Are we becoming a mirror of the Detroit Lions?

[BillsVet]

After 6 pages of this thread, it's apparent that the draft is far too complicated for the average fan. The oversimplification inherent in these pages becomes mind numbing really quick. (EG: We need a WR, let's take the best available because they're rated high!) It must be stated that certain positions on a football team are more worthwhile. QB's, OL, and DL should always be the priority, unless of course an amazing talent is available at a skill position or that position is held by at least an above average starter. You can always use DL or OL, no matter what.

 

Each draft has strengths and weaknesses. This year, we see a good draft for RB's, while WR and TE aren't particularly strong. DL and OL (particularly OT) have some excellent talents available both at the top and potentially later on. I've repeatedly heard this draft will be about the middle rounds and finding players underneath the surface. How many times do we see teams find guys one year in the mid rounds that contribute the following year or later?

 

I am tired of of those who declare the draft a total crap-shoot, and eschew any sort of opinion because it's the safe bet. On draft day, they celebrate any pick their team makes, because they have total confidence in that front office. That is equally mind numbing as only a few front offices should receive the benefit of the doubt. IMO, the following are (in no order) the best front offices:

 

Indianapolis, New England, NY Giants, San Diego, Green Bay, Philadelphia, Jacksonville, and Pittsburgh all locate talent more often than not during draft day and make good decisions in the offseason. Not surprisingly these franchises win fairly regularly and enjoy long term success by finding and/or replacing talent more easily than the remaining teams.

 

The NFL is separated by one unique team characteristic: Teams with good front offices win more often than not on gameday. For their short and long term future, the Bills need to start being more like the aforementioned 8 teams, and unlike the majority of the league.

[AKC]

I am tired of of those who declare the draft a total crap-shoot, and eschew any sort of opinion because it's the safe bet. On draft day, they celebrate any pick their team makes, because they have total confidence in that front office. That is equally mind numbing as only a few front offices should receive the benefit of the doubt. IMO, the following are (in no order) the best front offices:

 

Indianapolis, New England, NY Giants, San Diego, Green Bay, Philadelphia, Jacksonville, and Pittsburgh all locate talent more often than not during draft day and make good decisions in the offseason. Not surprisingly these franchises win fairly regularly and enjoy long term success by finding and/or replacing talent more easily than the remaining teams.

 

The NFL is separated by one unique team characteristic: Teams with good front offices win more often than not on gameday. For their short and long term future, the Bills need to start being more like the aforementioned 8 teams, and unlike the majority of the league.

 

No doubt there are teams that treat this like a business and ignore the media and fan ignorami, and the bad teams who approach the draft like it's a Fantasy League. I hope we're moving away from the latter and towards the former this coming April.

 

What is the position of greatest need? WR. Who is the best WR in the draft? Sweed/Kelly. Who will make the biggest impact on your team? a WR. How many points did we score a game last year? 16 or so. And you want to draft defense?

 

So let's draft a WR at 11 even though nearly every credible talent analyst says no WR in this draft is worth a pick before the mid 20s.

 

Glad to see all the chores in the Lion's front office aren't keeping you from some surfing free-time Mr. Millen!

[HeHateMe78]

Since the Buffalo Bills have taken DLinemen with our top pick in two drafts, we've used our top pick for Wideouts 4 times and Corners 5 times.

 

Since the Detroit Lions have taken DLinemen with their top pick in two drafts, they've used their top pick for Wideouts 4 times and Corners 3 times.

 

The Super Bowl teams, who not coinicdentally led the NFL in sacks this past season, broke down this way:

 

Wide Receivers:

 

4 Buff

4 Detroit

0 New England*

0 New York

 

Cornerback

 

5 Buff

4 Detroit

1 New England*

2 New York

 

If we continue the trend, I'm guessing we'll be looking for a new GM in 2009- Matt Millen should also be available and what a great fit that might be!

 

Our D-line is not comparative to our inept offense. Your claim that 2nd & later round picks are inconsequential is quite amusing and makes me question your capacity to comprehend this game. Our last two drafts (which are the only ones that truly merit any examination on the grounds of this front office's absence to former drafts) have been pretty prudent and for the most part encouraging. Lynch, Edwards, Parrish, Poz, Whitner, Simpson and others really can't constitute inadequacy.

Our decade of medicore football teams is from 1) Inconsistent QB's (all those so called succesful teams you alluded too have a pro bowl QB) 2) Failure to keep good players (cold weather & avergae records are not very enticing to free agents) and 3) Bad coaching preceding Dick's arrival (he can only do so much w/ the talent he has).

Yes our D-line has played a role to our lack of sucess but to make that the major factor in this absurd premise you so eloquently conjured up, is just foolish. Perhaps you should reassess this argument and live off of these words in the future..."Its better to remain silient and be thought a fool than to open's one mouth and remove all doubt :thumbsup":

[Ramius]

After 6 pages of this thread, it's apparent that the draft is far too complicated for the average fan. The oversimplification inherent in these pages becomes mind numbing really quick. (EG: We need a WR, let's take the best available because they're rated high!) It must be stated that certain positions on a football team are more worthwhile. QB's, OL, and DL should always be the priority, unless of course an amazing talent is available at a skill position or that position is held by at least an above average starter. You can always use DL or OL, no matter what.

 

By oversimplification, you mean saying things like "Drafting first round DL means automatic success?"

[Dawgg]

By oversimplification, you mean saying things like "Drafting first round DL means automatic success?"

 

He also said OL... I do think that if we stick to #11, taking either the best DL or OL is the right way to go. And then we can watch a Steve Smith-like receiver fall to our laps in round 2. If the WRs are all gone by then, we take a top-notch Tight End.

[Ramius]

He also said OL... I do think that if we stick to #11, taking either the best DL or OL is the right way to go. And then we can watch a Steve Smith-like receiver fall to our laps in round 2. If the WRs are all gone by then, we take a top-notch Tight End.

 

If we can't trade down into the late teens, i'd actually have no problem taking a DE at #11.

[Bill from NYC]

If we can't trade down into the late teens, i'd actually have no problem taking a DE at #11.

 

Nor would I; I have changed my mind. I would be happy to see any good lineman.

 

I had a momentary lapse because our receivers really are a disgrace.

[Ramius]

Nor would I; I have changed my mind. I would be happy to see any good lineman.

 

I had a momentary lapse because our receivers really are a disgrace.

 

Make no mistake, we need help at the WR 2 and TE position. We've all been screaming for years to get more weapons for _____ QB. This draft seems deep enough that we can get a good solid WR in round 2.

 

Ideally, we could trade down 5-8 spots and pick up a second in the process. Philly apparently is looking for an OT, and the top ones (Long, Clady, Otah, Williams) will probably be gone by the time they pick at 19. That would allow us to take a WR at #19, and have 2 second round picks to use on a TE and either line.

[Dan]

Make no mistake, we need help at the WR 2 and TE position. We've all been screaming for years to get more weapons for _____ QB. This draft seems deep enough that we can get a good solid WR in round 2.

 

Ideally, we could trade down 5-8 spots and pick up a second in the process. Philly apparently is looking for an OT, and the top ones (Long, Clady, Otah, Williams) will probably be gone by the time they pick at 19. That would allow us to take a WR at #19, and have 2 second round picks to use on a TE and either line.

I must admit... I'm not a fan at all of trading down. But, this year does seem like a good year for it. If Ellis/Dorsey are gone, it would be really interesting to trade down a few spots and get an extra 2nd.

[AKC]

By oversimplification, you mean saying things like "Drafting first round DL means automatic success?"

 

I've been a lifelong proponent of the thinning of the herd versus dumbing down for the witless.

 

Taking the broad observation that most of the recent succesful franchises in the NFL have placed far more of their early draft equity in their DL, and specifically DT selections, than the losers of the league like the Bills who even today have a fraction of that early draft equity in our DL when compared side by side and oversimplifying that to "Drafting first round DL means automatic success" seems a betrayal of your own sensibilities.

 

You can focus on the exception to the rule- the Colts- and fail trying to follow their model. There's an obvious required piece in that foundation that no one else can have. Or you can look at the far larger body of long-term successful NFL franchises who have built their current competitiveness from grabbing the best DLine talent available every draft while the Lions and Bills of the league fight over early WRs and Cornerbacks.

[Ramius]

I've been a lifelong proponent of the thinning of the herd versus dumbing down for the witless.

 

Taking the broad observation that most of the recent succesful franchises in the NFL have placed far more of their early draft equity in their DL, and specifically DT selections, than the losers of the league like the Bills who even today have a fraction of that early draft equity in our DL when compared side by side and oversimplifying that to "Drafting first round DL means automatic success" seems a betrayal of your own sensibilities.

 

You can focus on the exception to the rule- the Colts- and fail trying to follow their model. There's an obvious required piece in that foundation that no one else can have. Or you can look at the far larger body of long-term successful NFL franchises who have built their current competitiveness from grabbing the best DLine talent available every draft while the Lions and Bills of the league fight over early WRs and Cornerbacks.

 

You are still oversimplfying. look at the steeler drafts going back a long time. Their 1st and 2nd round picks from 1999 to 2007 (18 picks) amount to this:

 

5 DB

4 WR

3 LB

1 TE

1 QB

1 DE

1 OG

1 OT

1 DT

 

In the last 9 years, can you explain how a team like the steelers, traditionally successful (including a SB win) spent 1/2 of their first and second round draft picks on WR/DB, and only 2 on the DL, yet somehow managed to remain successful. Because, according to your simplification, they should have gone the way of the Lions a loooong time ago. They havent drafted a DL in those rounds since 2003.

 

Obviously, a strong DL is a good thing to have. But your oversimplifications are going overboard. Simply stocking the DL with draft pick after draft pick, just so you can have DTs, doesnt make sense, especially when a team has other glaring needs and already spent 2 draft picks on a DT. The Bills currently have a very solid, with a potential to be really good DT rotation currently, with Stroud, McCargo, Johnson, and Williams. Sure, if Dorsey or Ellis falls to #11, we should snag them. If they dont, then what DT do we take?

 

The most successfuly teams draft the best players and telent, and more importantly, dont miss draft picks, regardless of position.

[OCinBuffalo]

You are still oversimplfying. look at the steeler drafts going back a long time. Their 1st and 2nd round picks from 1999 to 2007 (18 picks) amount to this:

 

5 DB

4 WR

3 LB

1 TE

1 QB

1 DE

1 OG

1 OT

1 DT

 

In the last 9 years, can you explain how a team like the steelers, traditionally successful (including a SB win) spent 1/2 of their first and second round draft picks on WR/DB, and only 2 on the DL, yet somehow managed to remain successful. Because, according to your simplification, they should have gone the way of the Lions a loooong time ago. They havent drafted a DL in those rounds since 2003.

 

Obviously, a strong DL is a good thing to have. But your oversimplifications are going overboard. Simply stocking the DL with draft pick after draft pick, just so you can have DTs, doesnt make sense, especially when a team has other glaring needs and already spent 2 draft picks on a DT. The Bills currently have a very solid, with a potential to be really good DT rotation currently, with Stroud, McCargo, Johnson, and Williams. Sure, if Dorsey or Ellis falls to #11, we should snag them. If they dont, then what DT do we take?

 

The most successfuly teams draft the best players and telent, and more importantly, dont miss draft picks, regardless of position.

Wait! One poorly constructed example using one bad team doesn't define the behavior and results of the other 31?

 

Blasphemy!

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

You are still oversimplfying. look at the steeler drafts going back a long time. Their 1st and 2nd round picks from 1999 to 2007 (18 picks) amount to this:

 

5 DB

4 WR

3 LB

1 TE

1 QB

1 DE

1 OG

1 OT

1 DT

 

In the last 9 years, can you explain how a team like the steelers, traditionally successful (including a SB win) spent 1/2 of their first and second round draft picks on WR/DB, and only 2 on the DL, yet somehow managed to remain successful. Because, according to your simplification, they should have gone the way of the Lions a loooong time ago. They havent drafted a DL in those rounds since 2003.

