Dr. Who

Do we have money to bring in any free agents? A top 6 sniper with speed to play next to Eichel would be nice.

If he had the accuracy thing down cold, he'd be a Cleveland Brown right now.

Okay. Sorry I was under the impression I was making a rational argument.

Training camp through pre-season, teams don't game plan and you face vanilla defence. Allen needs signifcant work, though he has tremendous talent and upside. Though McCarron is not Alex Smith, I think Allen would benefit from a Mahomes-like redshirt year. Furthermore, I'd prefer we got our o-line and wr corps upgraded before throwing a rookie to the wolves. You don't want to David Carr the fella.

I basically agree with advocates for the take it slow approach, but I think you're right in your surmise that folks are going to be surprised at how much talent this kid has.

I think he is referring to a longer interview on the Rich Eisen show. It's posted in one of these threads. I'm surprised you weren't the one to post it, actually I see BuffaloHokie13 clarified this above. . .

No, I get it. I was unclear. I was trying to indicate that that particular move was so jawdropping I knew what you meant without having to check the time.

I was trying to watch the video and keep track of the time. No need. Just amazing.

I like your posts. Insightful and well-written.

I rather despise ESPN, but if they were smart, which they aren't, they'd get Kirk Cousins to do pre-draft segments with qb draft prospects. More interesting than Russell Wilson, imo.

Two men enter, one Metz leaves.

Just stop.

His name is Equanimeous, c'mon.

Love both picks. Please be right.

I think Josh Allen is potentially the best of all of them. It's a risk and he may not reach his potential. Josh Rosen is more polished and tough, but he has poor pocket awareness and durability concerns. Pretty sure Rosen has gotten superior coaching over the years. They could both end up good qbs . . .

I think that's overly optimistic. WR is still a big area of need, though OL really needs to be addressed.

So funny, and some folks wanted us to maybe take the qb that went 76 at 12.

Really like St. Brown, but he won't last to 96.

As others have suggested, durability was likely the most significant concern with Rosen, but the OP implicitly presupposes that choosing Allen was more a function of not choosing Rosen. Perhaps Beane actually thinks Allen will end up being the better qb or at least the better fit for Buffalo.

His opinion doesn't mean much, but neither does the plethora of bellyaching fans hating the pick determine whether or not Allen succeeds.

Why? Third option is really the only one that isn't presumptuous. How about a fourth option? I approve because I trust Beane and McDermott aren't fools and don't want to sabotage their careers. Or, I approve because the past failures of different qbs don't impact the fate of Josh Allen, who by all accounts is a talented, hardworking kid? Or, I don't have an opinion at this point other than fans ought to start acting with common courtesy and stop bellyaching over the pick, etc. etc.

Well, I think that's likely, actually. At least he'll know who the few discerning fans are

That may very well be true, but why not they just preferred Allen because long-term they thought he would be the better qb and a better fit for Buffalo?

If we had taken Rosen, these sudden advocates for plugging holes would be completely mum.

In another thread, Horned Dogs suggested bringing in Jordan Palmer full time to work with him. That sounds like a good idea to me.