SoTier

This is what makes the most sense but it's not going to happen because I don't see the Bills landing Cousins either. I am adamantly opposed to trading up for any QB except the consensus #1 pick in the draft. They succeed about 80% of the time, after that the success rate drops like a rock: 50% for QBs in the top half of the first round. Trading up for the 3rd best QB prospect ... supposing there even is one ... is a waste of resources. If 2 QBs are already off the board, stay put and see who's available at your spot ... or take a flier on a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round. Somebody like Mayfield who's undersized but who would otherwise likely be a first round prospect would be a good choice if he fell in the first round or into the second. Lack of size can be compensated for (Brees, Wilson, and Cousins have all proven that) but you can't compensate for a lack of the instinct/processing ability/"it" factor that separates guys like Peyton, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Wilson, etc from guys like Sanchez, Ponder, Gabbert, Osweiler, etc. How'd that work out in 2013? It's not ANY QB but the RIGHT QB that they have to draft. If there's nobody worth taking, take another position and see what's up in the 2nd round. It's a lot easier to send a 2nd round bust packing than a 1st round one.

Kevin Kaduk got it right. With all the NFL games looking like well choreographed productions, that game was special ... an echo of earlier times when the game of football was simpler ... and maybe more joyous. The shots after Shady's TD of the Bills players in the end zone with snow showering down on the players and fans were cool, but the shot of Matt Milano making a snow angel after the winning TD was the best!

"Settle" for what? Drafting a QB in the first round isn't what makes a QB a success! Drafting a QB prospect in the first round who should be drafted later just to draft a first round QB is what the Bills have done twice in this century. They got 2 busts for their trouble ... and they effectively locked themselves out of picking up better QBs from the drafts in the following years. The Bills lost out on even the opportunity to take Aaron Rodgers in 2005 and on Jay Cutler in 2006 because they had so much invested in Losman. Instead, they tried to make a third rounder into their franchise QB, and so didn't take a shot on Joe Flacco in 2008. Because they drafted Manuel in 2013, the Bills ignored Bridgewater, Carr, and Garoppolo the next year. It's not that the Bills haven't looked at QBs in the first round of the draft or that they haven't had the opportunity to draft decent to great QBs. It's that the bad choices they made in the QBs they did draft in the first round in 2004 and 2013 came back and bit them in their arses. You keep yapping about fans being willing to "settle", but in reality it's the Bills that "settled" for the fourth best QB prospect in the 2004 draft -- and traded up to get him, too! It's the Bills that failed to act in 2012 and take Wilson in the third or Cousins in the fourth and "settled" for Manuel in 2013, a kid who wasn't even a first round prospect, just to say that they took a first round QB. IMO, they drafted both QBs simply to excite the fan base and sell some more tickets. My guess is that they'll do the same in 2018. It's always dicey drafting a QB in the first round because they're expensive. No rookie minimum for any first rounder, especially a QB, and since most teams only carry 2 QBs with only the starter getting reps in practice, taking one in the first round precludes taking another one in the next draft or the one after that unless your original one sucks Johnny Manziel-style. The Bills' drafting rationale makes it even dicier.

No, they didn't. Not when late season games meant something like back in the 90s. We wanted to see the Carp come to Rich Stadium in December and freeze their aqua and orange arses off.

Sorry, but the Drought is all on the Bills themselves, and that's particularly evident with the argument about the Patriots. If the Bills FO was seriously interested in making the playoffs, they would have built better teams than they did over the years. In 8 of the 17 Drought years, 2 more Bills wins and 2 fewer Pats wins would not have even given the Bills a winning record. In 2004 the Bills lost to the Stillers' backups in the final game of the season; that's all on them. In 2008, the Carp won the division with a record of 11-5. Even if the Bills had swept the Brady-less Patriots, the best they could have done was 9-7 which wouldn't have gotten them into the playoffs because NE missed the WC with an 11-5 record. The only time that 2 wins over the Pats would have definitely put the Bills into the Patriots was in 2002 when they would have won the division. In 2014, they actually won the season finale against NE, so sweeping NE would have given them a 10-6 record, so getting a WC would depend upon winning the tie breaker against Baltimore. In 2015, the Bills would have vied with the Pats, the Jests, and the Stillers for the last WC with 10-6 records. The Patriots vs the Bills records since the Drought began: 2001: Patriots 11-5, Bills 3-13 2002: Jests 9-7, Patriots 9-7, Carp 9-7, Bills 8-8 2003: Patriots 14-2, Bills 6-10 2004: Patriots 14-2, Bills 9-7 2005: Patriots 10-6, Bills 5-11 2006: Patriots 12-4, Bills 7-9 2007: Patriots 16-0, Bills 7-9 2008: Patriots 11-5, Bills 7-9 2009: Patriots 10-6, Bills 6-10 2010: Patriots 14-2, Bills 4-12 2011: Patriots 13-3, Bills 6-10 2012: Patriots 12-4, Bills 6-10 2013: Patriots 12-4, Bills 6-10 2014: Patriots 12-4, Bills 9-7 2015: Patriots 12-4, Bills 8-8 2016: Patriots 14-2, Bills 7-9

I don't think the NFL's ability to select QBs has actually ever been very good. Over the last 20 years, when the #1 consensus pick has been a QB, he's worked out about 80% of the time. QBs taken in the top half of the first round have about a 50% success rate (great/good/decent). I think it's only about 25% for the bottom half of the first round, and after that, it's probably single digits. The 1983 draft was the best QB draft ever. Six QBs were taken in the first round but only 10 more were taken in the remaining 11 rounds of the draft, none in rounds 2-4. Of those 6, Elway went #1 and the last QB taken was Marino at #27. Blackledge went at #2, Kelly at #14, Eason at #15, and O'Brien at #24. The HOFers were mixed among the busts. Back before college teams ran the simplistic read option passing games, they ran the ball more. The pro game was also simpler (which is why the colleges could use pro-style offenses although many, perhaps most, did not), with much less sophisticated offenses and especially defenses, so QBs had a lot less to learn, recognize, and react to during the game. A QB with a cannon arm, a solid OL to keep blitzers at bay, a couple of speedy wide outs along with a good RB who could catch balls coming out of the backfield were a prescription for a successful offense. Most reasonably intelligent collegiate QBs with good arms could be half way decent. Today, the sophisticated defenses with their myriad of disguises, require a lot of skills that not many collegiate QBs can develop in the 2-4 years they're in school. Meanwhile, pro scouts are still totally enamored with tall QBs despite the success of Drew Brees, Russell Wilson, and Kirk Cousins and the failure of Brock Osweiler. Unless a QB would be a first round prospect except for something that has nothing to do with how he plays on the field -- lack of height (Brees, Wilson), a slight build (Cousins), athletic department politics (Brady) -- almost all QBs taken after the first round are destined to be backups. Other than Brees and Dalton, what second rounders have actually become solid starting QBs? For third rounders, there's Schaub in 2004 and Wilson in 2012. Who else? In the fourth round, the only one with a solid claim to fame is Cousins, although Orton did have a couple of decent seasons. Drafting a QB after the first round in hopes of finding a franchise QB is like counting on winning the Powerball lottery to finance your retirement.

This is true, but it's not the number of QBs taken high in the draft that makes a great draft; it's how the QBs from the class play over the course of their careers that determines the quality of the class. . 2011 was supposed to be a great class. The first rounders were Newton (#1), Locker (#8), Gabbert (#10), and Ponder (#12) in the first round and then Dalton the 3rd pick in Round 2 and Kaepernick the 4th in Round 2. Newton and Dalton are the only ones who've done well. I don't believe that Locker, Ponder, and Kaepernick are even in the NFL in 2017. 2012 was supposed to be even better with Luck, RG III, Tannehill, and Weeden in the 1st, Osweiler in the 2nd, Wilson and Foles in the 3rd, and Cousins in the 4th. It actually was the best class since 2004, but that's only because the 2 under-sized QBs picked later, Wilson and Cousins, have blossomed into exceptional talents. Luck has been somewhat of a disappointment in that he hasn't really developed into quite the superstar envisioned by the "suck for Luck" crowd. He's still a "franchise QB" but between playing on a crappy team and injury, he's definitely not the best QB in his class. Tannehill is an acceptable starter on the level of an Andy Dalton or Joe Flacco -- capable of looking really great with the right supporting cast but otherwise pretty ordinary. IMO, Wilson is the best QB from 2012, and Cousins probably the second best based on what he's actually done on the field. Generally, there's 1 really good QB from a draft class with occasionally another decent starter whether there are 5 first round QBs or 1 or 2. Very rarely does a draft class produce multiple good/great QBs. That's why 1983 and 2004 are considered "generational" draft classes.

