Dr. Who

He's not Manziel. That's a lazy comparison. Mayfield is an intense football competitor. He has a pretty high floor, imo. Allen has the highest ceiling, but he is much more of a gamble. I would be happy with either, so I don't feel the need to denigrate one player to promote another . . . unless you're advocating for Mason Rudolph

I was persuaded by Bandit's arguments. If he is right, Allen's problems are correctable. He has experience with a pro-style offense, reads the field well, and is intelligent. He is not truly a qb with intractable inaccuracy issues, but it will take time.

Mayfield and Rosen are the safest picks. I like them both. Darnold and especially Allen are risks, but I would still take them. I think those of you who are convinced Allen is destined to be a bust are far too confident he will fail. I think there is a reasonable chance he will succeed and possibly be very good. Team that drafts him better slow cook the development, though. If you're not committed to that, don't draft him.

It clearly doesn't. Law of averages finally worked so that a mediocre at best team laden with hardworking vets squeaked in. Don't care. Getting the qb is still priority #1.

Bandit convinced me to think better of Allen. Rosen is clearly the safer pick, however.

I am guessing this is contingent on Darnold going to Cleveland at 1. So, who is the guy at 2 if they trade up? I surmise Mayfield is the fella they might move up between 6 - 10 for, but I have no read on what they are really thinking.

OP has an agenda I don't agree with. Gunner seems to think there is already a deal in place with the Giants, perhaps contingent on who the Browns take at 1. A price "somewhere in between" is most plausible.

I can't see 2 going for so little after the Jets inflated the price of moving up.

Unfortunately, CFL draft picks have no value.

Equanimeous St. Brown

Non-qb, unless this is a snide commentary on those two qb options.

I wonder if these folks were also against taking Watson or Mahomes. What criteria and combination of circumstances would allow a trade-up by their lights? Seems to me many of them would never pick a qb early in the first apart from a magical synchronicity where the team has the worst record and a can't miss prospect is available at the top of the draft.

Love this book. I have a copy signed by Sally Fitzgerald. If you like O'Connor, I recommend the work of Marion Montgomery.

Why would you be happy with second-tier qbs? Though if we miss out on the top four, I would prefer we just went BPA and grabbed Lauletta or White later in the draft.

The fellas on the HockeyFutures Sabres' board seem to like Hughes after Dahlin, though some prefer Boqvist. I would be fine with Svechnikov or Zadina early and trying to trade back up into the 1st for D if we miss out on Dahlin.

If you could add Dahlin, Borgen, and Guhle next year, the future of the D suddenly looks transformed. If we miss out on Dahlin, however, I would be tempted to take Svechnikov. But as we know, the hockey gods are cruel to Buffalo. We'll finish last and end up picking fourth

In a state of quantum flux, depends on which second you ask me. In general, I think Mayfield and Rosen are the safest picks and I would be happy with either. I like Darnold, think there is more risk there, and almost zero chance we can get him. I have changed my mind on Allen and now like him, though the risk is great. I am always tempted to swing for the fences on a fella like that, so it's probably good that I am not a GM. I do want one of those four, though. Jackson worries me. I don't think he did himself any favors not having an agent and he just seems slight to me. I'm afraid he will be another RG3, but he does potentially have a high ceiling. I don't think Rudolph is a first round qb, but Gunner likes him as a borderline first round guy and he has a more expert eye.

One fella's tantalizing is another's excruciating, apparently

That's how I see it as well. This would imply that there is no way we can trade up before Cleveland's pick at one unless they definitively declare they are taking Darnold prior to the draft.

It's just a joke, but thanks for ruining my lunch.

Not unless it will make you feel better

Sorry, philosophical theology and Christian theology are in my wheelhouse. I actually write articles on this stuff on a theoblog.

One has to hope that Beane and McD are sound football minds with good judgment. I presume the hype is for the entertainment of fans. If the GM gets caught up in that, he won't be good at his job.

You have five grouped together, but OBD might have separation where one or two are strongly preferred. If they have five grouped roughly in the same area, obviously, one does not need to trade up to 2.

What is eternal life? What is eternity? What is love? None of these questions are limited to easy, univocal answers. Differences in Christian theology give profoundly different responses to the matter of suffering, for instance. In some Protestant versions of soteriology, justification is forensic and God's heaven a reward extrinsic to a metaphysical state of being. The Cross is suffering taken on by Christ so that the believer does not suffer. (In vulgar terms, this is categorized as "cheap grace.") It is likely a caricature of many forms of Reformation-inspired theology. Regardless, for much of the Christian tradition, the Cross is not extrinsic, not part of a purely individualist understanding of salvation, and not separable from Resurrected life. Hence, suffering is indeed central to Christian praxis for much of the tradition.