Dr. Who
-
Posts
7,083 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Dr. Who
-
-
2 hours ago, ROONDOGG55 said:
I think Josh Allen would be a great candidate to sit behind an Eli Manning, Sam Bradford, or Alex Smith. We should be able to get him later in the first round too Go get Vita Vea with the other first round pick.
I don' t claim to be a qb expert. I liked Watson and Mahomes in the last draft. Folks that seem more astute than I such as GunnerBill are not high on Allen. Not sure if inaccuracy is curable or not, but it's one of the important traits you want. Whoever is drafted (and I am assuming we will draft a qb high) bringing in a vet like you suggest is a good idea. (I also surmise Tyrod is unlikely to be back.)
1 hour ago, papazoid said:sign Cousins and keep all your picks....bills have way to many needs
Certainly prefereable to the idea of "building around Tyrod."
-
1 minute ago, 2003Contenders said:
Question is: Would the front office be willing to give up both firsts, one of our seconds and our third to acquire the QB? If they believe the kid is a legitimate franchise QB you would have to think so.
Yikes. That's a heavy price for a team with lots of holes to fill. You're not trading into Cleveland or the Giants' spot, so you're likely looking at the third best qb on the board.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:
Stay put and let one of the QB’s fall in our lap. Rosen and Darnold are gone. Forget about it. Lamar Jackson will probably be a top 10-15 pick when it is all said and done. The rest are distinct possibilities, IMO, around where Buffalo will be picking.
I like Mayfield and Jackson as qbs that might be there. Worried about Josh Allen. Looks like Tarzan, accuracy of Jane, but who knows, really?
-
2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I don’t hate trading up for a QB. I hate trading up for Mason Rudolph. I might be wrong but he’s the guy that I like least of the prospects to go early.
He's got an outstanding WR corps and a conference that doesn't play defense. He seems pretty uninspiring to me.
-
1 hour ago, ctk232 said:
9-7 likely won't cut it with the Ravens remaining schedule, if Cincy and LA keep winning, and/or the Chiefs don't slide. Unless we win out or go 4-1 for the remainder, we're sitting on the bubble looking in. I'm crazy enough to think we can go 4-1, but they took their fate out of their own hands with three deplorable performances in a row, two to AFC teams.
Yeah, for some reason I forgot about the Ravens. Truth is, we sneak in, we get slaughtered most likely. So officially, I don't really care. This is what I tell myself, but come game day, no matter how awful we are, I can't help rooting, so unofficially, I hope we go 4 - 1, etc.
-
1 hour ago, SaviorPeterman said:
This team simply can't catch a break.
But at this point is there any real reason to not shut down Benjamin completely for the rest of the season? It's not like this team is going to the playoffs and it's time to start thinking about next year and beyond which Benjamin is obviously going to be a part of.
You don't think Miami games and the Colts are winnable? 9 - 7 probably does make the playoffs.
-
Romo is great. Insightful and likeable. And I suspect Barbarian is right about CBS.
-
1 hour ago, simpleman said:
My reasoning is the SF trade would cost us too much. Denver would not. The first 2 or 3 spots will cost a premium. If Denver is around a 5, you might be able to give them a first and a 2nd from among our highest in each round, and TT. We still would have a 1st and a 2nd, instead of not having a pick in those rounds. Denver could win now with TT. They are not in an almost total rebuild mode like Buffalo is. With a decent QB they can be patient to get the right QB of the future without expending any draft capital to move up this year. We give up a QB we most likely won't want anyway next year, and still have a full regular component of picks we sorely need to fill the extra the holes management has created this year. SF would have no interest in TT. They most likely would want both our 1sts and a 2nd at minimum. Who would we have to trade to SF that we don't want that SF wants and can afford. Jimmie is going to cost a lot to re-sign. Are you thinking Glen?
I wouldn't want to trade Glen if he can get to a place where he is healthy most of the time. If we judge he can't, I'd consider trading him to move up if it would get Rosen. Your take is plausible, though I still wonder if Denver would be amenable. I'm likely to change my mind a lot once more scouting stuff comes out -- I'm not at all an expert on qb -- but I like Rosen and Mayfield the best. I'm guessing Darnold stays in school. I'd take Jackson if he fell to us; I don't think you have to trade up to get him.
-
Why wouldn't you just trade with SF? I think Denver knows they don't have a qb worth keeping on their roster. They are the competition.
-
They should hire Kevin Sumlin. A&M is ridiculous for letting him go. He's won plenty there.
-
1 minute ago, jmc12290 said:
QB next year, obviously.
Correct. OP talks about qb longterm, which implicitly refers to the 2018 draft. Those who are making it about this year are bad at reading or just want to perpetuate a useless and redundant argument.
-
5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
Some of the others... todays opponents included.. are at least trying to find theirs though. I don't think many object to rolling with Tyrod in the interim.... but it is the lack of a shot on guy that could have been the answer in the draft that irritates people.
Yep, but for some holding this view makes one a "hater."
-
Just now, bobobonators said:
The fact that you just had to qualify this win says it all. Thanks.
Alright, I think making those kind of distinctions is a sign of intelligence. You think its a sign of bias. Have fun with that.
-
Just now, bobobonators said:
People have to complain about a road win vs a team thats 1st in their division.
No one's complaining about the win, so far as I can see. And the Chiefs are plummeting -- losing to the Giants was indicative, so one has to contextualize first in their division.
-
Just now, Jackington said:
1% of his throws are INTs this year. You're wrong to say that doesnt matter. Petermans is 21% lol
I didn't say it doesn't matter. I responded to a sorta argument that made Taylor not throwing picks the singular basis for assessing his value.
