Ayjent

We shall see, but we won't really know until we see some live action.

Yeah its why not making a move until you know what is available is smart. Moving up to 5 today makes no sense if you it plays out that you are SoL on the guys you would've picked at QB that high. I think they make the move if it is possible on draft day for pick 6-11.

You can keep the guy and put yourself in a better position to take players when you see the opportunity and not bet the farm and hope you win. Water under the bridge, but I never said to settle for Tyrod. My point was that it makes a lot more sense to keep a decent QB until you are sure you have a better option. And giving up a decent starter at QB for a 3rd rounder isn't going to get you any closer to a better option.

Orton - not really. His year in Buffalo was a really a good year for Orton by his own standards. However, Tthe Offense under Tyrod was significantly better the year after Orton, Taylor had a better TD:Int Ratio, a better QB rating and the Offense produced more points per game. Fitz was too inconsistent, but probably in the same area code as Tyrod - his turnovers and inability to throw deep were too problematic. I'd rather have Tyrod, but I get what you are saying about both. Bledsoe was the benchmark I was referencing without looking up his last start - I did look it up and it was over a decade since his last year as a Bill was 2004 and we all know how that year ended - couldn't beat the backup Steelers.

Statistical production passing - possibly. Overall effectiveness I think Tyrod is a much better player, but we shall see since McCarron hasn't had a ton of opportunity. At this point of their respective careers Tyrod is a much better player than McCarron. I'm not saying that couldn't change with McCarron getting a little more experience, but chances are that McCarron is a downgrade at the Starting QB position from Tyrod. Tyrod's ability to be able to run and run plays that create headaches for defenses are something that McCarron won't be able to provide. He will have to be a significantly better passer and equally as good at limiting turnovers to be better than Tyrod.

Problem is that the biggest hole that has put them in desperation mode is by their own hand. How's that 3rd rounder for Tyrod looking right now? I'm not a Tyrod is the answer type guy, but he was a hell of a lot better than who they've had at QB for nearly a decade before him, and he would have allowed the team to operate with a margin for error. People like to think this regime is different than in the past, and I hope that they are right, but they just made a similar mistake they made before drafting EJ

I think the Bills will move up on draft day if they get an opportunity, but I think they are wise to see how things play out and if they can get a guy they want at 6 through 11 which won't cost nearly as much - then they'll try to move on it. I think standing pat is the best option if the cost is too high and Mayfield may drop into the 6-11 range because of concerns about his height and talent ceiling. Realistically though, it does seem like it is going to be a mad scramble and big run to start the draft with several QBs picks. You could see 5 go in the top 10 picks or less (Allen - Browns, Darnold - Giants, Rosen - Jets, Mayfield - Broncos, Jackson - Cardinals/Bills/Dolphins via Trade). BTW if I were the Browns I'd draft two of the top QBs and hold them for ransom, while also giving yourself a chance to put off your QB of the future decision a little longer. They'd also up the ante for any QB left over. The Browns would be silly to draft Barkley - if the Browns were on the cusp of being a real threat to get a Super Bowl, fine get your RB that is the final piece, but drafting a RB (which is the least durable position long term) with their team's talent level makes no sense. I thought the NFL was getting wise to not drafting RBs so high.

Yeah - I think that is why they can't trade next year's pick as part of a deal to move up. They are too precariously close to being a hot steaming pile of garbage on Offense with the three best players from the last couple of years on the OL gone, their starting QB gone, the two best receiving options in Benjamin and Clay aren't exactly on good wheels, and the other WR/TEs have not proven anything other than being also-ran, easily replaceable players. Giving away 1sts in a future draft is too dicey - the cost becomes greater the more you actually need the pick because your team isn't good. If we were talking about a team with an established core somewhere on the team, trading a future 1st is a little more understandable - but I just don't see how this team makes the playoffs this year barring a ridiculously good draft, and I don't see that if they have very few picks in the 1st three rounds. What kind of situation are you bringing this marquee QB prospect into if you keep on gutting the talent on the team and have no draft picks? Look a good QB cures some ills, but its got to be a workable situation with an OL that can provide some protect and there is a large need to properly develop the player with some talent. Providing good coaching and some good line play makes developing a QB a lot easier. This team exceeded expectations because of its turnover differential, playing respectable defense except for a stretch in the middle of the season, and an Offense that was somewhat capable and didn't make a lot of mistakes. The team has seen another seismic shift in talent leaving (Incognito, Wood, Glenn) and would likely be very happy to have the same mistake-free and efficient QB play this year with the guys they have. I just don't see it. This team is being gutted again so that Beane and McDermott can have it exactly their way and that is going to eventually be a problem, unless they are absolutely great in the draft and Free Agency, and that isn't exactly easy. Look I want to trust these guys, but I can't, they were very lucky last year and I think it goes to show just how bad the head coaching job was before McD (especially on the D side of things). Maybe long term it works out and they recreate it the way they see fit, but they are pretty purposefully taking a step back to do so and hoping that coaching and smart signings can make up the difference along the way. I think the Bills were a pretty talented team for the Rex years, and probably should have made the playoffs both years had Rex's D not been a complete disaster - they completely mismanaged the cap to get that talent and keep talent, but it was talented. The Bills finally got some good coaching on D and had an Offense that had familiarity playing together upfront with a decent QB last year = playoffs. Whaley's contracts have been an anchor on Beane to make hard decisions and get rid of guys they may have been better off keeping had they not been saddling the team with bad contracts. I know that it had a lot to do with Glenn and Taylor being traded. And I understand the need to eventually find a better QB. But I still don't get why you get rid of Tyrod, because of the stability, mentorship and consistency he would bring you at the most important position, and it wasn't that much to pay until you know you have something better. If the guys can't beat out Tyrod, then you keep on trying until you find one that does. People will be looking fondly on Tyrod's play if these QBs this year look like a bunch of clowns. I hope that's not the case, but the reality is that a rookie would be pretty impressive to play as well as Tyrod, and I just don't think McCarron or Peterman are even capable of that level of play. I think that the Browns got a great contingency plan in Tyrod, and it took a lot of pressure off of them to make a deal with another team desperate for a QB, including the Bills - which may result in the Browns getting that damned pick back plus a lot more. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Browns shop that No. 1 pick on draft day after posturing that they want it and want to draft Allen - I mean that would be a insanely stupid No.1 overall pick anyhow. The NFL is a QB driven league, but only the Bills get rid of a decent guy before they have a replacement that is as good or better. At least the Chiefs were smart enough to see what Mahomes was all about for a year before trading Smith (I'm not sure it was a wise move, but it makes a lot more sense than what the Bills did).

They put themselves in this pickle, like they’ve done before so I do get irritated with the thought of them giving up all of these draft assets that they acquired by getting rid of good players, and the talent deficit they created - just to gamble on a QB prospect that they “need” because they traded away a guy that was a capable starter. I’m not trying to call Tyrod the answer, but having him gives you the ability to be patient in both the draft and development of your eventual replacement. Now they’ve got two guys with little game experience at QB and a third that’s about to be in the mix - chances are, the deficiencies on the OL and at WR are going to be more pronounced with such inexperience, and DaBoll isn’t some unknown potential NFL genius that will be able to coach the hell out of the Offense (his NFL experience isn’t exactly exciting anyone with reasonable expectations). They’ve got to get an infusion of talent upfront on the OL, and hope that Dawkins keeps on progressing, because they just doubled down on it to move up in the draft. I feel like they need to move up more only if the deal is good and it becomes clear that they may miss out entirely on the top 5 prospects at QB, but again didn’t they create this dire need? They appear desperate because they now are desperate. It would be really sad if we trade up with the Browns and end up giving them back their 3rd and other high picks because they need a guy to replace the guy they traded. If he doesn’t exceed Tyrod, which is very possible, it makes the Browns look like they got over on you...that’s not a good look. That’s Buddy Nix territory on management of the QB position.

NFL and NBA personnel people constantly make the mistake of drafting players way too high based on physical traits without much evidence of actual elite ability to play the respective sport at consistently high level. It's really weird because if you look at what everyone is saying at the end of the college football season and what they say now, it is like people spend several months talking themselves into players way higher than they should be. It happens every year. Josh Allen reminds me of the ascent of Blaine Gabbert, where these football execs get really juiced up about these workouts and combine measurements and overlook the red flags about actual ability to be excellent playing the game.

If you watched EJ Manuel in college you knew he wasn't a great passer and it was a very close to pro system he played in. He often made wide open guys have to adjust to poorly thrown balls, and actually left a lot of plays on the field because of his inconsistent passing and inaccuracy. He could string together some plays, but he would really struggle at other times. He never really passed with any rhythm, and he was really a disappointment to many Noles fans that saw his problems frequently crop up in the biggest games. I can remember my utter disbelief when he was drafted in the first round. People I know who are FSU Grads and alumni were all calling me up and laughing their asses off at how dumb that pick was. That was a peach of a pick - Nix/Whaley combo didn't know what a good QB prospect looked like. It took Rex freaking Ryan to actually help out to get a decent guy on the roster.

