Shaw66

This is a good point. Both are good football players. They won't make you scream at the TV to get those guys off the field. You just won't hear Troy Aikman talking about them as difference makers.

Brown is a student of the game and works hard. I think his dad played college and maybe pro ball and Preston has been watching film since he was eight. His problem is that he lacks premier speed and quickness. He's often a half step late on his drops into zone coverage, a half step late to the hole. He makes the right reads but doesn't get there in time. McDermott's defense demands speed from the middle linebacker, so he wasn't a fit. In earlier seasons I didn't notice that Browns lack of quickness was such a problem, so depending on you scheme he may be fine. I think Glenn is overrated, but that's just me. He strikes me as a tweener. Not a big road grading tackle but not am elite pass blocker either. Solid, but not special. He was traded because a rookie taken in the second round (like Glenn) was just as good, despite his inexperience. And there's his health. Bills fans tired of the endless news about him in and out of the lineup. Maybe he's okay now. If he is, you'll be happy to have him, but he's not Orlando Pace.

Maybe, but I think you're confusing having a good running back with having a good running GAME. The fundamental reason why teams shouldn't burn igh picks on running backs is that tou can have, and many teams do have, a good running game without a great running back. Contrast that with QBs and the passing game. You can't be consistently good at passing without the right qb. It's the shiny new toy problem. GMS have to resist the urge to take the guy who looks good and focus on the guy who helps build towards long term success. That's why so many offensive linemen go in the first round. I think that's a good example of all of the little things that breed success. Staff like that never shows up on Stat sheets. It doesn't make a bad qb a good qb. But it makes a difference in team building.

Who is Walter Peyton? Some guy they cloned from Peyton Manning and Walter Payton? Now, THAT guy I'd take number one. Now that is REALLY random.

That's what I heard, too. A guy in charge who shares what he can and tells you when he can't. We can learn something about his job by listening to him tell us what he's thinking. On top of that, what he says makes sense. That's REALLY refreshing.

That's the way Rex Ryan talked. The problem was that he thought it meant something.

How many of you who say Beane was lying in his press conference would stand in front of him and say he was lying?

Do I think they'll trade up? Yes. Do I think Beane is lying about not knowing if he will trade up? No. In my experience, I've heard very few GMs talk in such an open and straightforward manner as Beane does. Here's what he said: I haven't focused on the draft. Until now I've been focused on free agency. We evaluate potential free agents more or less the way we put together a draft board, figuring out what each guy is worth to us. That's what I've been doing. Now I will begin to focus on the draft. I don't know nearly enough about any of the top players, and I will by the time the draft comes. We will put a value on each guy. We haven't done that. When we know how good each guy is, then we can talk to teams to find out what they want for their picks and we can decide whether we think it's worth what they want to get the guy we we want. I don't know whether there's a deal to be made or not, because I don't enough about the players and I don't know yet what teams at the top of the draft want. What part of that don't you believe? The question no one asked, which he would have ducked, is given what you know now about the QBs, what do you think the chances are you'll trade up? I'd say 80%. I'd guess he'd say the same. That's what I'd like to know. Here's the thing: I don't think any one of the rookies has a resume that looks like Luck's or Newton's coming out of college. None of these guys has the same high probability of success that those guys had. If I'm right about that, then the teams that need QBs aren't going to be so excited about trading up. And the teams that are up there already that need QBs may not be so anxious to roll the dice. Look at the extreme year, when EJ and Geno were generally the two highest rated guys coming out. There was no stampede to trade up; in fact, as you know, the Bills traded DOWN and still got the guy they wanted. So maybe Beane isn't all that impressed with these guys. Maybe he actually IS content to sit at 12 and take the best QB left on the board. Maybe he likes that better than coughing up his 22d pick and a second round pick. That doesn't seem to be a completely crazy prospect. On the other hand, how likely is it that he already knows he loves a guy so much he's going to the top of the draft to get him? Looking at the rookies we're talking about, I don't think it's very likely. In other words, I think he's telling the truth when he says he doesn't know if he's trading up.

Actually, it's worse than that, because there are very few $30 million QBs on the market. Cousins this year. Garoppolo, if you were quick enough to trade for him. Last one before that was Brees. (Peyton was a special case.) If I So when you have the draft pick, I think you MUST take the QB. It may be the only chance you get, other than getting lucky. That's why when the Bills passed on Cousins, it was about 95% certain that they were trading up, and now that they moved up to 12, it's just about as certain, maybe more so, that they're moving up again. You have to make your move when you have the opportunity. The Bills decided that Cousins wasn't the opportunity, so it must be the draft. As I said somewhere this morning, if I'm the Browns I'm not taking a running back in the first round at all. But if I really want to take the running back, the only way I'm doing it is if I can trade up from 4 to 3 or 2. If I sit at 4, I run the risk that I'm getting my THIRD choice at QB or I'm losing to Barkely to someone. Seems to me the Colts are either taking a QB or trading out to someone who wants one.

Man, I don't agree at all. Chris Ivory is Fred Jackson. Hard-nosed, good in the hole, good after first contact. Statistically, he had two subpar (for him) seasons at Jacksonville, but so did their starting running backs. As we know, Bortles was sometimes their best ball carrier. Yes, he could be burned out, but I don't think so. This will be his 8th season, and he's averaged only about 160 carries per season. Plus Cadet and Jones, Bills are fine at running back. If McCoy goes down, it's a problem of course. But you're not going to have a McCoy-type backup.

I haven't been around and will jump back in here. I agree with both of you that would be nuts not to take a QB at #1. Where I will disagree with you is taking Barkely at 4. Now, let me say I've essentially never seen Barkely, but I gather he's really special. Still, I'm really in the camp that running backs simply are not that important. A couple of points that I've made before: 1. Who are the best running backs in the last 15 years? Tomlinson and Peterson, probably. McCoy actually may be in the conversation. How many championships have they won? I think the answer to that is none. 2. Which leads to a broader point, which is which positions have the most impact on winning? QB is first. Running back is NOT second. Maybe offensive tackle, maybe edge rusher. But not long snapper, not punter, not running back. I don't care how good Barkely may be, if Kahlil Mack is at 4, I'm taking him ahead of Barkely. Actually, the same thing is true for receivers - the Bills should have taken Kahlil Mack instead of Sammy. 3. Meanie's made the point before about rookie salaries. From a cap management point of view, a stud offensive tackle on his rookie contract is a much better cap management value than a stud running back. The best tackles are $12-15 million, the best running backs are $6-8 million. That's $6-7 million of cap room you have if grab a star tackle in the draft, over what you'd have if you bought a tackle in the free agent market (assuming you could find one). The Bills have made all the drafting mistakes. They made the CJ Spiller mistake, they made the Watkins mistake. Don't waste high picks on running backs or receivers, don't trade up for anything except a quarterback. The Browns have been even better at it. A leading member, I might add.

I have seen very little of these guys, and I haven't studied anything written about them, but I agree about Rosen. The times I've watched him I've been really impressed with his poise and quick release. He looks to me like he really understands what's going on on the field, as it happens, and adjusts to it. My problem with him is his size. I think he's going to get snapped like a twig in the NFL. Mayfield is the other one I've seen with that kind of poise. Mayfield gets things done. There is not a guy I'm sold on. Five years from now Cousins might still be the best of all of them. But any of the four rookies has the potential to be a star, each for different reasons.

Offense, offense, offense. Where are this kind of guy on the offense? I know McDermott is going to get his guys on the defense. I think the defense will be a lot better this season. I'm worried about the offense.

Thsnks jp.

I agree with others that since they're building for the future, McCarron plus the draft pick plus the lower cap hit is the way to go. On top of that, Taylor's upside is pretty clear; McCarron's isn't. So there's a chance, slim though it may be, that McCarron could become your long-term solution. Moreover, by reducing the cap hit, etc., Bills may have left themselves in a position to force the Eagles to lower their price for Foles.

