Lurker Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 10 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: I think if you look at the playoff game with the 10 targets downfield to Duke, which josh willingly threw up and as I recall they were on target, some of which Duke couldn’t make the play... Could all the throws to Duke just as easily be a byproduct of Houston game planning to take away Brown and Beasley (know quantities) and gambling that an unknown like Williams wouldn't be a difference maker? Which, ultimately, was the correct assumption. IMO, Josh threw a lot of balls to Duke because his two primary receivers were most often covered, not necessarily because he was a 'big body'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said: This has been discussed a lot including at least one podcast by joe Marino about comparing him and Shenault for the offense and how Higgins isn’t as good of a fit. He also brought up though that we don’t know how he would be utilized until he is here (if he is here) because we haven’t had a WR like him with that skill set, his sure hands and catch radius. I am not big in Shenault either TBH. When it comes to the Tier 2/3 guys I like AIyuk, Mims, Reagor over Higgins again based on fit and how I would look at the offense (explosive playmaker vs a big guy WR. I'd rather have the top 3 WRs being 5'11"ish and up with 4.4 ish or better speed who can go over the middle and play outside. The specialty big guy is a WR4 or TE for me. I am not a fan of gimmick players either...Just me and my preferences of course! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCOrange Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 3 minutes ago, Lurker said: Could all the throws to Duke just as easily be a byproduct of Houston game planning to take away Brown and Beasley (know quantities) and gambling that an unknown like Williams wouldn't be a difference maker? Which, ultimately, was the correct assumption. IMO, Josh threw a lot of balls to Duke because his two primary receivers were most often covered, not necessarily because he was a 'big body'... Isn't that kind of the point though? If all the WRs are covered and Allen defaults to giving Duke the chance because he thinks he has the best chance to make a play on the ball; that's one of the things everyone seems to want to get addressed and Higgins would be that guy for us but likely much much better than Duke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, DCOrange said: Isn't that kind of the point though? If all the WRs are covered and Allen defaults to giving Duke the chance because he thinks he has the best chance to make a play on the ball; that's one of the things everyone seems to want to get addressed and Higgins would be that guy for us but likely much much better than Duke. We also don't have WRs who force a DC to game plan around them which creates opportunities for Smoke, Bease, Singletary & the TEs. Explosive WR who can take it to the house and cuase the DC to double team and not just sit in Zone and take away our WRs who can't separate quickly. edit: Higgins doesn't create that threat and again is not entirely versatile enough or create enough separation quickly. Edited March 13, 2020 by Reed83HOF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 16 minutes ago, Lurker said: Could all the throws to Duke just as easily be a byproduct of Houston game planning to take away Brown and Beasley (know quantities) and gambling that an unknown like Williams wouldn't be a difference maker? Which, ultimately, was the correct assumption. IMO, Josh threw a lot of balls to Duke because his two primary receivers were most often covered, not necessarily because he was a 'big body'... Yes that is why they activated him. If he made the catches they win the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 6 minutes ago, DCOrange said: Isn't that kind of the point though? If all the WRs are covered and Allen defaults to giving Duke the chance because he thinks he has the best chance to make a play on the ball; that's one of the things everyone seems to want to get addressed and Higgins would be that guy for us but likely much much better than Duke. Yes. Since Brown's really a WR2 and Beasley's a WR3, a true WR1 would have helped enormously. We can all debate about who's the best pick for that WR1 job, but not about the need to fill it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsbackto81 Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 5 hours ago, Mr. WEO said: So what? Players were generally slower back then....and are much faster now? 12 players ran sub 4.40 40's that year. 5 of them were DBs. The next year 19 guys ran sub 4.4, 13 were DBs. Last year, only 13 guys were under 4.4. Fitzgerald built a HOF career roasting all of them. That's my point. Doesn't matter how fast you are. If you can play, you can play. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 13, 2020 Share Posted March 13, 2020 41 minutes ago, billsbackto81 said: That's my point. Doesn't matter how fast you are. If you can play, you can play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsGospel Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 I just don't see us taking a WR round 1 when all the experts have said there are go to guys deep until the 3-4 rounds plus there is a major glaring need that will most likely fit BPA at pick 22 with guys like Apenesa, Chiasson to name a few although Chiasson is a bit raw for my liking there is no denying he's a freak athlete. Should be a great draft for our needs since we need pass rushers and WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan17 Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 15 hours ago, Reed83HOF said: 1) All of those players minus Hill were UNDRAFTED. 2) Hill was a very highly regarded talent but had an issues off the field. Domestic Violence allegations surrounding him really hurt his stock. Those arent the best examples to prop that argument up on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 20 hours ago, Reed83HOF said: We also don't have WRs who force a DC to game plan around them which creates opportunities for Smoke, Bease, Singletary & the TEs. Explosive WR who can take it to the house and cuase the DC to double team and not just sit in Zone and take away our WRs who can't separate quickly. edit: Higgins doesn't create that threat and again is not entirely versatile enough or create enough separation quickly. I think NFL defenses will end up game planning to stop Higgins. Michael Thomas didn't run fast, has never been fast and yet is game planned against. I am not obsessed with having a big receiver. I think that is a Bills fan obsession. I just want the best receiver and if that top 3 are all gone and we haven't been able to get up for them then that guy to me is Tee Higgins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 55 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I just want the best receiver and if that top 3 are all gone and we haven't been able to get up for them then that guy to me is Tee Higgins. Drafting for need? Personally, I want the best player available, whether that's a WR, edge, DB, OL, etc. Drafting for need gets you E.J. Manuel, J.P Losman, Aaron Maybin, Shaq Lawson... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 7 minutes ago, Lurker said: Drafting for need? Personally, I want the best player available, whether that's a WR, edge, DB, OL, etc. Drafting for need gets you E.J. Manuel, J.P Losman, Aaron Maybin, Shaq Lawson... That wasn't what I meant. I have been pretty clear I am not desperately keen on reaching for a receiver at #22. My preferences are: 1. Trade up for one of the top 3 WRs (but not into the top 10); 2. If one of the true first round grades at a premium position slides to #22 stand pat and pick (likely a corner, possibly an OT); 3. Trade back slightly to later in the first where the top 2nd tier receivers - Higgins and Aiyuk represent more value; 4. Stay at #22 and go BPA if a true 1st grade even at a non premium position falls; 5. Take Higgins or Aiyuk at #22. It is far from my number 1 strategy to reach for need. I suspect the Bills first round pick will be a receiver though one way or another. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 (edited) 23 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: That wasn't what I meant. I have been pretty clear I am not desperately keen on reaching for a receiver at #22. My preferences are: 1. Trade up for one of the top 3 WRs (but not into the top 10); 2. If one of the true first round grades at a premium position slides to #22 stand pat and pick (likely a corner, possibly an OT); 3. Trade back slightly to later in the first where the top 2nd tier receivers - Higgins and Aiyuk represent more value; 4. Stay at #22 and go BPA if a true 1st grade even at a non premium position falls; 5. Take Higgins or Aiyuk at #22. It is far from my number 1 strategy to reach for need. I suspect the Bills first round pick will be a receiver though one way or another. I like your list. It certainly priortizes the Higgins debate, even though I will be disappointed if scenario 5 is what ultimately takes place. Edited March 14, 2020 by Lurker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted March 14, 2020 Share Posted March 14, 2020 On 3/13/2020 at 2:19 PM, DCOrange said: Isn't that kind of the point though? If all the WRs are covered and Allen defaults to giving Duke the chance because he thinks he has the best chance to make a play on the ball; that's one of the things everyone seems to want to get addressed and Higgins would be that guy for us but likely much much better than Duke. Allen looked accurate throwing the ball to Duke against Houston. I recall him looking accurate throwing to Kelvin Benjamin too. That's the best argument in favor of drafting Higgins in the 1st. The difference is he will actually catch the ball most of the time. Allen doesn't look all that accurate throwing to Cole Beasley over the middle and I think that is a flaw in his game we will just have to accept. A size receiver with good hands will make it easy to forget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts