Thurman#1

You ought to call up the Seahawks and tell them that they fired him. They're under the impression that he quit. Unexpectedly. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/seahawks-lose-key-executive-scot-mccloughan-to-resignation/ The 49ers pushed him out, though it was reported as stepping down, but there are no similar reports from his tenure in Seattle. As for what happened in D.C., there's a lot of unsureness and two totally different stories: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/former-player-reignites-war-of-words-between-washington-and-fired-gm-scot-mccloughan-001059989.html Agreed. He knows how to build teams.

He does have drinking issues, but supposedly people (not the "brain trust" of the Washington Indigenous People, but everyone else, supposedly) is that he hasn't hurt his job performance. If I were the Pegulas, I'd be in the private jet right now. This guy is genuinely good. If you can figure out what happened ... you're using your imagination and disregarding the lack of facts. Confirmation bias. We simply don't know if there was an incident or pattern that caused this or whether it was the result of a power struggle and a guy who needed a justification to do what he wanted to do.

On the contrary. Pretty much all of those trades are right on value. They're offering just what the chart says they're worth. It's not like they're giving the Bills a bargain. They're not, they're paying the expected price. I'm not saying they will happen, of course. But they could. Easily. It would most likely require only that the Bills say "Yes." I disagree with this too. There will be plenty of guys up that high who Seattle might like. Enough to trade up? Maybe and maybe not, but it's not all that far-fetched. If the Seahawks were offering a big premium, then yeah context for such an unlikely move would be necessary. But since they're giving pretty much list price, it's not, really. There are plenty of guys up that high a team like Seattle might be interested in. And Seattle has a history of draft trades. Last year there were about 47 trades in the draft. This just isn't all that unrealistic. It requires that the Bills want to make those trades, but if they do, they could easily be there, with someone if not with the exact teams forecast here.

Love the trades back. Love 'em. I'm not as thrilled with their SPARQ formula as they obviously are, but it looked decent to me who they picked with what little I know this year.

We didn't tank the Jets game. We started Manuel and fired Rex. Not the same thing. Our chances of winning were lowered, but that's not tanking. Made a ton of sense at the time to sit Tyrod with his injury combined with the contract provision that would have required signing him due to the injury guarantee of his option if the injury was worsened during game action. We also needed to know more about where EJ was at. But in any case, I felt fine about it then, and just as fine now. My worries about winning end when we lose our playoff chances and often before if it becomes obvious we simply aren't close to competing for a Lombardi.

It wasn't condescension. It was annoyance at argument point drift. And your original post completely proves my annoyance reasonable. In your refusal to stop arguing you went from saying in your original post that Sean Taylor did not live up to his draft spot (which is just dead wrong, as I have been arguing all along) to somehow wanting to argue that his being shot somehow is an argument that he was a bad pick. Which is nonsense. That and something about Miles Jack's degenerative knee having something to do with why safeties shouldn't be taken in the top ten, which even after two posts where you tried to explain has no earthly connection which I can see. Things have gone far enough off-track that I am (actually) bowing out. You are obviously a guy who needs the last word. Go for it. As I said, see you on the boards.

There'll be peace when he is done.

So your point no longer had anything to do with Taylor being a safety? That was how this started and was the point he and I were making with you. And Taylor played for three and a half years, not a couple, before being shot to death in the botched robbery. He fully lived up to his draft spot. What? I have no idea what leap you're making here, and I've pretty much lost interest in the discussion at this point, as it has wandered very very far, from what I can figure out. Of course if people know your shelf life is limited it affects your draft stock. But they didn't know that about Taylor or any of the other safeties ... you know what, I don't even know what subject you're discussing anymore. Safeties in the top ten aren't necessarily a bad deal. Plenty of them have had enough impact to justify that kind of placement. See you around the boards.

Very good front office for two, Alex. Bringing in the right players is the key thing. After that you can get by with solid coaching. You can't have awful coaching, but solid is fine if the players are are there. I can understand cautious optimism, but I'm at this point more from Missouri.

I like the players, but I can't imagine them going so offensive. Our new HC is going to be looking at rebuilding that bad defense. I'd love to see them trade back once or twice. Wow, it's fun to watch him tackle.

There's a letter limit, dude.

It's not what you want from a top ten prospect. But it absolutely does not mean he was a bad draft pick that he was killed in a home invasion. That makes exactly as much sense as it would make to say that the scouts should have known that a draft pick would get killed in a car accident or an earthquake. That could have happened to anyone, and Taylor was setting the tone on that ferocious defence. He was a good pick there. There aren't many safeties worth that. But there shouldn't be any question whatsoever that there haver been safeties good enough to have easily validated top ten picks. I'm sure you can come up with a list as easily as anyone else. And Jack dropped last year because he was injured and hadn't played in a while. That is not a reasonable comparison. Don't know whether we will pick a safety but probably two will go in the top ten, and I'm betting at least one will be a good bargain there.

Hogan is absolutely a speedster. Guy ran a 4.39. The reason Belichick - a notorious skinflint - made Gilmore a top ten CB by pay is that he is a top ten CB. Our salary cap problems may have played into why we didn't bring Gilmore back, but Norman and Gilmore are a pattern and as Benoit points out probably indicate his draft tendencies and priorities. Don't see him still being there, but yeah, that's the kind of move this would seem to mean is possible.

Yup. He also said in that article that they should exercise the option, which turned out to be very wrong. He says they can win with Tyrod. He doesn't say they can win a championship with him. I think most of us think he's right that we can win with Tyrod. My personal opinion is that we're not going to see him make the huge steps up in his seventh year or later that he would need to make to make the Bills able to contend for a title. IMHO that's why they re-negotiated with him rather than exercising the option. But if you're saying that they don't need to pick a QB at #10 if they don't think the right guy is there, I agree with you 100%.

I was precisely trying to tell him to mellow out.

I go either way, but if you wait for a QB who is a sure thing, you literally will never ever get a QB. The guys who are close to a sure thing, guys like Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck, come along once a decade or so and are gone in pick #1. And the one thing the Bills have shown for 17 years is that we don't ever get bad enough to get the #1 pick.

Say it together ... Different opinions make the world go around.

Emily Kaplan's Senior Bowl report on Peterman and the responses to him there: http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/01/27/nfl-draft-senior-bowl-quarterbacks-nathan-peterman-davis-webb-cooper-kupp-oj-howard-haason-reddick Warning: contains yet another Kirk Cousins comparison. "...But big names around this time of year are always quarterbacks, and when Deshaun Watson declined his invite (he was eligible as a junior since he had graduated), the already-shallow senior quarterback pool was quite dry. However in talking to folks in Mobile before practices began, there was a belief that two of the six quarterbacks competing here could strengthen their stock—the ceiling being 'the next Dak Prescott.' Those guys: Nathan Peterman of Pittsburgh and Davis Webb of California. "We’ll begin with Peterman because he’s been by far the most impressive quarterback here. Says one evaluator who has studied Peterman extensively: 'He reminds me a lot of Kirk Cousins in this sense: He’s not going to blow you away with any of his traits, but he can do everything you need.' The evaluator stressed that Peterman is very mature. A graduate transfer from Tennessee, he enrolled at Pitt in 2015 to pursue an MBA and the 22-year-old got married to his longtime girlfriend in April. "Peterman didn’t have too many weapons to throw to at Pitt; junior receiver Jester Weah (no catches before 2016) came through, and tight end Scott Orndoff had a good year, but other than that 'there was not much there,' the scout said. Peterman has been playing for the North squad coached by the Chicago Bears, and yes, they’re in the market for a quarterback. The 22-year-old has thrown some pretty, well-placed balls and earned bonus points at weigh-in when his hands measured at 9 7/8 inches—impressive considering he’s only 6' 2 1/2". (Yes, the hand debate is back! Sorry I’m not sorry. There’s even one more hand-size reference later in the column, though I’ll go on record with my hand-size stance: It does matter, but only for quarterbacks, who have to grip the ball, especially in poor weather.) My sense is that Peterman is not ready to start next year, but would be a solid third to fifth round target and developmental project." I know I came across in this thread as a big fan. I'm not, especially. I just want the Bills to start drafting QBs regularly. I have no idea if this guy should be the one, but he looks interesting to me.

