Jump to content

HappyDays

Community Member
  • Posts

    26,597
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by HappyDays

  1. 40 minutes ago, JohnC said:

    What happens if Mayfield or Allen slips? I know you are not a proponent of Allen but he falls within the GM's preferred profile.

     

    I don't think Allen will slip. I'm really starting to think the Jets will take him. They told McCown he will start. They signed Bridgewater as a fall back. It makes a ton of sense that they would draft someone like Allen when they can afford to sit him for a year. I am curious how Beane feels about him. My best guess is that he would draft him if he was available at our original pick but wouldn't trade up for him.

     

    Mayfield I could see slipping because GMs are obsessed with physical measurables. If he falls out of the top 5 I would love to see us go get him.

  2. 1 minute ago, JohnC said:

    This would be a terrific outcome. Keeping our multiple picks in the second and third rounds would also give the roster a boost. 

     

    Smith will probably cost an extra 3rd to jump the Raiders but I would be all for that. Part of me wonders if getting him has been the plan all along, and the supposed connections to the top 3 QBs has been a smokescreen.

    • Like (+1) 1
  3. 8 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

    That has been rumored for quite some time. However, I don’t think he’s #1 on their board. Otherwise they would not have already traded up to 12. 

     

    I think everyone is reading too much into the trade up. We were going to trade Glenn this offseason no matter what. We got a good deal and took it. It opened the door for a trade up into the top 5 but it didn't necessitate it.

    • Like (+1) 2
    • Thank you (+1) 1
  4. I agree Shaw. When you look at draft history going back to 2000 there is only 1 QB drafted at #2 or #3 that has firmly established themselves as a franchise QB (that would be Matt Ryan, and Wentz is trending in that direction which would make 2). I personally think it's a poor choice to use a bunch of draft picks on one QB with a statistically low chance of success. I'd rather take my shot at 12 or 22 and fill the rest of the team around him. Maybe that QB won't work out either, the odds are still against it, but at least it wpuldnt leave the whole team in a hole.

     

    Then again I do keep thinking of 2004 when I think of this draft. We shouldn't focus too much on history when you're talking about a relatively small sample size of draft years. It may be that this is the first year in a while to produce multiple 1st round franchise QBs. I'm glad the decision isn't up to me.

    • Like (+1) 1
  5. 2 minutes ago, the skycap said:

    Pat Kirwan just stated, with certainty, that ONE team has Jackson as their #2 QB on their board. Hmmm.... Remember the rumors after the combine.

     

    I don't think Jackson fits what the Bills look for in a QB so I doubt it's us but you never know. He ran the EVP system in college which is what Daboll runs so there is a possible connection. I wonder how much input Daboll will have on our pick.

  6. 8 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

    Passed on Watson as well, who had a bunch of accuracy concerns per NFL.com...dumb?

     

    He didn't lose those accuracy problems. Much of his production came from Hopkins making ridiculous plays, and he had the 3rd worst INT rate among starting QBs. I'm not surprised everyone already anointed him as a franchise QB but he still has a lot to prove. Admittedly I'm mostly alone on this.

    16 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

    Since you want to ignore that accuracy does indeed improve in the NFL

     

    I overstated my position. Accuracy can and does improve for some QBs, but when you're starting from such a low skill level and are solely being scouted on your physical abilities it is nearly impossible to develop into an adequate NFL passer. It's been tried over and over again. Allen's ball placement and touch are a mess. So is his decision making.

    • Like (+1) 2
  7. Just now, JohnC said:

    The grass is greener on the other side of the fence especially when you don't have grass. As I said in another post don't let the seeking of perfection get in the way of seeking good. The ideal usually doesn't represent reality. 

     

    No QB prospect is perfect but there are certain negative traits that history shows you can't fix. Ball placement is #1. QBs don't suddenly become more accurate especially when they're now going against NFL CBs. Darnold threw too many INTs for example but his problem was bad decisions, nor accuracy. You can make better decisions with more experience. For one reason or another accuracy never really improves a lot. And accuracy isn't Allen's only flaw. He's terrible against pressure and he makes too many poor decisions.

    1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

    All I'm saying is whichever QB we take in the 1st I will talk myself into...done it before :)

     

    There's too much value in that pick to be anything but optimistic about it imo. It's kind of a franchise-defining moment, as a fan you kind of have to get behind it is the way I see it. I just see a lot in Allen to get excited about, he's clearly not perfect.

     

    The Bills had the chance to draft Mahomes at #10 last year. No way they are now going to trade multiple 1st round picks for a very similar prospect. That would be incredibly dumb.

  8. 2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

    Stafford? Yeah I'd take him in a heartbeat...you really going qbwinz here?

     

    I like Stafford but the problem is he's the only QB from this millennium that you can even try to draw a comparison from. I'll stand by what I said, Allen is not comparable to Stafford. I'll agree that this is the best positive comparison you can make to Allen but it isn't a particularly good one, and there are numerous negative comparisons you can point to. The historical data is pretty clear on this - QBs like Allen do not suddenly fix their ball placement in the NFL.

  9. 6 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

    You can keep repeating this as long as you like, but it's just not true. This was written about Stafford pre-draft: " Too often leads his receivers too far or forces them to reach back, slowing their momentum and limiting their ability to generate yardage after the catch." 

     

     

     

    Stafford didn't have elite accuracy but he clearly had adequate accuracy. I'm not saying he's the most accurate prospect in a generation but he was miles ahead of where Josh Allen is now. His scouting report specifically mentioned accuracy to all areas of the field as a strength. He was less consistent than would be ideal but it was not a complete mess like Allen's is. If Stafford had a game as bad as Allen's against Boise St I'd like to see it.

  10. 29 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

    You spoke to how each player's accuracy was described; my point is that I don't care how it's described.  Both players faced accuracy questions coming out of school.

     

    As for Allen's accuracy always being discussed as a negative, well, that's not true.

     

    Notice all the qualifiers. "Able to thread the needle." "Can roll right..." "Pretty good precision when allowed to sit in the pocket." No such qualifiers were used for Stafford because he was accurate more often than not. Look at the negatives on any one of Allen's scouting reports, ball placement always comes up. Look at the negatives on Stafford's scouting reports. They don't mention his ball placement, they mention his decision making. They're not similar prospects at all. The only thing they share is a strong arm. This should be immediately obvious by the fact that even though Allen's arm is even stronger than Stafford's, he is not a consensus #1 pick like Stafford was.

    • Like (+1) 1
  11. 10 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

     

    Who cares how their respective accuracies are described? They're less than 1% different 

     

    Are we really drilling down to phrasing at this point?

     

    Earlier you said just going off of completion percentage is lazy. But now you're conflating completion percentage with accuracy. I don't care what Stafford's completion percentage was. EJ Manuel had a better completion percentage in college but clearly was less accurate than Stafford.

  12. 27 minutes ago, JohnC said:

    Just think if the Bills would have drafted either Mahomes or Watson last year? This upcoming draft would be exciting not for the unending discussion about a qb but for the expected infusion of players with the added picks. In my view the rebuilding process would have been accelerated instead of delayed for the never-ending quest to find a franchise qb. The "what if" debates can be gut wrenching. 

     

    If we had drafted Mahomes we'd have a total unknown getting ready to start for a team with one of the worst receiving corps in football. If we had drafted Watson we'd have a guy who showed promise, but also had the 3rd worst INT rate among starting QBs and just tore his 2nd ACL in 4 years. The grass is always greener until you take a closer look.

  13. 9 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

    Your comments about Stafford are revisionist history:

     

    http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/matthew-stafford?id=79860

     

    "Sloppy footwork. ... Will get lazy and throw off his back foot, which could lead to turnovers in the NFL... ... Willing to throw into tight spots, though more often than not he places the ball where it needs to be... ... Not great accuracy on crossing routes. ... Too often leads his receivers too far or forces them to reach back, slowing their momentum and limiting their ability to generate yardage after the catch."

