Thurman#1

A support system for a QB without a QB is like an umbilical cord with no fetus. You can build a support system anytime. The moments when you have a chance to bring in a really good QB are very few and far between and must be treasured and taken advantage of.

From your mouth to God's ear, Gunner. Nice work. Cracked me up. Nice catch.

6th highest scoring offense in the league? No. In Tyrod's years here, the Bills have ranked 22nd (2017, 18.9 PPG), tied for 10th/11th (2016, 24.9 PPG), and 12th (2015, 23.7 PPG). And again, scoring is best understood not as an offensive stat but as a team stat. Offense gets maybe 70 - 80% of the credit, but defense and STs can actually score and have a huge hand in scoring opportunities in terms of field position. During that year you're I suppose referring to, we ranked around 10th in scoring by STs/defense and also 11th in drive start field position. While giving back to the defense the 23rd-worst field position. The offense had a lot of help that year.

That's fine, but you're using the words "franchise QB" in a completely different way than most people do. Use them that way and you're going to have bad communication with nearly everyone you talk with. Most people would use "franchise QB" in a way that would mean that there are probably 10 - 18 or so of them. If you're using it to pick out only two guys and you want people to understand you, most people would probably say something like, "the best of the elite QBs," something like that.

Not really because his completion percentage was significantly over 60% in college. Yeah, against a lower level of competition, but he rang up good stats and play against them. Allen's sub-60% against that lower level is indeed a serious concern. Personally, I don't want him. If they draft him I'll cheer for him but I have enough doubts that I'm rooting for that not to happen.

I'd have loved to see us get Cousins. He's good enough to make a good team Super Bowl competitive right away. And yeah his salary will be tough to pay. A smart team will be able to get around it. Having said that, we have no idea whether teams have been put on or off the list because they wanted to be there or for whatever reasons Cousins wanted. The latter seems likely. In any case, this was never a likely way for the Bills to go. They've said from minute one that they believe in building through the draft, they've sliced salaries from the first minute they got here, and they both come from a very fiscally conservative team and have said nothing but fiscally conservative things. They have always been unlikely to build with Cousins. I think Cousins would have been terrific here, but that's not the way the process works. And then when he did decide he wanted him, Cousins was no longer interested. He's said that he wants to go somewhere he's comfortable and wanted. Seems like when he felt comfortable, the team wasn't yet convinced and that when they really wanted him, the GM/owner/coach weren't able to get Cousins back interested. Horrible way to handle this by Washington. They did the best they could with a terrible situation by bringing in Smith. But they screwed things up there bad.

Maybe. As of yet, the stats would not indicate that. But it could certainly be true. I thought if Sammy stayed healthy he was going to rip it up in L.A. But not so much yet. We shall see.

Nicely put.

Yup. And they'll be using all 8 even if they trade up and get a QB. Which is by far their biggest need. There'll never be a year that losing picks in a tradeup won't hurt. It always hurts. And there'll never be a year when "everyone is [not] slobbering over QBs of this caliber." That's what happens to QBs of this caliber. Or anywhere close, really. If there's any way for them to get a guy they want out of those top three or four guys from a tradeup, they should do it. If it's for some reason impossible, trade back and stockpile an extra first or two for next year. We need a QB. If it somehow absolutely doesn't work out this year, make it so it's possible next year.

Love this. Smart. Hard-working. Doesn't just snap back a word or two that everybody loves. I've always liked Rosen a lot and now I like him more. Love that he shut up and worked his butt off early. He gets it. Don't think that's ever been the problem. He won't fit some teams. Some teams want QBs who only talk football and even then only in platitudes. He won't fit those teams. He will make headlines about stuff outside football. If you can't stand that, you won't want Rosen. From what I've seen, McD and Beane wouldn't care, but it's not like I know them and we're still figuring out just what their process entails. I'd guess they wouldn't mind, but it's hard to say.

Sure. But it doesn't have to all be done in one year. And yeah, it would be a solid haul. But they've already got like three solid hauls worth to use. I'm usually a huge fan of trading down. I want the Bills to do it every year but this one. Trade up for a QB, Bills. The Browns, IMHO, should do two things. They should bring in two impact players, including their QB. And they should start a treadmill of picks that will put them in premium draft spots every year by trading down for one or two really good picks next year. This year, they're OK. I don't think I have too major a disagreement with you here. I love trading down usually. I just think they already have so much they just need to use it this year. Bring in six or seven or eight players in one year and four years down the line after you've developed your guys you can't keep them all because you can't afford them. Your GM is saying, "We have to give second contracts to our QB. And he's not working with us yet, so there goes our franchise tag, maybe. And we also have to sign our second-best defensive player after Garrett, our LT, two of our OL starters and three of our LBs. We don't have the cap space, two-thirds of them will have to go." You have to spread 'em out.

They are more than one QB away. But they don't have to trade away anything to get the QB they want. He'll be there at #1. And they aren't a team looking to be ready to get to the Super Bowl this year. They'll need to make major improvements this year to keep Hue employed but if they win five or six games and are competitive with most of their schedule it will still be a major improvement. And they're already stocked up on picks. They don't need to stock up on more, not for long-term growth. Just as important, if not more so with their wealth of picks, to get a few real prime talents. And while I didn't watch a single Browns game and don't know what to think about Kizer, I do see that just by the stats he got better as the year went along. I mean, in his first seven games he had two games rated over 50 at passer rating. That's awful. But in the remaining nine games only two games below 50. Had games of 99, 98, 86, 73 and 66. Dunno if he's going to be any good, but as I say, plenty of bad rookie QBs become good players.

Not that I expect Sammy to be back, or am dying for him. But he was a good teammate and nobody except a few fans on forums ever had much problem with Sammy as a teammate or a person.

That 2nd round pick could very easily be a key part in a tradeup for a QB. And no, Benjamin's injury history isn't anything near as bad as Sammy's. Sammy's had a bunch of different injuries, never very often seeming fully healthy, while Benjamin has essentially had one injury. It was a bad one, but he hasn't been often injured. Sammy = high risk http://sportsinjurypredictor.com/player/sammy-watkins/6937 Benjamin = low risk http://sportsinjurypredictor.com/player/kelvin-benjamin/6952 And yeah, the Bills gave up a 3rd and a 6th for Benjamin. And while the 3rd could theoretically come back to haunt them with it's absence, we had two thirds at the time and still have one. And a 3rd is simply worth less than a 2nd. And they made that net gain for a guy who has been just about as prolific as Sammy, game for game but will cost around $10 million less next year and who last year saved the Bills nearly $2 mill on the cap compared to what Sammy would have if they'd kept him. Benjamin is under contract to the Bills for another year at $8.459 mill while Sammy may either be let go or franchised at around $17 mill. He saved money against the cap last year, he will be kept with major savings next year, they still have the 2nd they acquired for Sammy to trade for a QB and it looks like it could well be an integral part of the deal, assuming there is one. And he has a much less consistent history of injury. So, yeah, really.

I'm not supporting the move to pick Shaq. If anything, I have been critical. Rex's seat was warming and that made it maybe less of a smart move, especially with their first round pick. They needed their first rounder to be healthy that year. This year, less urgency, though there's always some. And I don't think many are arguing to pick up the post-injury Price in the first. But the reason Thurman is used as an example of successfully drafting an injured player is simply that that is what he was. An excellent example. You're right, it was a calculated risk with Thurman and I'm sure with Shaq and Listenbee and others. You can bet they consider it seriously. Considered risks are what most successful risks turn out to be. Some turn out well and some don't. You can argue that McGahee, for instance, was a success. I wouldn't, personally, but plenty have done so. I wish they'd just gone with Travis Henry and drafted another position. But it's very arguable McGahee was a success, though personally he's one of the two or three ex-Bills I really dislike. I'd like them to calculate and consider whether it would be worth it to get him if he falls enough to become a bargain.

He admitted his selfishness, but there's been no confirmation elsewhere that anyone else considered them serious at all. He apparently was talking about comments that he wasn't getting enough targets. Which is pretty much a nothing for WRs. Where was the flood of Bills players and insiders agreeing with Sammy that he'd been selfish? There wasn't a single one. Appears to be a case of a self-critical guy growing up even more and being willing to be criticize himself in public. You're right that the cap situation "isn't why Sammy was shipped out." Correct. It was only part of the reason. As I pointed out there were also concerns about injury and about whether they would be able to sign him and whether they had enough money to do so. Not to mention an absolutely feverish need for extra picks to trade up for a QB in the draft this year. If you don't know that by now, Common, then there is no convincing you differently.

