Shaw66

Not sure that's completely fair to Landry, but it certainly is an interesting circumstance to contemplate. Williams wasted a couple of years as a pro, but he turned it around. Landry changed the course of his career, for sure.

I think that's what I meant. McCarron is the best insurance Beane could buy for 2018 at a low price. But McCarron is not evidence that the Beane wants to trade up to #2 or anything else. He's just the guy who's gonna be the QB if the rookie, wherever he's drafted, doesn't step up to start. If it hadn't been McCarron, it would have been McCown or some other inexpensive recognizable name. It's almost as though Beane waited out the QB music chairs until there was only one guy left - didn't matter which it would be, only that it would be a guy left with no bargaining power.

Excellent, Logic. Just damn excellent. I've thought for a while that it's more likely that the Bills sit tight or trade up between 5 and 11 than it is that they make a deal with the Giants. It just seems to me that this is the Giants best chance to get the successor to Eli, and they aren't going to trade that chance just for a boatload of picks that won't be good enough to get them back up to the top of the draft next year. Especially if they trade with the Bills, because they know then that 1, 2 and 3 will be QBs, and that will leave the Giants with their fourth choice at QB instead of second. Beane is careful and deliberate. He isn't likely to blow all his draft capital in a deal with the Giants unless his absolute favorite, can't-miss QB is at #2, whoever that may be. (He may not even HAVE a can't-miss favorite.) If the McCarron deal signaled anything, it is that Beane was figuring he'd get his QB someplace after the #4 pick (or I suppose at #4 if the Browns want to deal) and that he's figuring that the QB he drafts in the first round should sit for a year. McCarron can get him through 2018. Plus, maybe McCarron turns out to be a surprise. But I hadn't thought about your point that by trading up 4-7 picks, Beane still can leave himself with a more or less full draft. I'd really like to know what went on at last year's draft. We don't really know who was in charge, but it's an interesting scenario to think that the Pegulas told Whaley to do what McDermott told him. Whaley probably already knew what was coming. In any case, passing on Mahomes and moving all the way back to 29 was a gutsy move. Getting White was a bonus, because the real prize was to set up Beane with two first round picks this year. Even though they turned out to be relatively late in the round, those picks set up Beane to make the other deals and get himself to where he is now. He has virtually every choice in front of him now - move to 2 if he wants to pay the price. Move to 5 through 11. Sit at 12. Heck, who knows? It's possible he'd even trade back a few picks from 12. Point is, he has the capital to do whatever he wants, and it all started because the Bills passed on Mahomes.

You're right, especially your first sentence. Frankly, I don't think there's anything to be read into their moves, either way. They felt like they needed to move Glenn, and the opportunity was to get a better draft choice. So they took it. That meant they could trade up more if it made sense, and it also meant they could get the middle linebacker they want. They could go either way. I keep remembering that McD said a month ago or more that the Bills aren't as far along as some people think. Sounded he was trying to control expectations for 2018. The McCarron signing and that statement can go both ways - "we're gonna have a rookie QB, and either he'll be a typical rookie or we'll go with McCarron. Either way, it'll take another year for us to get better."

A first, a second and a fifth, and they can have 'em.

Shady packaged with picks in deal with the Giants?

People fall inlove with the physical attributes. There's no convincing them otherwise, until they fail. The Raiders talked themselves out of every possible concern they might have had about Jamarcus Russell. I have a lot of confidence that McBeane are completely on top of this. If they take Allen it'll be because they know several things we don't know. I put some stock in the Wonderlic scores, and it's interesting that Allen had the highest of the QBs. Of course, Fitz was off the charts on the Wonderlic and he still threw every critical INT he could.

I keep saying I haven't studied any of these guys, but from what little I've seen and read, I'm also completely on board with Mayfield. Whenever I saw him, play over the past couple of years, I saw a flat-out winner. I like his fire, his competitiveness, his ability to find guys when he's flushed. Reports say he's the most accurate thrower in the group. Does he have an edge to him? Yes. So did Big Ben in his early years. Beane can deal with that. And I would suggest you not believe the reports that say he is 4th or 5th. I think he does too much too well for teams to miss the boat on him. If the Bills got him at 12 I'd be ecstatic, but I think they'll have to go up into the 5-6 range, and maybe that won't be enough. I think it's too expensive to trade with the Giants. Unless, of course, he is a Hall of Fame player.

By the way, I think you seriously misperceive McBeane on this one. Yes, they are Christians and they believe there is great value in that, but I don't think Christian is anywhere on their checklist. These guys are detail oriented and methodical. They can tell you without notes exactly what it is they are looking in a QB, and they will evaluate each guy against those criteria. They aren't taking a guy because he's a Christian, and they aren't not taking a guy because he's a Jew. They are way above that.

It's different when you have a Hall of Fame QB. You can draft a Garopolo or a Rodgers and sit him and work on him. The problem in that situation is what to do when you Hall of Fame quarterback doesn't want to retire on you schedule. Rodgers would have started as a rookie in Buffalo. Why? Because you have to play your best player, and he would have been the best QB in camp. It's inconceivable that the 2005 Bills would have drafted Rodgers in the first round and then told the fans he wasn't going to play for three years. Bills had NO ONE at QB by that time. Plus, it's inconceivable that Mr. Wilson would have paid him first round money to sit for three years.

I always defend the Manuel pick, although I agree with what you're saying about his passing. I defend the pick because if you're the GM of the Bills in that draft, you MUST take a QB, because you don't have one. So you evaluate the talent and make the best pick you can. Manuel probably was the best choice of the group available, and the plan, to have him sit for a season, was the right thing to do for him. Unfortunately, it didn't work out well, but the Bills had to take SOMEONE. Maybe they should have taken two, but the pickins were slim, for sure. I've always said the Bills didn't manage the QB situation horribly after Bledsoe, they just made bad picks. Moving up to take Losman was addressing the QB situation. Problem was their evaluation of him was wrong. And moving up cost them Aaron Rodgers in the draft the following year. Taking Edwards in the third was a good move, good planning for the position, and it seemed like it was working until his concussion. The biggest mistake was betting on Fitz. Well, betting on him made some sense, but not immediately drafting the next guy in line was the mistake. Just like they took Edwards when they thought Losman would be the guy, they should have taken someone when they gave Fitz his deal. And that someone was Russell Wilson. Because they didn't draft Fitzy's replacement, the Bills found them sevesin a situation where they were forced to draft someone, and that someone turned out to be Manuel.

The NFL doesn't do that because of cost. They'd have to expand the rosters or the practice squad, and if there'd have to be a way to protect a guy like Allen on the practice squad. And he'd want a lot of money. It is largely a sink or swim situation. Yes, they could work on a guy's mechanics like that, but the real skill, the decision making, is learned only on the field in real games. So the guy has to be good enough to get on the field to get that playing time. The fact is, if you've got it, you make it, and if you don't, you don't. People here often say well, if you put this guy in the right situation, he'll grow into the position. I think that's hogwash. I can't think of a QB who was a failure on his first team and then, under different coaching, miraculously blossomed. Maybe Kurt Warner is one. Most guys move on to their second team and look pretty much the same as they did with their first team. If the situation really changed the fortunes of QBs, there's be lots of stories about how this guy became a star with his second team. But, as usual, I agree with you. I wouldn't burn a first round pick on Allen, because he he's low probability. But his physical skill apparently are so spectacular that he may be worth taking as a project. He may very well go in the first round, and I doubt he fall past the second.

Got it. But, without really knowing, I'd say that in the college the opposite of what I said is true. In college you can have a high completion rate for a season or more and be inaccurate, but it's quite unlikely that an accurate college passer will have a low completion percentage. Maybe Stafford did, but by and large it's pretty easy to throw in college (relative to the pros), and accurate college passers should almost always have high completion percentages. So you wouldn't trade up for Allen, but it sounds like you'd love him at 12!