Agree. IMO, the only way to ever get rid of Brandon and his minions' influence over the way the Bills operate as a football team is if fans stop going to games. Back in the mid/late 80s, when Bills' attendance plummeted (crowds under 30k were common in a stadium that held 80k then), and Wilson responded by putting a "football guy" in charge: Bill Polian. I think that the "honeymoon" is ending between the Pegulas and a lot of Bills fans who had hope that new ownership would mean a new emphasis on winning football games. Instead, it looks like the new owner is following the same course as the old owner. That the Sabres have sucked under Pegula's ownership doesn't give fans a lot of optimism that things are going to improve for the Bills, either. Will fan discontent translate into a big enough drop in ticket sales to force Brandon and Co out, and if that happens, does it mean the Bills will improve on the field? I don't know the answer to either question as I don't have a particularly good crystal ball. What I do know is that this is one fan who is no longer a season ticket holder and is unlikely to attend any Bills game until there's a significant improvement in the product the team puts on the field.

Well said, Alphadawg7.

On a team that had a pass-first offense under supposed coaching genius Chip Kelly for 2 of those 4 years ... hell, that offense even made Nick Foles look like a top QB for a while, and Pederson runs a pass-first offense too. On the Bills, Foles has only been able to play in 10 games with 25 catches for 284 yards and 1 TD. If the Bills can let Hogan, Goodwin, and Woods walk and trade away Watson, why on earth would they want Matthews even if he is "cheap"? Shell out $50 for a winter coat at Walmart rather than $200 for one at LL Bean and see which one keeps you warmer at 10 below.

Why is it "Reboot time"? Despite the big deal made about all the changes at OBD, the Bills have pretty much managed player personnel the same crappy way they have for 17 years: let talented players walk rather than pay them and replaced them with high draft picks and scrubs. Face it: the Bills desperately needed to replace Stephon Gilmore, so they couldn't take a QB then even though 2 good prospects were still available. How many other times in the last 17 years have the Bills passed on more talented players because they "needed" to replace a DB, WR or RB they got rid of? What's so special about 2014?

I have no idea who is the culprit in the Bills FO but unless the Bills figure out how to "afford" to retain the decent players they draft, they aren't EVER going to make the playoffs. It's not like they're drafting busts; ex-Bills are scattered all over the league, many of them starters, some of them Pro Bowlers, most of them key pieces of playoff teams, including Super Bowl winners ... but they either weren't "good enough" for the Bills or they were "too good" for the Bills to afford to re-sign. How can that be when the Bills are not paying for a franchise QB or a marquee DE or a super WR? Aside from Dareus, Glenn, and Clay -- and maybe McCoy -- I don't believe any other of the Bills vets are making top money for their positions. Taylor certainly isn't. The Bills couldn't afford to keep Hogan in 2016 or either Woods or Goodwin in 2017. They sold the Watkins trade to many of the gullible on the assumption of "they wouldn't be able to afford to sign him" in 2018. They couldn't afford to keep Gilmore or Gillislee or Zach Brown either. How are they going to sign any veteran players above the veteran minimum if they have a QB who will be demanding $20+ million a year (likely $30+ by 2023)? Hell, even high first round QBs like Winston and Mariota currently make nearly $7 million a year on rookie contracts.

What has Matthews done to merit even being brought back? Find somebody better. ^^^ Again, you refuse to face reality. Watkins is a good WR, maybe even a great one which he might prove to be if he stays in LA with Goff and McVay. You can't blame Watkins because the Bills traded up to get him, never ran a pass-first offense, and have failed to draft a franchise QB since 1983. Every time the Bills decide to shed another blue-chip player, they hint at this and fans grab it up and run with so that it becomes "FACT". Pity the poor Bills! They can't afford to re-sign most of their best players ... even though they aren't paying a franchise QB or even a premier DE. If they actually do find and develop a franchise QB, which seems highly unlikely, they're going to have to let him walk after his rookie contract or totally gut the team around him to keep him. Neither solution seems promising for the future, but keep applauding the Bills for their "foresight".

