SoTier
-
Posts
5,595 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SoTier
-
-
51 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:
I said it in another thread (no clue which one since there are a million of them on here), this FO will definitely be on the hot seat in fans eyes as a failure if they don't aggressively go after a QB. Last year, kick the can to this year, trade TT, only sign AJ, allow a division rival to upstage you - nope they will get roasted - rightfully so. Also whether they like it or not, just as the no playoffs in 17 years vs Terry's 3 years (only counting his ownership period) will not erase the failures of every administration after Polian's to secure a franchise guy.
You already see them getting hammered on twitter. Saturday they posted a Happy St Patty's day tweet and every comment was this is what you are posting? The Jets just got pick 3, you better get to 2 and not screw up QB. Almost every tweet is like that, you can safely assume those comments have been filtered back up (not that they need to listen to the fans, but the point is being made).
Can you imagine them trying to sell us Rudolph or Jackson? I can't...
Frankly, I don't want the Bills drafting a QB just to placate the idiot fan base. They did that all during Ralph Wilson's ownership, and the result was a few years of almost winning it all bookended by seemingly endless years of mediocrity or worse. I want the Bills drafting to build a winning team. If they don't like the QBs in this draft enough to pay a ransom for any of them, that's fine with me. Use the picks to build the rest of the team, which they'll have to do sooner or later anyways.
22 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:No but McD was and he was calling the shots...Beane and McD are tied at the hip
Another ASSUMPTION without any kind of proof.
15 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:I dont disagree with anything youve said here. My point wasnt that Watson is so great. My point is that they purposely ignored ALL qb prospects last year until McD had his GM here.
Well guess what? McD's GM is here now. So it's time to go hard at a QB.
Actually, only Trubiskey was considered a true first round prospect. Both Mahomes and Watson had significant question marks that made them less than great prospects. If they were that great, they'd have gone in the top 5. That they went in the first round doesn't change the evaluations; it just proves that two teams were desperate enough to gamble a lot reaching for very risky prospects.
BTW, will you be around if the the Bills "go hard at a QB" who turns out to be a Joey Harrington or Vince Young? About half of all QBs taken after the #1 pick bust.
-
2 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:
Then all those moves going back to trading down in the last draft, were for nothing.
You ASSUMED they traded back to get a QB even though Beane wasn't even the GM yet.
You know what you get when you ASSUME, dude.
-
4 hours ago, slaphappy said:
Need a list of can't miss prospects that a team moved up to draft in the top 5 that ended up busting. Taking one at 12 isn't the same as giving away the farm to take "the guy".
Since 2000 ...
2004 ... the Bills traded up to get JP Losman
2005 ... the Redskins traded up to get Jason Campbell (yeah, he was a bust ... if he hadn't been a first rounder, teams wouldn't have started him)
2009 ... the Jests traded up to take Mark "Butt Fumble" Sanchez and the Bucs traded up to take Josh Freeman
2012 ... the Redskins traded up to take Robert Griffin III
Sanchez was a #5 pick and Griffin was taken at #2. Lots of fans make the excuse for Griffin that his injury wrecked his career but the reality is that he never mastered any of the skills QBs need in order to be successful. He tried to continue to play the way he did as a rookie, and he couldn't do that physically any more. His inability to master the cerebral aspects of being a QB doomed Griffin more than his injury.
-
33 minutes ago, ALF said:
“We had some inconsistency at right tackle, obviously,” Gruden said. “Newhouse, he had some moments where he played well. He had some moments where he obviously struggled.”
According to Pro Football Focus, Newhouse allowed 38 quarterback pressures last season, 13 more than left tackle Donald Penn, 16 more than right guard Gabe Jackson, 21 more than left guard Kelechi Osemele and 35 more than center Rodney Hudson.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/12/raiders-cut-starting-right-tackle-marshall-newhouse/
4 minutes ago, Magox said:Bandit, you know I respect your opinion but if memory serves me correctly you stated that Ducasse may be the worst Guard in the league. Well, I'm not saying he's good but he definitely was pretty close to average last year. Not just according to PFF but from everything that I saw from him. He would whiff on some blocks and he would also make key blocks. In other words he was not nearly as bad as you thought he'd be. https://www.profootballfocus.com/nfl/players/vladimir-ducasse/5586
This Marshall guy, I really have no idea what he has done, but according to PFF he has been poor. Not that PFF is the be-all-end-all but it is a metric.
PFF's methodology for rating OL play is seriously flawed. I don't know what their problem is, whether it is how they determine blocking assignments or how they define sacks, pressures, success etc or how much weight they give various elements in their algorithm, but something is off because their ratings don't often match the results on the field.
PFF rated all of the Bills starting OLers last season as average or better IIRC. They rated the Bills OL as a top ten unit. That simply wasn't true. The OL was not better in giving Taylor time to throw or opening holes for Shady in 2017 than it had been in 2016, and they were only an average OL in 2016. All of the OLers except Ducasse struggled with the new blocking scheme in the first half of the season, and it was reflected in generally poor individual performances. It was in the second half of the season that the OLers started playing better.
Ducasse has never, ever been anything but a backup -- and not always a particularly good one -- over the course of his 8 year NFL career. Then he comes to Buffalo and suddenly becomes a starter and helps elevate an average OL missing its starting LT to top ten in the league. If Ducasse were a young player on only his second team, that scenario might be at least plausible but it says to me that the stat boys at PFF are full of excrement.
Newhouse has experience playing both tackle positions, which is a good depth player for a team to have. As long as he's a backup and not a regular starter, he'd make a good signing. Fans should worry if he were penciled in as the starting RT.
-
58 minutes ago, Elite Poster said:
Yes, a chart that has Johnny Football, Blake Bortles, and Paxton Lynch in the top 10, is why we should settle for QB. The stats exist and it's basically just arguing with a wall now, you hit 3x as much in the first few picks as you do the entire rest of the draft.
We are one of 2 teams since the 1970s that have not taken a QB top ten. Wonder why we had a drought and haven't done a damn thing in 20 years.
The 1970s, huh? Had to really stretch to find that choice tidbit.
When was the last time the Green Bay Packers drafted a QB in the top ten? At least 25 years ago because they got Rodgers at #24 and they traded for Favre who was a second rounder.
When was the last time the Pittsburgh Steelers drafted a QB in the top ten? I'm guessing it was back about 1970 when they took Terry Bradshaw because Roethlisberger was taken at #11. Oh, yeah, and the Stillers went to the SB with Neil O'Donnell IIRC, and they won playoff games with the likes of Bubby Brister and Kordell Stewart. The Vikings have been a playoff team far more often than the Bills since 1970, and they haven't taken a top ten QB in decades. The last first rounder I remember them taking was Trent Edwards-clone Christian Ponder in 2011.
-
7 hours ago, JerseyBills said:
I can get on board with everything Bills related. I'm not knowledgeable enough on cfb players to even post a mock but I definitely like the idea of sitting back or moving up to a spot that doesn't deplete all our draft capital, if it means drafting a highly coveted player.
My whole stance on QB is that you can ask 10 different members who have CFB knowledge and a case can be made for all of the big 5. I'm sure it's the same if you ask GM's and scouts,so I just don't see the justification in throwing away such quality draft capital when we can sit back , still get a QB , plus add 4-6 top 100 prospects. That's a recipe for short n long term success imo.
Not blowing your load on one player who has just as many question marks as the next QB, that doesn't equate to consistent success , or the team this young,bright staff has envisioned for the Bills.
This is what is concerning about this year's crop of QBs: there's no truly outstanding prospect. These QBs should have sorted themselves out in some kind of more or less static order this late in the game but that hasn't happened. Darnold appears to be a lukewarm choice as the best of a rather warty lot, all of whom have serious concerns. That suggests that these QBs are more the products of hype than of solid performance. Trading a lot of picks to get one of them may not be the best idea.
7 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:The Jets strategy may cause them problems the next two to three years. Us using that strategy would mean no franchise QB which would mean lots of 7-9 or 8-8 seasons until we get one, which could be a decade if we're very unlucky.
If they absolutely can't get one this year, trade back for picks next year and plan to draft somebody then.
We had a pretty good roster except for QB in Nix's last year and Whaley's first. What did it get us?
The Minnesota Vikings say "hi". In case you didn't notice, the Vikes almost went to the Super Bowl with an UDFA QB signed as a backup. Meanwhile, some teams with franchise QBs sucked or were mediocre like Baltimore, Cincinnati, Detroit, Oakland, San Diego, Tampa Bay, and Tennessee. It takes more than a QB to win football games.
