OldTimer1960

I agree. All things being equal, a 6'4" WR would be better than 6'1", but all things are rarely equal. It isn't like he is 5'9". It isn't really the height as much as someone who can make contested catches frequently and someone who can catch passes that aren't dead on target.

I will concede that I think that the constant turnover of coaches in Cleveland is counter-productive to building a winner (yet many here are already discussing who should replace Doug Marrone) However, there are professional and civil ways to ask the question. The "reporter" could have said something like: "Based on fan posts to our station's web page, many are concerned about the stability of the organization. Can you comment on why you are confident in this decision and in your leadership team?"

Interesting, what line of work is that? I can say that I've worked in engineering and product development for 30 years and while everyone knows who isn't pulling their weight, I've never seen a case where a co-worker "called them out". I have seen cases where management has had to intervene, but not co-workers.

But, you just said elsewhere that RB3 was almost certainly a franchise QB. Hasn't he missed more time than Manuel and wasn't his injury more serious? Again, I am not here to say that EJ Manuel will or won't become a good starting QB, only to say that it is too soon to tell and in comparison to RG3 after this year, I don't see a lot to tell the two apart - yet you seem to think that there is a world of difference between them. To be clear, would I trade Manuel for RG3 straight up right now? Yes, I would, but given this year I wouldn't throw in a lot more to get Griffin. He might become a great QB, but it isn't a sure bet. Just as it isn't a foregone conclusion that Manuel will fail. Let Manuel grow with some of the young receivers for another year (or heaven forbid 2 years) and see where they are. In the meantime, If an Andrew Luck type QB prospect happens to be available at #9 this year (won't be), then by all means draft him. Else, if there is a decent QB prospect available in a later round (maybe someone who got hurt this year like Aaron Murray) then sure nab him, but don't give up on Manuel so soon - especially given the immaturity of the rest of the offense that he was saddled with.

You liked the whiney little "b*tchy" tone of that question? I think it is disgraceful that fans and ignorant media feel that it is their job to be sarcastic and "hold the management accountable". In the context that it is used on this board, "holding someone accountable" = "blame someone because I am not happy and I can't accept step-wise improvement". "Wah wah, wah I have waited too long for a winner so nothing is good enough other than an instant turnaround into a SB team". IMHO, reporters like this should be thrown out and not allowed back. They aren't "analyzing" anything. They are just being smart-asses and stating the obvious that things didn't go well. What would their plan be? What would they have done differently? I will be happy the day some coach punches one of these losers in the face.

Wait, RG3 is a certain "franchise QB" while Manuel will never be any good? RG3 in his SECOND season had a QB rating of 82 while Manuel's in his rookie year (while missing considerable time) was 79. RG3 had 16 TDs and 12 INTs, while Manuel had 11 TDs and 9 INTs with only 1 experienced WR. Now, I am not saying that Manuel is equal to RG3, but it sure seems like you've graded RG3 on a much easier curve than you have EJ Manuel.

Man, you and your agenda... You make it sound like EJ Manuel is lazy and not trying. THE biggest selling point with Manuel was his intelligence and work ethic. Now, you can argue that it was over-sold and EJ is sitting home eating Bon-Bons, but I haven't seen any evidence that he is anything less than very bright and hard-working. To be clear, that doesn't always translate into success on the field, but I think it gives him a reasonable chance of success - and (I think) that he played pretty well for a rookie (the Tampa Bay melt-down aside). I really don't know how anyone could judge a rookie QB walking into this situation. Going into the season, other than Stevie Johnson, the Bills WR corp had: 11 starts and 31 receptions among them (all by TJ Graham). Woods, Goodwin, Hogan and Easley had never started an NFL game or even made a regular season catch! What could anyone have reasonably expected from an offense set up like that? I am not saying that I know that Manuel is the answer, but I do think that the Bills knew going into the season that there would be A LOT of growing pains for the offense.

That is, no track record in producing NFL QBs. I think when you look at college coaches, you have to look at the talent that they are able to recruit at their university and judge how well they developed those players. Cal isn't going to be able to recruit the QB prospects that USC, Fla State, U of Miami etc are going to be able to get (IMHO).

OMG, Penn State was barely above .500 during his tenure - how could Houston "cheap out" and hire him???? (sarcasm - obviously Penn State's situation were a lead weight on the program)

Do you get leadership from your co-workrs? It is supposed to come from: 1.your intrinsic work-ethic/desire to succeed 2. Management 3. From there the examples set by co-workers If you, as an individual, are not pulling your weight - management can't do much about it other than threaten you with no-raise or termination... If you have a slacker co-worker, do you address the issue with him/her?

Chandler has proved to be an adequate receiving threat. The Bills need a true dynamic receiving threat who is "open when he is not". That player could be a WR or a TE, I don't think it matters. For what I expect Chandler to command on the FA market, I very much hope that the Bills can re-sign him. However, if he gets BIG money, then I don't think that they should match that kind of offer....

You need to stop it and realize that those who think that this is the greatest QB class ever know everything.

