slightly better player in (this may not even be true), when you could draft a player who would be a major upgrade at another position? It's poor form to reach for inferior talent. WR is most in need of a major upgrade anyways, if I was going to reach, I sure as hell would not be going OLB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Let's agree to disagree... fair enough... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Doug Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 (edited) If there are fans that truly think safety is a "pressing need," then it only affirms that people can talk themselves into anything if they think about it long enough. "Hey guys, one of our running backs is 31 - we got another pressing need there!" We don't need a new running back though. For the 2011 season, the Bills gave up the 3rd most TD passes in the entire NFL (only Raiders and Vikings were worse), opposing QBs had a 63.3 pct (5th worse), 90.4 rating (7th worse), and we were 14th worse in passing yards. In addition, the Patriots had the #1 passing offense in the AFC. Anyone who wants to win the AFC East will have to shut down their passing attack. Barron would also help us in run support, where we were 5th worse in yards per game, 5th worse in total yards allowed, and 2nd worse in rushing TDs allowed. Be it a DB, Kleuchy, or Barron, our 1st pick will be someone that helps shut down the pass. It won't be a LT. Nix has said that people need to listen to him and he has repeatedly said he likes Hairston as a LT. Edited April 26, 2012 by kas23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 If there are fans that truly think safety is a "pressing need," then it only affirms that people can talk themselves into anything if they think about it long enough. "Hey guys, one of our running backs is 31 - we got another pressing need there!" It really comes down to whether Buddy & Co. think Barron is the next Polamalu or Reed. If they do, then no other option they're considering at #10 is projected to make a similar impact and the pick is a no-brainer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 I get that. But you cannot objectively look at this Bills roster, point at the safety position, and say that it is a pressing need. That's ridiculous. We have one of the top safety pairings in the league. I'm still waiting for someone to list 5 better SS than The Senator. I bet after Polamalu and Berry, you have to hit Google. Did people forget that he got hurt midseason? And that when he was in the lineup we did in fact beat NE? (and btw, he was all over the field that game) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 Well if you subscribe to the "best player available" as opposed to the "best player who can help your team actually win more than 6 games" Barron is a good choice. If you want to fix the arterial bleeding you'll go with Reiff. If you can't get either of them Keuchly and Gilmore are good compromising candidates to both schools of thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 If we take Barron, I'll Only be happy because we didn't draft Martin or Rieff. If we plan on playing mostly 2LB 3 safety, which we did a lot of last year, I guess I'm ok with it, but he better turn out to be a stud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Búfalo Blanco Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 TE Coby Fleener to the Pats..? What?!?! Are they trying to play keep away with the rest of the league on the TE position? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 There are very few "game-changer" safeties in the history of the league and I'd venture to guess most of them are in the HoF. They don't come along that often. On the other hand there are plenty of guys who play CB, LT or LB who have the ability to alter games on a regular basis who aren't HoF caliber players. Those positions just have a more significant impact on the game and the guy doesn't have to be a once (or twice) in a decade type player to be worthy of a top 10 pick. Name a less important position than Safety that isn't a kicker? Maybe Guard - and that's why you don't see Guards going in the top 10 either. So yeah, if you think Barron is a HoF type player then he's worth a 10 pick, otherwise do like other teams and grab your safeties with later picks from positions that have a bigger impact on wins and losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickedface Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 if kalil isn't there i could see floyd or kuechly, barron is not an immediate impact player. unless all 3 of those guys are gone i suppose barron would be a different story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 (edited) So yeah, if you think Barron is a HoF type player then he's worth a 10 pick, otherwise do like other teams and grab your safeties with later picks from positions that have a bigger impact on wins and losses. The pass-happy game now being played is altering the demands of the safety position. Here's a good article describing the shift and I could find five more like it in a few minutes of Googling. "In a time when 5,000-yard passers aren't surprising anyone and tight ends are among the NFL leaders in receptions and receiving yards, the safety position is becoming vital for defensive success." "I think you see the evolution of the safety position," Lions head coach Jim Schwartz said. "There used to be the free