Moreover, in recent years, there have been a significant number of "second tier" prospects that have turned out to be decent starters or better when given the same/similar opportunities usually only accorded first rounders: Andy Dalton, Tyrod Taylor, Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, Derek Carr, and Dak Prescott. I didn't include Nick Foles because he only had one great season, but maybe in the right system he could be one again, so he might be still another second tier prospect who worked out.
The Bills aren't doomed if they don't get one of the top QBs in this draft. It's not like there won't be a new crop of college QBs next year, and sometimes good things come to those who wait ... like the Patriots gambling a sixth round pick on Tom Brady in 2000 or Packers scooping up Aaron Rodgers late in the 2005 draft or Seattle grabbing Russell Wilson in the 3rd round in 2012. What the Bills need to do is keep their eyes open for promising QBs even if they think they already have one on the roster (they could always get a better one) rather than ignore QBs in the draft until they feel the need to draft one in the first round to placate the fan base.
-
2 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:
I agree - RW is cheap. I'm convinced it's Rosen - if you look at what Beane wants in a QB - it's him.
They deferred because McD was running the draft and he didn't trust the scouts & Whaley. His approach was to kick the can to this year after Beane came in and the replaced the scouting dept. He wasn't going to take a risk with a FO who was being shown the door.
If they took Watson or Mahomes last year, it would cost us no extra picks and is the equivalent of just one player busting out. Problem is they backed themselves into a corner right now in regards to QB. The cannot afford to half-ass it; that also doesn't mean reach, but it means to aggressively fix it - which is not kicking the can down the road, which is what we as a franchise continually do...
You know for a fact that the Bills deferred because McDermott "didn't trust the scouts & Whaley" despite the fact that the Bills took an OT and a WR in the 2nd round? Both Mahomes and Watson had serious enough flaws that made them risky picks even at #10, and since they've only started 8 between them, nobody knows whether either or both are keepers or busts.
-
55 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:
For me personally we haven't as a franchise sold out and gone after who we determined was "our" QB since what 1983 and JK wasn't even our first choice in RD 1....We historically and recently have never aggressively attacked that position - that is my problem...We keep kicking the can or taking who is there...
First off, that wasn't the way the Bills operated under Ralph Wilson's ownership. Profit was always more important than winning. I think that after some fumbling around, the Pegulas seem to have decided that they want to build a winner. Commitment to winning means that the team's brain trust has to draft smart, including not picking a QB just to pick a QB. We don't know which QBs, if any, the Bills FO covet enough to move up.
We assume that the Bills traded Glenn in order to move up to then trade up from there, but maybe they just traded Glenn because they liked the idea of picking 12th rather than 21st.
32 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:I'd wager that far more teams have found QBs successfully by taking who is there when their pick comes up rather than agressively " attacking" anything by moving up in the draft.
You'd win. If you count Goff and Wentz as hits, there are 3 real successes from trade up including Eli currently. OTOH, teams that found their guys by staying put are NE (Brady), Pittsburgh (Roethisberger), Green Bay (Rodgers), Atlanta (Ryan), Detroit (Stafford), Carolina (Newton), Cincinatti (Dalton), Indy (Luck), Miami (Tannehill), Seattle (Wilson), Jacksonville (Bortles), Oakland (Carr), Tampa Bay (Winston), Tennessee (Mariota), and Dallas (Prescott). So, currently, 15 teams found their current starting QBs by drafting them when their picks came up. Only 3 traded up to draft their QBs.
28 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:This also doe
s not mean to be stupid...
We had 2 shots last year and deferred. Watson looked good for a bit and Mahomes, well Andy Reid threw out Alex Smith and built what looks to be a very talented offense around him...We kicked the can and decided we wanted to go to the playoffs, traded TT and now have to be aggressive in finding the guy. We cannot afford to be passive this time...If we are, those who fail to understand history are doomed to repeat it...
Maybe the Bills deferred because they didn't like the QBs available. Mahomes and Watson have made all of 8 starts in the NFL together. The jury is still out on them.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, 1billsfan said:
More like...
Baker Mayfield = Colt McCoy
Josh Rosen = Sam Bradford
Lamar Jackson = DeShaun Watson
Sam Darnold = Tony Romo
Josh Allen = Kyle Boller
IMO, this 2018 class is no where near either the 1983 or 2004 QB draft classes. The expectations of this 2018 QB class never lived up to it's billing. If it did, then the Giants would be drafting a QB (which they won't be doing).
I don't think 2018 is even as good as 2012, much less 2004 or 1983. Lots of hype, not much substance, much like 2011.
I don't think the pros think as much of these QBs as the draft mavens pretend because so many of the teams at the top of the draft have been willing to consider trading back. If these kids were as good as advertised, nobody would be interested in trading back.
-
14 minutes ago, NewDayBills said:
The Bills didn't beat up on the Dolphins in the 90s because Kelly was a better QB than Marino. We beat up on the Dolphins because we had the superior team.
We have the opportunity to build a powerhouse. We could walk away with an elite LB, DT, C and add a speedy WR plus depth at OT and CB.
The Jets will have the better QB for sure, but we will have the better team 10x over.
The Jests MIGHT have the better QB. Historically, most draft classes have yielded 1 quality starting QB with occasional classes yielding a second decent starter. Most starting QBs, even supposed franchise QBs, resemble Jay Cutler, Andy Dalton, Joe Flacco or Ryan Tannehill more than they do future HOFers like Brees, Rivers or Rodgers.
Obviously, a lot of Bills fans, especially the advocates of trading up at any cost, have failed to consider that about half of all first round QB prospects are more likely to bust than become franchise QBs by any reasonable definition.
10 minutes ago, The_Dude said:If they don’t credibly fix the QB position this year I’m done. I’m done. I’m 33 and I’m done wasting my time on this ****.
Adios. Arrividerci. Au revoir. Sayonara.
-
2
-
-
34 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
You didn't answer my question. You keep restating the result we all saw.
Foles isn't a guy off the street by the way. He had success with a very different Eagles teams several years ago.
He had ONE.GOOD.YEAR. Chip Kelly came into the NFL in 2013 and was supposed to be the best thing since white bread, and Nick Foles came out of nowhere as a sophomore to be his poster boy ... until the DCs around the league figured out what Kelly was doing and how to stop it. Foles was lousy in Philly in 2014 as Kelly's smoke and mirrors game was stifled. He was traded to St Louis as part of the Sam Bradford trade and sucked. He turned up in KC in 2016 as a backup, and signed with Philly in 2017 as a backup.
Foles has only had success in a certain kind of offense, one that features lots of read/pass options. In order for him to have success with Philly after Wentz went down, the coaches had to install and use plays that suited his style. That suggests he's probably unlikely to have long term success in the NFL as a starter. He is what he is: a good backup QB.
30 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:There are so many ways to fill out a roster and we have so many dead drafts where we have nothing to show. I really can’t understand why people over value draft picks the way they do. It wouldn’t take our whole draft to move to 1, but just to show the extreme. If we traded our ENTIRE draft for #1 and took Darnold, we would still be fine. And better off today then we were at any point in recent memory. The QB is just a different thing all together. The Jets will be fine and we will look terrible if they get one of the 2 very good QBs. We have plenty of picks. Trading up was the only way to go IMO. If we arent going up, why were we so quick to move all those good players last year? We did that to get the best qb. Not the best guy left after the good ones are gone.
What IF the QB they choose is a bust? The last time the Jests traded up into the top 5 to grab a "franchise QB" they picked Mark "Butt Fumble" Sanchez on whom they wasted about 6 years before they realized the dud they had. The Bills wasted 4 years on JP Losman and the opportunity to draft Aaron Rodgers while the Packers drafting at #24 the next year had him fall into their laps. What did Washington's trade up for RG III net them after 2012? Zilch. Good thing they spent that fourth rounder on a backup QB named Cousins or they'd really be up the creek.
It's less about where a team drafts than about the team's staff being smart enough to "know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em".
20 minutes ago, Putin said:He was a going for MVP before getting hurt ,
and BTW I’m pretty sure we’d give up 3 maybe even more 1st round picks for another Carson Wentz
Except, a team has to know if they're actually getting Carson Wentz 2.0 or just Mark Sanchez 2.0 in a Carson Wentz mask.
15 minutes ago, inaugural balls said:Where would he be acceptable?
Rudolph in the 2nd round seems about right.
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, BuffaloBill said:
The Rams and Eagles say otherwise. You get your QB when you can.
With that said this is a deep QB class and who knows what can happen.
