Craiger93 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Seeing that we need help at MLB, DT, and CB..... We have McCargo (who has yet to play a full year), and Youbouty (ditto).......both have a year under their belt in the Bills System. If (When) Fletcher leaves, we need to fill THAT hole.........maybe Patrick Willis (if he's still around) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers_is_back Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Seeing that we need help at MLB, DT, and CB..... We have McCargo (who has yet to play a full year), and Youbouty (ditto).......both have a year under their belt in the Bills System. If (When) Fletcher leaves, we need to fill THAT hole.........maybe Patrick Willis (if he's still around) Youboty has yet to play a full game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Seeing that we need help at MLB, DT, and CB..... We have McCargo (who has yet to play a full year), and Youbouty (ditto).......both have a year under their belt in the Bills System. If (When) Fletcher leaves, we need to fill THAT hole.........maybe Patrick Willis (if he's still around) Willis has dropped to #30 on Kiper's list (which is far from perfect as he makes a bunch of mistakes but it is an indicator of the trend among pundits) and given that he was not even a 1st round choice in some mocks, it is legitimately a question of how far can the Bills trade down and get Willis. He is a good player as he received the Butkus award as college's top LB, but his stock has plummeted since he struggled with pass coverage against top notch talent in the Senior Bowl. I think his struggles actually make him a better candidate for the Bills to draft as it looks like he will need some time sitting on the bench and learning the NFL game in practice before anyone wants to trust him with the reins at MLB. I think our needs in the trenches on both sides of the ball are significant enough that I am reluctant to see us use the 1st round pick on a player whose main contribution to the Bills his rookie year is going to be learning the game (even if the take yet another DT in the first at least he will see PT in the DL rotation. It certainly appears that if we draft Willis with the idea of starting him at MLB, the D is gonna be painful to watch for a while as he learns how to play an NFL Cover 2 which requires him to both tackle like a DT (which I think he can do) and also cover like a safety (which was something we used the MLB heavily for last year as Fletch led the NFL in INTs by an MLB beating out both MC and McGee to lead the Bills in INTs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMIEBUF12 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 if i was the gm of the bills and i was drafting a inside linebacker it would be paul posluszny from penn state...everybody knows the BESTlinebackers come from penn state.just go ask jim kelly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Right now it's probably Offensive Tackle seeing as we only have a grand total of 1 capable OT on our entire roster. If Marv and Co. were to forego Levi Brown in favor of a LB, I'd be pretty annoyed.....again. When Clements leaves that primary draft need probably then becomes corner, particularly when you considere that at times it seemed Nate was teh only guy on the roster who could cover anybody last year. I'm realllly not looking forward to seeing the Bills draft another 1st round corner, particularly in a year when none of the corners I've seen have been worth a pig in a poke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Right now it's probably Offensive Tackle seeing as we only have a grand total of 1 capable OT on our entire roster. If Marv and Co. were to forego Levi Brown in favor of a LB, I'd be pretty annoyed.....again.When Clements leaves that primary draft need probably then becomes corner, particularly when you considere that at times it seemed Nate was teh only guy on the roster who could cover anybody last year. I'm realllly not looking forward to seeing the Bills draft another 1st round corner, particularly in a year when none of the corners I've seen have been worth a pig in a poke. McGee sucked so bad at CB in the first half of last season that he deservedly got benched. However, as best as I could tell he was so bad not because he was suddenly physically overmatched but it was because he had problems mastering the Cover 2 and particularly doing good reads of how our coverage was working (or not) and then doing what he was supposed to do. For example, I think that the coaches were pissed at him not for simply getting beaten by better players, but on pass plays such as the one in the MN game where we simply got lucky the MV QN overthrew his WR running free on a fly pattern, McGee did not make the read not only that one of our rookie safeties was cheating too much to the middle of the field so he should have stuck with the WR even when he went out of the 10-15 yard short zone usually covered by the CB in the cover 2, but there was no one set to run a route underneath into the short zone so there was no one for McGee to really cover so he should have continued to cover the WR. McGee seemed to get his attitude adjusted by the benching and played his cover 2 role much better in the final 8 games. This may well have led to something indicated by the stats as in the first half of the season opposing QBs simply chose to pick on the struggling McGee rather than even test BC. However, in the second half of the season they began to challenge NC more as indicated by all 3 of NC's INTs coming in the second half of the season. It is a distinct possibility that McGee may have finally recovered the form which actually saw him tie for the lead in INTs in the 2005 season. I think the real question for the Bills is gonna be who plays our #2 CB spot. I think the Bills have calculated (and actually did so long ago when they made the offer to NC not to franchise him this off-season) that since the value of a corner who runs well with WRs and plays deep passes well has been diminished, they can get by with a rejuvenated McGee and either a Youbouty who has a rep for doing press coverage well or a second tier FA can handle the CB duties. If things go as planned, I do not see us having a huge need to draft a CB with our first pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalfan Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 ........ McGee seemed to get his attitude adjusted by the benching and played his cover 2 role much better in the final 8 games. This may well have led to something indicated by the stats as in the first half of the season opposing QBs simply chose to pick on the struggling McGee rather than even test BC. However, in the second half of the season they began to challenge NC more as indicated by all 3 of NC's INTs coming in the second half of the season. ......... The Bills changed coverage so that Nate was always assigned to the number 1 guy, that's why it looked like Mcgee improved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 The Bills changed coverage so that Nate was always assigned to the number 1 guy, that's why it looked like Mcgee improved. Yeah definitely one factor. However, my sense is that this was part also in McGee getting to breath a little more deeply and check himself and then also perform better after he got benched. Looking at his stats there is nothing consistent in them to indicate this bu IMHO we saw opposing QBs challenge NC a bit more beyond just simply an uptick i would attribute to them looking for their #1 WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Willis has dropped to #30 on Kiper's list (which is far from perfect as he makes a bunch of mistakes but it is an indicator of the trend among pundits) and given that he was not even a 1st round choice in some mocks, it is legitimately a question of how far can the Bills trade down and get Willis. Since when does marv give a sh-- about what Kiper says, hes wrong half the time, marv will take who is best for our team at that time plain and simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Since when does marv give a sh-- about what Kiper says, hes wrong half the time, marv will take who is best for our team at that time plain and simple Kiper will move him up the board after teh combine when he is shocked to learn that he can run and jump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 how far were we supposed to trade down to get that 16 game-starting Safety last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Since when does marv give a sh-- about what Kiper says, hes wrong half the time, marv will take who is best for our team at that time plain and simple I do not think he cares what Kiper says at all and as the post says one should recognize that he may well be wrong but his listing ia worth noting as a third party confirmation of him losing value based on what the pundits say and the expectation issue does play a role in drafting. My guess is Kiper is in fact wrong about Willis who could go at 25 and Kiper is wrong by five but also he could be wrong if Willis slips to the second round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 how far were we supposed to trade down to get that 16 game-starting Safety last year? Marv gauges (and I think correctly) that as we needed 1 of the two highest rated SS players one way or the other, once Oak surprised folks by taking Huff we could not risk trading down at all or we might lose the other SS Whitner. As Detroit with the #9 took an SS in the second round, it is a fair to middlin chance that if we had traded down Whitner might not have made it even past the next pick. The implication of this for the 07 draft is that since even if we choose the highest rated MLB Willis, it likely would mean taking a step down for a while in MLB production even though we would likely have our MLB of the future, that we will look elsewhere than the draft to fill the MLB slot this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 huh? Just pointing out that your pointing to the Whitner situation makes the point why the team would not want to rely on getting Willis as our likely starter at MLB. This strikes me as a bad idea anyway because the MLB role in the Cover 2 is substantially more difficult than the safety role such that it will be quite difficult for a rookie to play adequately at MLB in our Cover 2, but also: 1. We were simply forced to take Whitner with our #8 after Oakland took Huff with their #7. 2. Since even the top rated MLB would likely be inadequate for our 07 needs at MLB, the fact we are now picking at #12 rather than #8 means we better look to some other source like FA to get our starting MLB. If not a surprising pick prior to ours leaves us relying on an even lesser prospect to start for us at MLB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 the only thing my statement points out is that everyone can flush their "expert" draft boards down the toilet. and the Front Office knows best. only you could type and type until you somehow reached those conclusions in your post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 the only thing my statement points out is that everyone can flush their "expert" draft boards down the toilet. and the Front Office knows best. only you could type and type until you somehow reached those conclusions in your post Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Seeing that we need help at MLB, DT, and CB..... We have McCargo (who has yet to play a full year), and Youbouty (ditto).......both have a year under their belt in the Bills System. If (When) Fletcher leaves, we need to fill THAT hole.........maybe Patrick Willis (if he's still around) One option the Bills have is to move Crowell to the middle, with Ellison and Spikes on the outside, and Wire as the backup. A LB corps like that wouldn't be ideal, but it'd be good enough to get you by. Good enough that the Bills wouldn't be forced to take a LB with their first or second pick, if a better difference maker was available at some other position. To be honest, I'm not that particular about which position the first round pick plays, so long as he can be a difference maker. A WR or TE that requires double coverage, an OT that can block good DEs without any help, a DT that makes himself a frequent and unwelcome guest in the other team's backfield--all would be fine by me. But whatever position he plays, I want him to be an active force in altering football games; not just some guy who holds his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 One option the Bills have is to move Crowell to the middle, with Ellison and Spikes on the outside, and Wire as the backup. A LB corps like that wouldn't be ideal, but it'd be good enough to get you by. Good enough that the Bills wouldn't be forced to take a LB with their first or second pick, if a better difference maker was available at some other position. To be honest, I'm not that particular about which position the first round pick plays, so long as he can be a difference maker. A WR or TE that requires double coverage, an OT that can block good DEs without any help, a DT that makes himself a frequent and unwelcome guest in the other team's backfield--all would be fine by me. But whatever position he plays, I want him to be an active force in altering football games; not just some guy who holds his own. you are correct. it is too expensive to buy play makers in FA- if they are even available. The supporting cast can come from FA, but the studs need to be drafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaBills Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 If (When) Fletcher leaves, we need to fill THAT hole.........maybe Patrick Willis (if he's still around) The more I see and read about him, the more I like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 Yep PG, you and I frequently disagree wrt how the Bills can improve the team, but I must say that in this thread, I think that you are making a ton of sense, and I hope you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts