Luxy312
-
Posts
2,461 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Luxy312
-
-
1 hour ago, KD in CA said:
3 sure-fire HOFers in this class? Really?
I really don't get it either. I think this could easily be just like:
2011 - Newton, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder
2003 - Palmer, Leftwich, Boller, Grossman
2007 - Testaverde, Stouffer, Miller, Harbaugh
There were questions about every QB in all of those drafts, just like there are in this draft. Just because they are picked early doesn't mean that they're all going to have success. In every one of those drafts, players could have gone in almost any order. I feel that the same holds true this year. There's 4 guys that might be worthy of being picked first. The 1983 draft certainly turned out great in hindsight, but there were some chunks of stool in there as well. Do we trade up to get our Todd Blackledge or stay where we are at #12 for our Tony Eason? We can also skip picking QB and get our Ken O'Brien at #22. All sounds awesome. LOL. -
Just now, maryland-bills-fan said:
Take the comment with a grain of salt as sarcasm.
I take it with a grain of salt as fantasy and simply a statement that fits your narrative.
-
Just now, maryland-bills-fan said:
...and all the other players are all equal on every team, so only the QB matters.
Just an ignorant statement. By your words, every team has a LeSean McCoy. Every team has an Antonio Brown and a Von Miller. So many more examples that pointing out the ridiculousness of this statement is almost not even necessary.
-
15 minutes ago, BadLandsMeanie said:
I would love it if they took Jeff Allen. And so would Jeff Allen!
But I bet Josh Allen would be annoyed!
I don't think they take Jeff Allen. Probably pass on Jeremy Allen and Jaime Allen as well. None of those guys are first round material. LOL.
-
I thought 2000 was pretty interesting with the Raiders taking Sebass with the 17th pick in the first round. Not to be outdone with a kicker, the Saints took Russell Erxleben (Punter) with the 11th pick in 1979. My draft experience doesn't go much earlier than that. There's always interesting trades and picks every single year.
-
15 minutes ago, maryland-bills-fan said:
I don't know what they will do. It depends upon too many unknow outside of anybody's control or knowledge. I think each possibility (trade up a few, stay pat, trade down a few) are all about equally possible. Its a 1 in 3 chance, not an even chance.
So by that assumption, you should be willing to take odds. $50 bet gets you $150 if they trade down. You would be giving away money.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
Chubb is certainly the best player on my board and I think if the Giants stay at #2 that is who they will pick. I do think they would be willing to trade down.... but it's going to be expensive. I certainly don't think it is as simple as pick a QB or trade back. Chubb is very much in the picture at #2.
I concur 100%. They're not trading down for "even money" based on the pick value chart. They're going to want as much of a premium as the Jets paid to move up. To boot (and mostly based on their needs), I'm not sure they would be willing to move down into the bottom half of the draft, unless they get even more. I think we can pretty much assume that the top-2 QB's go with #1 and #3. Moving down past #5 could mean that they lose out on Chubb/Barkely/Fitzpatrick. On my board, those are the only 3 "can't miss" QB prospects worthy of picking that high. I have Nelson as a can't miss as well, but there's no way EVER that I have a guard in the top ten.
-
3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
I think from the moment Gettleman arrived they were not going Quarterback. Obviously Darnold falling past #1 adds a dimension nobody was really expecting and I can absolutely see him being Gettleman's kind of Quarterback but I think he might be too bought in now to his idea that he is going to get talent, put it around Eli and try and win this year.
If Darnold goes #1 I am 99.9% sure the Giants don't go QB.
If Allen goes #1 I'd still say 90%.
I don't know why people simply ignore the GM's that are making the calls and play Madden with their picks. Gettleman has a history of two things. First, he doesn't trade down in the draft. Second, he builds his defense through the draft early and often. All signs for the Giants point not to QB with that second pick in the draft, but to Chubb. By many scouting reports, Chubb is a "can't miss" prospect in this draft and immediately fills the void from trading JPP to the Buccs, way more so than the second best QB on the board.
As for the 1983 draft class, I don't believe for a second that this draft will yield 3 HOF quarterbacks. We'll likely see a repeat of the likes of Todd Blackledge, Tony Eason, and Ken O'Brien though.-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:
Both of NE's 1st's and 2nd's (2,106 pts) aren't enough for the 2nd pick (2,600 pts).
/thread
This in a nutshell. It's not even CLOSE to #2 pick value. Stupid thread.
-
This is interesting to say the least. They only get a total of 30 visits. I don't know if there's a "master list" thread out there that records this, but I believe that in the last 10 years or so, the Bills first round picks were all in the scheduled visits. I can easily list out a bunch of players that gets Smith to #12 or that gets the Bills the quarterback that they want. There's a lot of talent in this draft and linebacker is certainly a position of need.
-
8 minutes ago, Bills Dad said:
I don’t post much but if I may offer a thought...
Good depth signings and short deals. I may be wrong and I’m sure some may correct me but many of our depth pickups have been pretty short deals. This, to me, may signal that we are going to be aggressive in the draft and go after a quarterback that the management believes in. This may signal some amount of regression this year but we have to “trust the process” here, right? I think I have heard that we now could have upwards of $80-$90million in cap room next year after our recent moves. These short term deals are cheap stop gaps to fill holes that we may not be able to in the draft then next year we can be aggressive and build around a young stud quarterback.
And i I also see us continuing to invest in defense for more long term. If we have a good defense in place we won’t be asking a young qb to win every game for us. Again, to me, this seems like a smart way to build rather than the “draft a QB and he’ll be our savior” mentality that teams like Cleveland seem to maintain.
Whew!...sorry...I’ll post again in a few years. GO BILLS!!!
My take is admittedly different than many others that believe that this accumulated draft capital will all be bundled up and shipped off for a shiny new quarterback. Right now, I see the Bills signing younger starters to longer deals and older starters to shorter deals to fill out the starting roster. The exception (obviously) is A.J. McCarron. He's playing on a "show me" contract. At 27 years old, he's pretty much betting on himself. When I think about WHY the Bills brass would want to have starters ready at each position, I immediately think about draft flexibility. If I want to take "best player available" regardless of position, I do not want to be in a position from a roster perspective where I'm taking guys ahead of where they should go because I'm extremely thin at one or more positions. Davis, Latulelei, Murphy, McCarron, Newhouse, and Bodine are all starters right now. In addition, if you have huge holes to fill, other teams are going to know that. Gives them leverage if and when you try to trade up to get the guys that you want.
If 12, 22, 53, 56, 65 are all best available player, the Bills could land 3-4 immediate starters and potential studs to build this team around. I can't say I hate that at all, even if one of the picks is used on one of these 5 flawed QB's. Certainly better than giving away 4-5 picks and still ending up with a flawed QB that may never develop. -
I like both of these signings. Not super expensive and they targeted guys that have the right skillset for the system that Daboll will be running.
-
6 minutes ago, No Place To Hyde said:
I think the moves Beane has made since taking over prove that he has the guts to pull the trigger. You know what else he has? A roster with holes and in need of upgrades and 45 million in dead cap space.
Everyone here wants everything done asap...but truth of the matter is Beane, Pegula and McDermott are building for the long haul with a planning mind. Step 1. Clear cap room. Done. Next year we are looking at 100 million-ish in cap space. If you think this was a wild off-season..just wait. Buffalo imo will be MAJOR players in FA next year.
Step 2 Draft young players on rookie deals. About to happen. Still gotta draft well.
AJ McCarron...well who really knows what he will be. If you read this board you learn that a player is either an All-pro or he sucks. While I don't think he will be an All-Pro this year...I don't think he will suck. I really do think he has the potential to be an upgrade on what we had.
Every move Beane makes is well thought out and calculated. He knows how important a QB is. He will get that accomplished. Might be this year, might be next year.
This can also be said of all of the top 5-6 QB's that could possibly go in the first round. Absolutely none of them are "Andrew Luck" type of guys.
-
I question why this team needs to be desperate. I'll type here what I've typed elsewhere. If the front office doesn't believe that there's a clear cut #1 QB that's miles ahead of the next two guys, you don't get crazy with trying to get that #1. Every armchair GM will sit there and ask why they're not trading up to #2 because, of course, they MUST. Look at what McCarron did in college and compare him to what the current guys did in college. He's up there in every major statistical category. I think the Bills at this point are sitting at #12 and letting the draft come to them. A.J. got a two year "show me" deal and the Bills have the luxury of drafting the 3rd or 4th QB on the board at #12 if they want or even waiting until the second round. They should pull 3 starters out of the first 4 picks and I can't say I mind that at all.
-
3 hours ago, Green Lightning said:
Maybe, but I think McBean has their eye on one guy and they're going to do whatever they can to get him. So I think we're moving on up.
