Rochesterfan

In addition if you kept the picks - you could get your shutdown corner at the end of Round 1 - like a Tre White (several potential picks in this draft). The end of round 2 is usually a sweet spot for CB depth or Safety help. Several starters were drafted last year in that area - like Jessie Bates and Jackson. Now maybe neither of them equals Clark to you, but I think that combo helps you win more important games versus good passing teams than Clark does. You could also go WR as many talented WRs are taken at the end of Rd 2/early rd 3 - just look at Pittsburgh for examples and that could buffer you in case the Hill situation becomes worse and he gets a DV suspension or Sammy is injured again. They could also look at RB to help replace Hunt or LB to help with coverage - especially in nickel that they will be playing a lot. I understand the trade, but they forced themselves into it and I do not think they are a better team right now compared to last year and Clark although an improvement to the current roster is not an improvement compared to the guys he is replacing at significantly more money.

But you also would get to keep Ford. I understand changing scheme, but the Chiefs dumped two older pass rushers this off season that got less money combined than Clark and then gave up a first and a second in a draft this year that is the sweet spot for some top flight DBs - that they actually need to improve the defense. In the end - Clark is the better player and fits their new scheme, but the defense is not as good and you gave up picks that could easily be used to make the defense better. KC created multiple holes on the defense and then traded away multiple picks to fill holes they created and on top of that they way overpaid for a guy that is marginally better than the players they let go. I think their main competition- NE, Indy, Rams, and NO are less worried about KC with Clark because they can use a quick short/intermediate passing game to combat outside pass rush and KC defensive backfield is putrid. KC is going to pt up points - they need DBs that can actually cover, LBs that will not be exploited, and safeties that are going to be able to handle other teams passing games because they will be in shoot outs. I would have less issues with the trade if the Chiefs were a pass rusher away from being SuperBowl Champs, but they were not. The pass rush was not the issue - the LBs and DBs were the issue and the team just got rid of their top 2 rushers to replace them with a better overall player, but not one that increases the pass rush output and eliminates a chance at elite DB talent in this draft.

This is to me is the puzzling piece. Essentially they traded Ford, a first, and swapped thirds for Clark. Then they pay Clark a crazy sum of money on top of that. I would rather have Ford, the first rd pick (CB’s are perhaps the sweet spot there) and the earlier 3rd. Maybe Ford does not fit what they want, but with the lack of defense they showed - not sure Clark gives them much more and the loss of the first is the killer to me. Great spot for corner back help that they need.

Nope - I think he should start a new thread complaining about his answer. LOL - look exactly what was done - ??

It is interesting and I think each bust/failure has unique reasons. Some like Jamarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf - attitude and desire got the better of them. Their natural abilities were always enough to make them stars, but when you get to the NFL - you need desire and a hard work ethic to improve and they threw that away. Others like Trent Richardson - played on the best team and that matching to their talent made them world beaters in college. Once you got to the pro’s - the line could not bulldoze the same and the LBs and Safeties aren’t afraid to hit and suddenly you become average. His vision was never really tested at Alabama because the O-Line opened holes right where he was supposed to go and therefore it made him look so much better. Even now with the defunct AAFL he could no longer break away, but give him the ball near the goal line and he was money. There are others - like Maybin where scheme fit is a huge issue. He was expected to be something he was not, but he did not fit the role being asked. It was obvious he feasted on lesser talent, but he never really fit a role in the NFL. A definitive measurement of heart and desire would go a long way to identify these potentially borderline players, but there can be more than that to make a final judgement.

Why blame Goodell - this is what the NFLPA fought for. They took this phase 1 crap and less money. Poorly run Union - Goodell Just has to enforce the stupid NFLPA rules.

I thought I had seen that in other discussions. I have done a ton of thought drafts and studies and always at least one of those guys dropped. Even still I had to do the math over to make sure I was not missing something. I think pick 9 really pushes the end of the top line talent and although we are going to get a good player it may not be the best team fit player simply because it is what is left. That is why I am dying to see the Bills true board as I would love to know how they have these guys tier ranked compared to you and I and any other mock people.

So are you assuming Murray does not go #1? Picking 9 means one of those 8 players you listed is available if 1 QB goes. I do not see any way at least 1 QB is not picked before us. If it gets to pick 9 and all 8 of the position players mentioned are gone - I then think we are getting a lot of action for QB needy teams looking to get ahead of Denver. My issue with pick 9 is that there are 6 or 7 of those 8 guys that I think are great fits and it could easily be we are left with 1 or 2 guys like Taylor, Sweat, or Gary that are high ranked, but may not be ideal and the top QBs are gone leaving us with lots of choices, but maybe not the consensus guy.

This is especially true as you are sitting with the number 1 pick. You may get a bunch of stuff for the pick, but if you feel Rosen is only going to get you to 6-8 wins regularly then it will cost you more in future drafts to move up than take the guy right now.

Well if you really want to hear her side of the predictive model for her Mock - they are having her on One Bills Live - so people can complain about her and Tasker. or People can listen and learn that it is not a mock looking at what teams are expected or should pick, but a mock looking at which picks can give the best potential return based on increased won/lost records based on players and needs.

Maybe I am way off base, but I don’t think so. The issue with the current draft set-up is exactly the problem with this argument. Teams near the very top of the draft - top 10 - 15 picks end up drafting more true BPA. Because of the pressure and scrutiny- they end up drafting great athletes that do not always fit need or culture of the team or overpay for the QB position and do not get the value of the pick. The teams drafting on the back half of the draft - are getting the BPA with need and fit included and that makes for more successful drafting in my opinion. For example - Detroit ends up with WR as BPA early in the draft 3 out of 4 drafts or the NYJs drafting DL in the first round 4 out of 5 years. These teams drafting early struggle because you are not always getting good fits and good players. The teams drafting later have their choice of both BPA and fit/need and that to me is why they have more success. You see it with NE, Pittsburgh, etc even going back to the Bills and SF of the 90s. You also see high drafting teams struggle to break out like Cleveland, LA Rams, Buffalo, NYJ, SF - until they hit that one or 2 times were need/BPA/ fit all come together and they begin to transcend. That is where I stand on this point.

I disagree - the biggest issue that I heard was by drafting a RB that high - his annual salary outpaces the rate of most other RBs and almost eliminates the 5th year option. You are overpaying right out of the gate if you draft a RB in the top 10. Barkley on his rookie contract is top 8 for RBs even after this off season and it will continue to rise. Whereas a position like DE/DL - Miles Garret is 36th ranked. QBs like Goff, Wentz, Mayfield - are all in the 20’s for positional pay. WR - rookie contracts are in the 40’s, tackles late 30’s, LBs are in the 40’s, and CBs are in the 40’s. Drafting a RB in the first round early - especially top 10 is a huge waste especially for the rookie contract. More and more teams are realizing you are wasting rookie deals with the RB and then the wear and tear is an additional problem because of the 5th year option and 2nd contracts. Teams are better off drafting a mid to late round RB every couple of years or picking up a FA as needed.

I take the field and it’s not close - I think Dline will be the pick many times over before TE. I do not think most teams value RB enough to consider one at 9 right now - that would be a major mistake. Just look at the crap Gettleman is getting drafting the offensive rookie of the year last year - that was a transcendent talent that actually had a great season and most NFL pundits think it was a huge mistake - especially as there was an undrafted RB in the ProBowl.

I believe this is the approach they are taking and Beane has mentioned it before. Use FA to fill immediate holes with short term people to see how they fit and Draft BPA to build competition and long term roster stability. The next part is to identify who on your roster is a long term fit and start to retain more and more; all while identifying those that you can let go or trade to help the build cycle. The other avenue that becomes available is the trade market and that seems to be where Beane is looking at acquiring potential talent for more limited costs. I think he was in on AB because there was potential for real talent at minimal cost. I also believe that he was not really interested in OBJ because although the talent is there the cost was more significant and therefore you are more likely “stuck” longer term - even if he does not work out. Beane is the first GM in a while that I believe has a holistic approach to roster building with a longer term vision on the team. He will acquire talent in many ways and is not afraid to step back and admit a mistake and cut a sunk cost guy that is not working out. Whaley I think had that ability, but he was always forced to acquire talent for different coaches and different schemes - and he way overpaid for talent. We will see how Beane does as his rookies begin to need new contracts.

By this logic - the Chiefs should be all over Rosen then because you still do not know how Mahomes is going to handle one good year. He could come back and with the loss of Hunt and potentially Hill - really struggle in year 3. The value is there and Rosen could be a good fit in the Reid system.