safety and the strong safety, and the strong safety was always an in-the-box player. Over the last six or seven years that line has pretty much disappeared. There is no more strong safety. There is no more free safety. There are safeties." "Being able to play in the box against the run and also step back and cover the new breed of NFL tight ends is part of the job description now for a safety." Here's an even better article: "What’s most likely to happen is the linebacker and safety positions will blend into one. Linebackers will always play closer to the line of scrimmage, but with improved blitzes and certain offensive matchups, they’ll wind up playing just as much coverage as the safeties play. As important as the Giants’ pass rush was down the stretch last season, an overlooked aspect of the defensive resurgence was that safety Antrel Rolle moved to nickel corner/dime linebacker on passing downs. Rolle, a former Cardinal, was drafted high in the first round as a cornerback. He also happens to be an adept tackler. In short, he’s a safety who can truly cover man-to-man and truly play the run. That kind of versatility not only eliminated many of the matchup problems that New York’s opponents tried to create, it also allowed the Giants to better disguise and execute their defensive tactics. Rolle is not a superstar but his versatile skills give the Giants great elasticity. The more elastic defensive personnel can be, the easier it is for the coaching staff to highlight the strengths of all its players." How TEs are changing the game...and how defenses will have to adapt. "The next chess move will have the defensive coach going to look for the hybrid defensive player - that 6-3, 235-pound linebacker/defensive end who can do it all," Dilfer said. "He has to have great feet (for quickness) not necessarily top-end speed. "Maybe the prototype is (Seattle safety) Kam Chancellor (6-3, 232). Or, when he first came out of college as a safety, (Chicago linebacker) Brian Urlacher. They could catch up with some of these tight ends." Not sure about the Urlacher comparison (there only one of him), but Chancellor is a guy that Barron has been favorably compared to... Edited April 26, 2012 by Lurker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 The pass-happy game now being played is altering the demands of the safety position. Here's a good article describing the shift and I couldfind five more like it in a few minutes of Googling. "In a time when 5,000-yard passers aren't surprising anyone and tight ends are among the NFL leaders in receptions and receiving yards, the safety position is becoming vital for defensive success." "I think you see the evolution of the safety position," Lions head coach Jim Schwartz said. "There used to be the free safety and the strong safety, and the strong safety was always an in-the-box player. Over the last six or seven years that line has pretty much disappeared. There is no more strong safety. There is no more free safety. There are safeties." "Being able to play in the box against the run and also step back and cover the new breed of NFL tight ends is part of the job description now for a safety." The pass happy NFL has made it more important than ever to get pressure on the QB and have solid CBs. There are a handfull of top flight TEs in the league and there isn't a Safety in the league who can cover them one on one play in play out. Trying to force the issue by drafting one in the top 10 just compounds your problem. Draft a big physical corner and you'd be better off IMO. I've heard coaches discuss having 3 CBs on the field as a base package and getting rid of a Safety - which seems like a much better idea to me when going up against one of the teams with a big athletic TE. Obviously this only works if your CBs can tackle but they should be expected to. Top it off with scouting reports that say Barron's weakness is his coverage skills (not bad, just not fantastic) and I fail to see how he's going to help us stop Gronkowski or Hernandez. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsrhody Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 It's poor form to reach for inferior talent. WR is most in need of a major upgrade anyways, if I was going to reach, I sure as hell would not be going OLB. Inferior talent? I'm not sure where you got that from. If anything, Kuechly is rated higher than Barron on most people's boards. Also, he's a MLB and OLB. I dont think anyone would consider it a "reach" if we drafted Kuechly at 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 (edited) Obviously this only works if your CBs can tackle but they should be expected to. Tackle or hit like a LB. I'll take the hybrid LB/S type Barron represents rather than an undersized nickle or dime CB. If, all things being equal, neither the nickle CB or jumbo SS can cover Gronk, I still want a guy who'll punish/wear him down him after each reception... Top it off with scouting reports that say Barron's weakness is his coverage skills (not bad, just not fantastic) and I fail to see how he's going to help us stop Gronkowski or Hernandez. Barron's rebuttal Echoed by Saban Edited April 26, 2012 by Lurker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 nolan narwrocki was correct on Cam and hit the nail on the head with Geno Smith. This guy is an idiot that is trying to get his name in the spotlight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.