3putt Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I know everyone will be clamoring for a LT or WR in round 2, but IMHO i think we have an opportunity to be bold and add another starter to the Defense. Chix has said that they think Hairston is a starter and that the OT's available may actually play on the Right giving CH a chance to show development. A WR would be nice but they do not necessarily contribute right away outside of the elite ones that are already gone. IF a lights out LB or DE is available and will start right away, I say go for it. No one runs us out of the building. A ferocious D helps the Offense from a FP standpoint, and we still have picks to add back up on the offensive side of the ball. Fitz can manage a game, the Ravens showed you can win with a great D and an adequate QB. If L David or (gasp) Jenkins or Curry makes us into a top 10 Defense I would be really happy. Best of from the audio vaults of the Saints and Pats: Giants GM: Draft is coming up what do you guys think? Staff: well we could use secondary or O line Help: GM: wht about DE? Staff: We are set there. GM: But what if we throw 6 studs on a constant rotation at everyone and dare them to get the ball out quickly enough would that work? Staff: No that would be terrible. Gm: Yeah you are probably right, let's get that back up guard who may be a RT someday. Staff: way to go boss! you da man! BE Bold! I know this is going to get ripped so fire away I anticipate the critique! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I hope they take an OLB within the next few rounds. Along with WR and OT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilsner Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Fortune favors the bold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted April 27, 2012 Author Share Posted April 27, 2012 Fortune favors the bold. I agree and that is still the best avatar ever posted on this or any site! Period, no discussion!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todzilla Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 (edited) I don't hate this way of thinking at all. Especially a guy like Curry or David. I like Andre Branch too. If Mark Anderson is the guy from his middle seasons in the league and Merriman can't stay healthy, it would be great to have another pass rusher. Curry and Williams on the ends for the next 6 years would be tough. Yeah Pilsner, that pic makes it awful tough to focus on reading your posts Edited April 27, 2012 by todzilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilsner Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Thanks 3putt. She's a keeper! If Glenn doesn't make it to our pick and if perhaps Nixley is high on James Brown then...combined with the possibility that a quality WR can be found in the 3rd or low 2nd (with a trade up) then who knows maybe Nix will go for more D. That mess of a sentence was too long. Yeah Pilsner, that pic makes it awful tough to focus on reading your posts That's good todzilla, it helps distract you from the gibberish I often write Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I agree and that is still the best avatar ever posted on this or any site! Period, no discussion!! Agree on both the pick and avatar.... was in Munich last Oktoberfest in the Lowenbrau tent and there's plenty of young ladies that pretty much look that... rock on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted April 27, 2012 Author Share Posted April 27, 2012 Agree on both the pick and avatar.... was in Munich last Oktoberfest in the Lowenbrau tent and there's plenty of young ladies that pretty much look that... rock on! No disrespect, but I think she is one of a kind! I would love a D pick that not only makes BB think about drafting a FB to protect brady, but makes Jets wonder about turning Tebow into a blocker for Sanchez and makes Tannehill think about the glorious opportunities in hospitality management his college has prepared him for. Win Your Division, Win the Conference, Win it all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Every time I see that Avatar it makes me thirsty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimer1960 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Boy, as much as the need is there for a LT, if there isn't one there that they are REALLY sold on (and I don't think there is), then I could really get behind a pick on D. I really like the idea of Vinny Curry and, while I wasn't in favor of Courtney Upshaw in round 1, he could be a very good run-stuffing DE here with a little bit of pass rush ability, too. If they like LBs David or Kendricks, those could be good picks, but I suspect that neither fits Buddy's size criteria. All things being equal, I'd wait on a WR, but if Rueben Randle or Stephen Hill are available, they have to strongly consider them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 (edited) No disrespect, but I think she is one of a kind! I would love a D pick that not only makes BB think about drafting a FB to protect brady, but makes Jets wonder about turning Tebow into a blocker for Sanchez and makes Tannehill think about the glorious opportunities in hospitality management his college has prepared him for. Win Your Division, Win the Conference, Win it all! I'm not going to disparage das Fraulein in any way as she is certainly beautiful, but if you do a Google search on Munich Oktoberfest and scroll the pictures, you'll see plenty of talent! http://www.livelypic.com/oktoberfest-in-munich-gemany.html Keep scrolling... some avatar candidates in the lower half! Edited April 27, 2012 by cage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Fortune favors the bold. How exactly is another defensive selection any more bold than selecting a wide receiver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted April 27, 2012 Author Share Posted April 27, 2012 How exactly is another defensive selection any more bold than selecting a wide receiver? I believe that adding another key element to