Yeah, and Graham had to just about tie him down to get that "could". Graham: "Brandon, last question for you and I don't know if you have looked at your contract with the Buffalo Bills, but you are contractually obligated to answer a Tyrod Taylor question at every interview until he's no longer on the roster." (Beane cracks up) "So, to fulfil that contractual obligation I'm gonna say, I noticed that there were questions asked about Tyrod and there was never from either you or Shawn today any specific mention that he will be on the roster in 2018. You know what you have in Tyrod Taylor, what the situation is. Why can't you say, one way or the other, what his role will be in 2018 with the Buffalo Bills?" Beane: "Well, it's like any position, Tim. We have guys on our roster we plan to be here but maybe you come across something that you think is an upgrade. And I wouldn't be doing my job if I'm not looking at every position. And, you know, were we completely satisfied with our quarterback play last year? No. But at the same time, you have to know that you have made an upgrade. You don't just change to change at any position. So right now, Nathan and Tyrod both are on our roster. That's where we're at. We are doing our due diligence in both free agency and the draft. Um, but we very well could see both of those guys, you know, going to training camp with us and competing to start next year. Graham: "So just for the record. In terms of the time frame and how things sort out with the start of free agency next year and where the draft are. You know the dates. You know the situations. When does a decision need to be made on Tyrod regarding what you can do with him or whether he'll still be here?" Beane: "Well, I think, again, you don't just send a guy packing who helped lead this team to the playoffs for the first time in 17 years. So he did a lot of good things. At the end of the day, he's on our roster, that's where we're at now and we're just taking it day by day. I don't have a set day to say, like, 'Hey, it's March whatever, April whatever, Tyrod is definitely here for the whole '18 season or he's definitely moving on. Right now our plan right now is with those two guys, Nathan and Tyrod. And until, you know, something else changes, that's our plan." http://buffalonews.com/2018/02/28/on-todays-tim-graham-show-brandon-beane-chad-kelly-big-4-hoops-and-more/ I know hearing he "could" be on the roster might seem like a big victory since till now nobody has even said that. But it's not. "Could" is the opposite of a solid endorsement of TT. This was yet another briar patch full of obfuscations and an admission that it's not impossible. It has been like pulling teeth and a bit more here of the same.

Did I miss a tweet where they said the Bills would be open to keeping him next season? Where is that one? When did he say it? Neither one I saw said more than that they weren't planning now to cut him They are fine with paying his roster bonus They won't cut him without upgrading the position a one-year, $10 mill contract (his net to another team if the Bills pay the roster bonus) would be much more tradeable None of which amounts to them being more open to keeping him next season. All he says for sure there is that they aren't cutting him now. Again, maybe I missed a tweet where Rapoport said more. Did I? Do you have the quote? Is it the one on Feb. 14th at 4:12, with the associated video where Rapoport says, "My understanding, though, it doesn't seem like they want to cut Tyrod, seems like the Bills would like to trade him. Just based on how much quarterbacks are going for and how much interest, seems Buffalo will be able to do so." Did I miss one?

You mean Thurman Thomas? Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If they get a good bargain and he misses a year but then is a very good player, I'd love it, myself. The problem is often when you go in unawares, which is what happened last year. The full injury happened after the draft. I can see people saying they don't want him. I'd still like him if he's a bargain and looks likely to recover well.

If I were guaranteed a Hall of Famer? Maybe at QB or pass rusher. Any other position, no. A position of no need, absolutely not. First round choices are too valuable.

You're wrong that Kizer and Kessler won 0 games last year. I think if you go back and go through the game film you will find that the Cleveland Browns were the ones who won zero games. Win-loss record is a team stat. Kizer was a rookie. Plenty of terrible rookies become good or great players. Look at Eli Manning's first year. He completed 48.2% of his passes and had 6 TDs and 9 INTs and a YPA of 5.3. Or Brees' first full year of play, his second year in the league. 60.8%, 17 TDs and 16 INTs and a 6.2 YPA. Kessler has played about as much as Brees had and has frankly outplayed Brees if you only look at similar periods of their career. Young guys can get better. I don't know if either of them will, but saying that they're terrible so they will always be terrible simply doesn't make sense.

Yeah, agreed, out of Keenum, Bradford, Bridgewater, McCarron and Taylor, Taylor might be the cheapest. Just a reminder, the Browns have the most cap room in football, around $100 mill. They won't be making decisions on QB based on saving money. The fact that they thought about bringing in Smith makes that very very clear even if it weren't pretty obvious already. Also, they are very likely to want that veteran to not just be a guy who can start but also a guy who can be an on-field coach and help them develop the young guys, a Frank Reich type who could start. And that's not looked at by anyone as something Tyrod can do. I doubt if you asked him that Tyrod would be interested in that kind of role anyway. He seems to be committed to find a place where he can start and try to prove himself the long-term starter. Can't see the Browns valuing Tyrod enough to make including him in the deal worthwhile.

Sounds about right. And I might take Darnold or Mayfield also.

This is correct, you don't get rid of a guy who's a misfit and then bring him back. Completely irrelevant to this situation of course. We got rid of Sammy because of injury concerns, worry about the cost of re-signing him during our salary cap problems and to get enough trade capital to have a shot at one of the QBs in this draft. I doubt it will happen, but there's a chance because they never didn't like Sammy. It was a few message board people who had problems with him.

I don't know. It would depend on what he paid and on how well he performed. We wouldn't know for a year or three whether or not it was a coup. It would be interesting. I've always like Sammy as a person but his relative lack of productivity in LA left question marks. If they let him go, that would add to those questions.