SoTier

I remember you posting this earlier. As I was reading the part of the article about Belichick, I thought of this. Belichick didn't decide that Brady can keep going indefinitely, but Kraft. We'll never know now, but I think Brady's fear was justified; Garoppollo was going to be the Pats QB next season.

I don't see it. Newton is pretty good but he's not in the same league as Rodgers, Brady, Brees or even Wilson who was drafted two rounds after him. Teams don't trade true franchise QBs ... even if they lack fashion sense ... so that would be the first hint that Carolina, the team that knows him best, thinks he'll never improve only decline. Keep Tyrod and give a youngster a shot in the upcoming draft ... or the next one. Cam Newton isn't the next Jim Kelly.

I think what the OP is trying to say is that NE's success is not really a blueprint for continuing dominating the league indefinitely because it's primarily built on a set of lucky coincidences complement by having aquired a great defensive-minded coach and a great QB, who has only sustained 1 significant injury in his playing career -- his 2008 knee injury. Belichick and Brady are not only great at what they do, they complement each other, and as long as they are together, NE can continue it's dominance but it's unlikely the team can keep doing so once 1 or both are gone. IOW, NE's success is largely dependent upon a couple of specific people rather than upon a plan/philosophy/culture sustained by a group whose members can and do change over time. FYI, if you want to discuss sustainability, consider the Steelers and the Packers: In the 43 years between 1972 and 2016, the Steelers have had 35 winning seasons and made the playoffs 29 times under 3 HCs and with 10 different QBs. They won 6 Super Bowls and lost 2 others. In the thirty years since 1987, the Packers have had 24 winning seasons and made the playoffs 19 times under 6 different HCs and with 4 different QBs.

A tad defensive? You don't remember the pre-salary cap days when teams like Oakland, Pittsburgh, Miami, SF, Green Bay, Dallas, and, even for a while, the Bills dominated the league for long periods. Back then, sustainability was simple: identify talent, stockpile it, and add a good coaching staff. I think that the Patriots' "model of success" has been significantly aided by the salary cap which Belichick/NE staff mastered and manipulated from the beginning to a far greater degree than any other organization. That Belichick is a coaching genius is pretty undeniable, and that's a significant piece of their sustainability as well as Brady's undeniable talent and durability. Without Brady and/or Belichick, I think the wheels fall off the cart, but exactly when that happens, who knows? Certainly the general incompetence of the rest of the AFCE in this century hasn't hurt NE's "sustainability". Buffalo, Miami, and NY have too often been just too lousy of teams to do more than put up token resistance to the Pats -- or most other good teams. In some other divisions in both conferences, the teams regularly take turns beating the crap out of each other -- the AFCN and the NFCN where the division rivals regularly seem to go to war come to mind -- so that the teams in those divisions expend a lot of energy and often lose key players against divisional rivals that don't even make the playoffs.

Maybe you should follow your own advice.

The Bills are #9 on the NFL.com list, #10 on SI, and #11 on the ESPN list ... color me impressed. Did they even have power rankings the last time that the Bills looked like they could be serious playoffs contenders? By adding Benjamin, they've significantly improved the WRs who were easily their weakest link. It's enough to make even old skeptics like me begin to think maybe this might be the year.

Did you watch that travesty of a game against the Ravens? 40-0. That team seemed as disinterested in playing football as I've ever seen a team. Early in the season they got thumped ... their 20-0 loss ... and the announcers tried to pin on Cutler. Well, Cutler wasn't out there, and they played similarly ... only worse. I wouldn't be surprised if they lost out. I think that they've quit on Gase.

This is what I've said all along. The supposedly great 2018 QB class seems to be fading fast as more of the "stars" sink into mediocrity or are revealed as pretenders buoyed up by the talent surrounding them, so it's likely that there will be only 1 or 2 genuine top prospects, and that those will be long gone before the Bills get to pick. There's no guarantee that any of the teams at the top of the draft will be interested in trading away their picks, either. SF and Cleveland, the two most likely candidates for the top picks, have lots of needs. The Bills shouldn't waste a high draft pick on a QB just to draft one (although I think that's a definite possibility), but they should take one if there's one they think could make it as a pro. Maybe take a kid in the 2nd or 3rd with everything but height or size in general: both Russell Wilson and Kirk Cousins sank in the draft because of they weren't judged "tall enough" or "big enough". Drew Brees, a second rounder, is also relatively short.

Obviously, SF doesn't think that the 2018 QB class is all that much. Agreed. Before the collegiate football season starts, every draft class is "the greatest in a generation" except that it's only that generational class about once in a generation. Some really good QBs play as advertised but decide to stay in school. Some really good underclass QBs return as seniors and lose their sparkle. Most of the shiny new college QBs, even those drafted in the top half of the first round, are destined to be disappointments, and for those drafted in the bottom half of the first round or lower, probably 80-90% can't even rise to the level of competent backup. Garoppollo has already proven that he's a competent backup, so he's likely to be at least a decent starter, especially for a team with nowhere to go but up. If they're lucky, he could turn out as good Dalton, Tannehill or Cousins, which would make him a bargain.

"Some" thought Matt Cassel and Brock Osweiler were good, too, based on their play as backups but the reality is that if their original teams thought that they were truly as good as they looked in a small sample of games, there's no way they'd have let them go. Green Bay sent the legendary Brett Favre packing because they realized that the kid from Cali riding the pine wasn't just younger but better. Agree. There's this mystique about the Belichick and the Pats somehow having the "magic touch" about finding QBs because they drafted Brady in the 6th round, but the reality is that they were walking across the barnyard, slipped on some bull manure, and came up smelling like roses rather than, well, manure when they grabbed Brady. None of the QBs they've drafted since Brady have turned out to be more than competent backups, and most haven't even been that. Matt Cassel, Ryan Mallett, Brian Hoyer are the best of the lot and none of them are better than Ryan Fitzpatrick ... and certainly not nearly as good as Tyrod Taylor. He wants a chance to be a starter, which ought to be the goal of any young backup QB, so he was never going to re-sign with NE. It wasn't really about the $$$ but the opportunity. Cousins is a decent QB but he's not Superman. Crucify him. As a Bills fan, you should know all about that. The reality is that QBs need protection and targets to show their talent and skill but they also need the support from a good running game and defense to win lots of games. They also need good/great coaching. What support does Cousins have in Washington? How many more Super Bowls would Peyton Manning or Drew Brees have won if Indy or NO had given them better defenses? How many more Super Bowls would Aaron Rodgers have won if GB had better running games? If not for Belichick's coaching genius, just how many SBs would Tom Brady have won?

F the "draft capital"! Are the Bills interested in winning or they just interested in putting a few more $ in the Pegula's coffers? If the Bills trade Glenn now, then they prove they really have no interest in putting a winning team on the field. A team can NEVER have too many good OTs, and the Bills have a good one in his prime in Glenn, a decent young prospect in Dawkins, and ordinary or less quality in the others. That's actually about average for NFL teams. The OL is just getting healthy, and it looks like they're adapting, finally, to the new blocking schemes as they're giving Taylor more time to throw and opening holes for the RBs. Truth! Apparently, some fans figure that the 2018 draft is so overloaded with talent that every player taken before the 7th round will become a superstar. It doesn't work that way.

Point 1: There's hardly anything more irrational than a man who thinks he's innately superior to everybody else because of his rationailty, but especially women. Point 2: I wasn't talking about only this season since I mentioned building "regular" playoff contender (ie, a team that frequently makes the playoffs over a number of years). This regime dumped Gillislee, Gilmore, Goodwin, and Woods even before anyone had a chance to figure out if they "bought in" to McDermott's system, and Beane traded Watkins as soon as he was healthy, but a story now circulating in the media is that the WRs were moved because they wouldn't block. Dareus has been on the trading block since the summer. That suggests the Bills regime is more than willing to sacrifice talent in order to save money, but whether getting rid of any of these players had anything to do with them not "buying into" anything is truth or a convenient excuse, nobody outside the Bills organization knows. I'll give you a hint: if Cordy Glenn goes, you'll know it's all about $$$ and has nothing to do with "buying into" anything.