Wanny's scheme makes that unit potentially lethal. A Defender who is ready, and I emphasize ready, to come in and start gives us an advantage on one side of the ball. Adding a WR who needs to learn a route tree, to run nfl routes, read nfl d backs and coverages, in my mind doesn't have the same high probability of vaulting a unit from middle of the pack to top dawg. If the other team can't score the worse that can happen is you tie. The reverse is not true on O. But then again my checks aren't signed by the nfl or any of its affialites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted April 27, 2012 Author Share Posted April 27, 2012 I'm not going to disparage das Fraulein in any way as she is certainly beautiful, but if you do a Google search on Munich Oktoberfest and scroll the pictures, you'll see plenty of talent! http://www.livelypic.com/oktoberfest-in-munich-gemany.html Keep scrolling... some avatar candidates in the lower half! Don't know about avatar candidates but I am calling Lufthansa to book as we speak! Nice link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 (edited) I believe that adding another key element to Wanny's scheme makes that unit potentially lethal. A Defender who is ready, and I emphasize ready, to come in and start gives us an advantage on one side of the ball. Adding a WR who needs to learn a route tree, to run nfl routes, read nfl d backs and coverages, in my mind doesn't have the same high probability of vaulting a unit from middle of the pack to top dawg. If the other team can't score the worse that can happen is you tie. The reverse is not true on O. But then again my checks aren't signed by the nfl or any of its affialites. The defense was 30th(?) last year. A new DC, switching to a 4-3. If they add another defender to start, that would be 2 rookies, and three 1st year starters/2nd year pro's, plus two free agents. I know the defense sucked, but that is also a lot of new guys, and very young players. Experience helps. I know "on paper" it looks glorious, but the Washington Redskins have had some great paper teams too. They need an influx of talent on the offensive side of the ball, too. Fitz is good, but he isn't a superstar, and needs good tools. Even with a great defense, the rules favor offenses, and the Bills are going to be scored on. They will have to keep up. How about "boldly" adding to the offense. Edited April 27, 2012 by Matthews' Bag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Luckily LT is a position where no one ever gets hurt, and Hairston specifically has never gotten hurt, so we're rock-solid there. Also luckily no opposing defense was able to shut down our offense by sitting on short routes and daring Fitz to hold on to the ball for more than 2.5 seconds. But mostly I'd like to +1 the avatar/Oktoberfest talk. I was there in 2009, and need to get back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted April 27, 2012 Author Share Posted April 27, 2012 The defense was 30th(?) last year. A new DC, switching to a 4-3. If they add another defender to start, that would be 2 rookies, and 3 1st year starters/2nd year pro's, plus a new free agent. I know the defense sucked, but that is also a lot of new guys, and very young players. Experience helps. I know "on paper" it looks glorious, but the Washington Redskins have had some great paper teams too. They need an influx of talent on the offensive side of the ball, too. Fitz is good, but he isn't a superstar, and needs good tools. Even with a great defense, the rules favor offenses, and the Bills are going to be scored on. They will have to keep up. How about "boldly" adding to the offense. I am only saying that a talent at this position, i.e. one who may have a 1st round grade, can have a greater impact on Defense. There is less to learn, the schemes are more instinctive, and natural talent can come before pure technique. On O their is much more technique, more scheme to learn and usually a higher learning curve. Add more talent in 3, 4, 5 on O, no argument. But i think you can have a greater immediate, i.e. this season with a top end D player in rd 2. There will be tackles and speedsters and slot guys in 3, 4, 4 5, 5, to add to the O. Luckily LT is a position where no one ever gets hurt, and Hairston specifically has never gotten hurt, so we're rock-solid there. Also luckily no opposing defense was able to shut down our offense by sitting on short routes and daring Fitz to hold on to the ball for more than 2.5 seconds. But mostly I'd like to +1 the avatar/Oktoberfest talk. I was there in 2009, and need to get back. Then I consider you lucky! I think you are missing my point as to focus. We could package both 4'2 both 5's and 6 an 7 for a tackle and a wr as well and everyone wins. But id we are going to sit in place, then I think the biggest benefit is for a Defensive player. Adding a tweener in rd 6 to me is a waste. An OT in 3 may not start and simply back up Hairston and Pears. A WR could contribute provided he can adapt to the NFL game and get open ( James Hardy anyone.) If we do not move, I say add a D player and then spend the rest on O. on separate note, I spent New Year's 2007 in Ibiza and the sites were similar a little more provocative but the beer wasn;t probably not even remotely as good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilsner Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 How exactly is another defensive selection any more bold than selecting a wide receiver? I meant it as more along the lines of BPA on Nixley's board even if it means adding to the D again in the 2nd. If BPA is a wideout then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I meant it as more along the lines of BPA on Nixley's board even if it means adding to the D again in the 2nd. If BPA is a wideout then so be it. I agree with BPA... happy with WR, OT or LB. But would like to see us acquire another 2nd rounder somehow and snag 2 of the 3 given what's still on the board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts