Buffalo Rumblings: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Sounder At Heart for Seattle Sounders Fans!

Bills Needs List, Part I: Offensive Skill Positions

Losman's fate a huge key to the off-season (BuffaloBills.com)

In 2007, the Buffalo Bills struggled through what would ultimately become on of the franchise's worst offensive performances in team history. After offensive deficiencies were at the crux of the majority of the team's 9 losses, most experts believe that the Bills will focus a great deal of their offensive attention at improving offensive point production. That improvement, if it happens, will undoubtedly come at the team's skill positions.

In our recent breakdowns of the current roster, we had several discussions about possible additions and subtractions at the skill positions this off-season. Let's take a quick look at what those were:

Possible Additions
QB: cheap, veteran backup
RB: none
WR: big, physical veteran; big, physical rookie; tall deep threat
TE/FB: rookie pass-catching threat; veteran receiving threat with semi-developed blocking skill

Possible Subtractions
QB: J.P. Losman
RB: Anthony Thomas, Shaud Williams
WR: Peerless Price, Sam Aiken
TE/FB: Ryan Neufeld, Matt Murphy, Tim Massaquoi, Jonathan Evans

Prioritizing the Needs
This is, obviously, the first installment of our community needs list. The names listed above, as well as what we'll talk about below, are open to debate - and each segment will be for 12-24 hours (at least, that's how I hope it will work well). We'll take a look at the names we mentioned in the roster breakdowns, liquidize it into needs, and then prioritize those needs. Simple, right? Only in theory; I've a feeling that the debates are going to be (respectfully) heated. Let the games begin!

Liquidizing from the above possible additions/subtractions, here is - in essence - what we've identified as needs (and again, this is open to discussion in the comments, so feel free to whole-heartedly disagree with me):

- Veteran backup quarterback*
- Big, physical wide receiver
- Pass-catching tight end
- Blocking fullback**

* - only if J.P. Losman is traded/released; ** - added after T. Schonert made the switch back to a two-back system

Now it's time to prioritize - and that's all you, folks. Your options are three-fold: add to the skill positions needs list; debate the number of each need that we need; and, most importantly, prioritize the needs from biggest need to least important need. I'll partake in the discussions, but let's make this clear: this is our list, not my list. Let's prioritize!

0 recs  |  Comment 33 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

priorities
  1. TE: WR is huge too, but good TEs open up offenses  for everybody. The Bills still need a big receiver, but we have (semi) competent receivers. We have no presence at TE. Royal is a really good blocker, but is basically an afterthought in the passing game (for us and the defense). Gaines isn't special, gets open more than Royal, but dropped some key passes. Almost every good offense has a really good TE: NE, Indy, Dal, SD, GB, Pitt.
  2. WR: Really need a good receiver. Almost a 1A, but I'm a big proponent of an active TE. SD has built a perennial contender with almost no WR play. This year with Chambers and Jackson the WR play got better, but LT and Gates are still the focal points of that explosive offense.
  3. Fullback: Would love a solid blocker with some ball skills.
  4. QB: Veteran backup. Really will just be a pick out of some average/below average qbs. Hopefully Trent will actually perform and this will remain a backup need. I would like to see a late round QB pick if value is there. Would like to see three qbs next year: Edwards, Veteran, Rookie. Still would like to see JP stick around, but keeping him doesn't seem to be much of an option now.

by jmorris0823 on Jan 28, 2008 7:05 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

agreed...
  1.  TE (who is primarily a pass-catcher.  blocking is important, but that's what robert royal is on the roster for).
  2.  WR (kindof goes hand-in-hand with a pass-cathcing TE)
  3.  FB
  4.  QB
...and i'd like to add a 5th:  O-line depth/youth

Aside from the starting 5 (who will remain the starting 5 next season IMO), there is little depth behind them.  

Here are back-ups on the Bills roster:

Kirk Chambers
Duke Preston
Christian Gaddis
Patrick Estes
Aaron Merz

doesn't really give me much confidence if one or two starters go down in '08.  I would love to see at least two linemen drafted in the draft:  A Center in the 3rd or 4th round to eventaully take over, and a guard or tackle in the later rounds.

John I.

by jri111 on Jan 28, 2008 7:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Patience, John...
... notice this first list is offensive skill positions. We'll be talking about the lines in a post tomorrow. :)
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 28, 2008 8:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ahhh my bad!!
got ahead of myself as ususal!!
John I.

by jri111 on Jan 28, 2008 8:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It happens :)
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 29, 2008 7:07 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Re: QB
Everything I say below in this comment is assuming Losman is gone (I, too, hope he sticks around):

What is the advantage of drafting a late-round QB? I'm fine with Gibran Hamdan as our #3. He's a former late-round pick himself, is familiar with Buffalo's scheme, and has professional experience. Why does a developmental rookie - who theoretically would never see the field, considering the team has invested its interests in Edwards - have any more value to this team than Hamdan? I'm not convinced that a rookie will be added unless Losman leaves and they can't find a veteran backup younger than 42.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 28, 2008 8:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I've got no problem with Gibran Hamdan
Notice in mine I said "to give him some competition". Drafting a late round QB doesn't spell the end of him either, if Hamdan wins the competition the draft pick can always be put on the practice squad.
Who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 28, 2008 8:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I did see that
And I understand your point. Perhaps Hamdan needs some competition. I just feel that right now, the team is so thin at so many positions (especially OLB and the offensive skill positions) that drafting a quarterback to possibly put him on the practice squad seems rather pointless. What's the difference between drafting San Diego's Josh Johnson in the sixth round or signing Stanford's T.C. Ostrander as an undrafted free agent? It's negligible, in my opinion - I'd rather sign a talented UDFA than waste a draft pick, especially when it's much, much easier to develop a low-round offensive guard than a low-round quarterback. We're still at the point where we need all of our draft picks to stick.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 28, 2008 8:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Late round QB
Getting all 10 picks to stick is going to be a tall order, I'm not sure thats going to happen. If the Bills saw something in Josh Johnson that they liked, so they draft him in the 6th instead of signing Ostrander as a free agent, I have no problem with that, even if he only goes to the pratice squad.

I think that expecting all 10 to make the roster might be wishful thinking, I'd love to see it, but but like I said, I'm not sure it happens.

Who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 28, 2008 9:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree...
... with your theory of if a QB is BPA late in the draft, go with him. But if he's not, we don't need a late-rounder, and it shouldn't be a priority to get a young guy at that point either. There are far more important depth upgrades to make on this roster than #3 QB.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 29, 2008 7:08 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

My theory
I tend to feel the after the 4th round you go with best player available, regardless of position. The odds that a 6th or 7th rounder stick to your roster is never very high. So take the guy you have rated highest on your board. Even if that means taking a QB in the 6th. But you are right, there are more important upgrades for this team than #3 QB.
Who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 29, 2008 7:33 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

agreed
if the staff is high on hamdan's potential then keeping him is cool. i don't think he has starter potential in the league, which is why i would prefer to draft somebody that may. if the coaches feel hamdan has that potential, then keep him. either way, never know when you might find another brady in the late rounds. im not convinced edwards is legit (hope he is), so another option never hurts.

by jmorris0823 on Jan 28, 2008 8:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Keep Losman
Losman fits the bill as a cheap, veteran QB.  He knows the system, and no commitment is needed from him or for him, since he just has one year left on a relatively cheap contract (I think any veteran will require more money and a steep learning curve).  We should also remember that injuries, much more so than performance, dictated playing time between these 2 QBs this year.  If and when Edwards goes down, I would much rather have Losman than a veteran always backup QB.  And, by the way, I think Losman will not attract more than a 4th-7th round pick.  As a backup, Losman is perfect and we don't need to go looking for one at a high price (maybe pick up a 3rd QB and groom him for the following year as a backup).

by labill on Jan 28, 2008 7:36 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Wide reciever threat is needed
When i was watching every Bills game this season i really noticed that we did not a a consistent threat downfield or on the recieving end of the field at all.  Don't get me wrong, Evans is a great reciever and can make big time plays and is definatley our number one reciever but he is never a consistent big time threat and usually when a team places double coverage on him he is non-existent.  Not to mention we have other capable recievers in Price and Reed and a great option in Parrish in the slot.  But teams are not worried about our passing game at all.  This is where our management needs to improve in the off-season.  Now, while drafting a reciever is sometimes a hit-or-miss thing its something the Bills should look at.  A few names come to mind, the Bills could look at Adarius Bowman from Oklahoma State.  A big target to throw to (6'4, 220), he brings the big-play ability to the field. Isn't afraid to do crossing patterns and take a hit, if necessary. Should be a solid red-zone option with his size and athleticism.  In his final two seasons with Oklahoma he had over a thousand yards recieving and a total of 20 touchdowns.  Not a bad pick.  Limas Sweed from Texas would be another player to look at.  Very good size (6'5, 219) and strength. Speed is deceptive, which makes matchups favorable to him.  Mario Manningham from Michigan is great with ball control and can catch anything.  But I think his lack of size(6', 178) may not be what the Bills need.  Now while the Bills may not be able to get these players in the draft, it would be a bad idea to maybe make a play for them.  On the other hand making a play for some unrestricted free agents.  I know there are some top wide recievers out there like Bernard Berrian and Andre Davis(even though he was once a Bill, but hey Price came back)  that come to mind, as well as Patrick Crayton and the infamous Randy Moss that are top in free agency.  Now there are some other great recievers in the free agency market to look at but i would like to see the Bills make some offers to someone like Berrian.  Not saying that we would get him but he would be a great established reciever that brings a downfield threat as well as veteran experience.  And not to mention someone like that would bring confidence to Edwards, who will likely start.  As a second year quater back throwing to an established reciever would build good confidence in a young quarter, who's offense had struggled to throw downfield.  Not to mention that would open out Lynch's running game and with his talents i think our offense could vastly improve and surprise some teams.  Also if we can keep Evans somehow and either make and offer to a free agent or draft a reciever that would be a great one/two reciever combination.  Bye Bye Price and Reed.  Parrish is good and maybe keep a 3rd decent reciever, but nobody major.  But i think our recieving core needs improvement.  The only other area i can see that needs improvement is our run defense.

by Buffalosportsdude on Jan 28, 2008 7:38 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Welcome to the site!
Saw you joined up today, BSD - were you a lurker or a newcomer? :)

I agree with your sentiment that the receiving corps needs upgrading, but would you place it ahead of, say, tight end on our needs list? I'm implying that just by what you wrote, but I'd like to make certain.

Also, I agree that Price may be on his way out, but there's no way Reed leaves this roster - he's proven that he's an excellent possession type out of the slot. Certainly he's not a #2, but the combination of Reed and Parrish in the slot is a formidable one if the Bills can find a big target outside to keep Reed/Parrish from assuming that role. Reed's contact isn't huge, either, and he's got 2 years left on his deal. He's a Bill at least through the final two years of his deal.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 28, 2008 8:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

priorities
  1. TE
  2. WR If a big receiver like Wilford is signed, the need for size is eliminated. This then opens the draft up for ANY WR, not just the tall ones. If Wilford is signed, I wouldn't want to draft DeSean Jackson, but he would make more sense then if Wilford isn't there. (hope that makes sense)
3:FB I don't think Barnes is the answer. Three words DRAFT-OWEN-SCHMITT.
4:QB don't laugh when I mention Todd Collins, looking at the list of free agent QBs, he's probably the only one I like even a little. I would love to see another QB drafted in the later rounds, somebody to give Hamdan some competition.
Who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 28, 2008 7:39 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Re: Fullback
I do think that the Bills will address this position with some youth, but I wouldn't count on Schmitt. Latest word is that there are some scouting departments that have Schmitt listed among the top 32 players in the draft; if that's true, Buffalo would have to reach in a major way to pick him up. I don't see Schmitt dropping below Round 2; if the Bills draft a fullback with one of their first two picks, I'll flip out.

Surprised how many people are putting TE ahead of WR... I completely agree with it, but I thought we'd be hearing more support for wideout atop this list.

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 28, 2008 8:14 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I like Schmitt
I've talked about him for a while now, but there is no way he is top 32 in this draft. and if he is taken before the start of the third, well thats just plain crazy.
Who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 28, 2008 8:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Re: Top 32
I certainly don't believe he's Top 32 either - no blocking fullback ever should be. I'm just saying that I read somewhere (can't find the bleeping link) that some scouts have him graded out as a second rounder. Even in the case of Schmitt - as elite a blocking fullback as you can draft - he's not worth more than a 4th-round commitment from the Bills. I don't see him in Buffalo next season.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 28, 2008 8:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

needs
  1. WR
  2. TE
  3. Backup QB if JP is traded
  4. FB
Switch QB and FB if JP stays.

We need someone who can help stretch the field, which will open up the middle for TE's/RB's.  A bigtime WR opposite Evans would give Lee more single coverage and more chances for big plays. I think that's more important than a TE, though both are huge needs...

~K

by Kurupt on Jan 28, 2008 8:23 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

There's the WR argument
Knew we could count on you, K. :)

I agree, clearly, that WR is needed. But a "big-time" wideout? Not necessarily. We just need a threat on the outside. Personally, I look at the play of Edwards as the deciding factor on the WR/TE debate (which I may just write a separate post about tomorrow) - Edwards is a check-it-down, spread the ball around type of guy. If you give him an athletic mismatch, game-breaking YAC tight end in that area of the field, I believe it would go further toward diversifying this offense.

Of course, my opinion on the WR/TE debate changes every day. You can just say "get one game-breaker at either position", but that's the easy way out, I think. We have to differentiate - and right now, I'd lean more towards tight end. Feel free to set me straight. :)

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 28, 2008 8:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

RE: Big-Time Wideout
After redefining offensive futility in 2007, how can the Bills possibly not need a big-time wideout?

For better or worse, the Bills have completely hitched their wagon to Trent Edwards and promoted Turk Schonert to be their offensive coordinator.  I expect Schonert to incorporate his background in designing the offense, while maximizing Edwards' strengths and minimizing his weaknesses.  This means West Coast offense.

Trent Edwards' game is methodical, rhythm, timing, short, quick, accurate, low-risk, and over-the-middle passing.  Edwards does not have the arm strength to consistently throw outside the numbers or to the sidelines.  Also, Schonert was coached by Bill Walsh.  To me, the Edwards-Schonert marriage sounds like an ideal West Coast offense combination.  Yes, every team does run some West Coast plays and concepts.  However, I believe the Bills will be taking it a step further this season and in the future.  Watch for the deep outs and comebacks to be replaced by quick slants and crossing routes.  Again, maximizing Edwards' strengths and minimizing his weaknesses.  Typical West Coast wideouts are big and can run after the catch.  They catch a lot of passes over the middle, which is where Edwards thrives.  To the Bills, that elevates the importance of wide receivers.  Conversely, if Edwards was forced into a vertical passing scheme where the wideouts typically work outside, I think the tight end would be a higher priority than wide receiver.

Additionally, featured receiving tight ends are not required components of successful offenses (see early 1990's Bills teams and recent Bengals teams).  Furthermore, contrary to popular belief, tight ends are not the only position which can threaten the middle of the field or stretch the seam.  For instance, aligning a wideout in the slot could accomplish the same thing.

While I may not like the direction of the Bills' offense, my point of this post is: due to the quarterback and the scheme, the value of tight ends and wide receivers is the same.  Neither position is a priority need over the other; it just needs to be a great player.

by Fort Worth on Jan 29, 2008 1:19 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Re: Fort Worth
Fort, I understand your argument that we need one elite talent at either WR or TE, but for the purposes for this needs list and future discussions, I'd like to differentiate between the two positions as much as possible. You spoke a lot about WR in that comment; I take it you're of the opinion that a wideout will have a bigger impact on this offense than a tight end?
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 29, 2008 7:10 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

RE:
Brian,

Thanks for the reply.  Brian, this is truly a unique, great website for intense Bills fans like all of us here.  I love it.  Thank you Brian and all Buffalo Rumblings fans for making this site what it is!  As Brian said, an online sports bar!

Now for my reply.

As I initially mentioned, due to the quarterback (Edwards) and the scheme (West Coast offense), the value of tight ends and wide receivers is the same.  Neither position is a priority over the other, even when considering what the Bills already have on their roster.

You get my point; it really doesn't matter to me.  If I must decide between the two positions, I will say tight end over wide receiver.

I would also like to add that what makes offensive playmakers like Antonio Gates and Kellen Winslow so special is that you essentially get the talent and skill of both a TE and WR in one player.  You get the best of both worlds.

Does anyone agree/disagree with ANY of my comments under "Big-Time Wideout"?  Thanks.

by Fort Worth on Jan 29, 2008 9:56 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Who's buying the Beer?
I agree that the Bills need some size, YAC ability. And it doesn't matter if it comes from the TE position or from a Receiver.

I disagree (somewhat) with the West coast thing. I'm not sure Turk is going that way. I get the impression that Turk want to open things up, and throw the ball down field more, just my own hunch.

Who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 29, 2008 10:09 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I like beer
And it doesn't matter if it comes from the TE position or from a Receiver.

I told you my opinion changes on this topic on a daily basis - and with that sway in opinion, I'm going to disagree with that statement. I'm in the process of writing a post about just this topic, which will go live, hopefully, right after lunch (east coast time).

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 29, 2008 10:14 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Glad you approve
What's great about this online sports bar is that it's open all the time - and there aren't any stinkin' Jets fans ruining your experience.

As I mentioned in an above comment to sireric, I have a big article planned on "Big-Time Wideout" for early this afternoon. I'll let that article answer your question. :)

Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 29, 2008 10:15 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Any thoughts...
... on the number of acquisitions we need to make? I'm guessing y'all would only pluralize the WR position. Do the Bills need to bring in 2 wideouts to really round out what could be an excellent receiving corps?
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 29, 2008 7:30 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

2 wideouts
I would say yes, two wideouts. I mentioned this before; If the Bills bring in a big tall WR like Wilford or Johnson, that then fills the need for size at the position, would it then be feasible for the Bills to take the BEST WR, not just the best tall WR. For example, could the Bills sign Johnson, then draft DeSean Jackson? I wouldn't want to take a Receiver #1, whether they sign a FA or not, but is it feasible?
Who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 29, 2008 8:58 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

number of additions
2 WR
1 FB
1 maybe 2 QB (if Losman goes, I could see 2. 1 vet to replace Losman, and 1 rookie to push Hamdan (either late round draft pick or Undrafted FA) if the rookie beats out Hamdan that would be 2 additions)
1 TE
Who would have thought I'd miss Pete Metzelaars?

by sireric on Jan 29, 2008 9:19 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

TWO!!!
I think we need two wide receivers this offseason, one starter and one backup that could challenge Josh Reed for playing time.  I'd prescribe grabbing a veteran to start opposite Evans either through free agency (Berrian?  Hackett?) or trade (Javon Walker?  R. Williams?) and drafting one in the 4th or 5th round to challenge Reed for playing time this season or next season.  If Buffalo doesn't acquire a veteran starter, then I think drafting one in the 1st round becomes almost a necessity at the expense of other positions...I also don't think it's mandatory that our targets this offseason are "big receivers".  I don't view Evans as much of an asset running in the open field (only when he's already behind the secondary when he makes the catch).  I think this team needs a wideout that can run after the catch on slants and crossing patterns.  I'm thinking of Evans as James Lofton and Parrish as Don Beebe.  We need the explosive after the catch Andre Reed-type of receiver for this offense to start clicking.  Obviously, Hall-of-Famers don't grow on trees, but I'd use Reed as the "type" of receiver I'm looking for this offseason in terms of physical measurements.    
Nick (Bensalem, PA)

by Nick BensalemPA on Jan 29, 2008 9:01 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You're right
YAC is what this offense really needs, and it doesn't really matter what package it comes with. I'd still prefer size, simply because it creates matchup problems by itself, but what we really need is a guy who can take a short Edwards pass and turn it into a good chunk of explosive yardage. Again, more on that early this afternoon.
Create a free account to join in the discussion, Bills fans!

by Brian Galliford on Jan 29, 2008 10:17 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

RE: YAC
Brian,

I know you will have much more on this topic later.  I can't wait.

YAC is a great thing in any offense.  However, I strongly believe this:

Due to the neccessity to generate big, explosive plays (gains of 20+ yards) in the passing game, YAC is more important in an Edwards/West Coast offense than a Losman/Vertical offense.

No question about it.

When you make the change from Losman/Vertical to Edwards/West Coast, YAC becomes a necessity instead of a convenience.

by Fort Worth on Jan 29, 2008 11:18 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SB Nation's home for daily Buffalo Bills coverage.

Community Guidelines

Start posting about the Bills »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Vick to the Bills in 2010 "a good fit": Tony Dungy on NBC
Small
What Might Have Been: A Scenario
Run_like_hell_small
Belichick Interview
Bills_small
Good future draft pick to keep an eye on.
Beast_small
To Lighten Up The Mood...
Small
Bills Coaching Future?
Jphshrink_small
The Back of Ralph Wilson’s Football Card
261x_small
Continuity will lead to success with Buffalo
Small
Fixing This Team Starts in the Trenches
Cody_small
Deja Vu All Over Again

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation


Editor-in-Chief

Dawesome_copy_small Brian Galliford

Editors

Sucks_small Kurupt

Mrsinister03_small sireric

Homertitans_small MattRichWarren

Authors

Dynamics_small Ron From NM