 

Obviously, a strong DL is a good thing to have. But your oversimplifications are going overboard. Simply stocking the DL with draft pick after draft pick, just so you can have DTs, doesnt make sense, especially when a team has other glaring needs and already spent 2 draft picks on a DT. The Bills currently have a very solid, with a potential to be really good DT rotation currently, with Stroud, McCargo, Johnson, and Williams. Sure, if Dorsey or Ellis falls to #11, we should snag them. If they dont, then what DT do we take?

 

The most successfuly teams draft the best players and telent, and more importantly, dont miss draft picks, regardless of position.

 

awesome post. Even though I disagree with some parts. I question if our dt rotation can be anything over average. Our de rotation is terrible. I do agree past dorsey or ellis there really isn't a dt worth taking at 11. The only dline player worth taking at 11 is Harvey. We could grab a dt in the 3rd or 4th someone like dre moore red bryant, Ahtyba Rubin. There will be solid dt's to add later on. Lucky for the bills though a premiere pass rusher should be available, rather then overdrafting one of these mediocre wideouts.

[Fingon]

You are extremely ignorant. You can call the Bills the Lions when we draft WR's when we have no need for them.

[AKC]

In the last 9 years, can you explain how a team like the steelers, traditionally successful (including a SB win) spent 1/2 of their first and second round draft picks on WR/DB, and only 2 on the DL, yet somehow managed to remain successful.

 

The most successfuly teams draft the best players and telent, and more importantly, dont miss draft picks, regardless of position.

 

Pittsburgh is a natural to try to use as support for the nonsense that Buffalo’s current 4 DTs represent the same type of quality and depth the better teams in the league employ since they play a 3-4, but even in that scheme the Steelers have 5 guys on their roster playing their DLine who are over 290. That includes their starting Nose Tackle Casey Hampton who was a 19th overall pick in the draft. Hampton just went to his 4th Pro Bowl in the offseason. We have absolutely no match for the quality the Steelers have in Hampton on our roster. If the Jags thought Stroud was going to the 2009 Pro Bowl, he wouldn’t be a Bill right now. John McCargo has yet to prove anything on the field- he may turn out to play up to his potential but we have no sign that will be the case.

 

Bottom line is, in the 3-4 we expect the Steelers will roster extra Linebackers before they’ll roster extra DTs, and yet even they have 5 guys rostered who would play the interior on a 4-3 team.

 

You can stay stuck on trying to find some exception, but the rule is The Rule. The best teams follow it.

 

I’ve mentioned the Pats* model that employs 6 interior linemen, 3 of whom were taken in the first round and 2 of those early; Also Philly (I think most fans of the game would call them a team worthy of studying for their long stay near the top of the NFC) who have used 3 first round picks this decade at DT, and you seem to downplay the Giants- who rostered 6 interior Defensive Lineman for their Super Bowl run last year.

 

So let’s look at some other teams:

 

How about Baltimore- a leading defense for years- they roster 5 DTs and even then, last year used the #12 pick to take Haloti Ngata. Some might ponder whether we’d have been a better team last year with Ngata versus Lynch, but I don’t need to think about that for a second.

 

Chicago- a DE with their first pick in 2004 and BOTH their #1 and #2 went for DTs in 2005. Super Bowl within 2 seasons.

 

Tennessee has paid due diligence to their DLine in the draft- they not just draft high, they draft a LOT of DTs looking for quality in their rotation. They’ve been among the better teams for a long time because they’ve brought in top pick DLine talent and then supported it big time. In their 2004 draft alone, of 13 picks they took 5 DLinemen! Imagine the meltdown on this board if we ever approached that type of dedication to the most important segment of any NFL roster!

 

I know you’ve declared 1st round DT Ryan Simms a bust- but he’s the same Ryan Simms who (along with 3 more 1st rounders on their DLine) was part of the Tampa DT rotation in 2007 that were second league-wide in total Defense.

 

What I’m talking about are teams that consistently top the wins and defense numbers every year. And these teams have paid MUCH more attention, drafted higher deeper at DT than have the Buffalo Bills.

