section122 Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 As I put in my mock draft here what about this idea? Barrett Jones in the 2nd. Pundits be damned this guy is a stud. If he were available in the 2nd round he would serve 2 purposes. He would fill the hole that Levitre left (either he or wood could slide over as both have experience playing guard) and he would also guard against the potential loss of Wood next year. I see his pick as the way to go. QB in round 1 to me is all but a given at this point barring something wild (3 before their pick) and I think Jones would be the best solution to the issue. Sliding Glenn inside makes no sense to me as he has already proven he can play LT. Also it would be a morale issue as well. Top G's don't make them money that LT's do so I can't imagine he would be happy about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 Me too. Warmack and Nassib would infuriate me the most. Warmack is a very good guard, but he'll be gone in 4 years. So will anybody else they draft if they turn out to be good so what is the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 So will anybody else they draft if they turn out to be good so what is the difference? Except for QB..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 While you're 100% correct, remember you're dealing with the Bills. As a general rule, I don't think taking a running back in the first round is ever the smart thing to do (with the possible exception of a "once in a lifetime guy," and even then I'm no so sure about it). Yet the Bills have taken THREE of them in the last decade. Two of them are no longer with the team and the third one has had difficulty getting playing time over a free agent. So just because it doesn't make sense to take a guard at #8 doesn't mean the Brain Trust won't do it. It amazes me that there are still people trying to cling desperately to the "Nix is an idiot because he drafted Spiller" argument. Just lay it down already. :facepalm: Apparently we are at the last bastion of this argument: you can't be right about Nix/Spiller...so you use "the Bills/RBs", and try to be right, via aggregation, instead? Hilarious. Getting Spiller at #5, without having to use multiple draft picks, was THE BEST draft pick the Bills have had in the last 10 years. See if you can wrap your head around this thought: Glenn is already a G who's playing LT. And he'd be fine at RT as well. But if you and others around here can't see the idea of a Joeckel or Fisher (already better LTs than Glenn) and Glenn combining to form one of the most dominant left sides in football, and next to Eric Wood to boot, what can I say? Find some tapes of Art Shell and Gene Upshaw. I'm not saying or even advocating the Bills do any of this. They NEED to find their QB, but there are FAR FAR FAR worse things they can do than creating the best left side in football. GO BILLS!!! You are right. Winston Churchill: "I'd rather be right, than consistent". It seems we have people who'd rather be consistent than right, as in: "We should have signed Nate Clements, because then we wouldn't have had to draft CBs, and therefore, we shouldn't draft a Guard, because that's just recycling players too. See? I'm being consistent! ( Perhaps, but you'd rather be consistent than have a top 3 O line?.) The fact that Nate Clements didn't earn his contract in SF, to the point that they cut loose of him and now he is JAG on the Bengals...will never sink in. Not overpaying for a player, and drafting his replacement, is not "recycling". It's simply not overpaying for a player. Yeah, not overpaying means a hole gets created, but, that's not the point. The wisdom is that the overpaying costs you 1-2 other useful players, and that it is a BIGGER problem than the hole. Letting Nate Clements go was, both in real time and in hindsight, actually the right call. But, if we "know" it wasn't, then "that means we're not allowed to draft a Guard...because that would be recycling, and either makes us wrong about Nate Clements/drafting CBs, or is inconsistent with what we've been saying about it. So, we can't do it". Yeah, it's absurd. I believe I've diagnosed the absurdity properly. The next step is figuring out how to eradicate it properly so that it doesn't come back. So will anybody else they draft if they turn out to be good so what is the difference? What makes you so certain that 4 years from now is going to be = to today, on this team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts