SoTier

Peddling hope without substance is what the Bills have been doing for more than a decade. I see the 2018 draft as underscoring how similar the current regime really is to previous ones.

Just because a team NEEDS a great QB, doesn't mean that it can find one in the draft when it needs one ... and drafting a QB in the first round doesn't make him a better prospect, only a more expensive one. The Bills essentially paid a BMW price for a Hyundai Elantra. Allen has not demonstrated that he has the skill set to become even a modestly successful NFL QB much less either Roethlisberger and Wentz, both of whom dominated their collegiate conferences and became starters as rookies. That's simply bull ****. Well, the last time I looked, it takes time, usually years, to determine if any draft pick is a keeper. Of course, we know from past experience that it's not possible for the Bills regime du jour to whiff on a draft pick, especially when drafting a first round QB to excite the Bills fanbase, and especially a few days after the draft. Just like the little kid who puts his hands over his ears because he doesn't want to hear a scolding ...

It's a little early in the game to declare the Bills FO a winner yet ... sort of like getting excited because the Bills have kicked a FG on the game's opening drive.

How dare someone in the media question the Bills for using 2 first, 2 second, and 2 third round picks to get a nice MLB and a project QB who is unlikely to be able to start as a rookie and is a longshot to become even a modest success.

Beane & Company fell for the lure of a big QB with a big arm.

How dare you suggest that the Bills organization is doing essentially the same thing they've been doing for the last 20 years! That the Bills have replaced all the old bodies with new ones proves that. Success is foreordained because the Bills have just drafted their messiah. //sarcasm off

In 3 or 4 years, we'll probably be about in the same place we were at this time in 2017, with a new HC and maybe a new GM. It has nothing to do with Buffalo GMs failing to make bold moves, especially when both Donahoe and Whaley made bold moves, and everything to do with the Bills organization's continuing lack of commitment to winning, but continue to tell yourself differently if it makes you feel better.

And the year after that it will be a new HC and maybe a new GM, and the Bills will return to Square One once again. The Bills used 5 picks in the first three rounds and got 1 very nice LB, but not the best LB on the board. They left him (Roquan Smith) there for the Bears to take and instead gambled on a project QB that they traded up to get. How does this translate into a "plan" to build "the defense into a meat grinder"? IOW McCarron is an upgrade over Taylor because he's not Taylor ... just like Kolb was an upgrade over Fitzpatrick because he wasn't Fitzpatrick. ROTFLMAO. Stoking your unbridled optimism is exactly what the Bills' plan is for 2018 ... and 2019 ... and 2020 ... and evermore...

Well, that's what the Bills want you to believe so you'll continue to fill the stadium, buy the merchandise, pressure state and local officials to give more concessions on any stadium issues, etc. The reality is that the "new" plan is essentially just the "old" plan in a shiny new wrapper with a different name. It's simply a reprise of 2013.

Wasn't that the reason that the Bills traded Taylor? To clear the field for whatever rookie QB they drafted no matter how poorly he performed? AJ McCarron has started fewer than 10 games in his entire NFL career. Peterman's one start was a disaster, and he didn't redeem himself in his other appearances. The Bills' actions in 2018 are eerily similar to what they did in 2013 to clear the field for EJ Manuel: replace a serviceable veteran QB, bring in a backup likely to be significantly worse than the former starter, and then draft a project first round QB to excite fans. I really thought after the events of last year that the Bills had actually changed their corporate culture to put the winning ahead of profit, but while the names and faces have changed, the "Bills way" apparently continues unabated. That's what is depressing about the Allen pick: for all the talk about "process" and other bull ****, it's just the same old, same old for the Bills. I hope Allen is successful but I'm not optimistic about his future because first round project QBs simply don't do well in the NFL ... or about the Bills' prospects about becoming a regular playoff contender.

Whistling past the graveyard ...

If I were Gettleman, I'd have taken the best player in the draft over QBs who all had big question marks about them, too. Give Eli some help in the form of protection, a running game, and a defense, and he's about as clutch as they come as his two SB victories over the Pats demonstrates. The Giants have been busily collecting the pieces to surround Eli all off-season, and Saquan is another one -- probably a big piece.

A lot of Bills fans felt the same way about Ryan Fitzpatrick, too ...

Because Allen was unimpressive in college except for his physical attributes. On the important factors that separate successful NFL QBs from successful collegiate QBs, Allen is behind the 8 ball. His college career was not particularly impressive despite playing against competition that's most charitably described as "weak" ... and the Bills not only traded up to get him, but were apparently willing to trade away more simply on a hope that he becomes the first "raw" QB prospect taken in the first round to be successful in the NFL in decades.

What, exactly, makes Allen a "generational talent"? He's got size, a big arm, and some mobility. Whoopty-doo. So did any number of collegiate QBs who failed in the NFL. It takes more than that, and Allen hasn't demonstrated that he's got more. As all three have demonstrated in their careers, they are decent NFL QBs who can take their teams to the playoffs with the right personnel around them and can even win the Super Bowl in the right circumstances, but they're not in the same class as Rodgers or Brees or even guys like Roethlisberger or Stafford. Actually, I believe that the Carp did make the playoffs in 2015 or 2016 BTW.

