ans4e64 Posted February 24, 2006 Author Share Posted February 24, 2006 The main point of my post - for those of us who are hooked on phonics - is that it is not a necessity to draft linemen high, seeing as Buffalo has had success in the past with undrafted free agents, low draft picks, and so on. Examples: Kent Hull, Howard Ballard, and Jason Peters to name a few. But it is always a good thing to keep in mind. Especially in Buffalo's current situation. The other point that i was trying to make was that linemen don't always work out when they are drafted in the first round (Examples: Mike Williams, Bryant McKinnie, and Jordan Gross) mainly because of their size which limits them to their growth as a player (If you don't think linemen need good footwork, you need to put down the Madden controller and watch real football). And my final sentence about drafting Ngata, it is the only real move Buffalo has to make besides trading down. But based on the lack of depth at DT in this draft, Ngata is probably the best choice for the Bills' position in the draft and the best choice in terms of filling needs The initial argument was that you had to draft linemen high in order to have success in the NFL. I don't call that contradiction. 609786[/snapback] I'm sorry but saying you dont need to draft linemen high and then saying the Bills need to draft Ngata in the first round is a contradiction in my book. There is a lot of depth at the DT position. Many of the latter DT's have had injury problems or missed a year for some reason, but are excellent players. Everybody has some success with undrafted free agents, and because of this, it doesnt mean you should wait till the latter rounds just because we got lucky with a pick or 2. You say you can find linemen later, but dont you agree that your chance of hitting on a potential star increases the higher you pick them? It makes no sense to me that you say we shouldnt draft a lineman high because we can find them later. You can find anyone later, but its extremely difficult. The players at the top of the draft are at the top of the draft for a reason.... THEY'RE BETTER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoondckCL Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I'm sorry but saying you dont need to draft linemen high and then saying the Bills need to draft Ngata in the first round is a contradiction in my book. There is a lot of depth at the DT position. Many of the latter DT's have had injury problems or missed a year for some reason, but are excellent players. Everybody has some success with undrafted free agents, and because of this, it doesnt mean you should wait till the latter rounds just because we got lucky with a pick or 2. You say you can find linemen later, but dont you agree that your chance of hitting on a potential star increases the higher you pick them? It makes no sense to me that you say we shouldnt draft a lineman high because we can find them later. You can find anyone later, but its extremely difficult. The players at the top of the draft are at the top of the draft for a reason.... THEY'RE BETTER 610180[/snapback] I'll agree its just that i think that with the high pick that it will take to get the more skilled linemen you are taking a higher risk in terms of a salray cap hit. I do agree that they are higher draft picks because of their ability, but you also have to admit that it can be crippling to their development in the long run. Sorry about the "hooked on phonics" thing, i was in a bad mood or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluenews Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 na that makes far to much sense to invest heavy in the trenches. We need more skill position players who wont help us immediatly. 608413[/snapback] skillz mean nothing went a team can't protect the passer and can't smell the other team's QB!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I think the original poster's point was that the Pats drafted along the lines, and as a result, won three of four Super Bowls with the help of the top-shelf linemen they drafted. Whether or not the lineman they drafted became media darlings is irrelevant. 609184[/snapback] Except he's wrong. They won with a 2 1st day picks, and a bunch of undrafted free agent or late round guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Except he's wrong. They won with a 2 1st day picks, and a bunch of undrafted free agent or late round guys. 610784[/snapback] On offense. Different story on the defensive line: Richard Seymour - 2001 #6 overall Ty Warren - 2003 #13 overall Vince Wilfork - 2004 #21 overall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts