OldTimer1960

I agree. Winfield was one of my favorites. I will admit, though, that I thought that they did the right thing (at the time) in letting him leave in FA. At the time they also had Clements who was younger and they knew that they could only pay big $ to one of them.

Just some very sexy feet... That aren't mine!

I am 56 years old and I have NEVER been a great athlete, but I get up at 4:05 every week day to workout. While, I woul like to think that is superhuman, I KNOW that it isn't.

I agree. I think that there will be very good defensive talent available. I am not as much a fan of the QBs as you are, but I don't hate Any of the big 4

But completion percentage was far lower in 1983 than in 2016 - something must account for that other than that WRs are better. In 1983, 8 (eight!) QBs completed 60% or better of their passes. In 2016, 29 of 32 starting QBs completed at least 60% of their passes, including two who completed 70% or better. In 1983, the TD/INT ratio among starting QBs was 1.15 : 1 In 2016 the TD/INT ratio among starting QBs was 2.28 : 1 I think it is very hard to argue that those differences are not at least partially due to the significant rules changes that favor the passing game. To be clear, I don't think that there is any debate that players today are better trained (some help to chemistry) and practice sport-specific skills more than earlier generations. The proof of that is in the height/weight/speed of players today vs yesterday's players. However, I can't accept that the change in today's passing game is not at least partially due to those rules changes.

Those times HAVE to drop him considerably outside of the 1st round, don't they? I could see if they were around 4.6 that maybe he could still go in top of round 2, but those are very slow times for a CB. I wonder if he will even go in round 3?

I must respectfully disagree with this point. DBs used to be able to make contact w WR through route - not just in first 5 yards. DBs used to absolutely kill WRs after the catch - really intimidated WRs and hurt them too. Today if you hit below the waist or above the shoulders - penalty. If you hit too soon or too hard immediately after catch - penalty for hitting defenseless WR. You almost can't hit a QB in the pocket anymore and pass blocking rules have been substantially modified to allow more use of the hands.

Unfortunately, it didn't stop the thread earlier when it was posted.

My opinion, for this year, is that he would because he most certainly hasn't scouted all of the available players in any depth and, I am assuming that if Whaley goes, so too will his personnel staff/scouts. That would leave McDermott in a bad position, even if the scouts are retained through the draft you have to know that they know they are gone after it. What kind of draft would that portend?

Thank you for this point. Too many make it out like Whaley lost some monumental power struggle over TT. I think it is good that he worked with his head coach to provide the best QB available in the situation.

The weight of the drought is forcing decisions to change paths at an increasing frequency. If Whaley is fired after 3 seasons, it will still be true that the Bills haven't made the playoffs for 20 years when the next GM arrives. Unless the new guy comes in with some magic, 2 years from now many here will be calling for his and McDermott's head. Might be even faster if the new guy came in this year and drafted one of these QBs and they flop. My opinion is that Whaley is a good scout/talent evaluator who in 3 years has built at least a team that is competitive almost every week. Memory is fleeting, but try to remember how bad the tea was when Whaley inherited it - they were not even competive in many games - roster practically devoid of NFL talent. The roster is better now, even though it took a step back trying to get Rex his kind of players. If Whaley is fired, I can live with it, but don't expect the next guy to have a magic formula for finding a good QB and to have the ability to build a roster when there are 3 head coaches in 4 years (I think that is right: Marrone, Rex and now McDermott). For those arguing that Whaley can't get along with coaches, it sure seems like Rex had a lot of influence on the draft choices of the last two years. Doesn't seem like Rex and Whaley had a big rift.

IF it is true that Whaley is about to be fired, then the organization should trade as many of this year's draft picks as it can for picks next year. It would be an absolute mess having a lame duck GM and his lame duck scouting organization leading this year's draft. Everyone on the staff will already have checked out and there is no possible way that Coach McDermott has thoroughly scouted all of this year's prospects. Again, IF this is true, it is the worst nightmare for the organization. All drafts are extremely important and this one may become an unmitigated disaster.

That is your opinion, not shared by all. Who is/are the QBs worthy of a first round pick, and specifically the 10th pick? - Kizer looked good year before, many questions after past season - Watson had mega-talent around him on both sides of the ball - did he lift his team or did they lift him? - Trubisky and his one year of starts spells big risk - Mahomes played in a gimmick offense that has produced almost nobody at QBin the NFL. I agree that they all have some talent and might succeed, but I think the odds are long on them all. This feels a lot like "we need a QB, let's convince ourselves that the available guys can play" rather than "Damn, that guy is good!"

Not arguing that Trubisky is a top-10 pick, but Brady never could definitively beat out a guy who ultimately bounced between triple-A and playing 3B for the Yankees (Drew Henson). You never really know, but I do agree that Trubisky is a risky pick. Now, that is a faulty analogy. How about, failed relationship with EJ and are avoiding similar risk with a QB class like 2013s?

You keep saying that, but I don't think any of them are worth a first round pick.

Man, going from a deep CB class to shallow pretty quickly. At least with the pec injury, he should eventually fully recover. The Achilles for Jones might be a career limiter. I know I am in the minority here, but I think bargains can be had with drafting injured players later than they would have gone healthy. I see the draft as a long-term investment and I don't care if a player misses part or even all of their rookie season recovering - provided that the point that they were drafted represents a significant discount to their "healthy rating". As others have said, if the prospects for Sidney Jones to make a full recovery are good, I would be happy if they were able to nab him in round 3 - even if he misses this whole season.

I don't think that will happen. there are too many teams that need a QB and this class is not anywhere near as bad as the EJ/Geno class of 2013.

I agree fully. If they think that one of these QBs can be a long-term good starting QB, then don't mess around, just take him at 10. Problem is, are any of these guys capable of being a good NFL starting QB?

Just because a player is 3rd rated at his position doesn't mean that he isn't better than players rated 1st at other positions. For example, this year I am pretty sure that 3 or 4 CBs 2-3 safeties, 2-3 WRs will be drafted before the top rated OG, C, OT,DT.

I was sensing the same irony.

I agree with this completely. He had a ST coach trying to help him. If Christie gave same advice as coach there would be no benefit- if he gave conflicting advice there likely would have been harm

This is about where I come out on this as well.

When Watkins has been healthy, he has been outstanding. Nothing in Watkin's college history suggested that he would miss a lot of time due to injury. So, a GM has failed if he drafted a player who has played very very well when healthy, but has been injured?

Between Buffalo, NE, Jets and Miami there are > 200 seasons in the NFL and I can think of Kelly, Marino, Brady and Namath as HOF level QBs. So about once every 50 years?