OldTimer1960

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?

If the Chiefs sign/trade for Romo, Alex Smith would be a nice option for this team. He isn't great, but is a very competent starter. Get Smith and draft Corey Davis or Mike Williams and this team would be better

Where do you guys find the college game film that you scout? I love reading about the prospects, but I'd be interested in watching game film too.

If the Bills were able to nab Allen, it would be incredible.

I don't know about that. They just hired a new coaching staff and they (the coaches) need time to evaluate him. It is smart for the Bills to take their time and make a big decision like this - nothing to be gained by calling his agent to say "we are thinking". This is not just about Taylor. They have to evaluate other QB options via the draft, FA and possibly trade. They also have to evaluate what state the team will be in after FA. If they think that they will lose Gilmore and decide to release Aaron Williams due to injury concerns, they may not be competitive enough to warrant bringing Taylor back. If they think the rest of the roster can be good enough to compete for the playoffs, they may bring Taylor back - else they may just take their lumps and start a rebuild.

I would be very leery of trading for Garropolo. Think about it - if NE thought he would be an upper eshelon QB, they would not trade him with a 39 year old Brady ahead of him. Certainly they would want more than 1 1st round pick for him if they were convinced he was going to be a star.

I think that passing on a talent like Hooker at 10 because he might miss a bit of time as a rookie would be a mistake. In my opinion, those that are upset that Lawson missed time due to an injury are overreacting by a lot. Your first round pick is meant to be a long-term investment - I wouldn't pass on a superior talent for a lesser guy just because one guy might miss some of his rookie season. Now, the above assumes that the Bills have Hooker graded better than the other players available at their pick. If they like Mike Williams or Corey Davis as much as Hooker, then sure take the guy who won't miss time (you hope).

Are you saying that after playing football for his whole life, including a decade in the NFL, that Lynch can't watch football players and tell who is good and who isn't? I am not saying that scouting isn't difficult - I think it is very difficult and an inexact science, especially with no direct experience, but I would expect that a former NFL player and Stanford graduate could do a decent job of it. Heck, a lot of us on here think that we can watch college football or peruse game film from websites and have a pretty informed opinion of how a college player will do as a pro. Further, we treat the NFL player assessments done by ProFootballFocus as gospel, yet I don't think that those folks have any actual NFL experience, either (nor do they know what any player's responsibilities are on any given play). Just wait until the draft when the Bills' picks - selected by an experienced GM and scouting staff are roundly criticized by media and fans with no qualifications to do so. I suppose that those fans and media don't think that their criticisms are invalid just because they have no experience in a NFL front office.

It's funny how many media and fans criticize GMs and believe that they could do the job as well or better, but when a team hires a guy from Stanford (obviously smart) and has a decade of experience playing NFL football who has no front office experience, they are aghast. Now, I don't know if John Lynch will succeed or have problems, but I think that he has a chance to be successful even though he didn't come up through the ranks in the front office. Guys move from scouting and personnel into GM roles - their scouting roles did nothing to prepare them for managing people and non-personnel related activities that are also part of a GM's job.

Howard could be a great receiving weapon and is a decent blocker as well. I think that the Bills have bigger needs at WR, S, LB and CB, but It would be hard to complain if they took Howard.

I would not. I would have a difficult time picking at 10. I am not saying that he can't be good, but there seem to be too many errant passes for me to feel really comfortable. I think that his floor is not too low - that is, I think his attitude, work ethic and athleticism will mean that he will be at least "ok", but I don't know that he will be better than that.

Or Mike Williams - both look spectacular to me. It looks like the Bills will have a shot at some outstanding players at WR, S CB and maybe DL. I know that QB is by far the most important position, but I can't see selecting any of the QBs over WRs Davis and Williams or Safeties Hooker or Adams.

I would trade this year's and next year's first and second round picks for Luck in a heartbeat

I don't think that it is any weirder than the majority of coaches who never played either side of the ball in the NFL.

I respectfully disagree with you that just because a coach is "recycled", that does not necessarily make him a bad coach. Someone else pointed out the Pete Carroll had been fired twice in the NFL. The MASTER Bill Belichick was also fired from his first head coaching job. I am not saying that some young up-and-comer couldn't do a good job - heck you could strike gold, but I am suggesting that guys who have been fired might still be really great coaches.

So who does your friend the amateur scout say is the next good QB coming out in this draft?