Oct 2002 - The story of Dick Jauron "Coward"-gate

[1billsfan]

I'm not defending dick jauron at all. I'm pointing out the error in BillfromNYc's argument. If your head hasn't firmly lodged in your ass, you'd see it was a comparison between Levy and Polian and their drafting strategies. Nowhere did i mention dick jauron. But you've never been one to deal in facts and/or reality, so why start now?

 

You'd have to be a real jackass to not understand that the main reason for the Bills sucking since the Polian glory years has been the ridiculous amount of high draft resources used on defensive backs at the expense of the offensive and defensive lines. I'll let you try to figure out where that leaves you.

[Bill from NYC]

You'd have to be a real jackass to not understand that the main reason for the Bills sucking since the Polian glory years has been the ridiculous amount of high draft resources used on defensive backs at the expense of the offensive and defensive lines. I'll let you try to figure out where that leaves you.

 

He is a very smart kid, and I am at a loss as to why he doesn't understand this.

 

Look, I know quite well that there were quarterback issues, and this certainly didn't help us at all. Still, weak lines take away the ability to play fundamental football. This is the NFL, not touch football in the streets of Buffalo or NYC. Teams exploit weaknesses really quickly in this league, and for years we have been a team which fields weak sisters up front, and star studded defensive backs. This is idiotic by any stretch of the imagination.

 

The good news is Wood and Levitre. Perhaps Maybin too, but I see him as feast or famine. The Guards offer us hope of out muscling opponents at some point. If they are good, they will be part of a nucleus of a team that perhaps some day will suit the climate and fans. There is more work to do, but that was a hell of a start imo.

[Ramius]

He is a very smart kid, and I am at a loss as to why he doesn't understand this.

 

Look, I know quite well that there were quarterback issues, and this certainly didn't help us at all. Still, weak lines take away the ability to play fundamental football. This is the NFL, not touch football in the streets of Buffalo or NYC. Teams exploit weaknesses really quickly in this league, and for years we have been a team which fields weak sisters up front, and star studded defensive backs. This is idiotic by any stretch of the imagination.

 

The good news is Wood and Levitre. Perhaps Maybin too, but I see him as feast or famine. The Guards offer us hope of out muscling opponents at some point. If they are good, they will be part of a nucleus of a team that perhaps some day will suit the climate and fans. There is more work to do, but that was a hell of a start imo.

 

Good job completely ignoring the argument i presented. But then, you've ignored GG numerous times when he's posted similar arguments, so why should you change now.

 

But lets all pretend and make up lies about how the Bills draft more DBs than anyone else (when its been shown dozens of times that they dont) so we can whine and B word and continue our crusades.

[1billsfan]

He is a very smart kid, and I am at a loss as to why he doesn't understand this.

 

Look, I know quite well that there were quarterback issues, and this certainly didn't help us at all. Still, weak lines take away the ability to play fundamental football. This is the NFL, not touch football in the streets of Buffalo or NYC. Teams exploit weaknesses really quickly in this league, and for years we have been a team which fields weak sisters up front, and star studded defensive backs. This is idiotic by any stretch of the imagination.

 

The good news is Wood and Levitre. Perhaps Maybin too, but I see him as feast or famine. The Guards offer us hope of out muscling opponents at some point. If they are good, they will be part of a nucleus of a team that perhaps some day will suit the climate and fans. There is more work to do, but that was a hell of a start imo.

 

"It starts up front" is the truest saying in football. The Bills have literally been pushed around since Polian left. After finally addressing the line issues hopefully there's a turn for the better in 2009.

[Bill from NYC]

Good job completely ignoring the argument i presented. But then, you've ignored GG numerous times when he's posted similar arguments, so why should you change now.

 

What are you talking about? The Bills have a history of drafting first round backs while the lines suck. Period. You want to bring up Polian and the Colts? When you have Manning, Glenn, Meadows, James, Freeney and Harrison, you might as well draft defensive backs.

The same thing applies to NE, etc.

[Bill from NYC]

"It starts up front" is the truest saying in football. The Bills have literally been pushed around since Polian left. After finally addressing the line issues hopefully there's a turn for the better in 2009.

 

It might take more than a year.

 

The way I look at it, I'm in it for the duration under any conditions, so I can wait. Jauron is an anchor holding this team down, but I don't expect him to be around much longer. You never know, but he would have to win lots of games to stay here, and that in itself is a reach.

[Ramius]

What are you talking about? The Bills have a history of drafting first round backs while the lines suck. Period. You want to bring up Polian and the Colts? When you have Manning, Glenn, Meadows, James, Freeney and Harrison, you might as well draft defensive backs.

The same thing applies to NE, etc.

 

The Bills also have a history of drafting first round RBs while the lines suck, so whats your point?

 

My point is and always has been, that the problems come from not addressing the lines in the draft in rounds 1-3. The problems do NOT stem from drafting DBs.

[1billsfan]

It might take more than a year.

 

The way I look at it, I'm in it for the duration under any conditions, so I can wait. Jauron is an anchor holding this team down, but I don't expect him to be around much longer. You never know, but he would have to win lots of games to stay here, and that in itself is a reach.

 

Jauron's a disaster. I hate his style. It's painful to watch the Jauron coached Bills attempt to play football on Sundays. I will be shocked if this team has a winning record just because of who's coaching them.

[Bill from NYC]

My point is and always has been, that the problems come from not addressing the lines in the draft in rounds 1-3. The problems do NOT stem from drafting DBs.

 

Read this again. We are seeing eye to eye and there should be no quarrel.

 

If Levy/Jauron did things right in 06 (and we both know that they had every opportunity to do so), maybe a first round db would have made sense this year. Instead, they chose to focus primarily on the secondary.

When a team like NE drafts a db with their first pick, it generally makes sense. They draft late and are winning games due to, among other things, solid fundamental play. They didn't build their team from the secondary because it makes no sense to do so.

 

If Levitre, Hangartner and Wood can play you will see an immediate difference in the style of this team. Seriously, it will show up right away. Next year, I hope they go after Tackles on both sides. They must if they want to win, but I don't trust Jauron to do so. I trust him to lose.

[Ramius]

Read this again. We are seeing eye to eye and there should be no quarrel.

 

If Levy/Jauron did things right in 06 (and we both know that they had every opportunity to do so), maybe a first round db would have made sense this year. Instead, they chose to focus primarily on the secondary.

When a team like NE drafts a db with their first pick, it generally makes sense. They draft late and are winning games due to, among other things, solid fundamental play. They didn't build their team from the secondary because it makes no sense to do so.

 

If Levitre, Hangartner and Wood can play you will see an immediate difference in the style of this team. Seriously, it will show up right away. Next year, I hope they go after Tackles on both sides. They must if they want to win, but I don't trust Jauron to do so. I trust him to lose.

 

I dont trust jauron to do anything right. Money and that stupid extension is the only reason he's still here.

[thebandit27]

You'd have to be a real jackass to not understand that the main reason for the Bills sucking since the Polian glory years has been the ridiculous amount of high draft resources used on defensive backs at the expense of the offensive and defensive lines. I'll let you try to figure out where that leaves you.

 

You sir, need to research your points occasionally.

 

For the ten-year time period from 1999 to 2008, here are the teams that drafted DBs in the 1st round:

 

2008 - NO, Mia

2007 - Buf, Ari, TB, Ten, SD, Dal, NYG

2006 - Oak, Buf, St. L, Mia, SD, Cin, Sea

2005 - Ten, Ari, Was, Oak, Ind

2004 - Was, Atl, Hou, GB, Car

2003 - Dal, Sea, Pit, Ten, SD, Oak

2002 - SD, Dal, Oak, Bal, Phi, SF

2001 - Buf, NYG, Den, Mia, Oak

2000 - Den, Car, SF

1999 - Was, Bal, Buf, GB, Jax

 

Now check this out:

 

Below is a table showing each team that drafted DBs during that time in the 1st round, along with the # of DBs and whether or not they played in the superbowl after drafting a DB...

 

team # sb?

new orleans 1 no

miami 3 no

buffalo 4 no

arizona 2 yes

tampa bay 1 no

san diego 4 no

dallas 3 no

ny giants 2 yes

oakland 5 yes

st. louis 1 no

cincinnati 1 no

seattle 2 yes

tennessee 3 no

washington 3 no

indianapolis 1 yes

atlanta 1 no

houston 1 no

green bay 2 no

carolina 2 yes

pittsburgh 1 yes

baltimore 2 yes

philadelphia 1 yes

san francisco 2 no

denver 2 no

jacksonville 1 no

 

So I can confidently say that, no, there is absolutely no correlation between drafting DBs in the 1st round and going to the superbowl. There is, however, a correlation between picking good players in all rounds of the draft and playing in a superbowl.

[The Big Cat]

The Bills also have a history of drafting first round RBs while the lines suck, so whats your point?

 

My point is and always has been, that the problems come from not addressing the lines in the draft in rounds 1-3. The problems do NOT stem from drafting DBs.

 

What's the difference between drafting lineman in rounds 1-3 vs rounds 4-7?

 

There isn't one.

 

Here's what I've been trying to compile since Sunday:

 

Lists of all players drafted, sorted by round/team since 2000. Then, I'd like to sort them by career with team that drafted them (cut, released, traded, reserve/ST, starter, pro bowl) and career within the league (no longer in league, reserve/ST, starter, pro bowl).

 

Here's what I THINK I'll find:

 

The best teams in the league have some starters who were drafted TO THAT TEAM before 2004. The best teams in the league will have a majority of their roster obtained before 2006. There will be a very slim correlation between player success and draft position.

 

As it relates to the Bills and this argument of "turning around:" I'm willing to bet that the Bills will be in the top 5 of NFL teams with a vast, vast, vast majority of their roster acquired (through the draft) since 2006.

[C.Biscuit97]

You sir, need to research your points occasionally.

 

For the ten-year time period from 1999 to 2008, here are the teams that drafted DBs in the 1st round:

 

2008 - NO, Mia

2007 - Buf, Ari, TB, Ten, SD, Dal, NYG

2006 - Oak, Buf, St. L, Mia, SD, Cin, Sea

2005 - Ten, Ari, Was, Oak, Ind

2004 - Was, Atl, Hou, GB, Car

2003 - Dal, Sea, Pit, Ten, SD, Oak

2002 - SD, Dal, Oak, Bal, Phi, SF

2001 - Buf, NYG, Den, Mia, Oak

2000 - Den, Car, SF

1999 - Was, Bal, Buf, GB, Jax

 

Now check this out:

 

Below is a table showing each team that drafted DBs during that time in the 1st round, along with the # of DBs and whether or not they played in the superbowl after drafting a DB...

 

team # sb?

new orleans 1 no

miami 3 no

buffalo 4 no

arizona 2 yes

tampa bay 1 no

san diego 4 no

dallas 3 no

ny giants 2 yes

oakland 5 yes

st. louis 1 no

cincinnati 1 no

seattle 2 yes

tennessee 3 no

washington 3 no

indianapolis 1 yes

atlanta 1 no

houston 1 no

green bay 2 no

carolina 2 yes

pittsburgh 1 yes

baltimore 2 yes

philadelphia 1 yes

san francisco 2 no

denver 2 no

jacksonville 1 no

 

So I can confidently say that, no, there is absolutely no correlation between drafting DBs in the 1st round and going to the superbowl. There is, however, a correlation between picking good players in all rounds of the draft and playing in a superbowl.

 

 

Good work. It's jsut flat out wrong and dumb to think that there is one way to build a team. How many 1st round picks do the Steelers have on their o-line? Or how the Giants, who are considered to be one of the best o-lines in football?

 

If you wanna blame anything, blame the fact that the Bills have been good enough not to get high draft picks every year. Bill Polian looks a lot smarter because he got to choose Bruce Smith and Peyton Manning #1 overall.

[1billsfan]

You sir, need to research your points occasionally.

 

For the ten-year time period from 1999 to 2008, here are the teams that drafted DBs in the 1st round:

 

2008 - NO, Mia

2007 - Buf, Ari, TB, Ten, SD, Dal, NYG

2006 - Oak, Buf, St. L, Mia, SD, Cin, Sea

2005 - Ten, Ari, Was, Oak, Ind

2004 - Was, Atl, Hou, GB, Car

2003 - Dal, Sea, Pit, Ten, SD, Oak

2002 - SD, Dal, Oak, Bal, Phi, SF

2001 - Buf, NYG, Den, Mia, Oak

2000 - Den, Car, SF

1999 - Was, Bal, Buf, GB, Jax

 

Now check this out:

 

Below is a table showing each team that drafted DBs during that time in the 1st round, along with the # of DBs and whether or not they played in the superbowl after drafting a DB...

 

team # sb?

new orleans 1 no

miami 3 no

buffalo 4 no

arizona 2 yes

tampa bay 1 no

san diego 4 no

dallas 3 no

ny giants 2 yes

oakland 5 yes

st. louis 1 no

cincinnati 1 no

seattle 2 yes

tennessee 3 no

washington 3 no

indianapolis 1 yes

atlanta 1 no

houston 1 no

green bay 2 no

carolina 2 yes

pittsburgh 1 yes

baltimore 2 yes

philadelphia 1 yes

san francisco 2 no

denver 2 no

jacksonville 1 no

 

So I can confidently say that, no, there is absolutely no correlation between drafting DBs in the 1st round and going to the superbowl. There is, however, a correlation between picking good players in all rounds of the draft and playing in a superbowl.

 

Sorry, but your convoluted exercise was pointless. I never stated anything about "1st round" only Bills' DB picks. It has been the Bills' general excessive use of high draft picks (I'm talking rounds 1 - 4) on DBs at the expense of both the offensive and defensive lines that has been their achilles heel these past fifteen years. It saddens me that fellow Bills fans see this as even a point of contention.

[Bill from NYC]

Sorry, but your convoluted exercise was pointless. I never stated anything about "1st round" only Bills' DB picks. It has been the Bills' general excessive use of high draft picks (I'm talking rounds 1 - 4) on DBs at the expense of both the offensive and defensive lines that has been their achilles heel these past fifteen years. It saddens me that fellow Bills fans see this as even a point of contention.

 

It also doesn't take into account the state of the team when the picks were made. In 06, the Bills were hurting bad on both lines. They took dbs with 3 of their first 4 picks., and it remains their primary concern, although this draft did provide a glimmer of hope.

[thebandit27]

Sorry, but your convoluted exercise was pointless. I never stated anything about "1st round" only Bills' DB picks. It has been the Bills' general excessive use of high draft picks (I'm talking rounds 1 - 4) on DBs at the expense of both the offensive and defensive lines that has been their achilles heel these past fifteen years. It saddens me that fellow Bills fans see this as even a point of contention.

 

Only to those with selective reading comprehension.

 

You said that Buffalo couldn't win because they use excessive "high round" picks on DBs. Most people consider "high round" picks to be 1st and 2nd round. If you're complaining about how Buffalo spends it's 4th round picks, there's no hope for you in this argument, since a reasonable success rate on 4th round draft picks is about 30%.

 

I posted detailed information that very clearly illustrates that successful and unsuccessful teams alike focus on DBs at times. The fact that people like you try to boil 10 seasons of futility down to "Buffalo drafts too many DBs" is laughable. When I pointed out how laughable it is, you tried to justify it by saying that Buffalo doesn't spend high picks on the lines, and that's why they lose.

 

Again, that's just plain wrong. There are plenty of different ways to build a winning team, but one thing is common amongst all of them: they draft well. Forget about what positions. Do you think teams like New England, Pittsburgh, San Diego, etc. go into the draft thinking "We really need to target an OL in the oh-so critical 4th round"? Please tell me you don't honestly believe that; they don't. They pick the best players, they're aren't worried about how many linemen they draft or whether or not they have a perceived notion of drafting too many players at one position. They just draft guys that can play, and worry about positional dymamics later.

 

The fact that you don't understand the concept of this doesn't mean that your babble is justified.

[Bill from NYC]

Only to those with selective reading comprehension.

 

You said that Buffalo couldn't win because they use excessive "high round" picks on DBs. Most people consider "high round" picks to be 1st and 2nd round. If you're complaining about how Buffalo spends it's 4th round picks, there's no hope for you in this argument, since a reasonable success rate on 4th round draft picks is about 30%.

 

I posted detailed information that very clearly illustrates that successful and unsuccessful teams alike focus on DBs at times. The fact that people like you try to boil 10 seasons of futility down to "Buffalo drafts too many DBs" is laughable. When I pointed out how laughable it is, you tried to justify it by saying that Buffalo doesn't spend high picks on the lines, and that's why they lose.

 

Again, that's just plain wrong. There are plenty of different ways to build a winning team, but one thing is common amongst all of them: they draft well. Forget about what positions. Do you think teams like New England, Pittsburgh, San Diego, etc. go into the draft thinking "We really need to target an OL in the oh-so critical 4th round"? Please tell me you don't honestly believe that; they don't. They pick the best players, they're aren't worried about how many linemen they draft or whether or not they have a perceived notion of drafting too many players at one position. They just draft guys that can play, and worry about positional dymamics later.

 

The fact that you don't understand the concept of this doesn't mean that your babble is justified.

 

Your numbers fail to incidicate team needs at the time the selections are made. In 06, do you think that there were more important areas to address than the secondary? What do you think was our biggest need at the time?

[1billsfan]

Only to those with selective reading comprehension.

 

You said that Buffalo couldn't win because they use excessive "high round" picks on DBs. Most people consider "high round" picks to be 1st and 2nd round. If you're complaining about how Buffalo spends it's 4th round picks, there's no hope for you in this argument, since a reasonable success rate on 4th round draft picks is about 30%.

 

I posted detailed information that very clearly illustrates that successful and unsuccessful teams alike focus on DBs at times. The fact that people like you try to boil 10 seasons of futility down to "Buffalo drafts too many DBs" is laughable. When I pointed out how laughable it is, you tried to justify it by saying that Buffalo doesn't spend high picks on the lines, and that's why they lose.

 

Again, that's just plain wrong. There are plenty of different ways to build a winning team, but one thing is common amongst all of them: they draft well. Forget about what positions. Do you think teams like New England, Pittsburgh, San Diego, etc. go into the draft thinking "We really need to target an OL in the oh-so critical 4th round"? Please tell me you don't honestly believe that; they don't. They pick the best players, they're aren't worried about how many linemen they draft or whether or not they have a perceived notion of drafting too many players at one position. They just draft guys that can play, and worry about positional dymamics later.

 

The fact that you don't understand the concept of this doesn't mean that your babble is justified.

 

I'm not complaining, just giving a clear and concise observation about the main reason why our team has been pushed around on the offensive and defensive lines for the better part of 10 years. You seem confused and lost in your own argument. The Bills have drafted too many DBs high in the draft and not enough interior lineman high in the draft. This is an indisputable fact and the pathetic play of our lines has been the irrefutable evidence.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Again, that's just plain wrong. There are plenty of different ways to build a winning team, but one thing is common amongst all of them: they draft well. Forget about what positions. Do you think teams like New England, Pittsburgh, San Diego, etc. go into the draft thinking "We really need to target an OL in the oh-so critical 4th round"? Please tell me you don't honestly believe that; they don't. They pick the best players, they're aren't worried about how many linemen they draft or whether or not they have a perceived notion of drafting too many players at one position. They just draft guys that can play, and worry about positional dymamics later.

 

The fact that you don't understand the concept of this doesn't mean that your babble is justified.

Are you saying that teams do not factor their own positional needs into their draft strategy? Because, the above seems to read that way and that would be clearly incorrect. Let's take Bill Polian and the Colts again. You don't see the Colts drafting 1st round QBs and the reason is obvious -- they have Peyton Manning. When James signs with the Cardinals, they didn't simply count on the backup Rhodes to step up as the starter, they went out and drafted Addai. Again, when they were concerned about Jeff Saturday's status, they went and drafted 3 Cs in the hopes of finding one that could be his replacement.

[Lurker]

Your numbers fail to incidicate team needs at the time the selections are made. In 06, do you think that there were more important areas to address than the secondary? What do you think was our biggest need at the time?

Having a positional need and matching it with a player worthy of being picked at that spot in the draft are two different things. Reaching on guys because you have a need gets you Eric Flowers...

[1billsfan]

Having a positional need and matching it with a player worthy of being picked at that spot in the draft are two different things. Reaching on guys because you have a need gets you Eric Flowers...

 

...or Donte Whitner.

[Sisyphean Bills]

...or Donte Whitner.

and John McCargo.

[Bill from NYC]

Having a positional need and matching it with a player worthy of being picked at that spot in the draft are two different things. Reaching on guys because you have a need gets you Eric Flowers...

 

This is quite true.

 

The Bills (Levy/Jauron) passed on Cutler, Ngata, Bunkley, Davin Joseph, Mangold and Kiwanuka in the first round alone to take Whitner. They also turned down lucrative offers to trade down. They simply had to draft Whitner. Then, they dedicated early picks in rounds 3 and 4 to take Youboty and Ko Simpson.

It was so dumb that message board posters had a far better handle on team needs than Levy/Jauron, and that really isn't good, ya know?

After this disaster, they have never really stopped making the secondary their major concern until perhaps this draft, and even at that they continued to bring in these guys in sheer numbers, including a very expensive nickel back.

 

This team needs a different mentality.

[C.Biscuit97]

This is quite true.

 

The Bills (Levy/Jauron) passed on Cutler, Ngata, Bunkley, Davin Joseph, Mangold and Kiwanuka in the first round alone to take Whitner. They also turned down lucrative offers to trade down. They simply had to draft Whitner. Then, they dedicated early picks in rounds 3 and 4 to take Youboty and Ko Simpson.

It was so dumb that message board posters had a far better handle on team needs than Levy/Jauron, and that really isn't good, ya know?

After this disaster, they have never really stopped making the secondary their major concern until perhaps this draft, and even at that they continued to bring in these guys in sheer numbers, including a very expensive nickel back.

 

This team needs a different mentality.

 

 

You do realize this was 3 years ago and it is now 2009 right? Let's move on man and get excited about this season.

 

But for the record, if Whitner makes the pro bowl & McCargo becomes a solid rotational guy, can we stop whining about this for a fourth straight offseason?

[thebandit27]

Are you saying that teams do not factor their own positional needs into their draft strategy? Because, the above seems to read that way and that would be clearly incorrect. Let's take Bill Polian and the Colts again. You don't see the Colts drafting 1st round QBs and the reason is obvious -- they have Peyton Manning. When James signs with the Cardinals, they didn't simply count on the backup Rhodes to step up as the starter, they went out and drafted Addai. Again, when they were concerned about Jeff Saturday's status, they went and drafted 3 Cs in the hopes of finding one that could be his replacement.

 

No, but I am saying that positional needs are far less important to the high-end organizations than the quality of player.

 

A few examples from the '09 draft:

 

- New England's most pressing needs (at least according to the consensus) coming in were at CB, LB, and on the offensive line. Their first two picks came at S (where they already have Brandon Meriweather and James Sanders) and DL (where they have R. Seymour, T. Warren, V. Wilfork, M. Wright, J. Green, etc.)

- Indianapolis' most pressing needs (again, according to the consensus that I saw) were at LB and WR, but they went out and drafted Donald Brown. Why? Because Bill Polian felt that Brown was the best RB in the class, and was thrilled to see him on the board that late.

- Pittsburgh returned all 3 starters on their DL (Kirschke/Hampton/Smith), along with their top 3 backups (Keisel/Hoke/Eason), and had needs at OT, C, and CB. Yet they drafted Ziggy Hood, a 5-technique DT.

- Why does a team like Baltimore trade up for Michael Oher when they already have Jared Gaither, Willie Anderson, and recent 3rd round draft picks like Oneill Cousins, Marshall Yanda, and Ben Grubbs (who played OT in college)? Especially when they have needs at CB, LB, and WR? Because they feel Oher could be special, so they don't want to pass that up.

 

I could go on, but I think the point is that the most successful teams concentrate on getting the best player that they can regardless of position. Ask Bill Belichick if he'd rather draft for a positional need or get a solid player...I think most of us already know what his answer would be.

[thebandit27]

I'm not complaining, just giving a clear and concise observation about the main reason why our team has been pushed around on the offensive and defensive lines for the better part of 10 years. You seem confused and lost in your own argument. The Bills have drafted too many DBs high in the draft and not enough interior lineman high in the draft. This is an indisputable fact and the pathetic play of our lines has been the irrefutable evidence.

 

So how about a team like San Diego then, that drafts DBs in the top rounds every year and ignores their line, spending only a 2nd and 3rd round pick on o-line starters in the last 6 years? Seems like their doing okay for themselves.

 

But then again, they have great players like Tominson, Rivers, Merriman, Cromartie, etc., each of whom was drafted in the first round. Seems like it's more important to draft great players than any one position...I think I read that somewhere...

[Bill from NYC]

- Pittsburgh returned all 3 starters on their DL (Kirschke/Hampton/Smith), along with their top 3 backups (Keisel/Hoke/Eason), and had needs at OT, C, and CB. Yet they drafted Ziggy Hood, a 5-technique DT.

- Why does a team like Baltimore trade up for Michael Oher when they already have Jared Gaither, Willie Anderson, and recent 3rd round draft picks like Oneill Cousins, Marshall Yanda, and Ben Grubbs (who played OT in college)? Especially when they have needs at CB, LB, and WR? Because they feel Oher could be special, so they don't want to pass that up.

 

There is no reason at all to be surprised by the Pitt. selection. This is how they always build their teams. They focus on solid, physical play.

 

As far as Baltimore, you forgot something.

 

You are right that good teams can opt more for bpa than positional needs. Do you think that the Levy/Jauron Bills have been, or currently are good?

[Sisyphean Bills]

No, but I am saying that positional needs are far less important to the high-end organizations than the quality of player.

What does "high-end organization" have to do with the current Bills? We're talking about a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in 9 years, here. Their drafting strategy might need to be a little different than a team that has been competing for championships most of that time and already has the pieces, depth, and systems to sustain the success that they've already proven they can have.

[Ramius]

There is no reason at all to be surprised by the Pitt. selection. This is how they always build their teams. They focus on solid, physical play.

 

As far as Baltimore, you forgot something.

 

You are right that good teams can opt more for bpa than positional needs. Do you think that the Levy/Jauron Bills have been, or currently are good?

 

Well, since 2002, in rounds 1-3, pittsburgh has spent 13 (1 QB, 1 RB, 5 WR, and 6 DBs) picks on skill positions while spending 5 picks on the OL/DL (3-3rd round tackles, and 1sts on a OG and DT). This year, ziggy hood was their first 1st rounder on the DL since they took casey hampton in 2001.

 

So pittsburgh builds their teams by spending twice as many early round picks on skill positions as the line? The biggest difference between us and them is not what positions are drafted how often, but that pittsburgh hits on their early OL draft picks just about all the time.

 

Again, it comes to picking talent, not picking position X or Y.

[zazie]

Well, since 2002, in rounds 1-3, pittsburgh has spent 13 (1 QB, 1 RB, 5 WR, and 6 DBs) picks on skill positions while spending 5 picks on the OL/DL (3-3rd round tackles, and 1sts on a OG and DT). This year, ziggy hood was their first 1st rounder on the DL since they took casey hampton in 2001.

 

So pittsburgh builds their teams by spending twice as many early round picks on skill positions as the line? The biggest difference between us and them is not what positions are drafted how often, but that pittsburgh hits on their early OL draft picks just about all the time.

 

Again, it comes to picking talent, not picking position X or Y.

And Pitt hits on the coaches every time too, no missteps. Noll, Cowher, Tomlin in the last however many decades. Vs. Mularkey, Greggy, and DJ for the bills, in this decade alone.

[thebandit27]

There is no reason at all to be surprised by the Pitt. selection. This is how they always build their teams. They focus on solid, physical play.

 

As far as Baltimore, you forgot something.

 

You are right that good teams can opt more for bpa than positional needs. Do you think that the Levy/Jauron Bills have been, or currently are good?

 

Unless I'm missing something Bill, that's not really the discussion. The discussion (originally) was that Buffalo isn't good because they draft too many DBs. Then it became that Buffalo isn't good because they don't draft linemen. Not it seems to be simply that Buffalo isn't good, which we're all aware of.

 

The point that I continue to make is that it doesn't matter what positions teams spend their draft picks on, but rather it's the quality of player that matters most.

 

So far, nobody seems to disagree with that.

[thebandit27]

What does "high-end organization" have to do with the current Bills? We're talking about a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in 9 years, here. Their drafting strategy might need to be a little different than a team that has been competing for championships most of that time and already has the pieces, depth, and systems to sustain the success that they've already proven they can have.

 

Who said it has anything to do with the Bills? My point is that the best organizations draft great players, regardless of position, and they don't worry about how many players they've previously drafted at those positions.

 

Regarding Buffalo, they could stand to do the same thing. Pick the best player, to hell with where he plays. The best teams remain the best teams because their rosters are littered with draft picks at every position.

 

I'm not saying that Buffalo has done a great job drafting, but I am saying that their major flaw has NOT been taking too many players at one position; but rather that the majority of players they've selected since 2001 haven't been very good.

[Bill from NYC]

The point that I continue to make is that it doesn't matter what positions teams spend their draft picks on, but rather it's the quality of player that matters most.

 

In 06 Buffalo was weak at virtually every position. There was a lack of stars and very poor lines. Starting the rebuilding process with the secondary is a stupid thing to do, especially when you play in Buffalo. In that sense it does matter what you do with the #8, especially when there were many trade down offers, and quality linemen to be had on both sides.

 

One more point.....Losman was a young qb who needed all the help he could get. It was foolish to hang him out to dry and focus on the secondary.

[The Big Cat]

In 06 Buffalo was weak at virtually every position.

 

Your opinion, unquantifiable.

 

There was a lack of stars and very poor lines.

 

Your opinion, unquantifiable.

 

Starting the rebuilding process with the secondary is a stupid thing to do, especially when you play in Buffalo.

 

Your opinion, unquantifiable.

 

In that sense it does matter what you do with the #8, especially when there were many trade down offers, and quality linemen to be had on both sides.

 

Your opinion, unquantifiable.

 

One more point.....Losman was a young qb who needed all the help he could get. It was foolish to hang him out to dry and focus on the secondary.

 

Your opinion, unquantifiable.

 

I respect your opinions on these matters, just as I would hope you'd respect mine (which happen to be similar, but different). But let's not tout any of the above as an absolute. That's just silly.

[Bill from NYC]

Well, since 2002, in rounds 1-3, pittsburgh has spent 13 (1 QB, 1 RB, 5 WR, and 6 DBs) picks on skill positions while spending 5 picks on the OL/DL (3-3rd round tackles, and 1sts on a OG and DT). This year, ziggy hood was their first 1st rounder on the DL since they took casey hampton in 2001.

 

So pittsburgh builds their teams by spending twice as many early round picks on skill positions as the line? The biggest difference between us and them is not what positions are drafted how often, but that pittsburgh hits on their early OL draft picks just about all the time.

 

Again, it comes to picking talent, not picking position X or Y.

 

What about Woodley in 07? Or Alonzo Jackson in 03? Why don't you count DEs? Besides, Pitt plays a 3/4 and only lines up with 1 DT.

 

I make the case that Pitt wouldn't go after secondary help until the more important positions were secure, in terms of using their best resources.

[thebandit27]

In 06 Buffalo was weak at virtually every position. There was a lack of stars and very poor lines. Starting the rebuilding process with the secondary is a stupid thing to do, especially when you play in Buffalo. In that sense it does matter what you do with the #8, especially when there were many trade down offers, and quality linemen to be had on both sides.

 

One more point.....Losman was a young qb who needed all the help he could get. It was foolish to hang him out to dry and focus on the secondary.

 

First , please present the details of these "many trade down offers" that you are closely familiar with, since I've never heard a peep about them.

 

Second, an elite safety like Ed Reed or Troy Polamalu can do wonders for a defense. Look what Bob Sanders did for the (a the time) hapless Colts' defense. The Bills thought they were getting a dynamo in Whitner, they were (so far) wrong. That doesn't make drafting a DB the wrong way to go about rebuilding.

 

I never, ever said that it doesn't matter who you pick, I simply said that position is less important than ability; and I stand by that statement.

 

Finally, how can you say that Buffalo "hung Losman out to dry"? The team obviously felt like they had enough ability at WR after spending 1st/2nd/3rd round picks on Evans, Parrish, and Everett, and acquiring Royal and Price in free agency. Were they right? No, but it's not as though they didn't attempt to address the position. They also spent $75M on offensive linemen to protect Losman...again, they got it wrong, but they hardly "hung him out to dry".

[Ramius]

What about Woodley in 07? Or Alonzo Jackson in 03? Why don't you count DEs? Besides, Pitt plays a 3/4 and only lines up with 1 DT.

 

I make the case that Pitt wouldn't go after secondary help until the more important positions were secure, in terms of using their best resources.

 

Woodley and Jackson were all college DEs that were going to be converted and are converted to rush OLBs. Thats why i didn't include them. Pittsburgh didnt draft them to play DE, they drafted them to play OLB.

[1billsfan]

Well, since 2002, in rounds 1-3, pittsburgh has spent 13 (1 QB, 1 RB, 5 WR, and 6 DBs) picks on skill positions while spending 5 picks on the OL/DL (3-3rd round tackles, and 1sts on a OG and DT). This year, ziggy hood was their first 1st rounder on the DL since they took casey hampton in 2001.

 

So pittsburgh builds their teams by spending twice as many early round picks on skill positions as the line? The biggest difference between us and them is not what positions are drafted how often, but that pittsburgh hits on their early OL draft picks just about all the time.

 

Again, it comes to picking talent, not picking position X or Y.

 

 

PITTSBURGH'S LINE HAD ALREADY BEEN FREAKING BUILT AFTER TAKING KENDAL SIMMONS. THAT'S WHY AFTER 2002 THEY WERE AFFORDED THE LUXURY OF PICKING UP PLAYERS THAT DON'T LINE UP WITH THEIR HAND ON THE GROUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[BillsVet]

I'd like for someone to explain how DJ isn't at fault for the sorry state of affairs this team is in. His on-field effort is truly lacking any innovation, and when he held sway over Levy in building the team, he ultimately guided Marv down a dark path. UFA 06 was putrid. UFA 07 was poor. Draft day 06 resulted in some average players, and the book is yet to be written on Lynch, Posluszny, and Edwards.

 

Otherwise, DJ's act takes about 4-5 years for mediocre front offices to see it's the same game with the same results.

 

Look at the top 12 teams in the draft this season. Nearly all of them made a significant change in the front office and/or at the HC job. Only OAK and CIN (who's owners are de facto GM's) along with SEA and GB didn't make some shift at the HC or GM position. The latter two teams went to the playoffs in 07.

 

Hooray for continuity.

[The Big Cat]

I'd like for someone to explain how DJ isn't at fault for the sorry state of affairs this team is in.

 

Simple.

 

Relative to every other team in the league (or at least the ones better than us) we have absolutely no veteran talent, and relative to every other "new regime," Jauron has overseen a complete overhaul at EVERY position except K, P, WR and DE.