41 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:There are far more examples disproving the “gotta draft a franchise qb high at any cost to win” mantra thanthere is validating it.
the giants are the only team I can think of that can say it worked for them.
The only trade ups for QBs that have worked for more than a single season is the Giants trading for Eli.
Philly might be another team to have success based on their miraculous 2018 season, but there's no denying that they have one of the most talented teams in the NFL AND one of the most innovative coaching staffs.
The Rams might be a third successful trade up story but one great season from Goff doesn't make him a great QB. Lots of QBs had one great season before flaming out, including Josh Freeman, Colin Kaepernick, Brock Osweiler, Nick Foles, and RG III.
All the other times teams traded up to grab first round QBs, the trades produced busts. That includes JP Losman in 2004, Jason Campbell in 2005, Mark Sanchez and Josh Freeman in 2009, and Robert Griffin III in 2012.
20 minutes ago, Wayne Arnold said:Watch Mike White be the best quarterback to come out of this draft. That would be funny. Especially if we stay put at 12 and 22 and keep our extra 2nd and 3rd.
It would be hilarious ... and sadly, entirely possible. The first round rated QBs in this class seem to be more pretenders than real deals.
As more college teams abandon pro-style offenses, it gets harder to judge just what prospects can do. That makes first rounders riskier, and 2nd and 3rd rounders more likely to be hits if they're given the opportunity to play. Derek Carr is easily the best QB from the 2014 QB class. Mike Glennon is better than either of the 2013 QBs taken before him (Manuel and Geno). Russell Wilson is easily the best QB from 2012, and even Kirk Cousins has developed into at least as good a QB as Andrew Luck, who may have the most talent but hasn't developed as a pro as well as Wilson or Cousins.
-
4
-
-
4 minutes ago, zonabb said:
Been on the supply and demand argument forever about QBs. The very limited supply of quality QBs dictates that demand is always high. That demand then gets operationalized by over-drafting low quality QBs. If anyone thinks there are 5 legit starting, playoffs caliber QBs in this draft, you're insane. What amazes me, is the irrational thinking that goes into drafting questionable QBs in round 1 all the time by GMs. It's demanding owners, job security (damned if you, damned if you don't), and fan bases like this one that convince GMs they have to draft one.
I'll say there's one guy, Darnold, every team is probably comfortable with because he has a good chance to succeed.
It's the Peter Principle.... people get promoted, and this case drafted, based on how well they perform in their current job (college QB), which in no way predicts how well they'll do in the new one. Every promotion is a filter and everyone, all of us, reach our level of incompetence. In this draft, many of these QBs will once again prove the Peter Principle.
Exactly this. I don't like any of the QBs in this draft enough to want the Bills to move up from 12 for him for what it will now cost to do it.
-
As far as I can tell, it's quantity over quality when it comes to the draft. That's for any position. If there's only 1 or 2 QBs or WRs or DTs who are graded as first rounders, then all the draft mavens label it a "lousy" draft for that position even if those 1 or 2 guys are the best prospects at their positions in the last decade. If there's 4 or 5 QBs given first round grades, it's a "great" draft for QBs even if none of them are all that great individually.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, PBLESS said:
In my mind an overlooked consideration is that NO ONE really has any idea which, IF ANY of the so called big 4 or 5 or even 6 QBs that everyone wants to move up for, will be a Tom Brady or an EJ Manuel. In fact AJ McCarron might be another Keenum, Peterman had ONE tough game, [ and quite a bit that went wrong was not even because of NP]. My point is that with QBs no one really knows for a year or two if a team did the right thing by giving away valuable draft capital to get an unknown. Yes, it is true that highly drafted CBs, WRs, and LBs can also fail, but at least a team doesn't have to sell the farm to get them. If you have a team that needs ONLY a QB to get to the big dance, do what you must to get one. The Bills have MANY needs, a very successful draft this year coupled with 100 million in cap space in 2019 would allow us to get a top tier [not necessarily HOF] proven QB to go with the newly enhanced roster.
I'm not say'n,---- I'm just say'n.
Usually it takes longer than 1 or 2 years to determine if a starting QB is the real deal unless they're a Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck. IMO, the jury's still out on exactly how good Bortles with 4 years of starting and Winston and Mariota with 3 years apiece really are. Wentz looks like the real deal but can he come back just as good from knee surgery? Goff made massive strides between his rookie and sophomore campaigns but can he continue to improve?