This is probably wrong at this point now that they've signed McCarron. Tannehill restructuring to lock the Dolphins into him for 2 years. More and more, my original post is looking more accurate. The Bills are going to have the shot at the #2 or #3 QB in the draft at pick 12 and will not have to trade.
-
On 3/13/2018 at 9:25 AM, the skycap said:
That is a SMOKESCREEN. According to Luke Easterling and Chris Simms, Lamar Jackson is the #1 QB in the draft. Beane is gonna shock the football world and do what he has to do and get Lamar Jackson. Lamar has the highest ceiling of ALL the QBs in this draft.
We've also identified the highest poster. LOL.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Green Lightning said:
You're assuming no one's going to trade up to get to those positions if those teams don't take a quarterback.
That's a wildcard, but still has to be a team that is looking for their signal caller of the future, AND has the draft capital to do it. The latter is a problem for many teams that would have to basically address holes in their line-up completely through free agency. Everyone is speculating. I'm merely sharing my opinion. For those that think that we MUST trade up from where we are now, I will simply disagree.
-
5 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:
You want to have a veteran starter going into the season, besides the in the room presence. The point in moving on from Tyrod was to upgrade the position, at all points in the season.
The point of moving Tyrod could be to upgrade the position, but also simply be to move on from what didn't work.
-
Spits not swallows. Say 'NO' to Siemian.
-
It's hard to read what the Browns are trying to do right now. The deal for Hyde is decent, but not a bank breaker. I certainly don't read anything into that signing that they're not still thinking Barkley, anymore than I read into the trade for Taylor that they're not thinking about quarterback with one of those first two picks. Consistent with every year of the draft that I can remember, I would expect to be shocked early and often.
-
2 hours ago, WideRightRevenge said:
Why do we want Matt Moore or McCarron .. use that money on other positions ... why not improve your odds (of no bust pick) with a QB in the first and the second? More agressive flashback to what the Redskins did with RGIII and Kirk Cousins in same draft.
I don't mind this plan at all. Basically skip the retread QB route and draft two guys to go with Peterman. #12 and 22 will get you two of the top six candidates.
-
1
-
-
There is no urgency to sign anyone, and it's pretty straight forward as to why. Look at the teams that draft before the Bills at #12. Cleveland holds the #1 and #4 pick right now. Yes, they acquired Tyrod, but they will in all likelihood take a QB with one of those two picks. I expect Barkley to be the #1 pick in the draft as he's not making it to #4. Eli Manning has said he wants to play 3-4 more years minimum and the Giants have endorsed that. There's no reason for them to take QB at #2. The Colts have Andrew Luck and thus far I've read nothing that suggests he won't be ready to go at the beginning of the season. Let's check the box with Denver giving Keenum a big contract, so no QB for them at #5. The Jets now have McCown, Petty, Hackenberg, AND Bridgewater on their depth chart. Does drafting a FIFTH QB for their roster at #6 make sense? Nope. TB has Winston. Chicago has Trubisky. SF has Garropolo. Oakland has Carr. See where I'm going here? Maybe Miami isn't happy with Tannehill, but that makes only 2 QB's off the board before the Bills pick at #12 and possibly only one.
The free agent situation for QB's right now is and should be pretty quiet. If the Bills sign any of the myriad of retreads that are available, I think it's distinctly possible that they're still just a backup at the beginning of the season. If the plan was a journeyman "bridge" for a year, I think they would have just kept Tyrod. What does Moore, Henne, Stanton, Anderson, Sanchez, Gabbert, Osweiler, Siemian, Cutler, or Yates add that Taylor didn't? There's probably a half dozen other names that I missed, but the point is made.-
1
-
-
This is unbelievable. They're positioned to make another deal with the Browns.
-
Just now, Shaw66 said:
Not fair to call it the scrap heap, but you're exactly right. Take the free agents with talent whose careers have gone a little sideways. That really works.
AND, if one of the good QB prospects falls to 21, take him. I've stopped paying attention, but I think there are five - Rosen, Darnold, Mayfield, Jackson and Allen, maybe Rudolph. Chances are pretty good one or two of them is still on the board.
In the last 20 years, there have never been 6 QB's to go in the top 20. I think the chances are really good that one or two will be there when they pick.
Dwarfing 1983
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Is it the Houston Cowboys or the Dallas Texans now?