Truth! I did think the shot of Carr slouched on the bench and looking miserable in the rain after Shady's TD run was priceless. It's been a long time since the Bills demoralized an opponent.

BINGO!!! The Bills are a run-first team. They've ALWAYS been a run-first team even when they had good QBs and good passing games. Given that they play in an open stadium in the Great Lakes region, running the ball is pretty much a requirement because there are going to be games, sometimes more than one in the same season, where passing the ball is going to be difficult at best, primarily because of the wind. Moreover, the current coaching regime is pretty conservative, so they are going to favor short, safe passes and runs that produce time-consuming drives over long downfield throws all day long. The Bills are never going to collect a stable of top notch WRs and pass catching TEs so that their QB regularly throws for 300 yards under McDermott. That's not his philosophy, and I doubt that would change even if he had Aaron Rodgers as his QB. Most QBs who regularly put up big passing stats play for teams that don't have good running games or don't have good defenses. All the fans out there who think that the Bills are going to turn into a pass-first team if/when they draft a first round QB in 2018 are likely to be very disappointed. It's not the QB who determines the Bills offense so much as it is the HC's philosophy, which is okay with me as long as the Bills continue to win with what they're doing. Having a stout defense and a good running game have been the primary building blocks of successful teams for years.

I remember that great 2008 season under my favorite Bills coach, Dick "Play Not To Lose By Too Much" Jauron! The Bills started out 5-2 ... and then went 1-8 the rest of the way McDermott is a much better coach than Jauron but I'm not convinced that the way the Bills are being built can produce a regular playoff contender. I just don't think that "buying in" and overachieving can trump genuine talent over the long haul since we're talking pro football not family life or something. Anyhoo, I thought that they were a 5-6 win team but I always said "success" this year would only be either 10 wins or making the playoffs. That looks far more realistic a goal for the Bills than it did back in August or September. They have 9 more games to go. Can they win 5 of them? In September, I didn't see them being able to beat the Broncos, Falcons, Bucs or Raiders. I thought maybe they could win 1 of those, but not all 4. The Bills have yet to play: @ the Jests the Saints @the Chargers @the Chiefs the Patriots the Colts the Carp @the Patriots @ the Carp. It's not unrealistic for the Bills to come up with 5 wins from that group. The only games I don't think they have realistic shots at are @the Chiefs and both Patriots games but then I never thought that they could go into Atlanta and kick azz there, either. However, with the bitter experience of 2008 in mind, I'll believe that they get 10 wins and/or make the playoffs when they actually do ...

I agree. IMO, McDermott and his figurehead Beane are throwbacks to the Jauron years when Jauron and his figurehead Levy got rid of whatever talent the Bills had in order to replace them with JAGs and STers who "bought into their system". Watch it happen. We've already seen it happen with the WRs where talented WRs with NFL caliber skillsets were moved out to be replaced by other WRs with skillsets more in tune with McDermott/Beane's requirements ... whatever they might be. Dropping passes? Being unable to get open? Not being deep threats? Playing for cheap?

I'm surprised that the Bills were able to find a trade partner at all. The reason they only got a 6th is because every team in the NFL knew how badly the Bills wanted to unload Dareus and most were willing to wait for the Bills to cut Dareus in the off season when they could get him without his contract. That Jacksonville was willing to trade for a player that the entire league knew was going to be cut after the season says that Marrone wanted Dareus pretty badly, too. My guess is that Dareus is going to flourish under Marrone and that the Jags' D is going to carry that team to the playoffs, possibly keeping the Bills from making the playoffs this year. They're 4-3 and tied for first in the AFC South despite problems on offense with Bortles poor play (although he's improved somewhat recently). The Jags' D is already formidable, earning the nickname "Sacksonville" early on: 6th in yards/game; 2nd in points/game; 1st in total sacks; 2nd in INTs; tied for 1st in forced fumbles; Like the trades of Jason Peters and Marshawn Lynch a few years ago as well as Sammy Watkins this preseason, it's likely this one is going to come back to bite the Bills in their arse simply because the Bills got so little in return ... and this time traded a player within their own conference. The 2018 draft better be something special because the Bills are going to need to fill half their team with rookies next season.

