yungmack

Another piece of info that can be extrapolated is the success rate of "gunslingers" vs "conservative" system QBs. It's overwhelming the latter with the wins, with Favre, Stabler and maybe Namath, Wilson and Rodgers the winning "gunslingers." An even more telling list would include the losing QBs, which includes a load of gunslingers like Kelly, Tarkenton, Marino, Newton, LaMonica, and several others. While most of us love the kind of guy who can pull plays out of the air and fire passes in the craziest situations, the history of SB winning QBs is that the more boring, conservative, system QBs win way more Lombardis than do gunslingers. It's good to keep that in mind when picking a franchise QB.

It's a better bet than trading away a bunch of picks for any of the QBs after Darnold and Rosen.

No way any GM with half a brain is taking Allen over Darnold or Rosen. Even his most fervid supporters admit his shortcomings and the need for two or more years of committed work to make him into a top starter. But because we're talking about the Browns, then, yeah, I wouldn't be completely shocked if they took Falk or Rudolph. Still, I think they take Darnold, the Giants take Barkley and the Jets take Rosen.

Thanks for putting this together. Makes me think Beane is not considering Jackson, Allen and probably not Mayfield as worth a big trade. That leaves Darnold and Rosen and at the moment, they look out of reach.

I believe the Browns and Jets will use their first picks on QBs and right now they are both looking at Darnold and Rosen. The wild card...for both the Jets and the Bills...is the Giants. If the Giants are planning to take the replacement for 37-year-old Manning, then the Jets have given up an awful lot to grab Mayfield, Allen, maybe Jackson because the Giants will take whichever one is left from Darnold and Rosen. On the other hand, if the Giants aren't looking for a QB but want to take Barkley, and if the Bills really, really want either Darnold or Rosen, here's a three-way deal scenario that would work. The Bills trade up for Cleveland's #4 pick, giving up whatever they have to. That still leaves the Jets in front of them so they have to trade for the Giants #2. It would be a risk for the Giants that the Jets might take Barkley but maybe they'd find the risk worth it for a few more picks.

McCarron's a better option than all the QBs after Darnold & Rosen.

I believe McCarron is a better bet than Allen, Mayfield, Jackson or Rudolph, so if Rosen and Darnold are out of reach, stay at 12, go to work on the linebackers, WRs and Oline.

Another possibility: As Day One of the draft begins, the Jets themselves may be open to a trade for a king's ransom of picks.

So no Brady or Rodgers for you?

That's not in the Bills hands.

He's from a well off family. His father's a doctor. Bill Gates's kids are from a wealthy family.

I believe you can find all the thoughts you want on the hundreds of other threads discussing the same thing.

Darnold averaged one pick per game in a high scoring offense. The majority of those picks happened early in the season, before he and his receivers settled in. More worrisome is his fumbling but he's the best prospect in years.

Latest on Luck is he won't throw until training camp.

Not if it's Mayfield.

I noticed this was written BEFORE the 2017 season. That said, it is kind of astounding how many QBs were drafted and how very few of them panned out at all. As to genuine stars, boy, are they rare.

You consider them better than Foles right now and believe they will be available for the Bills?

How's 'bout a couple of names who will be better and available?

Perfect. And hilarious.

6 times as many people pick Mayfield over Darnold, nearly twice as many prefer Allen, and he's picked even with...Jackson? Ei yi yi, the circus is in town.

Too bad they fired him.

Walla walla

You write you would not overpay for moving up, and as examples you cite Bledsoe and RJ, who were acquired in trades, then EJ who they traded DOWN for, getting an extra pick in the bargain which morphs into Shady. Losman is the only true "overpay," and even there I would argue they should have offered MORE to get their real target, Big Ben. Don't you agree the last decade would have been better for the Bills if they had " overpaid" for him?