Shaw66

Yes. The Wall of Fame isn't the Hall of Fame. You don't have to have the best career in the history of the franchise to get on the Wall. You have to have been a transcendent Buffalo Bill, a person who occupies a special place in the fan psyche. That's why Bob Kalsu is there. That's why Daryl Talley is there. And that's why Fred will be there.

I agree completely with the OP. Keeping that in mind, I'm sure we all can agree the Bills should trade up at any cost to get Josh Allen.

Nice post Metz. I know practically nothing about these guys, but I know what I think is important. Accuracy and decision making. I wouldn't taken Allen anywhere in the top half of the first round because, as you day, he hasn't shown he's a good decision maker and regardless of what you say about not throwing to running backs, 56% is scary. Carson Wentz showed in college what he had. Allen didnt, and I think that makes him a big gamble.

I think I recall what you say - that there were several non-attributed comments from people saying they were gone. And I know the Bills would never say, but stuff leaks sometimes.

How do you know he had the power to call the pick? I think he did have some power, but I don't think the Bills ever have said how it was handled. And in any case, MD had to rely on Whaley and Whaley's team. McD wasn't going to do his own independent evaluation of Mahomes and, if it was contrary to Whaley's analysis, jump on it. The m,ore I think about it, I think McD wanted to save the draft capital for 2018 so he and the new GM could have the flexibility they had this year. And, by the way, I think it's likely Whaley knew going into the draft that he was done after the draft. I can imagine McD vetoing that move and forcing the trade back.

I agree. It's just very clear that if you're looking for a QB you have to look for one at the top of the draft, and when you're near the top you must take your shot. It just happened that the years they took Marcell and Sammy there wasn't a good QB to go after, but last year there was.

Yeah, I think it's pretty tough to hang the first round decision last year on McDermott. I have to believe that he was in control, at least in the sense that he had veto power. I don't know if he power to actually make the decision. But even if he did have the power, he's working off all the data and evaluations that Whaley and Whaley's people did, and he pretty much had to trust that. If Whaley didn't have Mahomes or Watson at or near 10, he wasn't going to do it. I think more importantly, it's now clear that McDermott had a total rebuild in mind. Given that's what he was thinking, then he probably decided to trade back so the new GM (I'm sure he knew Whaley would be gone after the draft) would have more draft capital to shape the team he and McD want. In other words, the trade back to 29 was the first step in a rebuild that McDermott knew would happen over the next two years.

I agree. They know what the Giants want, they know what the Colts want, they know what Broncos, Bears, Bucs, Raiders want. They've talked to 'em all. Some of them are probably too pricey, some of them have possible deals shaped up with the Bills and are waiting to see if the Bills call on draft day. Beane knows which guy(s) he wants and how much he's willing to give up for each. He might be willing to pay the price to go to 6 for one QB but only willing to pay the price to go to 9 for another. By now, Beane has the makings of a plan in place for how he's going to do this. He knows what deals are out there to be had, and he knows which QBs, if any, he likes enough to move up.

Not to put you down, but there isn't anything new in that article. Whaley described the process in general on several occasions, and not just about this deal. That's how GMs do it - they talk often about what they're looking for and what they made be willing to do, and as things solidify they get closer to committing. Then, when the time is right, usually on draft day when the team moving up knows their guy is still on the board, they do it.

Well, if Mahomes is as good as they say, and they seem to be pretty sure about it, Bills should have taken Mahomes last year, let him learn behind Taylor, and the Bills already would be all set.

I guess. My post was pretty innocuous I thought.

What's wrong with my posts?

Right. It's the talent of the leader and the character of the men.

I think it's much a more about coaching than players. The example I always give about two generals with armies of 100,000 soldiers. I don't care at all which general has the best soldier, or the ten best soldiers, or even the 100 best soldiers. I want the best general. Why is it that when Cordy Glen goes down, Dawkins steps in and does fine? Two reasons: (1), the difference in talent is miniscule. They're both big, strong guys in their physical primes. Compared to all of the men in the world their age, they are in the top one tenth of one percent and size and physical ability, and the difference between them isn't great. (2) They aren't asked to do things they can't. They're just asked to execute physical maneuvers efficiently and consistently. When you have good athletes, they all can do that IF they're taught properly and they haev the work ethic to become excellent at executing things that aren't beyond their abilities. Do you want the BEST offensive tackle? Sure, but that's icing the cake. Teams win with lots of average guys just - are you ready, all you Belichick fans? - doing their job. The coaches know what they want the players to to do, and they get them to do it consistently. Once you have decent NFL talent, it all about coaching and character.

Marcell Dareus is your answer. He was one of the five most talented guys in the league at his position, and McDermott didn't want him? Was he a felon? No. Was he a drug addict. No, at least not seriously. Did he put his teammates first? No. Did he do his job every play? No. Did he work every day to be as good as he can be? No. Did Chris Hogan have the right answer to all of those questions? Yes, and if McDermott had been the coach when Hogan was in Buffalo, Hogan would STILL be in Buffalo. Belichick wants guys with those traits, and McDermott does, too. I say it over and over. Talent is over-rated. (Again, we're excluding the QB here.) Do you need some guys with special talent here and there? Sure. But look at Hyde and Poyer. They're perfect examples. Those guys aren't outstanding safeties, not premier guys every team is drooling over. They are like most players in the league - in terms of talent, they were in the top 5 percent in college. In other words, they ALL have the size, speed and strength to play in the NFL. The question is what do they do with it? And what they do with it is a matter of character. Hogan has it, Dareus doesn't. Now, you can have a Mario Williams every once in a while who is SO outstanding that he can be great without the character McDermott is looking for, but there are very few of those guys. A good QB and 52 solid NFL-level players will win a lot of games for you. Yes, you say, but you can stand a few with less than perfrect character. Well, how good were the Bengals when they had 8 felons on the roster? Lotta talent, but they sucked. In his book GM, the Giants gm said you can have one prima donna on your team. When you have two, you're in trouble, when you have three you can't win. He said the Giants had three prima donnas - Strahan, Barber and someone else. Strahan came to an agreement with Coughlin and stopped being a prima donna, and they got rid of one of the other two. As soon as that happened, they won the Super Bowl. I'd love to hear McDermott on the subject, too. I'd like to know what he looks for. I'm sure he'll tell you he doesn't want guys who are problems. Saban will tell you the same thing, Belichick will. I heard Jim Calhoun say it about basketball. It's hard enough to win with good guys on your team; it's harder still if you have problems.

Sometimes I feel sorry for guys who post things like this and then get dumped on by everyone saying "that's ridiculous." Well, THAT'S RIDICULOUS! Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, consistently puts you in the playoffs from any position except an outstanding quarterback. Nobody. As in N-O-B-O-D-Y. Not Bruce Smith, not J.J. Watt, not Megatron, not Sammy Watkins (certainly not Sammy Watkins), not Troy Polamalu, not anybody. Now, if you're point is that there's nothing more to say about the QBs, I agree. But this year, for the first time in decades, the Bills are in position to get almost anyone they want in the draft AND there are good quarterbacks to be had. It's foolish to expect that people will stop talking about it.

Exactly zero Super Bowl rings on that list.

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.