It generally takes three years of starting to determine if a QB is good or not, primarily because on most teams the starting QB gets like 90% of the reps, and the backup gets about 90% of the rest. The third guy, on the roster or on the practice squad, gets to crumbs from the coaching staff and generally just impersonates the opposition QB. It's hard to determine how good any backup QB might be in that standard scenario. Other than Flacco in 2008, who else could the Bills have realistically drafted once they had Losman and/or Edwards??? Fitzpatrick was in B-lo from 2009 (started as backup) through 2012. Drafting any of the QBs other than Andy Dalton, Russell Wilson or Kirk Cousins during the time Fitzpatrick was here would have been a waste of resources. Taylor joined the Bills in 2015. Like Osweiler and Garrappolo, he was really an unknown. He actually took the starting job away from Manuel and the veteran that the Bills had on the roster in 2015. Neither Jameis Winston nor Marcus Mariota were available for the Bills in 2015 but maybe the Bills could have traded up for Wentz in 2016, although like Greybeard, I'm not sure that the few QBs who were both realistically available to the Bills and who were successful would have been particularly successful with the Bills. The Bills drafting hasn't been significantly worse than most teams' in the NFL. They have actually been very good at getting talent from later picks and UDFA, so they do find value. The problem is that the Bills DO NOT KEEP MOST OF THE GOOD PLAYERS THAT THEY DEVELOP, and that's been something that's been going on since even before the Donahoe era. It is what the Bills do: develop a player into a Pro Bowler and then send him off, getting nothing or virtually nothing for him while the Bills fill his spot with a JAG or ST refugee. We have no idea if McDermott/Bean will be any good at drafting. The 2017 draft was essentially just filling needs, not looking toward the future. If Mahomes becomes a stud, he'll get added to the list of the good ones the Bills let get away.

This is what so many posters just don't get. Drafting the wrong QB in the first round has serious long term negative consequences, most notably, missing out when "the guy" comes along. It's a lot more serious than passing on Joe Flacco or Andy Dalton. Maybe if the Bills hadn't drafted Manuel in 2013, they would have found a way to trade up to get Carson Wentz as Philly did.

I think too many posters here ignore reality when they claim that the Bills haven't tried to get a QB in the draft. Drafting a QB isn't the same as drafting a WR or RB or OT. The nature of the position requires that the team have only 1 starting QB at a time, which means that when teams draft a first round QB, they aren't going to spend another high pick on another one until they figure out if the first one is a keeper. If they have a keeper, they aren't likely to draft a replacement until said starting QB is closing in on retirement. Furthermore, a mistake in drafting a high round QB usually has serious consequences. In 2002, the Bills traded a first round pick to get Drew Bledsoe, a proven starter who had been displaced by the much younger Tom Brady. This wouldn't have been a mistake if the Bills had invested in talent around him and kept him longer. They simply released him in 2005 because they wanted to start JP Losman (who was definitely not ready to play) and he went to Dallas to end his career. In 2004, they traded their 2005 first rounder, 2004 second rounder, and a fifth rounder to trade back into the first round to pick up JP Losman at #22. That was a mistake. It's likely Losman would have been around in the second, and if he wasn't, Matt Schaub lasted until the third, and he turned out to be a serviceable starter for several years. What was worse about trading up for Losman was that the Bills lost all chance to grab Aaron Rodgers who lasted until #24 in 2005 ... and the Bills 2005 pick would have been #18. They could have also taken Jason Campbell in 2005. Even in a "deep" QB class, ya gotta pick the right guy. Once the Bills had Losman, they weren't drafting another first round QB until they knew what they had in him. Economically, it wasn't even possible since there was no rookie salary scale at that time. Besides, who was there to pick? In 2006, the first rounders were Vince Young, Matt Leinart, and Jay Cutler. In 2007, JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn were the first rounders. The Bills did take Trent Edwards in the third, and Jauron wanted him as the starter so the Bills passed on Joe Flacco in 2008. 2009 saw Matthew Stafford at #1, Mark Sanchez at #5, and Josh Freeman at #18. Sam Bradford, at #1, was the only QB worth anything in the 2010 class. In 2011, a supposedly "great" QB class, Cam Newton went #1 followed by Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert, and Christian Ponder. Like 2004, the Bills choices in this draft came back and bit them in the arse: they passed on AJ Green to take Dareus and they passed on Andy Dalton to take Aaron Williams whose career was shortened by injury. In 2012, the Bills might have traded up to get RG III but lucky for them, they didn't. Both Luck and Tannehill were gone before their turn. They traded up for TJ Graham rather than take Russell Wilson or Kirk Cousins in the third. Like in 2004, ya gotta take the right guy! In 2013, the Bills decided to draft a first round QB well before the draft because they didn't want to pay Fitzpatrick, which in hindsight was probably foolish. The 2013 QB class was terrible, they missed two chances to break the Drought in 2013 and 2014 with better QB play, and they probably sank more $$ into QBs than if they had just kept Fitzy (they had to pay Manuel plus Kolb plus Orton) ... and they didn't draft Derek Carr in 2014 because they had Manuel. Basically, the Bills had realistic shots at good QBs in 2008, 2011, and 2012. Only 1 of those was a first rounder, so claiming that the Bills haven't been "aggressive" enough in pursuing a franchise QB simply ignores who was available and what constraints the Bills faced, some of their own making but most just by lack of opportunity. I'll account them "guilty" of missing badly on Wilson and Cousins in 2012, but then, so did much of the rest of the NFL. Hopefully, they won't repeat past mistakes in 2018 ... just don't repeat 2004 or 2013: picking a first round QB just to placate an unhappy fan base.