     

    Look at the bold. "More often than not" he had good ball placement. That is absolutely not the case with Josh Allen. Look at Stafford's strengths from the same profile:

     

    Blessed with a stronger and more accurate arm than many current NFL quarterbacks... Efficient footwork and depth on his drop from center. ... Quick to scan the field and go through his progressions ... Can make all the throws and shows power and toughness getting the ball deep even when defenders are closing and making contact. ... Consistent with excellent accuracy to all levels of the field. ... Consistent placing the deep out on the far shoulder of his receiver, away from the defender. ... Has good deep accuracy and trajectory. ... Lofts the ball high enough to allow his receiver to run under it.

     

    You won't find any scouting report of Josh Allen that reads like this. Stafford's accuracy is brought up as a positive; Allen's is always a negative. His positives are exclusively tied to his physical traits.

  14. 8 minutes ago, JohnC said:

    Why do you think that  Mahomes is going to be a bust? KC handled him the way Allen is probably going to be handled. His first year was a prep year for the most part. He played in the last game and did well. Mahomes must have impressed the KC staff well enough for them to dispatch their long term starter. 

     

    I like Mahomes better than I like Allen. Mostly because he can throw on the run and I think his deep ball is much more accurate than Allen's. When Allen moves his feet his ball placement is terrible. I see him as being an all time bust if he goes in the top 5.

     

    And I think Mahomes will bust because he isn't accurate enough on the common throws every QB needs to make. I agree KC did the right thing sitting him his whole rookie year. I am less sure that they did the right thing jettisoning Alex Smith and forcing Mahomes into the starting role. Smith was one of the best QBs in the NFL at pushing the ball down the field last year. He had the #1 passer rating on deep throws. That's supposed to be Mahomes's strength but it's incredibly unlikely that he'll do better than Smith did. I think it will blow up in their face but we'll see.

  15. 37 minutes ago, FeelingOnYouboty said:

    You're pointing to Matt Stafford as the one QB who's had okay success at the NFL level but completely ignoring the long list of guys who've completely flamed out. 

     

    Matt Stafford isn't a good comparison anyways. He was a consensus #1 because on top of his elite arm strength he also regularly threaded the ball into tight windows and was generally accurate. He had better footwork than Josh Allen and he played well against pressure (Allen is terrible with even a small amount of pressure). The questions on Stafford were on his decision making/gunslinger attitude. Rosen is a much better comparison to Stafford IMO. Josh Allen is like Kyle Boller.

    5 minutes ago, BuffaloSol said:

    The kid shows flashes of greatness, has all the physical tools, along with the willingness to work hard.

     

    Haha this is exactly what people used to say about EJ. Word for word. I hated when we picked him too. Any time a QB is being touted for his "physical tools" you know he is a 2nd round project at best.

    • Like (+1) 2
  16. 9 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

     

    Show me and we'll discuss it, because I've shown examples of the opposite in this thread.

     

    You've shown a few examples of good throws. I'm talking about the overall trend. I could go find that Eliot Crist Twitter thread, it's pretty open and shut. He will not suddenly fix his terrible ball placement and decision making when the game is moving 10 times faster. It's never happened before. I have to think that if Mahomes and Allen bust we'll stop seeing these kinds of QBs get drafted high.

    • Like (+1) 1
  17. 20 minutes ago, Mickey said:

     

     

    In the end, all our debate here is over which of us is better at predicting the future. And if any of us could do that accurately, we would live in Vegas.

     

    No I'm unsure about most QBs going in the 1st round. Not Josh Allen. I am sure he will be a bust. If I could make a living betting against every 1st round QB like him I would. No one with his scouting profile has lasted, not in this millennium.

    • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...