SoTier

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.

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. The Carp just redid Tannehill's contract, so he's not going anywhere for a while. They're out of the 2018 QB derby.

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.

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.

And, who is that, exactly? There is no "top guy". They all have serious flaws. I don't know if you're an idiot or not, but you are definitely attempting to rewrite history to fit your own agenda. 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.

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.

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.

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.

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".

I'm a Boomer but I have no problem with Millenials. Those that do are simply crotchety curmudgeons who forgot the stupid **** they did and said back in their wilder days.

They just redid his contract to make it more cap friendly. I don't think he's going anywhere.

The fault in your logic is that the Browns have both the #1 and the #4 pick. That the Browns have hinted that they were "open" to trading the #1 suggests that they don't think one of the QBs is so special they have to have him. If the Browns don't love a particular QB, then why would they take him #1 over Saquan who is easily the best prospect in the draft? It's not like they don't get another crack at a QB until round 2.

That's all fine and dandy but drafting JP Losman or EJ Manuel at #1 wouldn't have made either significantly better (although Losman might have been better playing for somebody other than Jauron). Being drafted #1 overall didn't prevent David Carr or JaMarcus Russell from busting. Draft position isn't what determines a QB's success or failure.

Unless they really love one of the QB prospects, I think the Browns take Saquan at #1 and then grab a QB at #4. IMO, the Giants want Barkley, and Cleveland knows that. I don't think they're all that interested in a QB, especially if the Browns take the one they like best, so they could be open to trading down.

Lie to yourself but Brady, Brees, and Rodgers would have struggled playing with our WR corps from 2017. The Bills absolutely need to get better at WR, but there are still quality WRs out there ... and likely more to be added.

This is seriously flawed logic. It's as easy to miss on a QB in even in the greatest QB draft ever -- as they did in 1983 -- as it is to miss a QB in an average QB draft. More importantly, a great QB draft isn't about the number of prospects in the first round but how many good/great QBs actually come out of the draft. The team needs to judge prospects on their own merits, judged against an ideal, not judged against the other QBs in the class. If you can't get the QB you want, then it might be a wiser move to pass on the pretenders in the first round and take a lesser guy later in the draft, especially since some good QBs have come out of the later rounds in recent years.

I haven't heard anything but the trade didn't become official until 4pm today.

My screen saver is a slide show of my favorite nature shots.

I agree. I'm not complaining about trading Glenn to move up to #12, making a further move into the Top Five infinitely more feasible than it seemed last week. I just wanted to remind all the idiots who wanted Glenn gone because "he wasn't worth the money" that good LTs are almost "priceless". That's why Cinci was willing to swap #12 for #21 (and change) to get Glenn despite his foot question.

Except for Brady, all of these QBs played their college football more than 20 years ago, and some more than 30 years ago. Both the college and pro passing games have changed significantly since.

It's the going rate for quality LTs which is why I was against trading Glenn for any reason except to move up for a QB.

Teef, use KBB.com to get a price on your current car. Then use KBB or TrueCar to price out your new car ... including the options you absolutely need to have, those you'd like to have, and those you don't care much. All the pricing sites are zip code specific, so that will give you a ball park figure about the cost of the new car and what you're likely to get for your old car in your area. The difference in prices will be what you pay out of pocket, and is a good measure of what kind of deal you're getting from each dealer. Two points to remember: since you are buying a new car, keep in mind that you can always walk away if you don't like the deal; a good service department is worth paying a few extra dollars for, especially if you buy one of the many new models with maintenance included. Happy car hunting.

No, it doesn't. It's pretty much a foregone conclusion around the league that the Bills are angling for a first round QB in the draft, so any veteran QB who signs here has to accept that he's here for a placeholder for that young QB. Backup QBs with aspirations to be starters don't want anything to do with the Bills; they're going to be interested in signing with teams where they have better opportunities to become starters. Think of Ryan Fitzpatrick signing first with the Bills and then with the Jests.

EJ Manuel. Blaine Gabbert, and Christian Ponder all have NFL practice and preseason experience plus they have significant NFL regular season experience, too. Whoopty-doo.

What "talent" are the Bills "watching ... walk away"? Get a grip, dude! If AJ McCarron was such a great talent, he'd have been drafted higher than the fifth round. The Bills are looking for a modest veteran FA QB to serve, at best, as a placeholder for a season or part of one before they turn the reins over to the young QB they traded up for in 2018. "Veteran" means a player with more than 3 games of NFL experience. Somebody like Hoyer is adequate, and better than some others whose names have been bandied about.