The reality is that even with a top 3 pick, lightning still has to strike in order for a team to come out with a HOF caliber QB. Have Donovan McNabb (#2 in 1999), Michael Vick (#1 in 2001), Carson Palmer (#1 in 2003) and Alex Smith (#1 in 2005) had good enough careers to get into the HOF at some point? What about Matt Ryan (#3 in 2008), Matthew Stafford (#1 in 2009), Sam Bradford (#1 in 2010), Cam Newton (#1 in 2011) or Andrew Luck (#1 in 2012)? IMO, except for Ryan and Stafford, none of the others have been good enough. Now, Newton is still young and Luck is young and has been injured, but neither has quite lived up to the hype surrounding them when they were drafted.
8 hours ago, Green Lightning said:The best prospects will be gone by pick 5. If we can't crack that, we sort through the seconds and hope for the best or trust Beane knows his future is dependent on getting the QB right. 20 years without a franchise QB has taken its toll. All the impressive process we've seen, and it has been Impressive, ultimately will mean little if we can't fix the QB position.
Well, sir, manure happens. I personally don't think that the pros are as hyped up by this crop of QBs as Bills fans are. If they were, none of the teams holding top 5 picks would even be thinking of trading out of those slots, much less actually doing so, so my guess is that there will be at least 2 or 3 of the top prospects available between picks 6-12.
That doesn't mean that I would necessarily want the Bills to take one of them. I would rather the Bills not take a first round QB at all if they can't get to their first choice than waste even the #12 or #22 pick on a prospect that they don't really believe in just to placate the idiot fan base so that they buy tickets. That's how the Bills ended up with Losman and Manuel.
Furthermore, the best prospects don't necessarily turn out to be the best QBs as Tom Brady, Drew Brees, and Russell Wilson all demonstrate. Sometimes those second and third and sixth tier prospects can shine if given the opportunity ... and the top tier prospects fail despite being given every opportunity.
-
So, the Bills "clearly had a QB identified LAST YEAR" and started wheeling and dealing in order to get him as early as the 2017 draft? Is that the manure you're trying to shovel? Do you also believe in the Easter Bunny, Bigfoot, and Zombies?
The fact is that from the time the Bills started collecting draft capital with the 2017 draft and today, the FO has been entirely restructured from the GM down to the scouts. Virtually all of the pro and collegiate player personnel evaluation staff has been replaced, except maybe the admin assistants and janitors. Why would ANY evaluations of any player made by former employees continue to guide the current administration when it's pretty clear that the current administration has far different requirements and standards?
The Bills started collecting draft capital because they need it to build a winning team, not because they're fanboys of some over-hyped college player.
-
1 hour ago, BuffAlone said:
After just paying Keenum 36 million and Joseph stating that he was the "missing" piece? I think Denver is out of the first rd QB market
They also have Patrick Lynch for 2 more years, maybe 3, on his rookie deal. I bet they move to reload their D (Fitzpatrick) or possibly OL (Nelson) at #5 if they don't trade down. I wouldn't be opposed to the Bills trading up to #5 for Mayfield.
1 hour ago, Real McCoy said:Mayfied at 5 to the Broncos or 11 Dolphins.
The Carp just redid Tannehill's contract, so he's not going anywhere for a while. They're out of the 2018 QB derby.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:
I can understand that some bills fans want to go back to '04 that might create some kind of panic or thoughts of disaster but last I checked it's 2018 and this is not the same regime. who I may add has been quite aggressive before the draft has even taken place and I see no reason they fall flat and not remain aggressive, IMO.
The problem is that in 2004, the Bills couldn't find a dance partner among the teams in the top 10 not named San Diego or NYG. Maybe they miscalculated the Steelers' interest in Roethlisberger (I rather doubt that) or maybe none of the other teams wanted to trade down or maybe they just didn't offer enough. Not being privy to what went on behind the scenes, I don't know why they didn't move up higher in the first round.
I hope you realize that if they'd passed on Losman totally, they would have been infinitely better off. They could have taken Aaron Rodgers the next year or Jay Cutler in 2006 or even Joe Flacco in 2008. The lesson from 2004 isn't that a team shouldn't be afraid to trade up but that a team shouldn't be afraid to pass on a lesser QB prospect if they can't get the one they really want, which is 2004 was Roethlisberger.