To me - Pederson seems like a more well balanced and well rounded coach that can get play from a running back like Howard. He has spanned and seen more schemes and can make adjustments to the scheme. Nagy to me is more like Chan Gailey with the Bills - he has a specific offensive system and can’t adjust to other playing styles. He wants that water bug, quick RB and did not know what to do with Howard. They both came off the Reid tree, but Pederson was the healthier more mature branch in my opinion.

I agree the Championship game needs to be addressed, but that should be discipline to the guy that missed the call - he made the error. Would this rule fix that - probably, but in an attempt to fix one blatantly bad call - it brings into question several more very close calls - like the pass defense in the end zone of the Super Bowl or Hail Mary’s where there is contact, but the on-field team rules it as simultaneous. Now slow mo and frame by frame you can see the contact and it could change a game based strictly on judgement from the league offices. Dean Blandino backed this all up on One Bills Live yesterday talking about how the league will now have to redefine for both the on field and in booth Refs what to call and how to handle it because like the catch rule - there are many more cases of PI that goes uncalled that with review could be called especially in 2 minutes - unless they redefine how the replay team looks at the play. Also much like the catch rule there are numerous cases of very borderline issues that could impact the decision and as you saw with the catch rule - it ended up getting out of hand as they tried to redefine and legislate each potential scenario. The biggest take away I had from Dean was the other point I made - how angry are teams (and fans) going to be when on replay a PI gets overturned (or on challenge does not get called) because the defender held or made illegal contact by definition rather than PI. You can see the blatant penalty, but that is not reviewable - how does the league handle these because it is going to happen several times. My final issue is this is a one year trial - it has to be voted in again next year. If they are going to trial it - do it in preseason for a couple of years before rolling it into the Regular season and playoffs. I hate when they have a rule that will have an unknown impact and they are going to end up spending part of the year redefining the rule because of mistakes early in the season - meaning oops we screwed teams and realize this impact is bigger than we expected- let’s make some adjustments to fix that. This happened last year on the sack rule and cost Green Bay a couple of games as they defined how sacks could and could not occur.

It would be fine if they truly want to get it right, but that is not the goal or they would eliminate challenges and have every play automatically reviewed. The fact is technology has increased 100 fold and it brings every play into light all over the field. It also opens a Pandora’s box of potential calls that are questionable that come into focus every year. This rule just adds another layer of judgement that can go multiple ways to game that is already complex. This will be the catch rule all over and the league will need to “redefine” PI next off season because of calls late in the game that get either created or overturned. It also allows them to call PI - what happens if the replay judge decides it is not PI, but defensive holding or illegal contact (2 more questionable calls that keep more drives alive than PI) - they can not make that call - so there is definitely contact, but they cannot correct it because that is outside the scope of the rule. The NFL needs to stop with the limited bull and either say we are open to reviewing everything and having someone do it after each play or they need to get rid of replay entirely and let it play out. The wishy washy nature of challenges and full replay at 2:00 is bogus. If they want it right - it needs to be right all the time and if not then let it go.

It is not the challenges where it will be a major issue - although that is bad in and of itself - it is the subjective nature that at 2:00 - now every play will have some type of PI scrutiny put in place. Then these ticky tack fouls suddenly get called and in many cases it is subjective - is it offensive as the guy tries to push his way into an open spot - is it defensive because he held him up. It opens up a huge number of potentially questionable calls that will eventually add to the narrative that the NFL is fixed. I could care less about the time - the NFL game is fun to watch so the timing does not matter - unlike Baseball. It is the inconsistent nature in which they set these rules up that create a problem - it happened with the catch rule and will happen with this. There are so many potential big plays in an NFL game and they can happen at anytime, but the HCs have 2 (maybe 3 if they get them right) chances to challenge something. What happens if like in a NO game last year - there are 2 close calls early - then the rest of the game that team can no longer challenge egregious errors. It makes no sense. If the NFL wants to “get it right” then get rid of challenges and have every play reviewed and adjust the play clock so that even in hurry up situations there is enough time for the replay judge to review. Get rid of the challenge system that sucks - especially as many times the calls are so close in nature that it is hard to decide and becomes just another judgement call for a random guy to make and cost teams timeouts. I also disagree it balances things out - if you think the Bills get screwed by bogus PI calls now - just wait - this opens up the potential for even more small judgement calls to go against them at the worst time (within the final 2:00 of each half and OT). I personally do not think there is a league bias against the Bills or any team, but there are teams like NE that coach and work on getting PI calls on throws down field and this will add to their tactics. The short, back shoulder throw is a staple of Brady’s game and this rule plays right into that as the WRs purposefully make contact with the DBs to try and get a call - now that becomes even more of an option.