 

The trend has been passing us by in the NFL for too long. We’re still a bottom feeder thinking we’re going to enter the 2008 season with the razor thin DT rotation we have right now. We DON’T have numbers and we have only hope that there is quality there- yet one premium DT added to our roster would put us in the same league with some of these better teams in the NFL. Finally. After far too long.

 

Or we can ignore the fact that we’ve neglected this and that what we’ve done so far hasn’t really addressed the issue. We’re an injury from being the same bottom dwelling run defense we were last year, in a division where we’ll pay mightily for that sin. And no matter what growing pains we might have to go through on the other side of the ball, if we have the opportunity to add quality to our DLine in round 1, there is probably no single move our Front Office could take to make us a better football team this coming season.

 

I recognize the talent at DL might not be there at 11. But one thing that's sure is that under no circumstances will there be a #11 quality WR on the draft board. That first pick might tell us much about our fortunes in the coming few seasons; have we lost all ability to pay attention to what the teams beating us every year have been doing for years and do we want to adopt it to the best of our ability, or do we remain ignorant to the emphasis the best teams put on their lines?

[ax4782]

I've been a lifelong proponent of the thinning of the herd versus dumbing down for the witless.

 

Taking the broad observation that most of the recent succesful franchises in the NFL have placed far more of their early draft equity in their DL, and specifically DT selections, than the losers of the league like the Bills who even today have a fraction of that early draft equity in our DL when compared side by side and oversimplifying that to "Drafting first round DL means automatic success" seems a betrayal of your own sensibilities.

 

You can focus on the exception to the rule- the Colts- and fail trying to follow their model. There's an obvious required piece in that foundation that no one else can have. Or you can look at the far larger body of long-term successful NFL franchises who have built their current competitiveness from grabbing the best DLine talent available every draft while the Lions and Bills of the league fight over early WRs and Cornerbacks.

 

I respectfully disagree. I looked at the Bills drafts from when they were successful, say 1987-1995. They did not draft a single defensive lineman during that stretch. When the Cowboys were winning Three Super Bowls and building their team, they didn't take very many DLs in the first round. The Patriots haven't exactly drafted a lot of DTs in the past seven years. The only first round DT I can remember them drafting was Vincent Wilfork, who, while very good, is not top five in the league. Buffalo has addressed the DL for the current time through free agency.

 

Now, looking at this team, we have three primary needs that have to be addressed in the draft if the offense is to finish somewhere higher than the high twenties and if we are to be competitive in the playoff race. We need to find someone who can play #2 WR and play well enough to take some pressure off of Evans. We need a big, fast pass catching TE who can stretch the middle of the field and open things up on offense to give our passing attack a threat. Face it, Robert Royal is NOT going to get the job done as a receiver. Lastly, we need a true Center who is big enough to make a difference on the line. Fowler is a smart player and does very well for his smaller size. He is a great backup for us. But we do need an upgrade at this position. We could also use a guy like Owen Schmidt at FB to get another big bruising blocker out there in front of ML.

 

There is not doubting that D-Line is very important. We, however, have four guys who are capable of starting at the position and two guys who can be effective as backups. D-Line is not a need for this team in the draft. Stroud, Johnson and McCargo are going to be a force in the middle this year. That will also take pressure off of Schobel and Kelsay, allowing them better attack at the pocket due to fewer double teams. I always like the Bills to add talented depth to both the O-Line and D-Line because much of football is dictated by who wins that battle up front. However, when Buffalo has GLARING needs at other positions, they have to be addressed.

 

As to the comparison with the Lions, I don't know how else to say this. I live in Detroit and am CONSTANTLY told how awful the FO here is. The problem with the Lions was they DIDN'T draft need positions. They followed the best available theme that you are calling for. That led them to draft Joey Harrington, Kevin Jones, Charles Rogers, Roy Williams, and Mike Williams. All of them were overrated by the numbers and didn't pan out. The organization is now busily clearing out all of those draft picks. Much in the same way when TD was here and we drafted the best player available, which worked out so well. Most of his picks have been traded or released, and JP will be following suit. If Parrish doesn't show up this year, he may be gone too. The fact is there is NOTHING similar between the current FO at OBD and the FO for the Lions. Buffalo has been very smart about taking players at need positions who have panned out. Whitner, McCargo, Poz, Simpson, Edwards, Lynch have all turned out to be starting caliber players at their position. I wouldn't mind taking a DE or DT at #11, though I don't think Dorsey and Ellis are as "sure a thing" as everyone makes them out to be. They both have injury issues. However, I'd only be okay with that if the Bills moved back into the first round to take one of the top WRs in this draft. The class is BOTH DEEP AND TALENTED this year and I would love to have any of the four top receivers being pegged in the draft. Then we need a TE like Fred or Kellen Davis and Mike Pollack in the third. Then you can spend the rest of your picks on depth.

[AKC]

I respectfully disagree. I looked at the Bills drafts from when they were successful, say 1987-1995. They did not draft a single defensive lineman during that stretch. When the Cowboys were winning Three Super Bowls and building their team, they didn't take very many DLs in the first round. The Patriots haven't exactly drafted a lot of DTs in the past seven years. The only first round DT I can remember them drafting was Vincent Wilfork, who, while very good, is not top five in the league. Buffalo has addressed the DL for the current time through free agency.

 

One trend that I think is being widely acknowledged since the Giants finish is that the importance of superior talent all across the Dline is becoming a necessity of the game. We have more offenses that dump the ball so quickly that there's not time like "the old days" of the 1990s to get to many QBs before they throw. So the time thay are a changin', and the smart have been ahead of this for the past decade. Teams that have spent draft equity for their good DLines have been overwhelmingly the teams who have ended up the most competitive. Is there an occasional exception- Indy would be the one team doing it on the other side o the ball, but the numbers favor any team without Peyton Manning going hard for DLine.

 

New England* drafted Defensive Tackles in the first round in 2001, 2003 and 2005. They used the #6, #13 and #21 picks for those Defensive Tackles. Those also represent the 3 highest picks the Patriots* have had over that time period.

[ax4782]

I know you’ve declared 1st round DT Ryan Simms a bust- but he’s the same Ryan Simms who (along with 3 more 1st rounders on their DLine) was part of the Tampa DT rotation in 2007 that were second league-wide in total Defense.

 

The trend has been passing us by in the NFL for too long. We’re still a bottom feeder thinking we’re going to enter the 2008 season with the razor thin DT rotation we have right now. We DON’T have numbers and we have only hope that there is quality there- yet one premium DT added to our roster would put us in the same league with some of these better teams in the NFL. Finally. After far too long.

 

Or we can ignore the fact that we’ve neglected this and that what we’ve done so far hasn’t really addressed the issue. We’re an injury from being the same bottom dwelling run defense we were last year, in a division where we’ll pay mightily for that sin. And no matter what growing pains we might have to go through on the other side of the ball, if we have the opportunity to add quality to our DLine in round 1, there is probably no single move our Front Office could take to make us a better football team this coming season.

 

First, the Bucs were just so totally AWESOME last year with that stunning offensive line. They also couldn't score enough points because they had no offense. That led to their losing games. When Buffalo was first and second in the league on D with Ted Washington and Sam Adams at DT, we couldn't score points. And we couldn't win games.

 

We're a bottom feeder because TD was stupid and wasted our picks on players that we didn't need at positions that weren't needs. I wouldn't call our DT "Razor Thin." Buffalo has a top ten DT in Marcus Stroud, a First Rounder in McCargo who looked REALLY good at the end of last season. Kyle Williams is a solid guy at the 3 and Spencer Johnson is underrated as a DT and is going to surprise. Jason Jefferson is serviceable as a backup if we get real thin. We have decent depth at the position to go through the season, and unlike some I don't believe that the ankle injury for Stroud is going to be an issue.