There are lots of guys in the NFL who have better size, arms - especially at this point - than Peyton Manning and Tom Brady, yet they are the best QBs in the league (or certainly in the top 5). I should add Drew Brees and Phillip Rivers to the list of "not top" arms/size/athleticism who are doing well. I might argue that Jay Cutler has GREAT arm talent and very good size and athletic ability, yet he couldn't get the Bears to the playoffs with two OUTSTANDING WRs (Brandon Marshall and Alshon Jeffreies) and a very good RB (Matt Forte). Size and arm strength are entry level requirements to a point. Beyond that, there are many intangibles. I'd argue that EJ Manuel and Ryan Tannehiill have better size, arms and athletic ability than Manning and Brady, yet many here think they'll never do well...

Where did Marrone say this was a high priority need? I (choose to) interpret his comment to mean that they need a handful of guys whose life is special teams. I remember the "glory days" where Steve Tasker and Mark Pike were core special teams players. Tasker arguably could have played more at WR, but they valued his special teams contributions over that. I believe that there were others, including Beebe, who played primarily STs. I think the point was that there were some who were lackadaisical on STs - maybe because they thought they were going to make an impression on O or D. They may have most of the "core special teasers" on the roster - if they accept and embrace their role. So, maybe they should get one early to get up to speed. I think that Woods and Goodwin contributed this year, and I expect them to contribute more next year. However, they still don't have a true playmaker who can make the great catch 1-2 times a game and keep drives alive. If they can find a guy like that, even if it takes him a year or two to fully develop, then I'd love to see them take him early in round 1. I am don't know if EJ Manuel is THE answer, but I do know that he had 1 experienced WR and about 2 starts among the remaining WRs coming into this season. In terms of NFL receptions, outside of Stevie Johnson, there were about 35 catches on the remaining roster (at WR). What could you tell about the QB play with that?

He'd sell seats for 7-8 games, then not if they aren't winning - like all other prospects. Would the Bills be on TV more? Maybe, maybe not, but not long unless they are winning. Would he sell much? What would he sell? I doubt the team would get rich on his jersey sales.... He would be marketable for half a season and not after unless he was the "real deal" - and I am not sure they'll be able to tell without better WRs, TE and OL play. Would he be exciting? - Yes, for a while - a long while if he is winning, not long if he isn't....

Russel Wilson is also 27 y.o and light-years more mature than "Johnny Football". Wilson may also have a better arm. To be sure, I didn't expect Wilson to have a lot of success in the NFL due to his size, but with at GREAT defense and some good WRs with a very good run game, he is excelling. I was turned-off by Manziel's "leadership" on the sidelines last night. Now, I recognize that maybe I am wrong and his teammates may have been completely motivated, but I wonder how that goes over with NFL players. I have also seen him throw up "hope for a miracle" balloons and that will certainly not fly in the NFL. I will grant that he is definitely elusive and has a decent arm with a very quick release. I do very much wonder how he'll handle adversity in the NFL and I suspect that off-field issues may de-rail him in the "league".

Not against NFL talent or even SEC talent (well not even much better than MAC talent). He may be a big-time NFL prospect, but his level of competition is pretty low and, I would think, that Univ Central Florida can recruit better athletes than others in their conference.

+1 You can't evaluate a qb without some talent around him.

And Bridgewater will get picked apart in pre-draft analysis due to is small stature. Manuel is close to 240 lbs, Bridgewater might be 210 and is not supposed to be any better runner than Manuel. Don't get me wrong, I liked what I saw of Bridgewater, but he isn't John Elway, Peyton Manning, or even Cam Newton...

I don't think the Phins will pick another QB. I think Tannehill has shown the possibility of being a very good QB, so I believe they will try to shore up the OL to help him have a chance for success rather than take another QB who will also be saddled with a poor OL - and - both QBs getting fewer reps in training camp since there will be two fighting for the starting job. I am pretty sure that there would be some teams that would be happy to take Ryan Tannehill off their hands if they want to kick him to the curb.

But if you keep giving up on QBs after one year where they didn't earn Hall Of Fame credentials, how will you ever know if you have a QB that will be very good? Further by spending multiple high picks on QBs,, you are not spending those picks on players that can help a QB to succeed - WRs, RBs, OL...

Flutist isn't a very good example. He didn't exactly do much in the NFL. I was thinking just the opposite - that NFL players might grow tired of that very quickly and tell him to STFU. There were players on his own team that seemed annoyed with that "leadership" - of course I don't really know what they thought of that...

What was said that made you think that?

If they go this way, they need to get a play making WR in FA. While I think Woods is going to be pretty good, Stevie is only above average. This WR group doesn't compare well with most in the NFL and there is no true play maker that makes big catches at the big times in games. Compare this group to Chicago'a for instance. Both Marshall and Jeffries are big-time and make a couple of spectacular catches seemingly every game the Bills do not get that from any of their WRs, though Woods does have good hands.

I agree, coaches today don't have the luxury of losing for even 3 years, unless there is obvious progress being made. I am not completely sure that I agree with this approach, but it is what is happening. That said, I don't think you can run through more than a couple of young QBs in 3 years and have much idea what you have. I think 2 years for a young QB isn't always enough, yet if in year 3 the QB hasn't really righted the ship (or there isn't enough talent around him for him to do so), then the coach likely won't survive to see year 4. At any rate, I can see the merit if the Bills want to hedge their bet on Manuel by taking a QB that they think has a chance to be good in the 2nd-4th round area. However, I think they still need to give Manuel another full year to show good progress. Heck, I don't think he was bad this year. He wasn't immediately great, but he wasn't awful except against Pittsburgh and Tampa.