BillsFanSD

Like other people have said, the first two picks were both very good and also pretty lucky. I have a variety of opinions regarding the other picks, but honestly none of us really know how any of those later selections are going to play out. The main thing is that we drafted two players who should theoretically be competing for starting positions right away, along with a bunch of players who have viable paths to making our roster. Looks good to me. My only disappointment was not drafting a RT in round 1 or 2, but that position just wasn't an option with the way the board broke.

Kind of sad that this is even news. Why am I supposed to care about the behavior of somebody's brother? I hope Patrick Mahomes loses every game he starts against the Bills from now on, preferably in embarrassing fashion. I wish him nothing but the best in trying to deal with what I'm sure is a challenging family situation.

I was skeptical of the trade-up when it happened, but it sounds like we really did need to leapfrog Dallas if we wanted Kincaid, and it's very easy for me to believe that he was the last guy left on Beane's board with a first-round grade. So I'm fine with it, assuming that Kincaid is as advertised. I mean, the pickings were getting awfully slim at that point.

None of this can explain why Dorsey was unable to scheme Diggs open, why he couldn't use Cook or Hines in the passing game, why Shakir couldn't see the field, etc. It's okay. Dorsey was an inexperienced OC going through his first NFL season as a play-caller. It's not surprising that he might experience a bit of a learning curve. I'm a little disappointed at his performance last year, but I'm not in the building, I don't work with him each day, I can't even pretend to evaluate his football IQ, and I'll defer to our FO. If they were okay with bringing him back for Year #2, then so am I. But I'm not going to extend any benefit of the doubt beyond that. We simply cannot have our franchise QB's prime years wasted on an OC who doesn't know how to use the weapons he's given. Dorsey should absolutely be coaching for his job this year, and every year from now on. It's nothing against Dorsey personally. It's just that there are probably at least 30 guys who are capable of running this offense with the personnel we've assembled, and each of them would consider it the professional opportunity of a lifetime. I'm fine with giving Dorsey a chance, but he should rightly be on a short leash. If he can't do it this year, let's bring in somebody who can.

It's your forum, and you can run it however you want. Your house, your rules. That said, this is a pretty dumb rule in 2023. If it's on social media, it should be fair game for discussion. People who are still relying on network television, smoke signals, telegram, etc. for their news shouldn't hold the rest of us back.

There's enough talent on offense for this team to be extremely good on that side of the ball. I don't know if we have enough talent at OC to take full advantage. We need for Dorsey to take a big step up this year.

What's the point of having a thread to discuss the draft if people can't post picks in real time? It's not our fault that you guys are stuck with network television.

This is all true. Yet we just let Edmunds walk, and we're about to let Oliver walk. Elam rode the bench most of last year, Cook barely saw the field, Basham is at best a rotational guy, Epenesa is a JAG, etc. At some point, I think fans can reasonably start second-guessing some of these picks. It's not as if the FO is consistently nailing them or anything. Since Beane got here, he's had one really good selection in the first two rounds, and that's starting to look like a lucky fluke. (Edit: If Beane had drafted Tre, I'd count that as a good pick too.)

I like the part where Seattle trades the pick to Cleveland, and then within a matter of hours Cleveland is fielding trade inquiries from other teams. Where were the Chiefs, Bills, etc. when Seattle what shopping the pick in the first place? Was the Seattle GM not connected with those guys on LinkedIn or something?

The thing is that we could just go and on with this stuff. - He traded for the #1 overall pick without informing the owner. - He was surprised that the owner of the team found out about the trade somehow. - Everybody seems to be under the impression that trades are some big secret, as opposed to being splashed all over the internet. - "I want my picks back. All of them." :lmao: - The all-star QB has no friends, and nobody noticed that. - Everybody assumes Cleveland (!) knows exactly what they're doing, so when they pass on Callahan, everybody else freaks and passes on him instead instead of just saying Thank You. It's one laughably implausible plot point after another. And they're all glorious.

Draft Day is an amazing movie. It's a lot like Zero Hour, in that it's almost impossible to watch certain scenes without laughing. I know it presents itself as a drama, but there's no way the people who wrote this didn't understand that they were writing a very dry comedy.

Hey guys, we found the person responsible for last season.

Yep, and I've been beating this drum for a little while now. I don't mind easing rookies into their role, and maybe that makes sense for a team like the Bills, who need to avoid the "rookie wall" so guys are fresh for the playoffs. But McDermott seems genuinely allergic to putting rookies on the field, to the degree that I wonder if he and Beane are really on the same page. If I were Beane, I think I'd be a little ticked at Cook and Shakir just standing around on the sidelines all year. For people who are playing the "it's hard for rookies to crack the lineup when our team is this good" card, let's recall that we had problems at slot all year -- it's not like Shakir had to beat out Cooper Kupp or anything. And it's not like Cook had Thurman Thomas in front of him. For that matter, remember when we would take Singletary off the field in his rookie year so Frank Gore could fall forward for two yards? It's been like this since McDermott arrived. He's philosophically committed to not playing rookies as a matter of principle.

I've always really liked Singletary, but at the same time I never expected the Bills to re-sign him. If we could reliably pluck a Singletary-like player from the 3rd round every 3-4 years, I'd rather go that route. Of course, we've seen that that's easier said than done, but still. I hope he does well in Houston. I'll be pulling for him.

Okay, but . . . offense and ST are part of the game. The Bills gave up 31 points to a team led by Skylar Thompson. It doesn't really matter how many of those points are credited to the offense, the defense, or special teams. That simply shouldn't happen. Period.

It wasn't just the Cincinnati game. The Bills were the best team in the league before their bye. They were not the same team after the bye. Some of it was probably Allen's elbow. Some of it was probably other stuff that we don't really know about -- this team is incredibly opaque to its own fan base and our beat reporters are mostly cheerleaders. But regardless of the "why," the fact is that the Bills were just pretty good during the second half of the season, and lots of us noticed the drop-off at the time it was happening. You're forgetting the way they almost lost to a Skylar-Thompon-led Dolphins team at home in the WC round. That was a red flag. The Bengals loss didn't just come out of nowhere.

Maybe Hardy replaces both McKenzie and Hines. That would be a solid move all by itself.

Reasonable people don't jump to conclusions in the first place.

Not saying Edmunds is this guy, but there's a certain type of player who is okay-but-nothing special for his first several seasons, blows up during his contract year, and signs the richest offer sheet put up by a perennial laughingstock when he hits FA. Those guys don't tend to work out. Now, Edmunds is an unusual case because he was so young when he entered the league. But still.

I liked Edmunds and I would have been happy to have him back, but not at that price. I would have opposed signing him if you told me that he was going to get $18M/year. Go out and get a solid, unremarkable MLB. Or draft one. Then put the savings into the OL. Our first priority needs to be keeping hands off #17.

If we draft this guy and he's the second coming of Emmitt Smith, wonderful. But goodness gracious. Between Robinson, Cook, Moss, and Singletary, that's a massive amount of draft capital sunk into a devalued position.

Do he and Diggs get along? I always thought that Thielen was one of the reasons why 14 was unhappy in Minnesota, but I don't honestly know.

I don't recall talking to you before. Sorry. Oh, you're one of those people. Never mind.

I don't understand either of these responses. What I'm asking is, if we can see that Watson's contract was stupid, then surely any random GM can see that too. So if we wouldn't want to hand Jackson a guaranteed contract, why are we surprised that GMs feel differently? GMs don't "collude" against 200 lb DTs or 5.6/40 WRs. They select against them because they're all doing the same math. Why isn't this just the same thing?