Right. Everyone wants to follow the Seahawks model: hit the jackpot on a rookie QB and you have 3-4 years of cap room to load up on talent. When you have a top 10 QB on a rookie contract, you have a lot of money to spend. You're paying a rookie running back the same thing as a rookie QB, but you have to spend a lot of your cap room on a QB.

I agree about how he's a McDermott-type guy. And thanks for the OP. It's interesting information. The starting job is McCarron's today. It will be up to Peterman and the rookie to take it, if they can. If Beane drafts well, the rookie will take in 2018 or 2019. If McCarron is all that the OP says he is, the rookie will have to be pretty good to do it.

I think there are a few things going on here. 1. Players could see a fundamental difference in the 2017 Bills from earlier years. Didn't fold down the stretch. Team discipline. 2. Players listen to other players. They could tell, we all could tell, that McDermott had created an environment that players wanted to play in. 3. Players can tell when they're getting BSd, and they don't hear any BS coming from McBeane. 4. When you have the first three, then you look at the owners. The owners look like this, too. Disciplined, create an open and supportive environment, no BS. When you see all that, you believe the team will win. That's what sells.

McCarron is an interesting puzzle to think about. He might actually be good. But I doubt it. Here are some positive and negative thoughts about him: 1. He couldn't take the job from Dalton. Negative. 2. He had a Wonderlic score of 22. Negative. 3. When he filled in for Dalton he looked effective. Positive, particularly when you consider that the Bengals have been more or less dysfunctional for years. 4. He's a team-oriented, system kind of guy. Positive. 5. He's cheap. Positive. I would have paid for Cousins or Keenum. I might make a real hard run at Foles when he's a free agent. All those other guys? Save your money. But the inexpensive solution. At a bare minimum, it's fun watching Beane at work. Keep reading him. You'll get it after a while.

Thanks. This is an interesting point. Another validation of what we all thing we're seeing - total competence in the GM's office. For me, the big question is whether the coaching will be as good as the player personnel activity. On defense, I'm okay. I think McD knows how to build a good defense, and I think he and Beane are getting the guys who fit. The offense, on the other hand, is what I'm worried about. Offense in the NFL these days requires creativity and flexibility. We didn't see that in Buffalo last year, and we just have to wait and see what we get out of Daboll.

You make me laugh. Thanks.

Nice post. I think you describe him well. It's a quibble, but you chose the wrong words when you said he doesn't care about the fan experience or selling tickets. Of course he cares. He's all about team, and the broader team he works for cares about those things, so he does too. The thing about a guy like him is that he doesn't let caring about it change the way he does his job. He knows his role on the broader team is build the best 53-man team he can, and he knows that by doing that the other things will take care of themselves. You're right about Tyrod. I just got lazy writing. Tyrod was a short cut, and short cuts generally get you in trouble. Doing things and doing things well are two different things. We're all excited because Beane is doing things. Whether he's doing them well is a question that likely won't be answered for at least a couple of years. If three years from now Cousins is a top five quarterback and the kid we draft is a bust, no one is going to be calling Beane a good GM. I like what I'm seeing, but wins are what matter, not just doing things.

You didn't give a thought to the possibility that Doug Marrone might win the Super Bowl last year? I did. But I agree with you. I wish Taylor well. I hope he succeeds. I hope the Bills do better.

Thanks. You're right, in terms of the Bills. But the success of guys you get rid of is a risk in that it impacts how your boss evaluates you. I think Taylor has talent, and I think the right coach may get a lot more production out of him. I don't think that will happen, but if it does, Beane won't look so smart. I've always though Ivory is a real tough back. He's a Fred Jackson kind of guy. Guts, strength, shifty, a real pro. I thing he'll be great spelling Shady.

I didn't say he was coming. What I said is that the Bills COULD be in the mix if they wanted. They had the cap room. And they had the right package to sell. I also said that the Vikings were the most likely landing spot. I don't think Cousins wanted NYC and I don't think he wanted to go out west. I think he wanted the midwest. If we can believe the report from Sal or someone, the Bills simply weren't interested in writing a big check for a free agent QB. They want a guy out of the draft. Now the question is who is that guy?