-
1 minute ago, Chuck Wagon said:
KC & Houston were both playoff teams, Houston falling to the #4 pick can't really be predicted. I also believe there were stories the Texans didn't inquire about trading up with us, they were ok waiting to see if one of Watson or Mahomes fell further, but once Mahomes went they worked the phones hard.
However, I do agree with your larger point. The trade down was done to gather ammo for this year, the Sammy / Tyrod / Cordy / Darby trades, all more ammo for this year. If Mahomes comes out firing the ball all over the field and makes Sammy look like a WR #1, Watson gets back to his pre-injury level and whatever rookie the Jets have at QB lights it up and we are left being sold McCarron / Mason Rudolph / Nathan Peterman, all the trust the process and drought breaking goodwill is going to dry up very very fast.
Maybe the reason that the Bills traded down is because they didn't like either Mahomes or Watson enough to draft them at #10 rather than take the extra first. We don't know if ANY of the 2017 QBs will actually work out long term. Between them, Mahomes and Watson have a grand total of 8 NFL starts.
Keep in mind that nobody really knows how highly NFL teams regard this year's college QB prospects. Remember, the voices claiming this is such a great QB class and that so-and-so is going to go #1 or #3 or whatever are all from fans and media personalities. Talking about collegiate QBs coming into the pros excites TV viewers, talking about DLers or OLers doing the same, not so much, but the teams have different agendas, and I don't think they have these QBs rated nearly as highly as the media.
Personally, I think at least one and maybe two of the top 4 QBs will be available at #12. Jackson might even be available at #22. It's likely that most of the "QB needy" teams have the QBs ranked the same way, and that at least some of them have no interest in taking a first round QB who's not their top guy. I think a team like Denver is likely to pass on a QB with both Keenum and Lynch on their roster unless they get exactly who they want. I think that Cleveland might do the same. I have never been of the mind that the Giants were interested in any of the 2018 QBs. Eli is their guy, and they're looking to give him protection and weapons. If Cleveland doesn't take Barkley, Saquan will be in a Giants uni in 2018.
-
3 hours ago, Elite Poster said:
Cleveland: Likely taking Darnold
Giants: Rosen, Mayfield
Jets: Rosen, Allen, Mayfield
Broncos: Allen, Mayfield or Jackson
Bills: Leftovers
We are doing 2004 all over again. You have to get the top guy.
And, who is that, exactly? There is no "top guy". They all have serious flaws.
3 hours ago, Elite Poster said:I don't know how old you are but history has a freaking interesting way of repeating itself. I was being just as dramatic when we settled for Losman and everyone called me an idiot.
I don't know if you're an idiot or not, but you are definitely attempting to rewrite history to fit your own agenda.
3 hours ago, Ol Dirty B said:You are definitely an elite poster my friend... It's amazing how many people don't remember 2004. I saw people saying they wanted the Bills to stay at 12 and draft defense, then get whatever QB is left at 22.
They can not accept leftovers. Or they need to abort this year and kick the can down the road to getting to the top in the next couple years.
Too bad that you and your friend don't remember that accepting "leftovers" in 2004 rather than chasing after a first round pretender would have yielded Matt Schaub.
You both are hysterical babies ... and ignorant of what went down in 2004.
- 2004 had a bonafide consensus #1 pick in Elli Manning. Nobody else was even close, and that included all positions not just QBs. Consensus #1 picks hit at a much higher rate than do all over picks, including the guys taken at #2 or #3. In 2018, there isn't even a consensus on the best QB. That suggests that maybe all of them are pretenders or, more than likely, one will actually make a decent NFL starter and the rest will bust.
- Phillip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger were both elite prospects significantly better than any of the QB prospects in 2018. That's the major difference between 2004 and 2018: the quality of the prospects. Losman was easily a better prospect than Jackson or Rudolph, and at least as good as Allen. Darnold, Rosen, and Mayfield are only marginally better prospects than Losman, and nowhere near as good as the top three from 2004.
- JP Losman would likely have been a second rounder in 2004 if the Bills hadn't traded up to grab him in the first round when Pittsburgh took Roethlisberger at #11. It was a move predicated on placating the fans who had worked themselves into a QB frenzy. If Donahoe had waited until the second round and taken Losman, or if he was gone, taken the "leftover" who turned out to be Matt Schaub, who was a decent starter (at least as good as a Dalton or Flacco or Tannehill if not better), the Bills would have had a shot at Aaron Rodgers in the 2005 draft.