NFL Draft Scout has him as a 3rd-4th guy. 2nd would be a bit high, IMHO. If they like him, I wouldn't mind them taking him. Thing is ... when there is an Andrew Luck, we won't get him drafting number 12 or whatever. Might as well cross the Andrew Lucks off the list. We're going to have to find a Russell Wilson or Derek Carr or Teddy Bridgewater or whoever, because this team isn't bad enough to get an Andrew Luck, and we won't be in the next year or two either now that we brought Tyrod back. And yeah, TT is it for now. Which means you want to start drafting for his replacement immediately if there's anyone there with potential.

Not so much. Not that he has a bullet arm, he doesn't. But he appears to be able to make all the throws an NFL QB needs. EDIT: I can see this has already been posted here, but it's worth looking at, as are the scouting reports which do say he doesn't have a great arm but can make all the throws.

$13 mill a year. From the Patriots. $40 mill guaranteed from the ultimate cheapskates. Yeah, Gilmore absolutely is a great one-on-one corner. Not perfect and not a shutdown guy. But yeah, great.

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/03/29/nfl-new-head-coaches-sean-mcvay-kyle-shanahan-sean-mcdermott-anthony-lynn-vance-joseph-doug-marrone It's an article analyzing what the six new head coaches do scheme-wise, based on Benoit's extensive film study. He then uses that to predict what those coaches might be likely to do in their first drafts. Here's the section on McDermott: "By deciding to let cornerback Stephon Gilmore walk in free agency, the longtime defensive assistant under the late Jim Johnson in Philadelphia and the highly respected Ron Rivera in Carolina has already told you how he views the game. Gilmore is a lanky, athletic man-to-man defender. Most defenses would kill for a corner like him. The Bills were one of those defenses under Rex Ryan, who preferred one-on-one coverage outside and overloaded pressure designs up front. But McDermott plays a lot more zone. On early downs, it’s eight in the box with a safety patrolling centerfield. On passing downs, it’s seven in the box, maybe with an inside blitz look, and two safeties back deep. This approach naturally protects corners; almost always, they have help from a safety over the top or from a linebacker underneath. And so instead of spending money on a pricey cornerback you can spend it on linebackers and pass rushers. McDermott’s old team, the Panthers, did exactly that by letting Josh Norman leave in free agency, signing Thomas Davis and Luke Kuechly to long-term contracts, and consistently selecting defensive linemen early in the draft. The Bills will follow this model. Almost any position in their front seven can be upgraded." The whole article is pretty good, but the Anthony Lynn and Doug Marrone sections also have some Bills relevance.

Assuming your guess is right, I think they understand that this year is likely to be a wash even with Tyrod much less without him. We're just not likely to be good this year with this lineup as we try to input new systems. As for vet backups, we're in salary cap jail. We have $12 mill left, and that's before we pay the draft class their $5 - $7 mill. And the Bills (and most teams) like to carry $5 or $6 mill in space through the season in case we need injury replacements.

Fair enough. Still, we need to talk during the offseason. It really has been shown that when people are talking about bringing in expensive high-level FAs as winning the offseason, it most often leads to losing the regular season. Clearly we didn't spend freely this year due to the serious cap situation we've found ourselves in. But I like that we didn't just push the cap problems down the road. Instead we dealt with the problems this year without destroying our situation next year. That much I really like. But I hate that they took a season when we were losing a ton of FAs and managed to not get any comp picks next year, at least as it looks now. If there's one thing they need to do to start winning offseasons in ways that will produce regular season effects, it's maximize the number of draft picks we get in every conceivable way.

Mariota, Luck, Newton and Wilson are traditional pocket passers. They stay in the pocket as long as they can, which allows the play to develop if it's going to. Yeah, if the play breaks down, they're athletic. But they don't bail out till the rush drives them out. They are pocket passers, while RGII and Kaepernick are not. Ryan is an unathletic pocket passer and one of the best QBs in the game. Derek Carr is too. Cousins is no big runner. A healthy Dalton - when their OL gets back to at least decent - looks like he's going to keep the Bengals relevant for the next ten years. I could definitely be wrong about this but I think Wentz is going to be very good for a very long time and he's no athlete. Traditional pocket passers dominate the league, but a few of them can do extra things, particularly Wilson, Newton and Jameis. But they stay in the pocket and are very effective there unti forced out.