Really do not like this at all. Right now a big pass play goes incomplete and everyone waits for the flag - now we have the additional wait is someone going to challenge it. It also means some tricky tack call is going to impact an outcome with a booth review on something with no effect. Really wish they would eliminate more replay instead of adding to it. It would be one thing if they get the call right, but they won’t all it will do is cause more anger and frustration among the fans when a small bump by your DB becomes a 30 yard penalty and a first down late in the game against a team like NE.

Wear the colors proudly. As a matter of fact - the family just spent a week at Disney World (my daughter got to perform during spring break) - between my wife and I - we wore Bills gear every day of the trip and I have to says - Bills fans are awesome. Everywhere we we went we saw others proudly wearing Bills and Sabre’s gear and I can not count the number times of Go Bills, Buffalo Rocks, and Other phrases were yelled all over. It was great - plus you immediately had an in with others talking about Free Agency and the draft and Josh Allen - you would of thought all of Western NY was there. Buffalo fans are the best! Great people and a great community.

I think Beane will acquire talent in a variety of ways, but the long term future of the team comes via drafting. I think you see a lot of 1 and 2 year contracts to starting filling the talent pipeline (priming the pump) so to speak. The hope then becomes some of this crop of FAs and players gets replaced by draft picks and you can let them walk via FA (rather than having to cut them) allowing you to lose more than you gain and maybe getting additional free picks. I do not think many FAs (probably Morse) are in the true long term plans, but if some developed- then you retain them or let them walk and have a replacement on hand via the draft. Teams can turn around quickly, but to sustain the plan you need to have a winning QB, stability in the Front Office, and a steady stream of replacement level players coming via the draft. Then you can be a bit of a chooser in FA and who to retain and ensure the talent level stays up with money left to spend for big needs.

I will start with WR - based upon Spotrac both Brown and Beasley are around 30th to 35th WR contracts in the league. So that is low end starter level - so what would I expect - at that level and price - I expect complimentary pieces that are going to make plays and keep the offense moving. I am not expecting 1500 yards and 100 catches from either. At that level we should be looking for 60 catches and maybe 750 to 1000 yards for Brown - maybe mid 15+ YPA and for Beasley probably 50-60 catches - maybe 600-750 yards and a bunch of 3rd down conversions. I do not consider John Brown a high priced piece based upon the recent WR contracts as he is paid as one of the lower starting guys in the league with additional FAs and contracts coming.

I am not sure, but I did see someone eat a “Joey bag of Donuts” at Moe’s yesterday - does that count? Looked pretty good - seemed like the guy was really enjoying it and it did not seem like they were talking about the Bills either. It probably became **** later in the day to - so maybe relevant.

I will not disagree with any of this - it sounds about right, but also does not sound like it matches this case. A couple of additional questions to mirror it more to this. First - you say above if he/she wants to pursue charges - how does it change if there is potential evidence of abuse, but they do not want to pursue charges. Remember- this is now the third incident with this woman and man and she has not pursued charges yet and there was overwhelming evidence when she was pregnant that he beat the crap out of her, but she never pressed charges and now has married him. Second - he was named in an incident with the child very recently, but the spouse did not want to pursue things and now another incident occurs and the spouse again is not pursuing it - Does that not mean that Child Services will get involved and begin investigating the incidents? Because it is a minor - can Child Services bring charges if after investigation they determine child abuse was occurring. To me this is the step we are in. The spouse/mother is not going to press charges as is obvious by this being the third known instance of them having to get police involved with signs of injury, but she has not pressed charges yet. Therefore the police saw potential signs of abuse and have referred it to the Child Services team to investigate and determine the fate. How quickly this all goes depends upon the level of cooperation from the family, friends, and others involved. I think you are correct in that if she had wanted to press charges and the police left without naming him or taking him into custody- there would be little to the story, but it changes if she does not want to press charges and then tries to protect him when the police arrive.