Jump to content


Screw the Defense


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Haplo848

Haplo848

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 210 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 01:55 PM

Personally, I'm more a fan of getting a weapon for our new QB in the first round, like a WR, then taking a QB in the second.  Build around the offense.  I want to put my new QB in a position to succeed, not turn him into a bust with bad habits from being on his back all the time or not having any open targets.  Throw a TE in there in the 3rd round if there's one worth it.  Once I've taken care of my QB, then focus on the defense.  With better coaching, and playcalling that ISN'T completely predictable, it will be better than last year as is.  Add a few new LBs and it will improve by leaps and bounds

Edited by Haplo848, 20 February 2013 - 01:56 PM.


#2 Justice

Justice

    It's Our Time!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,576 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:02 PM

I agree with you, but there's one problem with that, the draft is weak on offensive talent this year. We have a shot at Patterson with the eighth overall pick, but that's about it. By the time our turn in the second round comes up there may not be a viable QB for us to take.

#3 Astrobot

Astrobot

    TSW's Draft Droid

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,189 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:04 PM

Actually, I like the idea of taking WR-QB-TE. Right now, those players would be
WR Cordarrelle Patterson,
QB Glennon/Wilson (Barkley gone on my board, too early for Nassib)
TE Kyle Juszczyk

One other way to play it would be to go in a different order:
TE Zach Ertz (Jr.)
WR Terrance Williams
QB Bray, Jones

The last combination:
QB Matt Barkley, Geno Smith
TE Tyler Eifert or if he's gone, Travis Kelce
WR Markus Wheaton, Quinton Patton, Ace Sanders

Which do you like?

#4 Hotpockets28

Hotpockets28

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:06 PM

How about this? #8 QB Matt Barkley USC .#41 Wr Justin hunter... Tennesee #71 TE Jordan Reed florida????

#5 RyanC883

RyanC883

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,948 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:15 PM

I would not mind this sort of combo, esp. if we can get some LB and safety help in FA (perhaps from the Jets).  I would like to land, in uncertain order: Wilson (QB-ARK); Williams (WR-Baylor) and Eifert (TE-ND).  It would prob need to shake out like this: trade back in RD1 to get Eifert (perhaps w/ the Steelers who need LB help); get Wilson and Williams in RD 2 (extra pick from the Steelers for trading down, or combine the pick from PIT with another pick to get back into second).  If this is not possible, I would def want (1) Eifert, who I think is a much better prospect than the other TE's, then Wilson, then Williams.  I think Eifert is the one you take in the 1st round, even if you get stuck at #8 if you are going all out on offense, because he appears to be one of the few pro-bowl caliber players in this years draft on offense.

Edited by RyanC883, 20 February 2013 - 02:17 PM.


#6 mEAz

mEAz

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 56 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:32 PM

View PostAstrobot, on 20 February 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

Actually, I like the idea of taking WR-QB-TE. Right now, those players would be
WR Cordarrelle Patterson,
QB Glennon/Wilson (Barkley gone on my board, too early for Nassib)
TE Kyle Juszczyk

One other way to play it would be to go in a different order:
TE Zach Ertz (Jr.)
WR Terrance Williams
QB Bray, Jones

The last combination:
QB Matt Barkley, Geno Smith
TE Tyler Eifert or if he's gone, Travis Kelce
WR Markus Wheaton, Quinton Patton, Ace Sanders

Which do you like?

Option 1 or 3 in this scenario

View PostHotpockets28, on 20 February 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

How about this? #8 QB Matt Barkley USC .#41 Wr Justin hunter... Tennesee #71 TE Jordan Reed florida????

Also wouldn't mind this scenario, although i am not the biggest Barkley fan....Really like Hunter and Reed though

#7 Buffalo Barbarian

Buffalo Barbarian

    Kyle Williams 95

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,915 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:48 PM

View PostHaplo848, on 20 February 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Personally, I'm more a fan of getting a weapon for our new QB in the first round, like a WR, then taking a QB in the second.  Build around the offense.  I want to put my new QB in a position to succeed, not turn him into a bust with bad habits from being on his back all the time or not having any open targets.  Throw a TE in there in the 3rd round if there's one worth it.  Once I've taken care of my QB, then focus on the defense.  With better coaching, and playcalling that ISN'T completely predictable, it will be better than last year as is.  Add a few new LBs and it will improve by leaps and bounds

if we pick a QB in the first round, which we shouldn't.

View PostAstrobot, on 20 February 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

Actually, I like the idea of taking WR-QB-TE. Right now, those players would be
WR Cordarrelle Patterson,
QB Glennon/Wilson (Barkley gone on my board, too early for Nassib)
TE Kyle Juszczyk

One other way to play it would be to go in a different order:
TE Zach Ertz (Jr.)
WR Terrance Williams
QB Bray, Jones :thumbsup:


The last combination:
QB Matt Barkley, Geno Smith
TE Tyler Eifert or if he's gone, Travis Kelce
WR Markus Wheaton, Quinton Patton, Ace Sanders

Which do you like?

Couldn't we get Patterson in the first and Ertz in the second? That would be awesome.

#8 Green Lightning

Green Lightning

    Mr. Peanut

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:03 PM

Yeah screw the defense and go all offense.  Let's not be like Baltimore ...... oh wait


#9 billsfan89

billsfan89

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,994 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:07 PM

Don't think we need to take a QB early I would in philosophy take a WR as I think its our most glaring need. Its just is there really an impact player worth taking at that point? Are there much better options in round 2? If the draft has a lot of good defensive players at the top why shouldn't we go after one 8th overall?

I also hope the team targets WR in free agency. Its hard to see use not going defense 1st round and QB 2nd round. We really need to resign Levitre and Byrd and add in some weapons on offense.

#10 NickelCity

NickelCity

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,505 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:21 PM

Ertz won't make it to the second. He is an excellent TE.

I would love for it to happen for our sake, however.

#11 DefenseWinzChampionshipz

DefenseWinzChampionshipz

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,738 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:21 PM

DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS!

#12 yungmack

yungmack

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,701 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:54 PM

Based on what I see with my own eyes, combined with comments by professional talent evaluators I respect, the areas with the highest talent in this year's draft appear to be the offensive and defensive lines, outside linebackers and then the secondary, with a few tantalizing prospects at WR and TE.  The critical area with the least proven high-level talent seems to be QB.  The Bills have real needs at linebacker, secondary, WR and QB and really don't need to draft linemen in the first or second round.  And I'm not at all sure there's a WR or TE deserving to be picked at #8.  And with the QBs being perceived as middling talents at best, it makes sense to me that the Bills would use that first pick on a linebacker, a safety or a corner.

As to QBs, the top ten or so all remind me of a combination of Fitz, Ponder, Eli Manning, Rivers, Kaepernick and a few others.  By that I mean that they all have had moments that are stellar, combined with moments that are just God-awful; they all seem to have both big talent and big flaws; they all have that intriguing quality, "potential for success."  In other words, all these QBs in this year's draft are a "shot in the dark" who, with proper development, could turn into a Manning or a Kaepernick.  Or they could stall out in that "falling just short" area of Rivers.  Or you could wind up with another Fitz.  Even worse, you could wind up with a Losman, a Brohm or any of the many QBs who were at one time seem as having that "potential for success."  So I wouldn't use that #8 pick on one of them, even though there's a chance one or more of them might turn out to be great in coming years because the Bills cannot afford to blow this pick on a "here's hoping" choice when there are highly regarded talents at positions of real need.

The Bills will certainly draft a QB somewhere in this draft (and let's hope it's not some Levi Brown afterthought).  With doubts about all the candidates being pretty much league-wide, there's a good chance the Bills will have a second round shot at one of the many guys whose names are being tossed around TBD.  Who they pick will likely be as much a function of who's available as anything else.  For myself, I'll wait until after the combine before getting truly serious about them.  But at the moment, I'm finding I like Ryan Nassib more and more as one of those "QBs with potential" who just might blossom into somebody special.

#13 T master

T master

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,739 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:55 PM

View PostHaplo848, on 20 February 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Personally, I'm more a fan of getting a weapon for our new QB in the first round, like a WR, then taking a QB in the second.  Build around the offense.  I want to put my new QB in a position to succeed, not turn him into a bust with bad habits from being on his back all the time or not having any open targets.  Throw a TE in there in the 3rd round if there's one worth it.  Once I've taken care of my QB, then focus on the defense.  With better coaching, and playcalling that ISN'T completely predictable, it will be better than last year as is.  Add a few new LBs and it will improve by leaps and bounds

There were more than one game actually about 4 that if the D would have been better we would probably been at 8 & 8 at least. So getting a stud defensive player in the first wouldn't hurt my feelings at all.

I'm all for a QB & with the WR receivers in this years draft we should be able to snag one (i hope it's Justin Hunter-UT) but with the talent at the QB position we can wait & get a good prospect in the later rounds.

I wouldn't mind us taking Bray in the later rounds either but he is awfully raw & immature which would allow him to sit for a bit & learn how to be a QB & a grown up. I just ope we don't blow our first rounder on a QB that we will be reaching for !!!

Edited by T master, 20 February 2013 - 03:57 PM.


