Jump to content

Section242

Community Member
  • Posts

    585
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Section242

  1. I think he could go somewhere and start much like Case Keenum started earlier this season. I don't think Denver or Cleveland would want him. He's not an upgrade for Denver. Cleveland is looking at 0-16 and taking a QB 1st overall. They'd be better suited to start any of their QB's rather than signing Taylor.

     

    Maybe SF would sign him and have him start but that's about it. His best chance at starting is in Buffalo.

  2. I don't think Tyrod can operate with a structured passing game. He's just not that guy. He makes plays with his feet and with his arm on broken plays. Hard to bring a team back even when down more than a fg late in a game when your only hope is throwing a 50 yard pass.

     

    I think Taylor can get the Bills to the playoffs in the same way Alex Smith gets teams to the playoffs. Once in they're out classed. Still been soo long I think most fans would take just getting in.

  3. This would be a fine pick IMO. At this point I expect WR to be the target but a safety makes sense as well. I like Adams quite a bit. This year's LSU team has TONS of talent.

    If they're picking the top half of the 1st then I don't think an extension for Taylor can be justified. If defense improves and nobody is fired then they're searching for a QB who can step in. If Rex, Whaley are canned then they're drafting someone.

  4. i don't think they are, but they could end up with him. I think their analytics guys determined neither one of the QBs was worth one of the top 2 picks, so they dealt it. And they are in a 2-4 year rebuild. It's almost like an expansion team. They have a few good players but NO depth. They didn't do anything in FA and they just need as many players as they can get that fit their new system. I still think they take a QB this year in the first 2 rounds but they currently have 3 QBs on 2 year or longer deals. Plus Terrell Pryor at WR who could be the #3/emergency QB if needed.

     

    Cleveland needs a lot. I'd say taking Goff or Wentz gives them at least a vision. More importantly for that team getting a QB at the top gives the fans some hope. Some reason to go to games. Maybe they're sold on Bob Griffin but hypothetically they go 5-11 pick top 5 and take a QB at top of 2nd rd who plays sparingly they're in the market at top of 2017 draft.

     

    On a side note if the Titans were offered what the Browns were I'd love the deal.

  5. Predictably, everyone on here will praise the Browns because in TBD land trading down good, trading up bad, but if I'm a Browns fan I'm thinking at some point I maybe need a QB.

     

    That being said, what the hell are the Eagles doing? Either a) they're not taking a QB or b) they HAVE to trade either Bradford (impossible) or Daniel, right?

     

    What a strange offseason.

     

    I don't get the move unless they're putting all their eggs in the Deshaun Watson basket.

  6. I agree with your view on us not drafting a qb in the first or second round.

     

    The pressure is on Rex and to a lesser degree on Whaley to win this season. Last year was a major disappointment for the defense. That is going to be the primary focus of the top of the draft for us. When our draft turn comes up the top two qb prospects will probably be off the board. If we took the third rated qb, assuming he was still on the board, he would still be unlikely to unseat TT.

     

    What happened last year had a profound affect to this year's approach to the offseason. If the defense had lived up to its expectations last year Whaley would have a lot more flexibility in addressing other critical needs such as RT, second receiver and safety positions with high draft picks.. He would also be in a better position to draft a qb with a high pick if he felt that there was one who appealed to him.

     

    You only have so many fingers to plug holes that you didn't expect to exist. If you also consider that our cap situation is tight (but still manageable) I highly doubt that the Bills would take a qb in the first or second round to sit behind the veteran starter.

    I would take Lynch if he were available at 19.
  7. Ceilings are kinda silly. A lot of guys have high ceilings but it's rare that they come close to reaching them.

     

    Also, Mayock had Blaine Gabbert ranked high than Cam Newton. It must have been about ceiling. Never forget.

     

    That Florida game was awful but it was by far the worst game of the year. Is the Big 10 really that much superior than the ACC? CH had 156 or less yards passing in 7 games this year.