You've been an accuracy guy for as long as I can remember, and you've convinced me. But let's not go overboard. Completion percentage isn't a measure of accuracy, but to to say it has little to do with accuracy is, well, inaccurate. It may be true that some accurate throwers have low completion percentages for a game or maybe even a season. But virtually NO thrower with a high completion percentage for a season is inaccurate. You simple can't complete 60-65% of 500 passes if you're a fundamentally inaccurate passer. Completion percentage is the only common stat that correlates in some way with accuracy.

I don't get into these draft discussion very much because I'e never studied the QBs nearly enough to form an intelligent opinion. Some people say Allen will be great. Some say it's Darnold. Some say it's Rosen. Some say it's Mayfield. Some say Jackson. Some say Rudolph. One or more of those opinions will turn out to be correct, and several likely will turn out to be wrong, and there is no way to tell who's right from any of these discussions. However, I do think a few things: A lot of the metrics keep pointing to Mayfield. Doesn't mean he's the guy, but I'm sure none of the teams looking for a QB is overlooking him. There is only one reason Mayfield will fall in the draft, and it's the same reason any of these other guys may fall in the draft: teams with access to a lot of film, data, interviews, etc. will all decide that the guy has enough questions about him not to merit a pick in the top 5 or 10. Parcells and QBase put a lot of weight on QBs graduating from college, starting for three years, posting a lot of wins, as well as accuracy. For whatever reason, it's apparently the case that very few guys who started two years or less turn out to be great in the NFL. Newton has come closest, and Flacco is the only other one who's had any substantial success of any kind. I'm confused and frustrated, and like Logic, I'm finding it nerve-wracking waiting for the draft.

Did I disagree with what you said about strong arms? I didn't say anything about Josh Allen's accuracy, but keep on guessing.

You're right. But rober's fundamental point is true. The one thing that all the greats have is accuracy. Not big arms, not mobility, not size. What they all have is accuracy.

Brady, more than anything else, is accurate. And the QB in the draft who gets high grades in accuracy is Baker Mayfield.

ALWAYS continue reading a Meanie post.

Meanie Well I hadn't seen this before and I'm so glad I got back to it. It's a great combination of personal memories, commentary on religion and humor. I couldn't stop laughing at the sentence that said "Mostly I've been focused on free agency...." Incredible juxtaposition. You have a way of making your stories personal and humorous and touching. It made me love your mother. I'm not Catholic. I enjoyed reading all the posts from Catholics who can relate to your story. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences.

Two years after they drafted EJ they bet on Taylor. Most teams make only one bet at a time. Bills have made a lot of bad bets. Losman Edwards Fitz EJ Taylor

It depends on what you mean by mistake. Everyone agrees that EJ hasn't become a useful NFL starter, so by that measure he was a mistake. But the Bills needed a qb and they had to get the best one they could. They were going to take SOMEONE. Could Nix have traded down and still gotten the guy he wanted? I don't know, but if he could have, them that was a mistake. But the EJ draft is exactly what I'm talking about. You need a qb, you see a guy with potential but with problems. You take him. In five years either the guy is good or he's another one of those guys who make up the 50% Bust rate in the first round. In other words, teams overdraft qbs, because betting on one is better than not betting.

Cambo Thanks for the post. A lot of provocative thoughts, and I think there's more truth there than people recognize. Your qb analysis is as good as anyone else. I think your analysis of the draft will go or should go is spot on. The Giants are the key.

Well if you read the article or some of the posts here you'd see that NO ONE, including the people who wrote the art I cle, thinks there's an1-1 correlation. I missed all of that. Scapulars? I'll have to come here more often. As for Meanie's post, I do think the pros are several steps ahead of us when it comes to guessing. The problem in the qb department is that if your team needs a qb, you have to take chances on guys. On a Losman, an Edwards, a Manuel. You have take someone. The simple fact is that it appears that there are only ten or twelve guys on the planet who can really master the position and there are 32 teams looking for QB's. So they take guys hoping they're own evaluation turns to be wrong.

Read what they say about Darnold. Surprisingly, very few guys who have started only two years in college have made it in the NFL, and the ones that did make in the pros had much better production in college than Darnold. Cam Newtons stats in college blow away Darnold.