- 2018 really resembles 2011 or 2012 more than it resembles 2004 when there were lots of QB prospects taken in the first round (4 in each draft) but only 3 had real success (Newton, Luck, Tannehill), although both of those drafts featured consensus #1 picks who, like Manning, were clearly much better prospects than the over-hyped pretenders whom teams wasted first rounders on (and Washington wasted a lot more than just that). Aside from the #1 consensus picks, the real quality in both 2011 and 2012 largely came from the "leftovers" or developmental guys who were drafted after the first round: Andy Dalton and Tyrod Taylor in 2011 and Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, and Nick Foles in 2012. Oh, yeah, and a real "leftover" among "leftovers", undrafted FA Case Keenum also came out of 2012.
- The Bills have been carefully building up a cache of draft picks that they could use to move up to get a QB prospect if one they like is available, but they don't seem likely to waste those picks drafting a QB that they don't really believe in just to draft a first round QB. That seemed to be the message from Beane's press conference. Making personnel moves primarily to pander to the fan base rather than to build a winning football team doesn't seem to be part of the Beane-McDermott regime's DNA, which is a sea change from the way the Bills operated in 2004.
In reality, what you two are suggesting --- trading whatever it takes to move to the top of the draft board to take a QB, any QB with a lot of positive hype from the media draft mavens -- is EXACTLY what the Bills did in 2004 that got them Losman.
I'm sorry that the Bills picked TJ Graham over Russell Wilson in 2012, but I'm sure not sorry that the Bills passed on Matt Leinart, Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder, and Brandon Weeden. Too bad they didn't do the same with Losman.
-
2
-
6 hours ago, 8-8 Forever? said:
he's too short to play in the NFL. he's just too short. after watching Taylor struggle with batted balls all year and trying to find openings to throw the ball through, my QB needs to be tall and stand tall and throw tall... you can't coach size. B M doesn't have it for today's NFL.
Bull manure. I'd take Drew Brees or Russell Wilson any day over the likes of Brock Osweiler and Mike Glennon. I'd take Wilson over Brees as well as over Cam Newton, Andrew Luck, or Carson Wentz, and he's not even 6 feet tall (5'10 or 5'11), because he's not only proven that he's a leader who can carry his team but he's also a lot younger than Brees. The only reason that Seattle isn't drafting in the top ten in April is because of Wilson.
-
13 minutes ago, Bengalholic said:
Thanks brother. How was Brown in coverage? That's an area where our LB unit has struggled in recent years.
I'm very stoked about adding Glenn from a talent perspective, although I do worry about him staying healthy.
The reports of Glenn having health problems are greatly exaggerated. He didn't have any issues until he injured his foot some time in second half of the 2016 season. The decision was made to give it time to heal rather than Glenn having surgery, and that wasted most of the 2017 season. Cordy's had successful surgery on the offending foot after being put on IR late last season, and should be good to go.
Glenn is one of the top pass blocking LTs in the game, and he's a decent run blocker, too. He's a good teammate and a good citizen. The Bengals got a good deal.
-
1
-
-
I hit a deer on I86 about 15 years ago ... did about $5k damage to my car. Hitting a cow at highway speeds could be fatal not just to the bovine since Holsteins tend to be much taller and a lot heavier than a deer, and beefers are significantly heavier. Livestock wandering loose on the roadways is a major hazard of driving on back roads in rural Chautauqua and Cattaraugus Counties, especially in Amish country.
-
1 hour ago, Seanbillsfan2206 said:
Hear me out, you’re on drugs...
Nate Burleson said the same thing on Good Morning Football this am: Barkely at #1 and either OG Nelson or some other blue chip or trading out for more draft riches. Any number of NFL media analysts are predicting that the Browns are going to take Barkley with the #1 pick because they don't think that they like any of the QBs in this draft enough.
Also Dorsey said a few weeks ago that the Browns were open to trading the #1 pick "for the right price". He wouldn't say that if the Browns had already predetermined that they were taking a specific QB at #1. They don't have to put up any "smokescreens".
-
1
-
[Vague Title]Glad some on here are starting to see...
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
RIP. Where do I send the donation in lieu of flowers?