Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

Just means you need to run it in from the 25. Considering how everyone is bunched at the line, probably not that much tougher than from the two as once you're past the initial group of players, likely would have a clear field ahead.

Here's the problem I see with your logic. So why not just use one of those 1st round picks and draft that sure fire franchise QB? Answer is because we or anyone else really have no good way of predicting who that guy will be. So if we don't know who he'll be, why would another team who also doesn't know who that franchise guy will be make the trade and give up on a sure thing? Second problem is as you've eluded to we're just a QB away from being real good. You could draft that next star QB, but again the issue is first figuring out who he is, then you still may likely need to wait a couple of years for him to develop into that star. Well that's the same problem these teams you mention as trading partners, for the most part, they are also either close to or already winning teams, so they'd be taking a step back in time to make that trade, so again why would they. The only way I could see a team even consider making the deal would be if they were a team with a very good QB, but the team was complexly on the down side of winning. Looking at your list, there really aren't any teams in the category with a good QB on a terrible team. Likely the reason is the good QB elevates the entire team around him. I'd als obe scared to death of any team willing to make that trade as likely the QB we'd be getting must not be nearly as good as we think, else why would the team have given him up.

It's been quite awhile now, but I kind of liked it.

Yeah I was thinking about that recently myself. I'm not sure it has anything to do with this years draft class as much as just the preception that next year always looks better. There was a thread here the other day talking about he amazing 2015 FA list of wide receivers. The future always looks better until it gets here! On another note I was just reading the other day about some 7th grader out in Montana who is likely to break all of Peytons Mannings passing record.

Supposedly the Bills are excited about the two late seaso npickups at guard JJ Uglia and someone else, can't recall whom? So if they are even half correct with them two, maybe guard isn't quite so bad, though still could use a mid round draft pick for future years. I do think Chandler is better than average . Personally I 'd like them to go after Evens with the 1st round pick

To shortern this thread I propose renaming it to: "List the all-time Bills NON Jerks"

With all this tackle talk in the first round, so if you were the coach you'd be fine with telling Mathews that we've drafted him to play RT?? Doubt he'd be too happy, well guess he'd be fine with it as long as the Bill's are willing to pay him LT money to play RT, but not so sure that would happen. Or someone could suggest moving Glenn to RT, and he doesn't like that too bad. And that will work just fine..... until Glenns contract runs out and he bolts for some team that's seen enough of him the the first two years to pay him LT money to play LT. Then we can have another 50 page thread here about how the Bill's let their stars walk.

Agree Beerball, even if they cut Smith and Claussin that would still leave them with four, which is one more than you normally keep. So who's the next one you're going to cut? Gragg, Moeaki? Unless they feel Moeaki is not healthy, I also can't see them taking another one. Also can't see taking a RT at #9, that's crazy. So my take is WR, Evens should be there which is good as he's much different than their other WR

Exactly, Taking a TE is just wasting draft picks and/or $$. You can't keep dumping players or picks you just got without giving them time to mature and prove their worth or lack there of. You don't even list the blocking TE Lee Smith believe is his name, that makes five total. Likely two of those five will be cut, now we want to add a sixth. It's different with DB, lineman, evan receivers where you have a large number of them on the roster so not a big deal cutting one of the weaker ones to make room for a better player. But really think Chandler, Moeaki and Gragg are worth looking at unless they already know one of them isn't as good as they've been letting on. What they don't have is that big WR which is why I'd like to see the pick be Evens. I'm almost hoping Watkins is gone by #9 which sounds like will be the case so no big debate as to which one to take. While I do think Watkins likely will be very good, to me he's another clone of Woods, may be better, but still very similar. Evens gives them something much different. (another James Hardy:) )

If Watkins fell to maybe #7 so the price isn't too much, then maybe try and trade up. Though I'd be very happy with Evens. The Bill's already have a Watkins clone in Woods, what they don't have a is a big WR which Evens would bring. so IMO if they could get Evens at #9 I wouldn't waste picks moving up.

The one advantage I see in Fitz, in all seriousness would be less likely to have a QB controversy. If EJ plays bad, few people would be screaming for Fitz to play, where as if they sign Vick or the guy who went to Tampa, could be more of a distraction

Could be they plan to draft a MLB but want to give him a year to develop, so use Spikes this coming season, let him move on and play the guy you draft this year in 2015.

So assuming we sign Spikes, what offense line players are still out there? I'm kind of figuring we will still resign Leonhard. At this point if we then sign Spikes, I'm thinking that's about the only area I can see them still maybe signing someone a would be for the O-line and maybe more depth. Supposedly the Bill's like the late season signings they made a guard, so may figure they are OK there. Do they sign a tackle or draft a RT in 2nd round or so. Any good lineman left that won't cost a fortune??

