The Dean

Here are a few: Jones seems to slam the door on picking Manziel “I”m not that gunned up over what a rookie quarterback could do for us this year,” Jones said Tuesday, via Clarence Hill of the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram. “That takes time. This is not rebuilding time.” http://profootballta...icking-manziel/ Jerry Jones swears he wasn’t looking at Manziel, really “Romo, by contract as well as by commitment, is going to be certainly the quarterback for several years to come,” Jones said, via Todd Archer of ESPNDallas.com. “Don’t care who we drafted, that’s the way it was going to be. So that’s what was going through our minds. That’s why we didn’t spend a lot of time considering Manziel.” http://profootballta...manziel-really/ Jerry Jones proud of himself for resisting the urge to draft Manziel “I think I’m proud of that decision right now, and I’m proud I was a good listener,” Jones said. http://profootballta...-draft-manziel/ I'm expecting an article on how he actually drafted Manziel any day now.

"Factor Back"

I think a 10K range is about right for a ballpark salary requirement, asked WAY too early in an employment conversation, IMO. Like I said, unless you sound clueless about what the job normally pays (you don't seem to be clueless) you should be fine. Early in my career, I named a salary and got an immediate "fine". I still think I should have said something higher. Later in my career, I would name a number and then they would counter offer, and we would negotiate from there. Never had a prospective employer say, "That's more than we were budgeting, thank you for your interest. Good Bye." But seriously, you will make your money so it shouldn't be an issue for your first job. Don't let the salary question throw you too much.

Ozanian must think pretty highly of his sources: "In a little while I will let you know how much the three groups...are preparing to submit for their binding offers". I wonder why it took him until 9/30 to note that Golisano didn't submit a bid?

I think I've read several different accounts from Jerrah on Manziel. I'm pretty sure I read where he said he never considered Johnny. Considered him, but ultimately passes. Now he wanted him in the worst way. I think when you lie as often as Jerry Jones, it's had to know what you really think/thought.

Congrats on the Masters degree. I remember being asked the same question in my interview for my first real job outside of academia (and bartending). It can be a real head-scratcher. In general, I tend to think that you can't really price yourself out of consideration. If you ask for way too much, they will just offer you less. But for your fist job, I understand you want to seem as though you have a clue. "$500,00 a year. And you're lucky to have me," Of course, you certainly don't want to ask for too little So, this is where the question gets into specifics. If you have had no luck with Google, then it must be a pretty unique kind of job. So you might get better information, if you share some of the details of that first job. If you don't care to do that, I don't blame you. But you will get fairly generic answers, I think.

Well, unless he has specific information, or knows one source is full of crap, what is he to say? There may, indeed, but conflicting reports. What am I missing here?

Once again (how many more times to I have to explain this?), I was in a discussion with a poster who seemed to initially be taking the position that stats don't matter. He used Trent and Fitz in an example. I was simply trying to refute that example, while at the same time explaining my position. I wouldn't have chosen Fitz and Trent as the best examples for this exercise, for many reasons, but mostly because there wasn't much difference between them. With that said, I do stand by the position that, with some very rare exceptions, an NFL QB, in this modern era, should be expected to complete 60+ percent of his passes. This is particularly true for game manager type QBs. When the completion percentage starts dipping into the 50's (even low 50's) that simply isn't good enough to get it done. When you start to get into that miserable completion percentage, if that QB's team is winning, he probably isn't doing too much to help the process.

Have you tried Q tonic or Fever Tree, yet?

No bathroom? You have to pith in a helmet?

I'm thinking TG served his purpose. His bid from the start has been bizarrely handled, unless it was strictly for the purpose of providing local "competition" to Pegula's bid, IMO. I have a feeling (no inside knowledge whatsoever) he was asked to submit a bid by The Trust after the 1st round of non-binding bids came in.

Full bar? OK, I can eat there.

I believe Whaley thought he had the backup in Thad---perhaps he really believed Tuel was that development guy. (Really hope not, though.) That didn't work out too well for the team. Perhaps he had targeted someone in the draft (I'd be surprised if he hadn't considered a QB or two at some point). It's possible he expected to get QB X in the 4th (for example) but the guy was gone before that. What I'm saying is it is speculation what exactly he tried. What we do know is what happened. I hope the Bills draft a QB somewhere next year (or acquire a young prospect somehow) after this year. Hopefully we'll have a good idea if EJ will pan out by then, so he'll know if he is looking for a development guy, or EJ's replacement. Without Thad and Tuel on the roster, next year, and with EJ having a couple years under his belt, I think there is a better chance to successfully develop a young QB.

So you think Vick would have chosen Buffalo over NYC? No thanks to Sanchez

The only example in that list that qualifies for "draft a QB every year until you find one" is the Foles/Barkley combo. The signing of Vick and Sanchez hardly qualify as guys who need the time and attention of a rookies/2nd year QB, which was the point of my post. They were lucky, in a way, that Foles matured quickly. I don't believe the Eagles were looking to replace Nick, but as a longer term development guy. (Which, BTW I support for the Bills.) They might have been better off using that draft pick to address some other need on the team. But I understand getting a guy with that kind of college experience in the 4th round. Had they picked one in an earlier round, I'd call it a dumb move.

Ah, Got it.

What "available" QB was likely to challenge for EJ as a starter? Even if you can think of some, what would it cost (I suspect a trade would have been necessary)? I don't think they were protecting EJ as much as giving their 1st round pick a legitimate chance and without weakening the team in the long term.

Indeed. You might be able to do that if you have an established QB---and a team that is pretty set at most other positions, But with most young QBs you really don't know what you have for a while. You keep drafting them (while passing on other talented players who can help at other positions) and now you have three, four, young QBs you really don't know much about, There are only so may resources, reps, etc, to work with. That seems to me like a recipe for disaster.

HWS?

The draft probably wouldn't have helped with a proven backup QB. The problem with drafting a QB every year (as suggested by some) is there are only some may reps to go around. And there is only so much (required) attention you can give to a developing QB. When Washington drafted both RG3 and Cousins, I wondered how they expected to develop two young QBs at once., That's very hard to do. But don't assume Whaley wasn't looking for an experienced backup until last week. He may have attempted to sign someone else sooner (we are now fairly sure he's been trying to sigh Orton for awhile), I think some here think he should have just signed anyone, just to sign them. That's a crazy idea, IMO, If it isn't a guy you like, why bring him in?

C'mon, We all know far more than any GM, Head Coach or owner. Most of us have other jobs and we can still run a team better than these bums!

I'm not entirely convinced Whaley didn't attempt to sign another vet before they ended up signing Orton. After all, it seems as though they had been pursuing Orton for some time. I agree they believed ( and I believed) Thad was a serviceable backup based on his play last year. Dunno what happened to the guy this year.Though to be fair, we really can't say how he would have performed with the 1st string. But Marrone apparently didn't see what he needed to see in TC/preseason so I have to trust that. We disagree on Cousins. I think he may end up being a pretty good QB (backup likely) but he obviously doesn't have the gameday experience of Orton. Orton is the safe bet here.

No doubt in my mind, he did the right thing. I probably would have also called the police.

I believe my point was, despite Trent's shortcomings, when he passed for a reasonable completion percentage, the Bills had a better record than when Fitz passed at a much lower competition percentage. Passing at lower than a 60% completion percentage (in that case much lower) typically results in a worse performance. I wasn't arguing that Tent was good,. Just refuting an argument that stats meant nothing. Stats, in context, can usually reveal something.