     

    Still, like EJ, he has intrigue because of the physical skills. Honestly, unlike EJ, his best shot to succeed is to fall in the draft. He won't be rushed on the field and been given up after a few games.

     

    As strange as it sounds, falling in the draft might be the best thing for Qbs in the long run.

     

     

    Depends where a guy falls. If he falls like Jimmy Clausen he'll never get a shot. If he falls like Aaron Rodger than perfect. E.J. was over drafted badly. We were starved for an early QB and the Bills were in a no win situation. If one of the top 3 QB's are available when the Bills pick in the 1st i'd take one.

     

    Ceilings are funny JaMarcus Russell and Jake Locker are two that come to mind who had huge ceilings. Other positions the floor is higher than the floor for QB's. If it's win or jobs are lost then I wouldn't expect the Bills to take a QB. If they wanna take one in the 4th or 5th fine. I think they've got a better opportunity to take a position player that contributes in later rounds than a QB who turns out to be the "savior."

  8. That logic doesn't really make sense (no offense). Tyrod is the QB next year no matter what. If the Bills need to make the playoffs for everyone to keep their jobs are they better off with a young QB on the bench or a starter that potentially has the impact of Darby? It isn't really debatable. A starter at WR or in the defensive front 7 is much better for next year's record.

    For everyone to keep jobs obviously they're better off with an impact player. For Whaley to keep job a QB on the bench taken in the 1st is better for him to keep job. It's a bad year to debate elite QB play to win with Denver in the SB. Also Alex Smith won a playoff game. So to go against what I think if the Bills pass on a QB at 19 or none of top 3 are available; the move should be a buy low candidate as a backup.

  9. I actually agree. As a group we did a terrible job. We passed up on Spence and Butler in favor of Washington and a kicker!! We took a QB in the 1st (who won't be there). We passed up on Rankins multiple times. Next time anyone here complains about our drafting we should just look here to the terrible job that we collectively did.

     

    Rex and Whaley are in trouble if they don't make the playoffs. Taylor's numbers were good but I think they need better. Hypothetically if they go 8-8 next year and Taylor has the same season I think they'd be going into 2017 looking for a QB early. In terms of Whaley miss the playoffs take a QB in 3rd rd he loses job. Take a QB at 19 he gets another year to see whether he's the answer. The safest pick for Whaley to keep his job is a QB. The safest pick for the roster probably gets Whaley fired. It'll be interesting.

  10. My appologies, I can see that I wasn't exactly clear. I was not referring to finding a backup QB. I should have

    said "QBs who become good starters for many years".

     

    I have no problem with people wanting to draft a QB after pick 36 in order to find a serviceable backup. But people should keep in mind that a serviceable backup QB is not a good QB. Odds of finding a good QB after pick 36 are extremely slim.

     

    Garrard was a starter.

  11. I think it safe to assume that the Bills won't(shouldn't) draft a QB in the 1st round this year. As 2016 is the season where we make a decision on TT's future, a 1st round pick on a QB now could potentially be a huge waste of resources.

     

    In the past 30 years there has only been 2 QBs drafted after the top 36 picks that have seen a second contract with their drafting team(Brady, Wilson). Those resources(picks 37+) are by far more likely to find you a Darby or Kyle Williams than a solution at QB.

    It's unlikely a QB taken after the 1st rd will get a second contract with a team because it's unlikely he'll be given a chance. Still this statement is false David Garrard got a 2nd contract. Sure their are others like Frank Reich who were career backups. Which at the least this team needs.

  12.  

    The Browns have been so horrible at first-round picks lately (Taylor, Richardson, Weeden, Mingo, Gilbert, Manziel) that I hate to sentence Jared Goff or Paxton Lynch to a life on the Lake, but draw straws, gentlemen. Short one goes to the Browns. Tennessee has the first pick and could get a package of picks to move down with any number of QB-needy teams (San Francisco at seven, Chicago at 11, Philadelphia at 13, St. Louis at 15).

     

    If Chicago is considered a QB needy team trading up for Goff then the Bills are at least that.

×
×
  • Create New...