-
11 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:
Look at the teams that lost today. Every QB threw picks. Look at the teams that lost to us. Their QB threw picks. Guess what Tyrod doesn't do? Any questions.
If not throwing picks is all that matters, just don't throw the ball. Silly, reductionist argument. It's excellent that we beat a struggling team on the road. Doesn't validate TT as anything more than the most adequate qb currently on the roster. Most folks have figured this out.
-
Just now, Domdab99 said:
the most Billsy thing ever would be for Mahomes - the QB they traded away from - to come in and lead the Chiefs to the comeback victory.
You had to say it
-
21 minutes ago, The Wiz said:
Part of the problem that the bills have always had over the drought is getting good players and not overpaying them. Problem being is most players don't want to come to a perennial loser like the bills so they have to sweeten the pot by overpaying them or giving them long term deals. This hand ties them with the cap by having to give them these deal and makes it harder to replenish players.
I do think having a better overall team would attract more free agents and retain the talent that they have without having to break the bank. Again, the problem is we need the talent to be better but haven't had the ability to do it with the large contracts they have given out in the past. I think part of the purging of current players and big contracts is a good first step into clearing cap space for future free agents and players that will fit into their system.
Just my 2 cents.
I think if you are perceived to have a franchise qb, it makes it a lot easier to persuade potential free agents to join up.
-
6 minutes ago, jahnyc said:
Watching the Sabres over the last couple of years, I have wondered if the stripping of talent through the tank and not having a pipeline of young talent meant that it would take years to replenish the talent and become competitive to make the playoffs, which seems to be the case now. I am wondering if a similar problem has been created by the Bills. Since last season, the Bills have lost (through a combination of free agency, trades and releases), among others, Watkins, Woods, Goodwin, Gillislee, Zach Brown, Dareus, Gilmore, Darby, Nickell Robey, Aaron Williams, Corey Graham, and Jonathan Williams. Many of these players were starting caliber players.
I know that some of these players were free agents and we did not have the cap space to retain them. I also understand that football is different than hockey, and teams can improve significantly from year to year, but are we starting a new rebuild from a very low base of overall talent? I also know that we have a lot of picks in the next draft, but if we trade up to draft a QB, we may not have those picks available. At a minimum, we will need a significant infusion of talent. I hope through the draft and free agency we will be able to fill our holes for both starting players and depth players, but my concern is that this will take too much time because of the realities of from where we are starting this process.
I think the difference is hockey drafts 18 yr olds that need years to develop. I think an NFL team can rebuild more quickly, but we are certainly starting with a roster largely bereft of talent.
-
2 hours ago, JM2009 said:
The defense has been beyond bad since Dareus was traded. There is no pass rush at all. I'd like to win against Miami and the Colts at home, so I'd rather have TT start. KC and NE have much better teams than us, but Miami and the Colts , they can beat. Long time till next September. I'd like to enjoy a couple more wins before than. TT won't be here in 2018 and Peterman is a backup talent at best in the NFL.
He's not the long term answer, but those numbers suggest he isn't terrible like some make him out to be. I hope he goes somewhere in 2018 where he is appreciated more.
Most folks would be fine with TT as a bridge qb if we had a plausibe, high draft pick potential franchise qb waiting in the wings.
-
2 hours ago, jrober38 said:
We should just target Mayfield with our 1st round pick. He'll probably be available in the 12-20 range, which is where we'll end up picking.
Then cut Tyrod, bring in a cheap veteran, and let Mayfield, Peterman and the vet compete for the job. Then spend the rest of our picks fixing the defensive front seven.
Well, I mostly agree, but you better use some draft capital or free agency to improve the o-line as well.
-
1 hour ago, Shotgunner said:
I'm blind or intentionally argumentative? No. I'm being sensible. You say he traded speed for this and that, that's an abridged version. All the trading in draft, preseason, and season accrued draft picks. The players are just so we have someone to roster this year, and since the draft picks have not even been used yet, you are still way too early on judging the job. It's the plan, and you have to let it play out before you pretend to already know the outcome.
I'm not just some McD fanboy, and I have concerns, but realize that judging it now is foolhardy. We let him tear down the roster, and that is already done, so now we have to allow him to rebuild and spend all that draft capital. We absolutely need to let this play out rather than punctuate his tenure because we weren't patient enough to give him a legitimate chance.
I don't care who you are, you can't judge "roster building" in less than a year. You just can't.
No one can reasonably argue with this. I am not confident this regime knows what it is doing. I did not like the Sammy trade or the Dareus trade, but you can't judge a vision before new players are brought in. Lots of new scouts; hopefully, they know what they are doing. I'm really hoping they know how to evaluate qb.
-
8 minutes ago, JM2009 said:
I won't support agendas. TT just happens to be the best QB we have had in a bit. He's not the long term answer, but we haven't had better since he has been here. That's all there is to any of it.
I think you have more of an agenda than you admit or perhaps recognize, but that's fine with me. You bashed Tyrod's awful play against the Saints, so good for you. I don't really care who plays qb this year. I'm not interested in getting into the playoffs as a marginal wild card team in a year where the AFC is pathetically weak. If one does care about that, Taylor makes more sense. I thought Peterman might fit Dennison's offense better, but the oline is so bad you need a fella with Taylor's athleticism.
-
On 11/19/2017 at 2:59 PM, MAJBobby said:
I agree heck even Falk might sneak in the 1st. Just get tired of the annual October and November bad draft class talk. Happens every year
Sure, and every year about this time, folks start figuring Bills' wild card odds and wondering if we will finally get a qb in the next draft that can play.
Call the 32 2018 starting QBs
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
What I really want to know is who is the second string qb on the Bills -- I hope its Mayfield.