Well, FTR, Parcells never won a playoff game without his trusty side-kick Belichick running his defense ... and I don't think any of Parcells' teams ever got shut out 20-0 much less 40-0, and certainly not in the same season. Seriously, the Dolphins remind me of a team that's likely to have a new coaching staff come next season. Being out-manned is one thing. Getting whipped by a better team is another. Being disinterested in playing the game, however, which is what the offense appeared to be, says something is wrong in Carpland. Matt Moore's played before, and he never looked this bad. The Carp looked like this was December and they were running for the bus.

As someone who remembers 0-for-the-Seventies, it was just wonderful! Did the Carp seem as disinterested in playing this game as they did the game that they got whipped 20-0 by the Saints? In that game the announcers were dumping on Cutler for being "uninvolved", but in this one it seemed as if the entire offense was "uninvolved"... like they all had just come out of retirement.

How do you know that there will be even 1 QB in the draft who's worth a first round pick or if the team that holds that pick would be interested in trading it??? A lot of the college QBs from the preseason have gotten tarnished by poor performances and some of the best performers are underclassmen. Advocating drafting a first round QB, especially trading up for one, when nobody even knows who's going to be available is stupid. Trading up to get a QB who's the consensus #1 or #2 pick is very iffy but trading up for any other QB is beyond stupid. Just because a team drafts a QB in the first round -- or worse, trades up for him -- doesn't guarantee that QB will be a success. The Bills have tried both methods when they knew who was available and failed both times. Because they traded up for Losman in 2004, they couldn't take Aaron Rodgers in 2005: they'd traded away their first round pick, #18, to get "their QB of the future". Rodgers lasted until GB took him at #24 or #25.

That's me, too. I was at that game. Willie Parker, some UDFA rookie nobody had ever heard of before that game, ran for 100+ yards. I'll be "all in" when they clinch a playoff spot.

2018 is NOT necessarily "the time to do it" if the top QB prospects suck! It could happen since there's no rule that says that there has to be a great QB in every draft class. Drafting the best of a poor lot only gets you an expensive bust. The Bills already tried that in 2013 with Manuel ... which prevented them from even looking at Carr or Bridgewater. I used to think Rivers was elite, too, but I've changed my mind in the last few years. He's a very good QB but he needs a lot of support to carry him more than he can carry his team. He's never come up big when the Chargers needed him to do so, not early on when the team was making the playoffs every year nor later when the team was less talented but still capable. More recently, he seemed to be a significant part of the reason why they were having losing seasons. He seems to always find ways to lose games whereas guys like Rodgers, Brees, and Brady find ways to win them.