Big C

True. He's just a ferocious little kitty

The word you're looking for is "infer."

Agreed on all counts.

Watkins-Woods-Kupp-Austin is a strong WR corps. If Goff takes "the next step," that second rounder we got might not be as good a pick as we were hoping. Still a big "if."

Does anyone remember Chris Kluwe? Punter for the Vikings was very outspoken on controversial issues was cut and never found a new team. Same thing and it had nothing to do with race. I am glad to see Kap's protest catch on with other players, but am not surprised to see him out of the NFL. Of course, he had to know this might happen when he opted out of his contract, a decision which still baffles me.

And what about moisture wicking technology in today's jerseys! We are doomed!

I do think it's a bit of both. Kap is good enough to make an NFL roster as a backup and he's even good enough to start on some teams, but those teams are looking for a long term answer, which he is not. The teams that need a backup can find a guy who will do in a pinch and will take that guy instead because the media and certain fans won't badger the staff about him.

Also worth noting that water comes in many forms. steam can burn you and ice can crack your teeth.

They better not play shady that long. Was thinking the same thing. Still hoping it's a final evaluation. It just doesn't make any sense!

Yes! #allin returns.

You gotta be kidding me McD!

Thank you for resurrecting this gem!

I get what you mean with the pure numbers of it, but it's not that simple. There is a larger risk/reward factor in play. You can afford to take more QBs in late rounds because the risk is so low, but you can't afford to take a QB with your first pick every year. It's most important to address the position often with a variety of picks when the value is there. The Patriots have drafted more QBs in the last tens years than the Bills have, and they have Brady. It's hard to compare us with them, for many reasons of course, but in this case as we've had different regimes frequently with different visions, but drafting Peterman while you have a good placeholder/veteran in Tyrod and continue to evaluate and address the position from here on. Maybe Peterman blossoms, maybe not. Keep trying is all. Just don't reach for a guy and continue to build talent where the need and value are highest in tandem.

*Big sigh of relief*

But it's not just about hit rates. Obviously there are more late round QBs that don't pan out, but partly that's due to the fact that more QBs are taken in later rounds because of the greater number of picks and lower risk. I'm saying if you look at the top QBs in the league over the past however many years, I think more of them were taken in later rounds. 8 of the 12 teams that made the playoffs last year did it with QBs that were picked out of the top 10. Of the eight QBs in the top 30 NFL players according to the top 100 players show, only one was selected in the top 10. Winston and Mariota might signal a change there, and I understand what you're saying, but I think bottoming out for a possible QB, especially when you don't know who is going to be there, is unwise. If you're bottoming out because you are just rebuilding and you take a Clowney or Garrett instead, cool. I'm still not sure what the Bills FO thinks of itself yet.

I hear you. I don't think one deal happens without the other, because both deals effectively included replacement players, but it must point to something behind the scenes regarding Sammy, mustn't it? Like, if they knew they weren't going to keep him it must be because they don't believe he can stay healthy or they don't believe in paying a premium for that type of player. Maybe they saw the Panthers reach the Super Bowl without a #1 receiver and think that they got something of more value to them than a Sammy Watkins? I really don't know. But I don't think the moves point to full-on tanking. But again, if they look like garbage out of the gate, maybe they do start selling off and going full rebuild.

Is that true, though? If I had to list my top 5-10 QBs in the league, most of them would have been picked outside of the top 10.

The Browns have not tanked specifically for a QB though. They took chances on guys a little later with their extra picks and went BPA with their 1st. Of course, that's still no guarantee, but it's a better strategy than selling the farm for a QB no matter what. If we are trying to build up assets to get mroe talent regardless of position more or less, sure I get that logic.

Any draft pick is a risk. You can trade up for a sure-fire guy that ends up busting out. You can luck into the greatest QB of your era in the 6th round. Sucking for Luck still hasn't gotten the Colts a Super Bowl appearance. There is practically as much chance as Nathan Peterman becoming our guy than whoever we might tank for next year - again we don't even know who that might be. There is no reason to tank for an unknown unless you really have no talent on your roster. We still have plenty of talent. And if we were really tanking, Shady, Tyrod, Kyle and Wood would all be gone by now.

You're probably right about that. I'm just saying, if this team was really tanking we'd already be rid of more players. Unless the windfall from dealing Sammy and losing Boldin has moved us into sell mode. But if the selling point for Shady is still high, I don't think they are ready to pack it in. Really, the D looks ferocious right now and if the offense comes out with some better looks in the regular season, why can't they compete? Good QBs are found all over the draft. While lately QBs have been going early and some of them like Winston and Mariota are looking good, the best QBs in the NFL right now and over the past 10 years or more have been picked outside of the top 10. Our roster is not as depleted as the Browns, 49ers, Bears, etc.

I get what you mean, but I think with Sammy the team didn't feel that they could rely on him and with no guarantees about him staying on next year they took a reasonable deal. It's more like the Chandler Jones trade. Not that we are New England good, but the idea that we have a player on the last year of his deal and we feel like we can still compete without him this year, so let's get a good pick for him. That's the logic, at least. Might backfire on them. I've been saying that if they really wanted to tank they would start selling off absolutely all their assets and team leaders - Kyle, Shady, Tyrod, Wood, etc. Those guys can all garner picks and losing them would all but guarantee a bottoming out. So why haven't they dished them all if they really are tanking?

I hear you. I did say "probably the best" because I knew there were some other options. I do feel he is the best offensive player and it looks like your counterpoints still support that. He is a bonafide superstar, as Mario was a few years back. I would have been against trading him in 2015 if we were having the same discussion.

I understand the reasoning, but I believe that the staff feels there's still a chance they can compete with the current roster. The run game shouldn't skip a beat and the defense looks much improved already. Why not start the season and see what happens? I think they would be more likely to start the season with TT and Shady and dish them out if they fall out of playoff contention by the trade deadline. I mean, we don't know for sure if Darnold and Rosen will declare and selling off our best assets without much clarity in the 2018 draft would not be wise. We already have some good ammo and we have the chance to be competitive now.

Gimme a 1st, Collins and Crowell. Nah, I still want Shady.

Shady is probably the best player this team has had in the entirety of the drought and beyond. I would rather keep Shady than add another pick right now. He's too good.