Lurker Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 the OBVIOUS answer is that the front office did not think the better talent was at those OLine positions. just because they bring in someone DIFFERENT than Preston, does not mean they will be BETTER Aye Carumba... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Because the people who hate the draft have the most vitriol about it, and are mostly the ones acting like children about it. They are also the ones who are completely unable to substantiate their opinions. Are you seriously trying to equate having a contrary opinion with stupidity and childishness? What of the converse? Is it not childish gullibility to believe absolutely everything someone in authority does as simply infallible? What sort of argumentative substantiation is blind Polyanna optimism? "They are the professionals and they've forgotten more about football than you tards could ever know" is a thought terminating cliche with a smack of general ad hominem tossed in for good measure. But, I actually thought the draft was pretty good. I'd have liked some more attention to the lines as a long term strategy, but realize this team has needs everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Why do you assume the FO is "ignoring" positions? Isn't it possible or even plausible that the FO picked the best players available at that selection? Would you feel better if they chose a OL that the FO/scouts didn't think was worth the pick just to make fans happy? If they didn't think a TE or OL was worthy of the pick over some other player they think will contribute on Game One or down the road then how can that be "ignoring" a position? Again, it would be easier to evaluate if you're right and the FO is wrong if you say who they missed would be so much better than who they selected. Again, BPA is one thing, but team needs also have to factor into the picks after the 3rd round as well. Not to many O-line 'hits' in this group... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 For someone who does an awful lot of complaining about others and their idiocy, I question why over the course of 8-10 years you haven't been able to grasp the concept of how public message boards work... Seriously, 10 years later you pull out "signal to noise ratio of this place"? Here's a little task for you while you badger people for their resumes. Click on your name and go to your profile. Click on the link that shows all of your posts. Read through them then calculate YOUR personal "signal to noise ratio" and get back to us... Then we can discuss your signal and compare that to other poster's noise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Fischer Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Again, for the umpteenth time, you are missing the point that Lurker made in this thread. The positions of the players selected is the concern. It is unknown, without a crystal ball, to know how the individuals we did select will turn out. No, the point is that unless you can say WHO would have been better that who was picked then your vitriol is pointless. Tell us, which position of what players are a concern and which position and which players would have been so much better? If you're not willing to make your case then why get so insane about what a "disaster" the draft was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike formerly from Florida Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 mike, i agree that you are entitled to your opinion. and i agree that you have the right to disagree with anything you want. but if you arent going to take a second to realize that you are arguing something that cant/wont be fairly judged for a long time and that your entire argument at this point is therefore illogical, irrational and flawed... then i cant help you and we really have nothing more to discuss. we get it, you dont like the picks. so? and? as far as specific players, do you really think that Jauron and Co didnt realize Justice was still on the board? do you think they are that completely inept that they overlooked a Center you had heard of, and chose a RB, by accident? No, of course I realize this...and I appreciate your tone. Thank you. The question is can we trust Jauron? Perhaps he has more input this year without Marv. I had complete faith in Marv's picks because Marv had 60 years of scouting/player evaluation, etc. I'm not so sure of Jauron. I do like the runningback--but how can we go into the season with Fowler/Preston and not start to develop someone with Fowler gone next year? That's what puzzles me. I hope that at least gives you some insight in how I think--for better or worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 No, the point is that unless you can say WHO would have been better that who was picked then your vitriol is pointless. Tell us, which position of what players are a concern and which position and which players would have been so much better? If you're not willing to make your case then why get so insane about what a "disaster" the draft was? Do you even read your own threads? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Fischer Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Again, BPA is one thing, but team needs also have to factor into the picks after the 3rd round as well. Not to many O-line 'hits' in this group... But what makes you think that the players available are worthy of the selection? I'd rather take a player who I feel can make a contribution than select an OL just because we may need one and will get steamrolled when they play. If they FO didn't take YOUR position of need then why do you think that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchBledsoe Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 No, the point is that unless you can say WHO would have been better that who was picked then your vitriol is pointless. Tell us, which position of what players are a concern and which position and which players would have been so much better? If you're not willing to make your case then why get so insane about what a "disaster" the draft was? Oh, you're just not getting it are you? I'm saying that they easily could have selected similarly rated players at positions that they are thinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Fischer Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Do you even read your own threads? Well done. (more than I can say for others) Why do you think the FO didn't select these guys? I don't know anything about them other than what can be read on the internet. Is there some website that says these guys would make a bigger contribution than the players we selected? How certain are you that their selection would translate into more wins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 It seems that people are expecting to fill THIS seasons' needs with 5 Rd picks. How many teams that make the playoffs will have a ROOKIE, starting center(or TE) from the 3rd, 4th,5th,6th or 7th rounds? Yeah it happens, but the second day picks usually take some time to develop. The Bills sucked, and one draft cannot fill all the holes. They have 2 nice prospects that might upgrade 2 positions of need. That's good. People can bicker about what position to spend the top picks on, but the other guys likely won't start as rookies, so the Bills chose the best players on their board, or guys that were recommended, or a guy on the staff used to coach etc. When you are trying to get lucky, you have to take the BPA. They are just trying to find guys that MIGHT be good enough to actually play in the pros, let alone become starters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Fischer Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Oh, you're just not getting it are you? I'm saying that they easily could have selected similarly rated players at positions that they are thinner. That I agree with (and I'm sure everyone on this board would agree as well). But what makes you so certain that these players would have contributed to more wins than the players that were selected. Let's hope your answer is: "we don't really know." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchBledsoe Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 That I agree with (and I'm sure everyone on this board would agree as well). But what makes you so certain that these players would have contributed to more wins than the players that were selected. Let's hope your answer is: "we don't really know." Yes, nobody but God knows at this point. Unless there is a Nostradamus among us. But, I do know that I'd have felt better without taking a 3rd CB and an RB, while virtually ignoring the OLine, DT and FB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 if only the Bills wouldve thought about making you feel better, we wouldnt have to be subjected to all this... for that reason alone, im starting to hate the picks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 But what makes you think that the players available are worthy of the selection? I'd rather take a player who I feel can make a contribution than select an OL just because we may need one and will get steamrolled when they play. Because I think the guys I named could make a contribution. Yes I'm no more knowledgeable than anyone else on this board...I'm not a scout, I didn't sleep at Holiday Inn Express last night. There, are you happy? But I'm not just picking any available O-linemen out of a hat for the hell of it. These are guys who's skill sets and attitudes--based on the knowledge I have at hand, just like any other TSW poster--would be very helpful to the Bills. I've followed the Bills closely for three decades, attended more than 200 games at the Ralph and have (I think) a modest understanding of the game. Yes, I could be wrong, but I'm willing to express an opinion based on that experience. Bottom Line: There are two--count em--two drafted O-lineman on this team right now. That is not a road to success in my book. (edited: I forgot Duke the first time I posted this and only had Butler as a draft pick...must've been a Freudian Slip!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchBledsoe Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 if only the Bills wouldve thought about making you feel better, we wouldnt have to be subjected to all this... for that reason alone, im starting to hate the picks Uhhgg, leave it to you to go back to this stuff. We had almost come to a point of agree to disagree, then you go stir the pot yet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Uhhgg, leave it to you to go back to this stuff. We had almost come to a point of agree to disagree, then you go stir the pot yet again. then just agree to disagree and leave it alone already. ive already stated im not even arguing with you, cause your argument isnt fair or valid until months and/or years from now. we get it, you dont like the picks. you dont like the positions. noted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 All these 'don't question the pick' responses seem to be missing the point trying to be made by the "Negative Nancy's." Its the positions being filled or ignored that are vexing, not the players selected. The lack of O-line depth can't be questioned? Duke Preston's showed nothing in three years...is the light bulb gonna go on this year? Did Kirk Chambers suddenly develop into something more than a warm body? The Bills have yet to sign UDFA's and have some young lineman on the team that are being developed. Possibly the front office has confidence in the abilities of the existing lineman and chose to focus the draft in other areas. Possibly they have a few UDFA lineman targeted and will pull the trigger on them quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 The Bills have yet to sign UDFA's and have some young lineman on the team that are being developed. Possibly the front office has confidence in the abilities of the existing lineman and chose to focus the draft in other areas. Possibly they have a few UDFA lineman targeted and will pull the trigger on them quickly. Peters is the exception to every rule, but the UDFA route is a hard row to hoe. IMO, here are a few guys worth taking a shot on, however: Kirk Elder OG Martin O'Donnell OG Fernado Velasco C/OG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Long Beach Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Again, for the umpteenth time, you are missing the point that Lurker made in this thread. The positions of the players selected is the concern. It is unknown, without a crystal ball, to know how the individuals we did select will turn out. After about the 3rd round I really believe that you have to pick the best player available. Statistically speaking, few players drafted past this point become productive, quality NFL players. I'd rather have my team trying their best to unearth these diamond-in-the-rough type players who can become good players than to draft a warm body to hold a spot. If we're that desperate that we expect a 4+ rounder to start than we're in way worse shape than our middle of the pack record over the last few years says we are. We already have enough bodies on our team. We're trying to supplant them with better players. Yes sometimes you have to draft for need, McCargo & Hardy as examples. But late rounders we'll be lucky if we find a better player than what we already have even in a "thin" position. Give me the best chance by picking quality guys, not quality positions. Remember, it's easy for us to criticize based on position, but the team isn't drafting position, they're drafting actual people with lots of flaws, most of whom won't have an NFL career longer than maybe 2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts