Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Please, Someone Make Bob Sapp Stop Already

Rumblings Draft Scouting: Our Grading System

Clarity. That's really what I'm going for with this story. This article has great potential to leave everyone, including me, saying "huh?" I'm at my best explaining things off a white board or using something visual. Especially something mathematical. That said, I'm going to give my best shot at explaining how we graded the 2010 NFL Draft prospects, and how we'll continue to do so over the next couple of months. 

The "we" is really the Buffalo Rumblings Scouting Staff. The current version of the scouting staff started about mid-November, with Brian, kaisertown, and I forming the working group. Job one to effectively covering the draft was finding a method to objectively grade players. From there, we could rank the players, which would lead to other draft season coverage.

The grading system started by borrowing a positional traits grade sheet from Mocking Dan at Mocking the Draft. The grade sheet, as I've found, is an outstanding way to organize thoughts and notes while grading players during a live-telecast of a football game. For our purposes, the grade sheet had too many categories for each player, lengthening the time needed for any sort of enumeration.

So we modified the grade sheet to only evaluate five traits per position. We combined traits where it made sense to. For example, in grading a running back, one of the evaluation criteria we used was "passing game." This is a combination of the separate evaluation criteria of "pass catching" and "pass blocking."  We used this methodology to combine traits until we had five per position.

Star-divide

We also separated positions where it made sense. Defensive linemen were separated from one position into "Defensive Ends" and "Defensive Tackles / 3-4 Ends." Linebackers were also separated into "Outside Linebackers," "Inside Linebackers," and "Rush Linebackers." Traits were modified to reflect the differences in the positions where needed.

Next came the math. We wanted to keep this from becoming a science project, so we decided to grade players 1 through 5, with a grade of five being the best score a draft prospect could receive. Instead of each criteria accounting for one whole point out of the five a player could receive, we weighted the points with a percentage. This allowed us to weight traits as more important than others.

For example, 30% of a cornerbacks' grade are weighted to athletic ability. 25% each go towards man coverage and zone coverage abilities. 10% are accounted for in run support abilities, and the final 10% come from mental acumen.

To get a player's grade, we graded each player attribute 1 through 5. 3 qualified as average per a draft prospect. 1 is poor. 2 is below average. 4 is above average, and 5 is outstanding. After a grade was determined by criteria, that score was multiplied by the percentage. For example, a cornerback possessing outstanding (or a grade of five) athletic ability received 1.5 total points toward his overall grade (5*.3 = 1.5).

Each grader evaluated each trait and added up the total to come up with a raw score somewhere between 1 and 5.  The grader was allowed to add or subtract points in intervals of 0.1 to adjust a grade due to character, injuries, or intangibles. This then became that grader's final grade for the player.

The last step was to average the scores. This was the crucial step in taking subjectivity out of our grades. Three graders lessened the weight of personal favorites, opinions or dislikes. We posted our grades to a database, which averaged the three scores, giving us and you the "final" grade for a draft prospect.

Finally, here is the Buffalo Rumblings Positional Traits Gradesheet.

GENERAL TRAITS FOR ALL POSITIONS
Intangibles (Leadership ability, Character, Competitiveness, Work Ethic)
Durability
Up or down in 0.1 intervals for each player if warranted

POSITIONAL TRAITS
QUARTERBACK

Accuracy/Touch (25%)
Arm strength (25%)
Athleticism/mobility (includes Size) (10%)
Mental Acumen (Decision making/Field vision/Pocket awareness/poise, intelligence) (30%)
Mechanics (Throwing motion, footwork) (10%)

RUNNING BACK
Athleticism (Speed, Acceleration/burst/quickness) (20%)
Agility/Elusiveness/Feet (20%)
Passing Game (Pass catching, Pass blocking) (10%)
Power and Balance, (includes Size) (20%)
Running (Vision, running instincts, Ball protection) (30%)

FULLBACK
Athleticism (Speed, Acceleration/burst/quickness) (10%)
Run Blocking (30%)
Passing Game (Pass catching, Pass blocking) (25%)
Power and Balance, (includes Size) (25%)
Running (Vision, running instincts, Ball protection) (10%)

WIDE RECEIVER
Athleticism (Speed, Acceleration/burst/quickness, Agility/Leaping ability) (30%)
Catching (Body Control/Ball Adjustment/Concentration/Hands) (25%)
Technique (Release, Route Running, Separation) (25%)
Vision/Run after catch (10%)
Size/Length/Hand size (10%)

TIGHT END
Athleticism (Speed, Acceleration/burst/quickness, Agility/Leaping ability) (20%)
Blocking (25%)
Catching (Body Control/Ball Adjustment/Concentration/Hands) (25%)
Technique (Release, Route Running, Separation) (10%)
Size/Length/Hand size (20%)

INTERIOR OFFENSIVE LINEMEN
Mental Acumen (Awareness/Reaction) (25%)
Size/Length/Arm Length (10%)
Athleticism (Balance, Initial quickness, Blocking in Space, Pulling/Trapping) (20%)
Pass Blocking (Balance, lateral movement, anchor, technique and hand placement) (20%)
Run Blocking (Power, strength, explosion, pop, leg drive, Technique and hand placement) (25%)

OFFENSIVE TACKLES
Mental Acumen (Awareness/Reaction) (10%)
Size/Length/Arm Length (20%)
Athleticism (Balance, Initial quickness, Blocking in Space, Pulling/Trapping) (20%)
Pass Blocking (Balance, lateral movement, anchor, technique and hand placement) (30%)
Run Blocking (Power, strength, explosion, pop, leg drive, Technique and hand placement) (20%)

40 FRONT DEFENSIVE ENDS
Pass Rush (Closing ability/Moves and counter moves, Technique/Hand use/Leverage) (30%)
Run defend (Recognition, Ability to shed blocks, Pursuit/Lateral movement, ability to set edge, tackling, Technique/Hand use/Leverage) (20%)
Athleticism (Quickness/Explosion off line, strength) (30%)
Mental acumen (recognition, instincts, Versatility) (10%)
Size/Length/Arm Length (10%)

40 FRONT DEFENSIVE TACKLES & 30 FRONT DEFENSIVE ENDS
Pass Rush (Closing ability/Moves and counter moves, Technique/Hand use/Leverage) (25%)
Run defend (Recognition, Ability to shed blocks, Pursuit/Lateral movement, ability to anchor, tackling, Technique/Hand use/Leverage) (25%)
Athleticism (Quickness/Explosion off line, strength) (20%)
Mental acumen (recognition, instincts, Versatility) (10%)
Size/Length/Arm Length (20%)

OUTSIDE LINEBACKERS
Pass Defend (Coverage/Zone defense skills, blitzing, Closing ability, angles) (20%)
Run Defend (Pursuit/Lateral movement and agility, tackling, Ability to shed blocks/technique, angles) (20%)
Mental Acumen (Instincts/Recognition) (20%)
Athleticism (Quickness/Explosion, strength, agility, range) (30%)
Size/Length (10%)

INSIDE LINEBACKERS
Pass Defend (Coverage/Zone defense skills, Blitzing, Closing ability, angles) (20%)
Run Defend (Pursuit/Lateral movement and agility, tackling, Ability to take on and shed blocks, technique, angles) (30%)
Mental Acumen (Instincts/Recognition, versatility) (20%)
Athleticism (Quickness/Explosion, strength, agility, range) (20%)
Size/Length (10%)

RUSH LINEBACKERS
Pass Defend (Coverage/Zone defense skills, Pass Rush, Blitzing, Closing ability/Moves and counter moves, hand use) (30%)
Run Defend (Pursuit/Lateral movement and agility, tackling, Ability to shed blocks/technique, angles) (10%)
Mental Acumen (Instincts/Recognition) (20%)
Athleticism (Quickness/Explosion, strength, agility) (20%)
Size/Length (20%)

CORNERBACK
Athleticism (Agility/Hips, Body Control, Speed) (30%)
Mental Acumen (Instincts/Recognition) (10%)
Man Coverage (turning ability/press skill, Technique, hand use, ball skills) (25%)
Zone Coverage (awareness, technique, ball skills) (25%)
Run Support (Tackling, pursuit, ability to take on and shed blocks, includes size) (10%)

SAFETIES
Athleticism (Agility/Hips, Body Control, Speed, range) (25%)
Mental Acumen (Instincts/Recognition, versatility, field vision, awareness, intelligence) (25%)
Man Coverage (turning ability/press skill, Technique, hand use, ball skills) (10%)
Zone Coverage (awareness, technique, ball skills) (20%)
Run Support (Blitzing, Tackling, pursuit, ability to take on and shed blocks, includes size) (20%)

Comment 38 comments  |  5 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I like this scoring system. I think it cover everything you need per position

The only thing I would ask is when it comes to QB’s, how do you grade anticipation. I feel this is one of the most important things for a college QB to have coming into the pros. In college, a QB can wait till he sees a recieveer open and then throw. In the NFL, if you see a reciever open he is already covered. Successful NFL QBs anticipate the reciever coming open and throw it to a spot.

by The Irishman on Feb 14, 2010 9:44 AM EST reply actions  

That would fall into the mental acumen category.

Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott

by Brian Galliford on Feb 14, 2010 9:51 AM EST up reply actions  

I looked at it again

And I sort of figured that. To me, that along with accuracy, pocket awareness, and leadership at the most important aspects of a successful Qb.

by The Irishman on Feb 14, 2010 9:54 AM EST reply actions  

Based on this

and the obvious level of dedication, expertise, and devotion that went into it, I grade my own level of football fan-aticism and knowledge at a point 2 (.2).

You guys are truly committed (or is it should be committed?) HAHA :)

Seriously, thanks for your efforts and for the education.

"In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there is bacteria"

by fansince60 on Feb 14, 2010 10:01 AM EST reply actions  

Thanks, much appreciated

For all, remember that this is a team effort by Brian, Kaisertown and myself. What you all see is a combination of our efforts, and can’t be attributed to just one of us.

by Der Jaeger on Feb 14, 2010 2:00 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

yes thanks...my bad

Kudos to Brian and Kaiser as well…keep up the excellent work fellas.

-Buffalo Rumblings resident Chan Gailey basher-

by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 14, 2010 4:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Yup

You guys have done a great job to this point, and I expect it to get even better. Kudos for all the hard work.

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Feb 14, 2010 5:54 PM EST up reply actions  

I agree

Thanks you guys for this! The draft is one of my favorite times in the NFL season. To have this site to reference and compare against my own thoughts is going to be great. Once again, thank you for taking the time on this.

by The Irishman on Feb 14, 2010 10:13 AM EST reply actions  

no doubt
The draft is one of my favorite times in the NFL season

Its about the only time of the year where you can truly billeve as a Bills fan, lately, atleast.

-Buffalo Rumblings resident Chan Gailey basher-

by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 14, 2010 10:16 AM EST up reply actions  

Agreed. It’s the one time of the year when the Bills at least have the opportunity to be on a level field with the rest of the league. I just wish someone could lock Ralph and Russ in a room until about the first week in September.

most of my posts get deleted :(

by dzil on Feb 14, 2010 11:01 AM EST up reply actions  

Thanks guys

Looks like you put a lot of thought and work into this – it’ll be fun to have our own experts this draft season!

by Andy Boron on Feb 14, 2010 11:36 AM EST reply actions  

So...uh...any cliff notes?

New York City Buffalo Bills Backers
www.nycbbb.com

by BillsNYC on Feb 14, 2010 2:48 PM EST reply actions  

my 2 cents

which is probably worth less than that….

I like all of the rating for every position except WR.

Although I understand what you guys are trying to achieve with giving athleticism a higher grade, I would disagree, slightly.

Personally I would like to have a WR that can run crisp routes make sure of the catch and be able to run after the catch. Many many great WRs weren’t the most athletic guys. Guys like Marvin Harrison, Jerry Rice, Andre Reed and Tim Brown were not the freaks like Moss and Calvin Johnson. But they were great at running routes and running after the catch. Personally I would chop 5% off the top of athleticism and give it to Vision/RAC.

And thanks very much for all the hard work and time you guys spend on making this site one of my favorites.

by BillsfanDan on Feb 14, 2010 3:23 PM EST reply actions  

Good Job

That was a lot of work; well done!! Maybe THIS will be the year!!

by coolness1 on Feb 14, 2010 3:42 PM EST reply actions  

Wow

This really great effort from all of you!

How do you get time to sleep? :-)

The past is fixed, the future is unknown, try dealing with the present!

by gregeng on Feb 14, 2010 4:26 PM EST reply actions  

A lot

of the “objective” part is pretty “subjective.” That’s the nature of “evaluations” because these aren’t grades. The grade comes when you mentally evaluate the prospect as a whole. The reason I don’t care for this system much is that the “weights” of the grades are the most subjective part. The player should get a number grade based purely on observable things, then the human factors in the non-quantifiable (a gut feeling, perhaps) part into the grade.

Sorry, I know you didn’t want a science project but I’ve spent the past 5 years of my life dissecting scientific methodology and scrutinizing experiments for possible errors. I know y’all think you know best and won’t change your system, but they’re suggestions nonetheless.

"I don't agree with a damn thing you say, but I would die for your right to say it."

"If I had to do it all over again, I'd do it all over again."

by ForeignArrow on Feb 14, 2010 4:55 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

FA - very good and informative post........

awesome counter to the thesis of thread…….you bring up an interesting aspect with they “subjective” part……and its spot on.

Rec’d – and keep the good posts coming, I enjoy your perspective.

-Buffalo Rumblings resident Chan Gailey basher-

by norcaliangelsfan on Feb 14, 2010 5:01 PM EST up reply actions  

To elaborate

A 10% weight for OT is incorrect (my opinion, subjective). Most sacks are a result of a missed assignments (confusion) on the offensive line. There’s a select few DL that need be doubled because they simply can’t be single blocked, but most sacks (and a lot of TFL) come on confusion or a guy is just left unblocked because of a missed assignment… i.e. the mental stuff. Tackles are especially ignorant to the corner blitz (especially if the back is shading the other side of the formation). All of this gets pretty intricate and complicated, which is why I don’t like the weighting system in the objective part of the eval.

"I don't agree with a damn thing you say, but I would die for your right to say it."

"If I had to do it all over again, I'd do it all over again."

by ForeignArrow on Feb 14, 2010 5:04 PM EST up reply actions  

We understand that we can’t make this completely objective. We also don’t think that we’ve got the best system or that we know best. However, we started with a very complete attribute list and created an evaluation method based off of it. That’s better than average and fantastic for a site that covers Bills football and not the draft exclusively.

Addressing your OT concerns, I disagree. Walter Jones was the best OT of the 2000’s, and he scored a 6 on the Wondrelic test. Ryan Clady scored a 13, and he’s arguable the best LT in the league. Geoff Hangartner scored a 40…. and we’re wondering if Eric Wood will heal well and start over him at center.

If I have to chose, I want someone big, strong, and athletic. Blocking schemes aren’t like designing gravity-fed water pipe schemes. Walter Jones was successful because he physically was better than the man across from him… and he learned the right technique and how to fit into an offensive line along the way.

Which is why, when drafting raw prospects out of college, I’d rather have the big, physical player with good feet. Just my opinion though. : )

by Der Jaeger on Feb 14, 2010 5:19 PM EST up reply actions  

I ain't buyin what you're sellin'

Wonderlic’s are almost worthless when it comes to football, especially the offensive line. QB and MLB and S might be the only positions where it could be 1% relevant, and that’s 1%. Like I was saying, it doesn’t matter how athletic you are if you miss your assignment. And it’s not the blocking schemes that confuse players, it’s the blitzing/line stunts that can confuse them. Once again, though… if you all are basing a player’s intelligence on Wonderlics then there’s no point in looking at the evaluation. They have practice Wonderlics online. I would encourage you to take one and let me know if it’s a good metric of how smart you are. We could even compare our scores and the one that wins, wins the argument (I’m just kidding because that’s stupid and I’m actually arguing the opposite of that, for those keeping track).
Some noteable Wonderlics

Dan Marino => 15 Alex Smith => 40
Peyton Manning ===> 28

It’s a wonder they even use the Wonderlic.

"I don't agree with a damn thing you say, but I would die for your right to say it."

"If I had to do it all over again, I'd do it all over again."

by ForeignArrow on Feb 14, 2010 9:00 PM EST up reply actions  

I totally agree about thw Wonderlic

That’s why we didn’t rate mental acumen super high. The biggest knock on Michael Oher last year centered around questionable intelligence and ability to learn a pro blocking scheme. In our scheme, I would have graded Oher a 1 or a 2. But it carries only 10% of the grade. Oher turned out to be pretty good.

by Der Jaeger on Feb 14, 2010 9:05 PM EST up reply actions  

To try this from a different angle, it’s not that we think that the mental abilities of an OT are only worth 10% of the grade. The problem is that college teams don’t throw complex blitzes out there like NFL teams do and there’s really no way for us to know which OTs will excel with that stuff and which will struggle other than wonderlic type, intelligence concerns. I can tell you that Bulaga plays to the whistle and that Davis has work ethic questions, but I couldn’t tell you how sever those questions are for Davis or which guys have the football smarts to consistently pick up Rex Ryan blitzes. We don’t have the resources or the background that NFL teams do and we work with what we’ve got.

I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute

by kaisertown on Feb 14, 2010 10:38 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't think anyone is basing intelligence ratings

or the like on Wonderlic scores….

Even if that is being included, there’s no saying whether that is right or wrong. Can any of us truly determine whether the Wonderlic has any effect on a player’s pro career? It’s not being used to evaluate whether a player will become Dan Marino or Alex Smith, it’s simply used as a tool to show a player’s IQ, potential to learn, and critical thinking abilities. I happen to think those attributes do have some impact on players. Obviously, it’s hard to predict based on a Wonderlic score what a player will develop into, but I wouldn’t say they are basically useless. Just like in anything, there are always outliers and those that don’t follow the normal rules….

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Feb 14, 2010 10:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Aren't you being a hypocrite here??

You talk about how subjective these ratings are and go as far as criticizing the weighing of each attribute and saying it’s something you don’t care for. You put subjective, evaluations, and weights in quotes as if to mock them, although that may not have been your intent. You mention only observable qualities as those that should be assigned a number grade:

The player should get a number grade based purely on observable things, then the human factors in the non-quantifiable (a gut feeling, perhaps) part into the grade.

Well, wouldn’t you say that the post you put up about the QB’s is also extremely subjective? In it you mention your grading system as:

I used 5 criteria in which a player is graded on a 5 point scale. The physical aspect is pretty self-explanatory. The “Intelligence” category pertains to how “smart” of a QB they are (reading coverage, throwing into coverage, protecting the ball, etc.). “Intangibles” equates to leadership, toughness and clutchness. May the best man win…

How do you measure those intelligence aspects? How do you quantify intangibles? Why should any of us take your subjective evaluations seriously then?

I just think it’s unfair of you to criticize their grading system when you do the exact same thing on your own. Maybe you weren’t criticizing them here, and if so, I apologize for calling you a hypocrite, but from first blush it looks like you are. These ratings and evaluations aren’t meant to be taken as gospel, aren’t meant to prove anything scientifically, and are being put together to inform the readers about draft prospects while attempting to rank and compare them to each other. You did the same thing in your post, of which I thought you did a fine job, by the way. Here it just appears to me you are unfairly critiquing something as wrong or invalid simply because you don’t agree with it. And again, if that was not your intention, I apologize.

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Feb 14, 2010 10:15 PM EST up reply actions  

You can

see if a QB is playing intelligently or not…. the only category that is subjective and an approximation is the intangibles one. I would in no way alter the “score” I gave a player based on subjective weighting… that’s something each individual person has to do. For example, Tebow graded out in the low 80’s… probably a late 2nd to 3rd round score… but his value (to ME) is somewhere in the early 2nd round.

It’s OK, I knew it would come off that way… and I knew there would be backlash for criticizing their system.

"I don't agree with a damn thing you say, but I would die for your right to say it."

"If I had to do it all over again, I'd do it all over again."

by ForeignArrow on Feb 15, 2010 9:53 AM EST up reply actions  

So why criticize the subjectivity of it?

What exactly do you expect? It’s not a science project.

I still think it’s incredibly ballsy of you to criticize them for a subjective ratings system, when yours is as subjective or even more subjective. Nobody went after you for that system, I don’t see the point in you going after theirs.

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Feb 15, 2010 12:33 PM EST up reply actions  

Sorry, but since the hell when was the NFL Draft scientific in any way, shape or form?!

OF COURSE it’s subjective. We believe that we’ve taken as much subjectivity out of it as we possibly can, but we’re by no means claiming complete objectivity, because that is flat-out impossible in making player evaluations.

And we’re not out to try to make this system into some end-all entity for grading players. We’re not trying to usurp the Mel Kipers of the world. We’re just trying to add a method to the way to we do things on this blog during the draft season, which at the very least will prove that we’re not just blowing smoke out our asses about the latest hot name that’s flying up boards after a 4.2 40.

Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott

by Brian Galliford on Feb 15, 2010 8:44 AM EST up reply actions  

I know that

I’m just saying I do not like the weighting system because it creates too much room for error when it’s in the BLUEPRINT of the evaluation.

I just think my way is better, that’s really it. I tried to explain why but it seemed to have put y’alls panties in a bunch (as I figured it would). I’ll just leave it alone.

"I don't agree with a damn thing you say, but I would die for your right to say it."

"If I had to do it all over again, I'd do it all over again."

by ForeignArrow on Feb 15, 2010 10:00 AM EST up reply actions  

I don't think we've got our panties in a bunch

I think your analysis of our system is off. Not in the math, but conceptually. The method that we have started with a FBS style scouting report that actual NFL teams use. The weighting gets us to about a 75-85% answer for a grading methodology.

That’s not bad for three guys that aren’t actual NFL scouts or do this for a living.

by Der Jaeger on Feb 15, 2010 10:56 AM EST up reply actions  

This is why you are criticizing them
I just think my way is better, that’s really it.

Seems like you’re the one with your panties in a bunch. Nobody was criticizing your system. Yet you found the need to come criticize their rating system simply because you wanted to flaunt how “awesome” your system is. Kind of low in my book….

~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

by Kurupt on Feb 15, 2010 12:36 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Great job Der Jaeger, Brian, Kaiser!

I guess you guys had some busy saturdays the past few months! And we are reaping all the benefits……..much appreciated.

Ok, so now that you guys are certified draft experts, I have a question: Has anyone of you compared the grades this system compiles vs some of the other “draft experts” like Kiper or McShay? Who’s grades most closely mirror ours here? Who’s are different? Did you lose/gain respect for any of these guys after doing this excercise yourselves?

by StroudFanClub on Feb 14, 2010 7:34 PM EST reply actions  

i think he meant

did your final prospect rankings mirror any big name “experts” more than others?

"you just have to know there's always going to be adversity. None of these games are going to be easy. Nothing will be given to us" - Paul Posluszny

by poz on Feb 16, 2010 1:12 AM EST up reply actions  

Question

Are NT’s graded in the same way 40 front DTs and 30 front DEs are?

by BBFan4Ever on Feb 14, 2010 10:59 PM EST reply actions  

Yes

There’s enough flexibility on “pass rush” and “run defend” to account NT’s vs DT’s.

by Der Jaeger on Feb 15, 2010 10:57 AM EST up reply actions  

Awesome job guys. Looking forward to seeing some great draft coverage.

by MattRichWarren on Feb 16, 2010 2:52 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SB Nation's home for all things Buffalo Bills.
Community Guidelines :: Essential BR

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Finesse Offensive Tackles

Recent FanPosts

Pot_small
2012 OLB
Truth1_small
What's the Diggity? Part 3
Imagescata2xwh_small
Brandon Lloyd WR for the Biils?
Small
Buffalo adding picks
Thumb-10488_small
The Bills Not-Need Needs
09000d5d80a96824_video_rhr_280_210_copy_small
Who should be the next Super Bowl halftime show.
Small
Mismatches in the Secondary
1216_large_small
Thoughts including Fitz, a poll, potential trades, free agent signings and BPA
Small
My Updated 2012 Bills Mock Draft - with Trade Down
Thumb-10488_small
The Trade Fred Jackson Thread

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Lead Editors

Img_20110806_213313_small Brian Galliford

100_2488_small MattRichWarren

Senior Moderators

Sucks_small Kurupt

Mrsinister03_small sireric

Contributing Authors

Range_march_2011_small Ron From NM

Slide1_small Der Jaeger

Site Moderators

211_talking_proud_1_small krytime

Santa_bill_small poz

Billsdinosaurrider_small WABillsfan

Avatar31985_4_small silverstreak3k

3850_small JPH