OldTimer1960

On the flip-side, if not for a lucky 5-2 start fueled mostly by a lot of turnovers caused by the Defense, they could have been 6-10.

We are agreeing, but I think both the Rams and Eagles had much better rosters than Buffalo currently does when they traded up for their QB. I am pretty sure that their 1st round pick was also considerably higher than the Bills’ at 21. For the Rams move from 15 to 1 it cost pick 15 and both 2nd round picks they owned and their 3rd plus a 1st and 3rd in the next year. That is, 2 1sts, 2 2nds and 2 3rds. Note that they had received a lot of picks earlier by trading with Washington to allow them to take Robert Griffin. The Bills are not in the same position.

Check out the Rams’ roster that was in place before Goff got there. Their defensive depth chart is largely 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks. Remember that they were picking very early for several years before they traded up for Goff. They also went heavily into FA and trade this year to nab Watkins and Woods who helped a lot. Also, don’t forget that they also picked Todd Gurley early very recently. Likewise, the Eagles already had a very good defense when they picked Wentz and they’ve been fortunate that the Vikes gave them a #1 pick for Bradford.

Agreed that those are the top 3, but are they REALLY that much better prospects than the next 3?

My point is that 3 premium picks and Glenn, who if healthy is very good - if not healthy, you’d have to throw in another 2nd

Except that just getting to #2 doesn’t mean you have a franchise QB. Trading that much gets you a chance to pick a non-guaranteed prospect.

So, who is the sure-fire star that they could get if they trade the majority of their draft to get someone early? i think the best of theses prospects is at best a 50-50 prospect. I am not enamored with trading 4 high picks to get someone who is a coin flip to be a good starter. I would be fine with Rudolph at 21 if he gets there AND one of the 2nds on another QB prospect. i haven’t given up on Peterman, but he is a long-shot and his presence should not dictate draft selections in any way. Beyond Cousins, I don’t think any of the available FA QBs are long-term answers and I would not want to trade more than the Bills’ 3rd round pick (96) for Nick Foles - he isn’t the answer (IMHO).

If they don’t take a QB in the 1st, I would strongly hope that they could somehow nab Mike White or Kyle Lauletta in round 2 - likely with trade up. Both are intriguing. I’ve watched what I can find an White and he has talent, but it is a big step up.

Agreed. Especially if they let Taylor go, they could be picking much higher next year.

The wealth in draft picks isn’t that great. They *might* get to the top 5 with both firsts and both seconds. Price is too steep for my tastes because I don’t think that Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield, Allen are such sure things that I would be willing to give that much up. I am inclined to hope that Rudolph, Jackson and Allen make it out of the top 10. If they really like one of those 3 better than the others, a trade from 21 to maybe 12 would be interesting. If they leave round 1 without a QB, I think you will see an aggressive move up in round 2 to get a prospect like Mike White or Kyle Lauletta.

I can see what you are saying, but I also think that they could do both. I think they could use the second pick to take a QB and then use the remaining picks to try to build for that run with Eli.

I don't see it that way. They have had an entire year to scout all of these QBs. I am sure that they have dissected all of them in great deal off film study, have information on them all from coaches and players and likely have seen them all play or practice live. The combine interviews and team visits are important to get a feel for each player's personality and how they process information, but I strongly believe they already have good idea about those things as well - teams spend millions of $ on this and it all starts far far in advance of the Senior Bowl and Combine. I am with you - Allen could certainly turn out to be good. His accuracy is a concern, but his supporting cast is a big mitigating factor. His team was seriously undermanned against most competition. That could certainly help to explain his lower completion % (or he could just not be accurate).

I am not advocating for them to take Jackson, but that isn’t the only upside to taking him. We don’t know, he could be a complete bust or be great or somewhere in between. I could envision him as a better Tyrod Taylor or possibly a Marcus Mariota type.

Don’t be surprised if the Browns are MUCH better in 2018. They have some talent now and have picks 1, 4, 33, 35, 65. They could add Cousins, Saquon Barkley and some trench help and be pretty good pretty quick. This isn’t true. It would take the Bills’ two 1sts and both 2nd round picks to beat Denver’s 1, 2 & 3.

No doubt that Jackson has some very bad throws, but he also has some nice throws that make you think he can be a decent passer. I Think that it is quite possible that if Jackson became as risk-averse a passer as Taylor, that his completion% would be about the same as Taylor's.

There is a BIG difference between McCoy's productivity and attitude compared to rarely available slacker Dareus. There is no debate that Dareus *could* be great if he wanted to, but at least this far in his career, Dareus has rarely played great.

I respectfully ask why you think this is such a dumb statement. Anyone could have a good completion percentage if they are only willing to throw to receivers who are WIDE open. What i mean by saying that Jackson is a better passer than Taylor is that he will make more plays passing because he is willing to throw the ball in situations that Taylor is not.

Difference that I see is that Jackson throws the ball. He isn’t the most accurate, but still already a better passer than Taylor, in my opinion.

I’m not a Taylor hater, but the indignation that some of these national reporters express about Taylor’s benching is waaaaay over the top. In the 2 games right after his benching he threw for 164 yards and 0 TDS against KC and then 85 (eighty-five) yards against NE. Keep in mind that the much-maligned Peterman managed 92 yards and 2 TDS in a blinding snowstorm the next week. That doesn’t scream mid-level starter to me. I don’t think there will be a great bidding war for him.

Really, there haven’t been that many successful QBs coming out of college including all conferences.

You should let the NFL GMs know who you’ve identified as successes!

Agree. They just gave Dareus away for not being dedicated, I think Richardson is similar- ultra-talented but lacking want-to

Even with that, they still don’t need to trade down - they have picks 1, 4, 33, 35, 65, 97, 120. That is 6 picks in the top 100. They do already have some talent - with decent QBing and the picks they already have, they could become a very good team quickly.

Better throw in AT LEAST a 2nd as well to even get Cleveland to answer the phone. I will be surprised if Cleveland is even interested in trading down. They already have 4 picks in the top 35

Yes and Denver’s 1st and 2nd are worth more than the Bills’ 2 1sts. It will take A LOT to get ahead of the Broncos and Jets if those teams want QBs. I think it would be almost impossible if the Bills are in a bidding war with both of those reams.