Sure on March 11th you could have paid double for him! Now you can get him from the daly old half off bakery table.

Whether he does sign with the Bill's or some other team, I'm sure Buffalo could have signed him on Tuesday for around $10 mil more than he'll likely get now. Kind of shows the Bill's front office is smarter than many of the posters here and let prices settle down and get the same guy from the day old bakery table for half off. Which brings up another question I'm wondering about more with each year of free angency. Does free agency work from the team side particually around these first day signings. Do teams ever get good value? You hear and read all about the failures, the defensive end from Washington (Haynesworth was it) being a complete bust along with many other busts. Are there truely many more 1st/2nd day busts than successes or does the news just report the failures as it sells more readers? You'll always have a team like Denver who has a very small window to win taking risks, but for teams like Washington Dallas, Raiders, etc are they just completly wasting money with so many holes to fill. Or is it becoming a realization that the better approach is to follow the model of Green Bay, Pitt, Giants (and maybe Buffalo too) of signing mostly depth players and low level starters to put around your stars who you get via the draft. And on occasion you do make a bigger FA signing like a Mario Williams, if this is true Spikes, etc. You also resign your own players when reasonable, but knowing there are some who are going to bolt for whatever reason, fell their worth is more, don't like Bufflao, etc. And when that does happen there will always be some team out there in the small window catagory who will over pay to get him. It's tough right now here in Buffalo as we don't yet have enough stars to easily absorb players like Byrd leaving where as NE can move on without seemingly losing much.

Authority?? All you need to do is see a picture of her to know she likes wings and anything else you can eat. She'd do a decent job at NT herself!

GM's get atleast two cracks at HC hirings, so evne if Marrone does terrible next two years and is fired, likely you'd keep Whaley around for at least one more HC, and maybe more liekly two. Of couse if RW is out of the picture and new owenership is here and lets assume team does somehow stay in Buffalo, Whaley then could be out sooner.

2 years?? So you're going to pay him close to $20 mil for 2015 as that's what I've read the tag costs for a third year the average of highest paid players, i.e. QB And you won't see him in June at all, if you're real lucky it will be Septemeber, but more likely mid Nov, just in time for game #10. And until he signs the tag can't fine him either. So exactly how is your statagy going to frighten him into crying uncle??

Add to that it's very easy for the tagged player to tell the team who tagged him he won't talk to or agree to any contracts with any teams. I can't see any team offering picks or anything for a tagged player unless he'll agree to an extension. Take Byrd as an example, maybe he had a half dozen teams he would talk to . If one of them were to work out a potential deal with Buffalo maybe he talks to them, but there's little incentive for those teams to agree to trade draft picks as they know Buffalo's only other option would be to release him. And if your team is on the list of teams he's not interested in going to and won't talk with them, then unlikely to get anything for him. Couple that with the fact that the player can hold out all the way to game #10 and still get full credit for the year, really a kick in the a** to the team who tags him. Meanwhile they have to keep all that money available in case he does sign the tag. System does make it tough to tag and trade. That is one rule I'd love to see changed that players have to be there from game #1 on to get credit for season.

Yeah but isn't Chandler 6-7"? He's big by this years draft standards, but is he really big?

That right there is the key, Carpenter is already been cut so is he really that good or just was on a roll?? Did he all of a sudden figure something out different? Could be our expert ST coaching made the difference??

I was suprised reading the article today in BN that he could not have been signed until today as his contract was a "minimum vet deal" whatever exactly that means. But apprently the Bill's couldn't re-sign him until today. Wouldn't be surprised if that als oprevented them from tagging him too? Surpsied I hadn't seen or heard anything about that prior to today.

I don't know, the name of the game these days is big. I think I'd prefer resigning Chandler (with Modeski also signed and assume healthy) and draft Evens. Stevie, Evens, Woods, Goodwin, Chandler, and Modeski plus some Easley would look pretty good IMO

Neither do most teams. That's the problem, there are 32 teams in the league and about a dozen very good or better QB's. So the other teams just keep playing musical chairs hoping to get lucky. Teams will sometimes get someone who appears to be the answer, like a Stafford in Detroit or a Daulton. Better than average, but after a few years of not getting any better you move on, often end up going backwards So agree they don't do it well but along with many others too.

Personally I'd place that more on Whaley than Marrone. Marrone coaches the players he's given, granted he has some say in who they sign and whether he felt he could make Brown work. He likely was also going off of tape of Brown, may be he's one of these people who looked better on tape than live. But if you're going to place the blame for Brown with Marrone, than you also need to give the credit to Marrone for Alonzo, Robey, Hughes, R Woods, Branch, and Lawson. Personally I'd give more of the credit and blame with Whaley but if you want to fault Marrone, then needs to get credit too.