 

The reason our run D was so bad last year had a lot more cause than that we had some injuries on the DT and everything fell apart. We had two starting linebackers get hurt. We had injuries on the D-Line at times during last season. McCargo had issues with his foot during the season and he missed time. We lost, at one point, both starting safeties and their backups. Corner wasn't very deep either and injuries had practice squad guys coming in and starting at times. The fact is, taking a DT in this draft with so many other needs on offense would be throwing away another season. If you can be satisfied with another 7-9 or 8-8 season while the offense languishes at the bottom of the league, fine, we can take another DT. Frankly, I beleive the FO has addressed the issues with the D-Line and that next year would be a better time to draft a DT in the first round, because there will be fewer needs and more of an ability to draft a player that we like rather than one that we need. This year, however, we have major needs at WR and TE, as well as C that need to be addressed to move this team back. Until we give the offense some weapons, it won't matter how good the D is. If the O can't score more than 17 points, you're not going to win 10 or 11 games needed to make the playoffs. And that is the goal, after all.

[dave mcbride]

One trend that I think is being widely acknowledged since the Giants finish is that the importance of superior talent all across the Dline is becoming a necessity of the game. We have more offenses that dump the ball so quickly that there's not time like "the old days" of the 1990s to get to many QBs before they throw. So the time thay are a changin', and the smart have been ahead of this for the past decade. Teams that have spent draft equity for their good DLines have been overwhelmingly the teams who have ended up the most competitive. Is there an occasional exception- Indy would be the one team doing it on the other side o the ball, but the numbers favor any team without Peyton Manning going hard for DLine.

 

New England* drafted Defensive Tackles in the first round in 2001, 2003 and 2005. They used the #6, #13 and #21 picks for those Defensive Tackles. Those also represent the 3 highest picks the Patriots* have had over that time period.

The Cowboys also featured a number of first rounders: Tony Casillas (#2 overall), Russell Maryland (#1 overall), and Jim Jeffcoat. And while they didn't draft Charles Haley, by the time the got him he was certainly the equivalent of a top 3 pick overall. He was one of the best pass rushers of his era. And of course, while he was a sixth round pick due to off-field issues, from about 1993-1995 Leon Lett was the best DT in football. I'll never forget John Davis saying after the second Bills SB loss to Dallas that while the Dallas D-linemen were mouthy jerks, they could flat out dominate. He added that they were at a different level.

[ax4782]

One trend that I think is being widely acknowledged since the Giants finish is that the importance of superior talent all across the Dline is becoming a necessity of the game. We have more offenses that dump the ball so quickly that there's not time like "the old days" of the 1990s to get to many QBs before they throw. So the time thay are a changin', and the smart have been ahead of this for the past decade. Teams that have spent draft equity for their good DLines have been overwhelmingly the teams who have ended up the most competitive. Is there an occasional exception- Indy would be the one team doing it on the other side o the ball, but the numbers favor any team without Peyton Manning going hard for DLine.

 

New England* drafted Defensive Tackles in the first round in 2001, 2003 and 2005. They used the #6, #13 and #21 picks for those Defensive Tackles. Those also represent the 3 highest picks the Patriots* have had over that time period.

 

The Giants could take three DTs in the past two drafts because they addressed their offensive problems. They have their QB and they have starting caliber WRs at the 1 and 2. They have a good two back system that gains a lot of yards and Jeremy Shockey helps them to stretch the field. Also, they have one of the better O-Lines in the league. Thus, they could afford to draft three D-Lineman in the last draft and not have a problem. Buffalo doesn't currently have that luxury. We have offensive needs that we have to address. We used FA to address the issues on D. Not fully, but they have solidified three of our need positions. Now we need to fix the offense. I think there is good DT talent to be had in the later rounds for depth, and next year there will be some very good players at the position as there are every year. Next draft is the time to address those wants, after we fill our positions of need. Also, there are two schools of thought on how to stop that short pass offense, which, by the way, was also prevalent in the late eighties and early nineties. See the 49ers and Packers for two solid examples. A 3-4 defense, much like the Bills of old used to use was used to counteract this and many teams have gone to that. However, good LBs and a solid group at safety can stop that stuff early before the short receiver can get those YACs that are so pivotal to success in the West Coast, dink and dunk type of system. Also, watching the SB this year, and the Patriots of the past eight years, I find it hard to say that the old school offenses are dead. The Pats don't exactly favor a dunk system, as they go long and deep on the corners and over the middle more than almost any other team that I have watched. Your suppositions, I think, are not as clearly demonstrable as you seem to believe.