John from Riverside Posted April 24, 2016 Share Posted April 24, 2016 I could sign him signing a one year deal with a good passing qb and trying to get a bigger contract in a couple of years. Woods, and pretty much every possible #2 wr, will not put up numbers in this current offense. It's not set up that way and it's been a staple of Roman offenses. If anything, the number 2 option is Clay. That's why it would be insane to go wr in the 1st or 2nd. But what is coveted in a Roman offense is a receiver who is a willing blocker...... I agree that a WR in the 1st or 2nd is not likely....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 24, 2016 Share Posted April 24, 2016 But what is coveted in a Roman offense is a receiver who is a willing blocker...... I agree that a WR in the 1st or 2nd is not likely....... You can find receivers who can 40 passes who can block almost everywhere. I still think this offense would benefit more from another dual threat TE. I loved O'Leary but if there was a good prospect in a good spot in the draft, I'd draft one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted April 24, 2016 Share Posted April 24, 2016 We dont know that Things are a little grey when we are in a year where we are cap strapped.....we will not be next year and Whaley takes a lot of pride in resigning his own players. Personally....I hope Woods has a very productive year No we don't know until it happens. But I'd put money on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted April 25, 2016 Share Posted April 25, 2016 No we don't know until it happens. But I'd put money on it. I am forced to think Woods will shine a bit with Tyrod two years in. Roman has to get TT looking for him and TT has lead him. One thing Robert does is move to the ball in tight windows well. Do not see it often but it has happened. 19 is too soon for what Roman runs traditionally. But that could change couldn't it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinMassare Posted April 25, 2016 Share Posted April 25, 2016 You can find receivers who can 40 passes who can block almost everywhere. I still think this offense would benefit more from another dual threat TE. I loved O'Leary but if there was a good prospect in a good spot in the draft, I'd draft one. And the fact that Woods caught 47 out of 80 targets. 58% is very low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 Really great article by Kevin Massare here: Buffalo Bills Drafting Offense – The Great Debate In that article, he makes the case that the Bills should go offense at #19. I'll admit, I didn't realize how much I actually liked our starting front-7 until I sat down and reviewed it. It's a lot stronger than I *thought* it would be. We definitely have some depth to fill in, but I don't think it's as bad as we all assume it is when we think defense is a given. #2 WR might be the biggest hole on the team. Robert Woods isn't good enough (but a darn good slot receiver), and he's our best option. We have to replace the production of Harvin/Hogan, and we don't have a great talent to do it. I do like Hankerson, but he's an ideal #4 WR, not a #2. I'm becoming a fan of a potential trade back, as there will likely be multiple good WR options at #19, grabbing an extra pick for depth, and then going WR/NT in the draft. If I look at our starters, the biggest holes are WR, RT, DL. Let's get two of those in the first two rounds to really make this team stronger. BTW, in case you guys don't read the article, Matt Miller is reporting that the latest draft buzz is the Bills going WR in round 1. https://twitter.com/nfldraftscout/status/723725773513756672 It might really be a good idea to focus on offense because Rex doesn't seem to have much of a say in it. Another receiver, a RT, and some OL depth could probably do a lot for the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihilarian Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 I would not be happy with a receiver at #19. Treadwell is the only one I have given a first round grade to. I think Doctson might have the highest ceiling in this draft and I love his potential but he is too big a gamble for me at #19. If all the receivers are there at 19 though that gives us slide back options. Washington at #21, Houston at #22, Minnesota at #23 and Cincinnati at #24 are all possible receiver drafters. Cincy rarely move anywhere in the draft but if Houston or Minnesota have one guy way ahead of the others then the Bills could slide back a few spots pick up at least a third rounder and let them make sure they have a shot at their guy. EDIT: The only offensive guy I'd want at #19 is Taylor Decker. Here,here! And a guy I know you don't want or like. I wouldn't mind the Bills taking a shot with Paxton Lynch if he is there at #19. 6'7'' 244lbs and the kid can run like Kaepernick. Only Lynch is not damaged goods like Kaep. I can see Denver trading up for him and I would hate to see him go to the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster Guy Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 There is zero chance we take a WR at 19. Our scouting department is too good for that. Also, to correct the OP, if we did trade down we'd very likely have 3 picks in the 1st 2 rounds, not 2. We have the best rushing attack in the NFL last year, 2 good wr's and a great TE. Continuity on offensive line, Miller looking to join the other 3 in the "very good" club. We need 2 starters in our front 7 on D from this draft. Everything else is smokescreen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 (edited) You can find receivers who can 40 passes who can block almost everywhere. I still think this offense would benefit more from another dual threat TE. I loved O'Leary but if there was a good prospect in a good spot in the draft, I'd draft one. I agree that a TE could be a surprise pick for us in the first 4 rounds of the draft. I'm not opposed to taking a WR if a quality D-lineman not available. I know we need a LB but Whaley has shown he can locate quality LBs in Rounds 2 in Kiko and Rounds 3 in Preston Brown. Edited April 26, 2016 by The Jokeman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts