95 replies to this topic

[Lothar]

Even though I'd like us to go with a wideout here, I get the impression Nix is thinking about picking up a couple tackles, including a first rounder.
http://blogs.buffalo...more-than-1-ot/
“Depth at tackle is problem,” said Nix. ”We’ve got depth inside. We’ve got guards and centers that can play in there. Last year we lost two left tackles and Levitre moved out there and he did a commendable job, but we’ve got to have at least one top tackle in the draft and another guy that we can develop.”

Nix believes there are “two or three” offensive tackles in the draft class that can start on day one. He obviously would not divulge the names of those prospects. What’s interesting is the Bills GM may it sound as if the club may take a second tackle in the draft even if they take one early.

[stony]

Lothar, on 26 March 2012 - 05:54 PM, said:

Even though I'd like us to go with a wideout here, I get the impression Nix is thinking about picking up a couple tackles, including a first rounder.
http://blogs.buffalo...more-than-1-ot/
“Depth at tackle is problem,” said Nix. ”We’ve got depth inside. We’ve got guards and centers that can play in there. Last year we lost two left tackles and Levitre moved out there and he did a commendable job, but we’ve got to have at least one top tackle in the draft and another guy that we can develop.”

Nix believes there are “two or three” offensive tackles in the draft class that can start on day one. He obviously would not divulge the names of those prospects. What’s interesting is the Bills GM may it sound as if the club may take a second tackle in the draft even if they take one early.

Love it. Thanks for the update.

[Fisher Bills]

He said “We’ve got some guys that would hopefully be second or third round guys that we think in one year can be a starter for you,” said Nix. ’It’s not bad for tackles.”
which means he will be looker tackle but may not be in the first.....^^^^i dont know if you didnt read the whole article but it sounded more like we will be going tackle in rounds 2 or 3

[Lothar]

Fisher Bills, on 26 March 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

He said "We've got some guys that would hopefully be second or third round guys that we think in one year can be a starter for you," said Nix. 'It's not bad for tackles."
which means he will be looker tackle but may not be in the first.....^^^^i dont know if you didnt read the whole article but it sounded more like we will be going tackle in rounds 2 or 3

I did read it.  It sounds like he's thinking of getting an immediate starter (of which there's only 2 or 3), then maybe taking a second tackle that might not be ready for a year.

Edited by Lothar, 26 March 2012 - 06:04 PM.

[sharebear]

Oh my.. I would vomit if we took a LT first and second rd. We need a WR LB an CB also! We have ten picks we can get tackles later in the rounds im all for getting 2my but first and second pick? Nah I go wr lb or lb wr

[Kelly the Dog]

It really all still depends, obviously, on who is there at 10 that they really like, aside from the other two LTs that he thinks can start on day one (obviously Kalil is one of them). If Nix loves Tannehill or Floyd or Kirkpatrick or Hill or some other guy at a position of need more than they like the LT who is good enough to start, Nix will likely take that guy and wait to get a LT in the second or third round, and go into the season with Hairston. If none of the guys he really likes are available, OR if the LT that can start from day one is quite close in overall rating to any of those other guys, I think he takes the LT (which I think are maybe Glenn or Martin, but easily could be Reiff or Adams)

[Joe Fergy]

How i took it was  3 starters in round 1.  2nd 3rd round guy will take a year
Personally i love it build the d line and then the oline.....
Go Bills

[Doc]

If Nix hints it will be a tackle at 10, it won't be.

[jboyst62]

Depth at line is not something you acquire in the first two rounds.  I starter is what you draft.  Depth is 3rd and 4th, with free agency.  5th and 6th are projects.

[UticaBill]

When we resign D. Bell then we can take a tackle in the 2nd or 3rd rounds... if we don't have Bell or a similar talent signed by draft day then I am sure we try to get one of those start right away types...

LB,CB,WR is my thinking... in that order too....

[sharebear]

I really hope so. Take a risk one one of these tackles who no ones really that sure of. Still only have one WR to throw too. Still weak in the olb category

[Kelly the Dog]

jboyst62, on 26 March 2012 - 06:12 PM, said:

Depth at line is not something you acquire in the first two rounds.  I starter is what you draft.  Depth is 3rd and 4th, with free agency.  5th and 6th are projects.

To me, he didn't mean that it was a possibility that he would take a LT with both the 1st and the 2nd round picks at all. And I would highly doubt it. He's a crafty old coot though and it's possible, just highly unlikely. I think he just meant there are a couple guys you could get in the first round that could start, there are a couple guys in the 2nd or 3rd that could start in a year, and we will take one player from that group of high picks or "top tackles" as he called them... and then we will take a project tackle with a lower pick.

Edited by Kelly the Dog, 26 March 2012 - 06:16 PM.

[Hopeful]

sharebear, on 26 March 2012 - 06:09 PM, said:

Oh my.. I would vomit if we took a LT first and second rd. We need a WR LB an CB also! We have ten picks we can get tackles later in the rounds im all for getting 2my but first and second pick? Nah I go wr lb or lb wr

Chillax, Man, it's March.  There are two kinds of March Madness.  One involves hurling a spherical ball through a hoop.

The other is induced by listening to NFL GMs in March.  They all lie like rugs, and when they tell the truth, it sounds so much like a lie it can not be relied upon.

[sharebear]

I got to admit your post made me feel better

[3rdand12]

Buddy is quite a trip to decipher. When i first read the post i was ugghh. Because i dont feel good about our pick at ten at this point unless players are dropping. But i read the link and i am reassured. He knows we need a tackle he wants a tackle and it might be a year before we are up to speed with our new tackle. regardless of where we draft him. I am reading between lines but Buddy is good fun for that. Country bumpkin? hardly.
But he sure kows how to keep us interested doesn't he?

[Joe_the_6_pack]

UticaBill, on 26 March 2012 - 06:14 PM, said:

When we resign D. Bell then we can take a tackle in the 2nd or 3rd rounds... if we don't have Bell or a similar talent signed by draft day then I am sure we try to get one of those start right away types...

LB,CB,WR is my thinking... in that order too....

Even if they resign Bell I get the impression theyve lost some faith in him as a starter for injury reasons. I'd look for him to be thrown into the pool of candidates and have to compete for the job with Hairston and the rooks. Which begs the question, why bother resigning him, especially since he hasn't shown any particular interest in being here.

[Astrobot]

Lothar, on 26 March 2012 - 05:54 PM, said:

Even though I'd like us to go with a wideout here, I get the impression Nix is thinking about picking up a couple tackles, including a first rounder.
http://blogs.buffalo...more-than-1-ot/
“Depth at tackle is problem,” said Nix. ”We’ve got depth inside. We’ve got guards and centers that can play in there. Last year we lost two left tackles and Levitre moved out there and he did a commendable job, but we’ve got to have at least one top tackle in the draft and another guy that we can develop.”

Nix believes there are “two or three” offensive tackles in the draft class that can start on day one. He obviously would not divulge the names of those prospects. What’s interesting is the Bills GM may it sound as if the club may take a second tackle in the draft even if they take one early.

He's visited the Pro Day of Mike Adams and is having Jonathan Martin in.
Here's a good summary of the Tackles, written by LongBall, who does the O-Line analysis at D-Tek.

http://www.drafttek....ckle-Review.asp

The 2nd installment covering ROT prospects is now also posted for your reading pleasure!

http://www.drafttek....ckle-Review.asp

[Kelly the Dog]

Joe_the_6_pack, on 26 March 2012 - 06:37 PM, said:

Even if they resign Bell I get the impression theyve lost some faith in him as a starter for injury reasons. I'd look for him to be thrown into the pool of candidates and have to compete for the job with Hairston and the rooks. Which begs the question, why bother resigning him, especially since he hasn't shown any particular interest in being here.

Because there is a decent chance that Bell would be willing to sign a 1-2 year deal to show he can play and then get the huge contract, which would allow Nix to draft the players he said you can find in the 2-3 rounds who will take a year before they can start, or to give Hairston that extra year to develop so he can start when Bell leaves. I would love if we signed Bell to a 1 year deal and then drafted an LT in the first or second round.

[Joe_the_6_pack]

Kelly the Dog, on 26 March 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

Because there is a decent chance that Bell would be willing to sign a 1-2 year deal to show he can play and then get the huge contract, which would allow Nix to draft the players he said you can find in the 2-3 rounds who will take a year before they can start, or to give Hairston that extra year to develop so he can start when Bell leaves. I would love if we signed Bell to a 1 year deal and then drafted an LT in the first or second round.

What are the terms of the offer to Bell?

[Meathead]

negro please. theres no way nix is taking tackles first and second. simmer down john boy