And therein is my problem with Allen: we traded up for somebody we have to hope develops. I would have been much more accepting of taking him at #12 than at #7. I just think that Beane has set the franchise back significantly unless Allen comes through and is at least as good as Flacco, Dalton or Tannehill.

Allen, like Losman and Manuel, is a project considered "raw", and the track record of first round "projects" is terrible. Few, if any, first round projects in the last 30 years or so have been successful. I'm not optimistic about him developing into a successful NFL QB.

Apparently your "many years" don't include the JP Losman and EJ Manuel eras.

What do you know about anything that I should "trust you" about anything? The top six picks went pretty much as I had expected all along, so my thoughts have more merit than yours. My thoughts are that if the Bills didn't panic, they miscalculated and paid more than they should have for Allen. IMO, Allen would have been there at #12. Even if Arizona had traded up, they would have taken Rosen anyways. The only 2 QBs went in the top 5, to Cleveland and Jests, making all the soothsayers claiming that 4 of the first 5 picks would be QBs look like fools. Darnold wasn't the #1 choice. The Giants went for Barkley rather than a QB, as anybody with half a brain or wasn't hyping QBs figured they would. Cleveland wanted too much for their #4, and with no takers, they went defense. Denver was never looking for another QB since they just signed Keenum and still have former first round pick Paxton Lynch on his rookie QB. They had worked out the outlines of a trade with the Bills earlier, but when they had the chance to grab Chub, they grabbed him. QB was about the ONLY position that Indy didn't need, and they grabbed blue chip guard Nelson. Nobody knows how things would have turned out if the Bills hadn't traded up to #7, but it's very possible that if the Bills hadn't traded up, neither would Arizona. Contrary to the hype, there apparently weren't many teams other than Buffalo and Arizona really interested in trading up to take Allen or Rosen. The idea that Miami was interested in taking a QB was the same kind of nonsense that was spouted by the fools claiming Denver would take a QB since they have Tannehill. Contrary to the BS being spouted by the media mavens hyping QBs in the draft, his HC likes him a lot. He doesn't have "durability issues", either. He missed 3 games in 2016 and all of last season with a knee, but starting every one of Miami's games from 2012-2015. More importantly, the Carp have so many holes that they simply don't have the luxury of drafting a QB in the first round as "heir apparent" to an decent starting QB who's only been in the league 6 years.

I think the interior OL is a bigger concern than the tackles at this point. Luckily, interior OL are positions where it's relatively common for Day 3 picks to turn into decent or better players. I also think that the number of trades in the first round suggests that there may be limited top end talent in this draft, especially at some positions like OL, and teams went up and got the best ones early. Usually interior OLers (centers/guards) who actually go in the first round go in the 20s. Nelson went in the top ten and Price went in the top fifteen I think. A right tackle went in the top ten as well, which is not nearly as common as left tackles going high. Apparently, none of this year's WRs were particularly well regarded, so maybe it's just as well that the Bills look to Day 3 or FA for help there.

IOW, the OP doesn't actually know anything more than anybody else posting here, and is relying on wishful thinking.

It seems that way to me, too, but I'm not all that worried about the having to settle for at #12 -- which seems to be the OP's gist -- if they pick outside the top five or even the top ten. I think only 2 teams drafting before them are just about guaranteed to take a QB: Brownies and Jests. If the Bills don't take a QB at #12 or sooner, my guess is that the guy they wanted went in the top four, and they don't like any of the other QBs enough to take one of them at #12 or higher.

Trading up for a QB might not be the best thing, either, but trading up for a player at another position seems outright foolish unless it was for a consensus #1 pick who happens to be an edge rusher like Bruce Smith. If 4 or 5 QBs go in the top 11 (highly unlikely), the Bills should have a real chance to grab somebody like Smith or even Chubb or Nelson without moving up.

I'm not a great fan of moving up, and if Beane can't/won't move up, that's okay with me. I answered the specific question the OP asked: what if the Bills don't trade up and at #12 only have Allen, Jackson, and Rudolph on their board. That's gross incompetence IMO because a GM and his staff have to be prepared for virtually all plausible scenarios. Having 3 QBs go in the first 11 picks is a very plausible scenario. It's even plausible that 4 QBs could go in the first 11 picks. In either case, there are probably at least 2 or 3 blue chip prospects at other positions who fell because teams gambled on prospects who aren't nearly as good just because they want a first round QB. A team has to be prepared to take JJ Watt over Jake Locker or Blaine Gabbert if that's the way the draft works out.

Fire Beane ... and maybe McDermott, too. At #12, a team needs to have more options for that pick than 1 position, especially when 1 of those options is a 2nd or 3rd rounder.