Orton's Arm

Maybin was the bigger bust, because he was picked much earlier.

Thanks, Bill, for the kind words. I've been wrong before, and there's a chance I'm wrong about Manuel. Ramius has argued Manuel's case eloquently. On the other hand, the article which appeared earlier in this thread--the one written by an FSU fan--argued the anti-Manuel case with equal eloquence. Ramius feels the author of that article is biased. Maybe he's right. But I also get the sense Ramius may be biased as well. Ramius's opinions about Manuel are about as opposite to those from the article as could possibly be the case. Both sets of competing opinions came from people who have probably watched every college snap Manuel has ever taken. After reading a lot of Manuel-related material--and after taking San Jose Bills Fan's opinions into account--my sense is that Manuel has great physical tools, is more accurate at throwing short to intermediate passes than Losman had been, and may or may not have better pocket awareness than Losman. I do not believe that Manuel was asked to make more than 1 - 2 reads after the ball had been snapped. I agree that if the Bills were going to roll the dice, it made sense to roll them on a quarterback. This isn't the quarterback I would have chosen, and that makes me nervous. Typically, when my opinion has sharply differed from the Bills' front office, I've been right and they've been wrong. I don't view that as much of an accomplishment: most people here knew the Whitner pick was a mistake, for example. The Whitner pick was bad enough that even you mentioned one or two minor concerns. Hopefully this time around the Bills' front office knew what it was doing!

Good thinking. I personally preferred Barkley to Nassib; and I think the Bills would have been better served using their third round pick on Barkley than on a WR who didn't even start for his own college team. But Nassib was my second-favorite QB in the draft, and I wouldn't have complained if the Bills had used their fourth round pick on him. Whether the Bills chose Barkley or Nassib, I agree that the right thing to do would have been to release Travaris Jackson. Barkley has often been described as "polished" and "NFL-ready," so the Bills could start the season with Barkley as a credible backup behind Kolb. The hope would be that in time, one or both of the Bills' rookie QBs would surpass Kolb; moving him down the depth chart.

If after watching a lot of Manuel's games you concluded he has good pocket awareness, there's a good chance you're right. If you are right, that would take one of my concerns off the table. A QB with good pocket awareness can get rid of the ball quickly when pass protection isn't there; while holding onto the ball/letting downfield plays develop when it is. A QB who lacks that awareness can't do that. Instead, he might decide to adopt a Rob Johnson strategy; holding onto the ball for long periods of time whether the pass protection is there or not. Or he might decide to go for a Trent Edwards strategy; dumping the ball off short even when he could have gone downfield. But even assuming you're right about Manuel's pocket awareness, I'm still not happy about his simplified, 1 - 2 read college offense.

The most important element of the article in question is the one subject it did not discuss: that of Manuel's ability to process on-field information. A few years ago, Gailey chose Trent Edwards as the starter over Ryan Fitzpatrick. At the time, this was portrayed as a sign that Gailey was foolish. But there were a number of points in Edwards' favor. He had better physical tools than Fitzpatrick, including a stronger arm. He was more accurate than Fitzpatrick. As for the mental processing stuff--Edwards had gone to Stanford, and had a recommendation from Bill Walsh. Unlike many other schools with division 1 football, Stanford does not lower its admissions standards for athletes on scholarships. So you'd think he'd have the mental aspects of the game covered; which together with his other attributes would have given him a clear advantage over Fitzpatrick. But no. For whatever reason, Edwards seemed mentally unprepared to take advantage of opportunities to throw the ball downfield. Edwards' attitude seemed to be, "I am not fully aware of whatever opportunities may or may not exist downfield; or how to best take advantage of them. I don't know how much time I do or don't have before pressure arrives from my blindside. Given all this uncertainty, why not play it safe by dumping the ball off to my RB?" Losman also had an inability to keep track of all 22 guys on the football field. His way of dealing with the resulting uncertainty was to go into backyard ball mode, improvising on the fly. As others have noted, Manuel's college offense was simplified. He wasn't asked to make more than 2 reads. Even with that, he struggled with pocket awareness. Will he succeed where Edwards and Losman failed? Will he do a better job of keeping track of all 22 guys on the field than Edwards and Losman had been able to?