To me as well. They only thing that is questionable is his height, but not a killer issue. Just depends on whether he can pass from a pro pocket without visibility issues and batted passes. Still better prospect than the other guys IMO.

The presumptuousness of people sometimes drives me crazy. If you don't understand what people are saying, maybe ask a question about what they mean rather than assume you know and that the person posting has a poorly formed opinion. You will get no argument from me about the value of QB play, but if you draft a guy that is a long shot or has a lot of issues with his game, do you really want to wait for him to develop over the course of a couple of years while your team struggles with inconsistent QB play? Or would you feel more comfortable waiting to see if you can get him with your 22nd pick and not have as much draft capital and expectations invested in him? If the top 3 QBs are gone by 12 I just think that there are a lot of good options available outside QB if you don't get a chance at Rosen, Darnold or Mayfield, and maybe you can move back down a little bit or wait until No. 22 and still get the guy you want. Counting on Jackson or Allen as a consistent starter with McCarron and Peterman as backups isn't a good plan for success, and I'm not saying that they shouldn't draft a QB at all. I think they have no other choice now that they jettisoned Tyrod and that their best chance at finding a quality starter is in the draft. I'm really just saying that I don't want them to count on Jackson or Allen like they did with EJ to be a franchise guy. I also don't think that either guy merits a No. 12 pick, because of the deficiencies in their game. We can differ on that opinion, but the point is I don't want the Bills holding on to some illusion that they shouldn't draft a better prospect if one becomes available next year or the year after just because of what round and position they draft a guy this year. Especially, if next year presents better prospects. IMO they made the same mistake this year with Tyrod that they made with Fitz, putting themselves in a must draft QB predicament without a top 5 pick. The Bills put all of their eggs into the EJ basket and then doubled down with Watkins rather than staying put and giving themselves a chance to get both a QB and a WR in that draft, which I thought they should have. I was a big proponent of them drafting another QB in the Watkins draft - those two drafts were horrendous and it was clear at the time that they were.

I like Jackson too, but if this staff seems to be more enamoured with traditional passers as I think they are, then chances are Lamar Jackson isn’t going to be the choice for them. The fact that they trotted our Peterman and benched Tyrod tells me all I need to know about this staff’s ability to assess competent QB play, especially when the biggest issues were up front on the OL preceding the change. So your OL is struggling and the defense turns into a sieve, let’s put in a 5th round draft pick that doesn’t handle pressure in the pocket well against a good pass rushing team - great solution. Watson was surprisingly good before being injured, but let’s see him over the course of a couple years before we say he is a superstar. I do like what Jackson has to offer and he is probably my 2nd choice after Mayfield. I’m not sold on Darnold and Rosen, because every time I watched them they just didn’t look like guys that would be consistent enough in the NFL, but I can’t say I watched them as much as the QBs in the ACC, SEC, BIG12 and BIG10

They are drafting a QB, but I'd rather them back off at 12 if Rosen, Mayfield and Darnold are gone, and only Allen and Jackson available. Maybe even trade out to someone more desperate, although I think the Bills hold that crown right now. Putting all of the eggs into Lamar Jackson or Allen would be just a small bit better than thinking EJ was the guy. I do like Jackson more than Allen, but I think they are both 2nd rounders at best and both are longshots to be long term great QBs.

My preference is Baker as well. If they go for Rosen (too slender IMO and has injury history), Allen (please no!!!!!!!!!!!!!), or Darnold (I just don't see him as a consistent enough passer to be a good NFL QB - he had good games in college, but had some woofers as well) after trading a lot of picks to move up into a higher position I think they are going to be looking for another QB in 2020-21.

I don't know about trusting Beane and McDermott - I think they got away with thinning out the talent on the team this year and since then have already traded a starting LT and QB, lost the starting C to retirement, lost their starting MLB to free agency, and are going to loose another starting CB and WR to free agency. Oh and Zay may be craZay and looking at some missed time this season. They have made some moves to get some players in to fill those positions but I don't think the guys they signed are better than the guys they lost, and they have a lot of picks (for now) in the first 3 rounds. They've put themselves in a pickle with the QB position in my opinion - and if they can get a rookie or McCarron to give them the same output as Tyrod (low turnovers, decent completion percentage, and some ability to extend drives with scrambling) I think we will all be thrilled, but the chances of that with McCarron, Peterman or a Rookie is unlikely. I understand why they wanted to move on from Tyrod and his limitations, but I think it is going to bite them in the ass to not be sure that they had a better player at QB before letting him go. They just made the playoffs, despite having a horrendous OC (who was rightfully fired) and Tyrod did what he could do with bad playcalling, a WR corps that was about as bad as the OC. Tyrod was sometimes part of the problems on Offense, but he also did a lot of things right. We will be pining for the days of Tyrod should we be stuck with McCarron and Peterman, and a struggling top prospect. Don't be enamoured with the potential of a guy that can do one thing better than Tyrod if he is a disaster in other aspects (e.g., Peterman), or a guy that couldn't unseat Andy Dalton as a starter, or a QB prospect that looks completely lost against NFL defenses and shows he doesn't have enough accuracy or anticipation in the NFL (e.g., Allen, Rudolph, Jackson), or has some pocket presence issues (e.g., Rosen, Darnold). Mayfield would be my pick at QB, but I think 12 is about where his value is - I don't think the Bills should move up any more, and the teams that would be fielding offers know the Bills are in a bit of a predicament with their QBs and that raises the ante.

And what the Chiefs gave him makes the Rams look brilliant by not resigning him. It's amazing how guys with pedigree of draft position get the benefit of the doubt, while guys who prove themselves constantly but were low picks or UDFA have to fight that stigma most of their early careers. NFL Executives get way too much credit for being extremely mediocre to bad at their jobs - its all relative to the other guys that we judge them - NFL guys are not as bad as NBA execs, but they aren't impressive. Doug Whaley is a good case in point, but the funny thing is he truly is a middle of the road NFL exec - there are much worse still employed all around the NFL. I knew that the trade for Watkins was a dumb move at the time it was made, just like I knew drafting Manuel was ludicrous in the 1st round (especially after the Bills had sat on their hands for many, many years waiting for the right time to pick a QB). Everyone who watched college ball and paid attention to the draft projections of WRs knew that Watkins' class was full of talent. It was a high rated draft for both QB and WR prospects before the draft. Watkins skill set was great for the college game because WR screens are way more effective in college and that was Sammy's bread and butter. Although he is physically gifted, he isn't particularly big to withstand constant abuse in running those types of plays and he isn't a great route runner and isn't particularly good at positioning himself and adjusting to throws (not as good as the best WRs in the game - Brown and Evans are really good at this). He wasn't asked to do these things much at Clemson and that was why I thought it was ridiculous that he was considered a top 5 pick over Evans (who I also thought was a risk because of his temper and attitude), but Evans was a better receiver in almost all aspects if you watched them both play, especially when it came to throws beyond the line of scrimmage. I didn't think Beckham would be that good, but LSU QBs were pretty bad (and Mettenberger was atrocious at times until Cameron joined the staff) - he also went into a good situation with an established QB. The Nix-Whaley team spent a ton of picks on WR and the best pick was Woods - but even a monkey throwing crap at the wall will hit the target if you throw enough crap at it - TJ Graham, Goodwin, Dez Lewis, traded pick for Mike Williams, Woods, Watkins (three picks). All that and by the time the Whaley era ends - the Bills with Beane and McDermott traded Watkins and started over spending a 2nd on Zay Jones, a 3rd and 7th on Benjamin, and traded a Darby (a starting CB) for Jordan Matthews. Jones, Benjamin and Matthews didn't play much as a unit, but the WRs weren't exactly lighting it up. We'll see if Benjamin can recover from his injury and if Jones makes a big leap from last year, but the WR position is still very questionable.

You make some good points but you have to realize that the Rams didn’t need to spend that money on Watkins given his role and what he produced for their offense. Sure he was nice for them but he wasn’t the guy that they depended on in the passing game, and that is why I brought up Woods. I fully recognize their differences (Woods and Watkins) but the contrast is more about how they help their team consistently. Sometimes stats without context are just BS regardless of how “advanced”. Watkins had a lower Rec to Target ratio, and less targets - which is probably due to more long balls for Watkins, but it also shows that his role was that of a nice big play threat, but not a primary receiver. Watkins was effective in the red zone and that isn’t a small deal, but Woods was there game in and game out and is simply more dependable. Sammy even conceded that Woods was the “Alpha” during the season last year. Sammy can have a big game or barely make a whimper and to me that is a guy that is a luxury not a must have and at $16 mil/yr that is a substantial luxury that may preclude you from paying for more dependable and useful production. I know a lot of people think Mahomes has a big arm and having Watkins, Kelce and Hill is going to open up KC’s offense, but I can’t see Reid with a first year starter at QB unleashing a deep ball attack on a consistent basis. He’s a WC offense guy that had Alex Smith not throw a TD to a WR for nearly an entire season. I honestly think that people in KC are going to sour on Reid very fast if Mahomes and the weapons he has don’t produce an instant success, even though I think those are unreal expectations. I Think Reid has Watkins eyed for a different role that is more like what he did at Clemson, but given his injury history that plan may not pan out, but it may. I think he will see more targets in that role, but he hasn’t been asked to do that in the NFL and getting crushed by safeties and LBers is a little different in the NFL. He’s been in the league long enough, it’s time to stop talking about potential and start talking about what he is and is not. He is not Antonio Brown. Maybe he isn’t getting the targets because he doesn’t earn them and smart QBs and coaches aren’t going to force targets unless they like punting and turnovers.

Dude isn't dependable enough nor does he give enough effort on 50/50 balls or balls that require some adjustment and aggression to go get. Physically talented guy - no doubt about it, but physical talent isn't all you need. Good for Watkins for getting paid - I think it is great that these guys get paid well when they do - considering how much money is out there to have in the NFL. It's only right that the ones putting themselves in harm's way get paid well, but if we are talking about a guy that you want your team to spend a good deal of its limited resources on, then Watkins isn't exactly they guy I'd be excited about. I've seen enough of him to know he isn't an elite NFL reciever - he's okay, but Robert Woods is a better all around receiver that gives way more effort and is far more reliable as a target. So the Rams saw that too and that is why Sammy is now on KC's roster.

They started Peterman and benched Tyrod in the middle of the season - let's not call the Bills' brass genius. That was a huge error in judgment - if they should have benched anyone at that time they should have started with the OL and Defense - even though Tyrod was not playing particularly well in the two games before he was benched. So the Bills have and likely still do have a high opinion of Peterman - just let that sink in - and they are the guys looking for the franchise QB. I know these guys took the team to the playoffs - but let's not get too excited about a team that was playing well above its talent level, has a roster that continues to be gutted (starting LT and QB have been traded for pick/position) and squeaked in on an improbable 4th and forever TD by a team that was playing for nothing. That Bills team last year wasn't that good and really they don't have a lot of young pieces to build around. This team is not better without Glenn and Taylor - its worse and it will be unlikely that they even sniff the playoffs this year. Sure they saved some salary and they have picks - but those things don't win games - just ask the Browns. I'm really surprised they are not trying to move Shady - they may be, but at this point the cost of his contract is probably making trade offers nearly worthless. I'm just resigned to the fact that they are most likely going to get worse QB play in 2018 than they've had the past 3 years and Shady isn't going to be able to hold up as well because of age and mileage, and let's not even get started about the TEs and WRs. Outside of Benjamin (who may have chronic knee problems) this team is not very talented at all at WR or TE.

I thought for sure that they had something other than trading up the draft board for a better lottery ticket as a plan once they traded Tyrod. This is questionable manuevering by Beane IMO - I'll let it shake out, but the solid Veteran options are just about dried up and now we've got Nate Peter...man what the hell are you doing?!!!! and Joe Webb on the roster and in a desperate situation to get another QB through a trade and/or draft.

I don't think so. That would be dumb and the Bills have far less talent at WR and TE than Washington. And that's not saying much because Washington outside of Jordan Reed isn't very talented. Gruden is a good coach for Washington's Offense though and if you look you'll notice that Cousins didn't really do much before he became coach. Cousins also still regresses to some dumb decision-making that lesser coaches may not be able to mask as much. They only franchised Cousins because they didn't have a better option available and didn't want to pay him what he thought he was worth. And Washington isn't cheap by any means. This isn't Drew Brees 2.0, this is the makings of some team thinking they are getting a franchise QB to be sorely disappointed - unless they have some really good Offensive coaching.

I know we all have a little more faith in this FO, but I’m still not convinced this was a good move unless they’ve got a really good deal in place for someone cheaper and with more upside than Tyrod. Peterman should consider himself lucky to still be on an NFL roster.

Well the Eagles just won a super bowl with a guy that no one thought would win a super bowl because of good coaching and good players around him. I get what you are saying though, and I think it’s a valid argument, but Tyrod was worth having even with losing out on some cap space and a high 3rd rounder just to maximize the options to have someone for a rookie to be groomed behind. This is is why it looks like they are probably close to working out a deal for one of the guys on the market or have traded up into a position to get a QB - it may already be all but announced.