"Zero patience"? With a team that hasn't managed to get into the post season in 17 years? With a team with exactly 2 winning seasons in those 17 years? The Bills have been perpetually "rebuilding" since 2001 ... and they are have gotten nowhere. I'm not impressed by Jauronball 2.0, however much you think it will be solved by dispensing with Tyrod Taylor and replacing him with a rookie QB.

Well, that's only if you ignore facts, sweetie ... Sammy Watkins has 184 receptions, 2984 yards, and 29 TDs in 4 seasons, 3 with the Bills ... but carry on pretending the geniuses at OBD know how to build a winning team -- or are even interested in doing so.

Has the phrase "you get what you pay for" EVER occurred to most posters here? I know that the Bills don't really care about winning as long as there's butts in the seats, but fans who want to win can't have it both ways: a veteran player is "cheap" because he sucks, and if you think the Bills are going to win more than 7 or 8 games a season by filling the team mostly with rookies and cheap vets, you've obviously been playing Rip Van Winkle for the past 17 years.

Keep telling yourself that. How are the Bills going to replace the players they shed and didn't replace this year when they're undoubtedly going to shed more players in the coming off-season? They don't have enough draft picks to fill all the holes they created even if every one of their picks is a difference maker, and if they decide to trade up for a QB, they'll have a lot fewer anyways. They won't add expensive FAs but will round up more career JAGs, STers and PS refugees and call them "quality players". It's the essence of Jauronball 1.0 just given a shiny new paint job for 2017.

Plain and simple, the Bills WRs this season are not NFL caliber. Aside from Benjamin who has played 1 game plus 1 series of another game, none of them would be starters on any other NFL team ... if they even made the team. Holmes is a career STer. Thompson was a street FA when signed by the Bills.

How, exactly, will you know that you have "an above average QB" if he doesn't have protection or targets? When he goes elsewhere and shines like so many other ex-Bills have done in recent years?

It's Jauronball 2.0. Replace most talented players with JAGs, career STers, and PS refugees and pretend they're "just as good" because they "buy into The Process" while adding 1 big name "star" to con fans into filling the stadium ... rinse and then repeat ... ad nauseaum.

You're wasting your time pointing out facts to Shady. Some posters with agendas don't let the truth deter them from spreading their propaganda. Why fix what's not broken? It's Jauronball 2.0.

The Seahawks already had a talented team when they went without first round picks in 3 drafts, dude! They weren't trying to build up talent on a team that's full of JAGs, career STers, and PS refugees. Oh, and they haven't been quite so "fine" either. Russell Wilson, another QB the Bills could have taken but chose a WR bust instead, is like 80-90% of their offense and the only reason they don't have a losing record this season.

The Bills HAD "speed guys" ... the three of them are now playing in LA and in SF. Obviously, speed and sure handedness aren't part of the "skill set" that the Bills brain trust want.

How would having a "good QB" -- or even "any QB" -- fix the play calling unless the Bills get a twofer deal ... a new QB and a new OC?

I'm done "cutting the Bills slack" about anything. The supposed purpose of an NFL team is to win football games, but that obviously isn't what the Bills are interested in. If it was, the best Bills players wouldn't be scattered around the NFL on teams going to the playoffs while the Bills are loaded down with JAGs, career STers, and PS refugees yet again. Since the Drought started, if you include Wade Phillips (he coached 1 year during the Drought), the Bills haven't really suffered from bad coaching except for Jauron and Ryan. Phillips has been successful as a HC and even more successful as a DC, and Gregg Williams went to win a Super Bowl as New Orleans' DC. Mularkey, Marrone, and now Lynn appear to be solid NFL HCs ... Chan Gailey, like the others, didn't do a bad job as a HC but he was hampered by his team's lack of talent. Fans like to scapegoat coaches for the team's failures, but I think the Bills' problems go higher up the corporate food chain. Too many bean-counting accountants with other agendas than winning football games have made -- and continue to make IMO -- too many key decisions that impact whether the Bills have the talent to win football games no matter who their coaches are. So, Mike Mularkey stays on the list of the coaches that got away, just like Antoine Winfield is the first name on the list of outstanding players that the Bills let get away even if he left more than a dozen years ago.