#14 reddogblitz

reddogblitz

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,656 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:10 PM

I'm leaning heavy in the O direction as well.  We have sunk massive resources the last 3 years into the D which has produced ZERO results.  In fact, our D has gotten worse.  I don't want to throw more resources into that side of the football right now.  If Pettine is as good as we are led to believe, he should be able to figure something out with the guys we got plus a FA or 2.  I'm definitely not drafting another DB in the first 3 rounds or so.

#15 Haplo848

Haplo848

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 210 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:31 PM

View PostGreen Lightning, on 20 February 2013 - 03:03 PM, said:

Yeah screw the defense and go all offense.  Let's not be like Baltimore ...... oh wait

"Oh wait" is right.  Baltimore did NOT have a good defense this year.  They were 16th in the league.  What got them to the playoffs and won the Super Bowl for them was their OFFENSE.  These aren't the Ravens of years past.  The defense was worn down and beaten up.  It's the offense and their explosiveness that got them by.

#16 Haplo848

Haplo848

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 210 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:43 PM

View PostDefenseWinzChampionshipz, on 20 February 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS!

People say this like it's an inviolable oath.  It's also not true.  Offenses have been winning the playoffs and Super Bowls in recent years.  In the Giants/Patriots Super Bowl last year, the Giants had the better defense.  They were 22nd in the league.  The Pats were 30th.  Meanwhile, the Pats were 3rd in offense, the Giants 9th.  Going back to '91, the Super Bowl winning team had a better offensive rank than defensive 15 times, while defensive rank was better only 6 times (in '96, Denver was first in the league in both O and D).  The other team that got to the Super Bowl had a better offensive ranking than defensive 18 times, and better on defense only 3 times (again 1 tie.  Philly was 8th on offense and defense in 2004).  You can look it up for yourself: http://www.nfl.com/f...mics/episode-15

In summary, defense DOES NOT win championships.  Offenses do.

#17 Astrobot

Astrobot

    TSW's Draft Droid

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,189 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:12 PM

View PostHaplo848, on 20 February 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

People say this like it's an inviolable oath.  It's also not true.  Offenses have been winning the playoffs and Super Bowls in recent years.  In the Giants/Patriots Super Bowl last year, the Giants had the better defense.  They were 22nd in the league.  The Pats were 30th.  Meanwhile, the Pats were 3rd in offense, the Giants 9th.  Going back to '91, the Super Bowl winning team had a better offensive rank than defensive 15 times, while defensive rank was better only 6 times (in '96, Denver was first in the league in both O and D).  The other team that got to the Super Bowl had a better offensive ranking than defensive 18 times, and better on defense only 3 times (again 1 tie.  Philly was 8th on offense and defense in 2004).  You can look it up for yourself: http://www.nfl.com/f...mics/episode-15

In summary, defense DOES NOT win championships.  Offenses do.
Interesting stat. Wouldn't have guessed that. OK, I'm all in! Gimme:

1-Cordarrelle WR
2-Nassib QB
3-Le'Veon Bell RB

4-Collin Klein QB

5-Michael Williams TE

6-Levine Toilolo TE

#18 Green Lightning

Green Lightning

    Mr. Peanut

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,810 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:45 PM

View PostHaplo848, on 20 February 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:



"Oh wait" is right.  Baltimore did NOT have a good defense this year.  They were 16th in the league.  What got them to the playoffs and won the Super Bowl for them was their OFFENSE.  These aren't the Ravens of years past.  The defense was worn down and beaten up.  It's the offense and their explosiveness that got them by.

What was I thinking? Certainly that crappy Baltimore  defense could not have shut down Tommy Brady and the high scoring Patriots and then shut down San Francisco when it mattered. Yup, all offense for those Ravens.   Get real.

#19 Pete

Pete

    Go Bills!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,885 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:51 PM

View PostAstrobot, on 20 February 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

Interesting stat. Wouldn't have guessed that. OK, I'm all in! Gimme:

1-Cordarrelle WR
2-Nassib QB
3-Le'Veon Bell RB

4-Collin Klein QB

5-Michael Williams TE

6-Levine Toilolo TE
I much prefer this draft.  Cordarrelle might just become the best player in this draft IMO.  Couple his playmaking ability with CJ and our offense could be explosive.

Well I much prefer the top two picks at least

#20 OldTimer1960

OldTimer1960

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,629 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:53 PM

View PostT master, on 20 February 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:


I'm all for a QB & with the WR receivers in this years draft we should be able to snag one (i hope it's Justin Hunter-UT) but with the talent at the QB position we can wait & get a good prospect in the later rounds.


I agree with your sentiment to stay away from QB in round 1, but disagree that there is good QB talent to find "later".  I think that all of these guys are very questionable and that the half-decent prospects will be gone by early round 2.  Now, I don't know if any of them are good enough to take early in round 2, but I do think it is looking at the world with rose-colored-glasses to think that there will be good QB prospects available in round 3 on in this draft.