Boatdrinks

Of course, Garrapolo was acquired for the lofty price of a second round pick.

Teams don't have their final boards set. Players still making private visits for a couple weeks

He said it's early yet and they probably will. Sounds plausible.

Not my opinion. I was talking about NFL head coaches and what they might think of his twitter response to his college coach. I'm sure they think it's a great indication of his personality. I'll go out on a limb and say anNFL HC probably won't see it in as favorable a light as you.

That's not the point. His response is the thing. It's not a good look.

Should win him favor with NFL head coaches.

That's irrelevant. McDermott had plenty of control and decided to move down rather than take a QB. Fine, if your plan is to have a better shot at a top ranked QB the next year. By all accounts, this year was going to be a better one than last. The team wasn't expected to be good, so a high draft pick was very possible. An extra pick, ( though likely in the 20's range) from KC should help get into stronger position. All well and good, and still could happen. If not, plan B is take a different player that only costs one pick or a lot less than a move up to the top 10. They liked Trubisky last year. Where would he fall in this draft? How about Watson, or even Mahomes? Any of these results could be seen as logical, but to simply ignore the position and " roll with AJ or Peterman" as stated by the OP would be epically bad planning. This is probably not true. It shows only that they were risk averse and wanted only an incremental move down for lots of picks. Free picks for almost no risk. They weren't going to 12 that early.

Whaley had one foot out the door by last years draft. It was obvious as the picks started coming in that he wasn't calling the shots. McDermott pretty much ran that draft.

That wasn't the OPs question though. We know the Bills CAN take a QB. The question was what happens if the Bills ignore the QB position in round 1 and go with AJ and Peterman .

The plan was to draft a top QB this year. That plan may not work out. Plan B is a QB later in the round that may need more development. No first round QB as the OP stated ? That is absolutely a failure to address the situation with any kind of plan. I don't think this will happen, but it would clearly be a failure if it did.

Sit back and relax. Hot take. ESPN , news and podcasts aren't aimed at the casual fan. Neither is a fan message board. It's cool and all if you are one, but this isn't where you'll find the " Netflix and chill" crowd on draft night.

Yeah, I don't think they are worrying about fan reaction. I think they are motivated by success so they can keep their lucrative jobs. I don't buy into any notion that they would move up to 12 for any reason other than a QB. Teams asking an exorbitant price outside of parameters of other drafts IS an unwillingness to move down. That might happen. If it does, then plan B such as taking a QB at 12 or even later in round 1. Every team always says they're happy with their draft for obvious reasons. The Bills would be no exception.

Not my point at all. Even if the Bills go QB in this draft or had in the last, it will take some time before the verdict is in. It's not even if those p,ayers could be called successes right now. Rather, that passing on QB last year AND this would leave the team with no highly touted prospect at the position. That would be an abject failure. Eveb trading for Foles would be a better scenario than having little potential for the future at the all important QB spot. It simply unthinkable to consider the OPs scenario of no move up and no round 1 QB as anything less right now.

I'm not so sure. Could make the Giants go QB rather than trade out. Less options for the Bills.

That's a reasonable assessment , and would be fair criticism. They had choices last year and took option C.

Well, their moves to date and the HC statements point to a pick they don't plan on playing for awhile . That sounds like the best case for a guy such as Allen.

I'll trust/ give them credit because they actually work in the NFL and are risking their jobs. I'm sure they will do a thorough evaluation on the QBs, and a cost/ benefit analysis of any moves up. They may very well agree with your assessment in the end. If they do, it will be indicative of how closely they have these QBs ranked . Also on the overall effect on their rebuild. Not due to the fear of choice. If they move up to 2 it will show they have a much stronger belief in one of these players over all the others. That's the position I'd like the GM to be in if they have a much higher rank on one QB.

The # 2 will be a very expensive move up. Maybe the Bills don't believe there is a large separation between the QBs likely available at 2 and who they might get with a lower pick. At a much lower cost. If they pay that premium to get to #2 then we'll know they believe the separation is huge.

What if Allen ends up as the best QB from this draft ? The fact is that none of us know. Including ANY of the NFL teams drafting them. You give yourself too much credit. I stated I would prefer a move to the 2nd pick, NOT that I would like the Bills to give up everything to do so. That's a different question / discussion altogether. The best scenario for this Bills GM/ HC/ scouting department ( not the same " them" as the last 20 years) is to have the choice. The opportunity to go all in on the player they believe in the most, rather than hope that player is the one that slides to them at pick 5, 6 or whatever. Yes , that is also an opportunity to get it wrong. If that happens, then jobs will likely be lost. But all GMs would take the ability to make the choice every single time. The # 2 pick may well be out of reach due to cost or the Giants unwillingness to move. If the Bills can get there, I'll take that over the alternatives. I don't think the Bills organization has had the choice between two top ranked QBs in round one since ' 83 . That one turned out OK.

Then the next FO regime will be introduced a LOT sooner than later.

As if these media reports are spoiling the Bills well kept secret that they need a QB.

So they would not only have to move up, but also must pick the player YOU like as opposed to the one they might like ? It makes one wonder why you would bother following the team. Just strange to me. I'd like them to move up to 2 the most because it would give them the most possible options - 3 out of the 4 top ranked QBs. That's the best scenario for the FO, rather than hoping their target falls to them. So that's what I prefer.

If the Bills are indeed unable to move up, wouldn't it be due to teams not wanting to trade back ? It seems unlikely they would move to 12 just to stay there. That's exactly what I mean. There wasn't a need to move all the way back to 12 with the free picks they got to move to 6. If they stay at 6 they still get a top player that falls to them and scored extra picks in the process. They're in no worse position at 6 than they were at 3 and could move back again.

The only realistic options may be to overpay or simply not have one. Which do you think is worse/ better?

This take has become extremely tired. It's most likely inaccurate . Beane didn't have what was required to trump what the Jets could offer the Colts: namely a high draft slot. The Colts moved back a mere 3 spots ( about as safe as could be) and scored 3 second rounders for practically nothing. A move back to 12 incorporated risk for the Colts , and removed them from scoring another potential deal in the trade up for a QB market. The 6th pick fit that nicely. It wasn't happening for the Bills because they lacked the currency to give the Colts what they wanted.