RyanC883

in terms of OT, even trade into the first. Depends on how they see Ford long-term. If someone like Becton or Thomas is available at 15 or after, it makes a tempting trade.

thanks. will do!

anywhere you can do this online? My fanduel app has a limited amount of NFL drafting available. I can't even find the O/U wins for teams next year!

the interesting thing about this draft, is who do you trade up for. If we trade-up my guess is for an OT. OT in my opinion is the best position to have a starter on a rookie deal after QB. This would let us keep Dawkins, and have a rookie OT and Josh Allen together for a long time. If not OT, perhaps a trade-up for LB Murray from Oklahoma to complete the LB corp? I'm not sure I see an edge I'd trade up for. (Chaisson appears overrated, IMO. Total lack of production on stacked LSU D, and would likely cost too much). I'd rather grab Weaver in the 2nd and trade up back into the 2nd for another impact player. RB and WR appear too deep to trade-up, unless there is someone you absolutely love above the rest (and going Weaver first allows you to trade back into the second).

I think they both fit in. Lots of versatility. Chinn does appear to be the better prospect, IMO, but I'd be happy with either one.

this makes me think they wanted both.

I agree. I can't imagine that Bean thought Sanders is a WR1 at this point in time. Diggs is much better than Sanders was in Sanders prime, IMO. And Diggs is in his prime. Sanders likely wanted more $$ than we were willing to offer a WR 2 or 3. (Brown may be better than Sanders right now?)

massive letdown if we don't make it. Really, we should win the division by 2 games. And, we should be able to compete for the #1 seek. KC will have a difficult schedule this year. this is what I refer to as Bills Fan Syndrome. It impacts every sporting event I watch. People are like, "your crazy." I then mention I'm a Bills fan, and they understand. Super Bowl, Tenn Game, Dallas MNF game, Pats*** game with McKelvin fumble, etc.

I'd love Yannick here. We have some extra WR's likely after the draft.

correct. If there is a debate over the allegedly added language, it would not be considered legally binding. Instead of a redo over the entire contract, an arbitrator likely strikes this language should it ever go to arbitration. It's similar to you buy something, then add language to the purchase contract. The purchase and the underlying contract are not now void, only the additional language is void.

Good point. I get the backups are the same, but I think we needed an upgrade at depth.

yeah, not a fan of the Rhinos. The Browns should consider changing their helmet to that color-scheme, even if they keep the Browns name. it's a better look, IMO.

you cannot add language to a CBA after the vote. In that case, the remedy is NOT a re-vote on the CBA, but rather, no arbitrator would abide by the language when the union files a grievance. it's very difficult to have a re-vote on a CBA. Also, the language implying that this was done nefariously is ridiculous. Typos often happen before the final CBA is distributed. The Union would be all over a typo and it would be fixed. Reid is WRONG. it's true you cannot change contract language after approval. But the remedy that Reid wants (assuming the language was changed) is not appropriate. Reid is clearly trying to get what he wants, which is the agreed upon CBA nullified.

na, more likely to be cancelled after we clinch home field advantage and the #1 seed, and look like the favorites to win the SB. That would be the most billsy thing. I think Edge is a concern in terms of depth. I.E. Addison gets injured. That said, I think you draft someone in the 2nd round that you envision starting immediately, unless a DE you have high on your board falls to you.

That's kind of awesome. If I'm a HS player I'm calling him and asking him for training tips, etc.

I get the part about a RB needing to get into rhythm. I don't think Motor is one of those guys. HE appears to be able to come in at any point at be up to speed. So we will need to make sure we draft a RB partner that can also come in and be at 100%. Your point about Henry is spot-on. He was good, but not great, when splitting carries with Lewis. When he was the "lead" he dominated. I'd love an Ingram/Kamara situation. I think that's what we are going for.

would love this. And he's likely a 3rd or 4th rounder.

oh, prepare to own it

sorry, i couldn't see vote totals until I refreshed.

he's in next weeks

ha, I had to debate between him and Taylor. Didn't want to split the RB vote, so i took the guy who is generally higher. But you'll see him in next weeks poll! Yolo, don't just comment, vote

For fun, lets assume all 4 of these guys are available with our 2nd round pick. It's possible that none, or only one is available. These are top-level guys at our positions of greatest need. I'll do another poll with "2nd tier"/"more realistic" or whatever you want to call it options next week. But if all of these guys are around, and some mock drafts have them being available, who do you take and why. Let the fun begin!

Bean may be able to pull it off. That, or trade him for JJ Watt!

James Morgan, FIU; Jalen Hurts; would be nice if around in the 5th.

he has a jewelry habit?