> Apples to Oranges comparison. > Wade's defensive line consisted of players like Bruce Smith, Ted Washington, Pat Williams, and Phil Hansen > The closest example of a line that good is when Gray got to work with Pat Williams, Sam Adams, and Schobel. > Do you even remember the player on the opposite side of the line? Of the four defensive linemen you mentioned for the late '90s defense, two (Bruce Smith and Phil Hansen) were aging, and well past their primes. An aging, declining Bruce Smith is not necessarily better than Aaron Schobel in his prime. Similarly, an aging Phil Hansen is not necessarily better than Chris Kelsay in his prime. Sam Adams was roughly equivalent to either Pat Williams or Ted Washington. The Bills retained Pat Williams through the end of the 2004 season. Gray's defenses had a lot of talent and money invested in the back seven: Lawyer Milloy, Troy Vincent, Nate Clements, London Fletcher, Takeo Spikes, etc. > A 4-3 and a 3-4 have both strengths and weaknesses. > Neither one is inherently better overall than the other one. The defenses that Wade Phillips and Jerry Gray built were roughly comparable in terms of talent. But Wade's defenses were much better able to contain good offenses than Gray's defenses had been. That in itself does not prove that every 3-4 is better than every 4-3. But it does prove that Wade's 3-4 was much better schematically than Gregg's/Jerry's 4-3. > Yes, in a 3-4, you can send in a LB from different positions, but it's still a 240lb LB vs a 300+lb OL. > If the OL gets his paws on the LB, care to guess who wins that battle? Some of the LBs in a 3-4 are supposed to be significantly heavier than 240 lbs, specifically to solve that problem. An ILB in a 3-4 doesn't have to cover as much space as a MLB in a 4-3; so the ILB can afford to trade away a little speed for size and strength. > Salary cap problems caused far more problems than people realize or they choose to ignore the problems created by the salary cap. I am well aware of the salary cap mess TD inherited from Butler. > TD did not "choose" to cut a bunch of defensive players. He had no choice. I do not object to his cutting aging, expensive players like Bruce Smith. My concern is that some of the younger, less expensive players on that defense were lost in the transition to the new scheme. In his last few years as GM, Butler hadn't exactly acquired oodles and oodles of good, young defensive talent. So it's not like we lost too much here. But we did lose some. > If anything, that was the best time to switch defensive schemes. Why switch defensive schemes at all when the new one was a big step down from the old one? The Bills' offensive schemes from the late '90s were mediocre at best, so why not hire an offensive-minded head coach capable of actually fixing those problems, while taking an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach to the Bills' defensive scheme?

Every quarterback has his own mental ceiling; and there is significant variation in those ceilings from one QB to another. The various scouting reports about Manuel suggest he may have a low mental ceiling. The high Wonderlic score would seem to indicate otherwise. However, it's possible to practice and study for the Wonderlic. Scores obtained after significant practice/coaching/study are considered less indicative of mental ceiling than scores obtained without study. If I become concerned about a QB's mental upside (or lack thereof) due to an apparent inability to process information quickly while on a football field, there are limits to the extent to which a high Wonderlic score can assuage my concerns. As for Barkley and his physical tools--or lack thereof--I agree that a guy with, say, Holcomb-level arm strength would not be physically equipped to be a franchise QB. A guy with Trent Edwards-level arm strength would be; assuming he has the accuracy and intangibles you want. (Which Edwards himself did not.) I personally would rather take a physical risk (Barkley's arm) than a mental one (Manuel's information processing speed). Besides that, it's not like the Bills avoided risk with their third round pick. They took a WR who wasn't even a starter in college. If it's a choice between a guy like that and the QB many had rated as best available in the draft, why not take the QB? Good post!

Good post, and I agree with its overall theme. There are a few minor inaccuracies which I'd like to correct: > I think it was Dick Jauron who cut Pat Williams in his prime (switching from a 4-3 to a 3-4, of course), Back in the late '90s, the Wade Phillips Bills had a great 3-4 defense. The best defense I can remember us having. Wade's defenses would do a very good job of stymieing even the best offenses in the league. Compare those to Jerry Gray's blitz-heavy defenses under TD. If your team couldn't pick up the blitz, Gray's defenses would kill you. They'd absolutely rip your head off. Humiliate you. But if an offense could pick up the blitz--which better offenses typically can--then the effectiveness of Gray's defenses was largely neutralized. Even though Gray's best defense were supposedly top-5, the Patriots scored slightly more points per drive against it than they did in their 14 games against non-Bills opponents. If you're in a 4-3 defense, the only real way to send a pass rusher they're not expecting is to blitz. Blitzing makes you vulnerable. In a 3-4, you rush your three down linemen, plus (usually) one linebacker. But that one linebacker can vary from play to play; allowing a 3-4 to create pass rushing unpredictability without taking the risks of blitzing. This is one of several reasons why Wade Phillips' defense was so much better than Jerry Gray's at shutting down good offenses. The team TD inherited had a great defensive scheme, but not much in the way of an offensive scheme. TD therefore did the obvious: he completely dismantled the defensive scheme which had been so successful, and in some cases got rid of players who'd been chosen to fit that scheme. TD began that process with his very first major decision: his choice of head coach. In his coaching search, the final four candidates were all from the defensive side of the ball. With the exception of the courtesy interview given to our own defensive coordinator, each of those four guys could be counted on to dismantle our amazing defensive scheme, and replace it with an inferior scheme. Which is exactly what happened when TD hired Gregg. Pat Williams had been a very important part of Wade's 3-4 defense. He was a perfect fit for the NT position. On running plays, he'd use up two blockers and not get moved. On pass plays, he'd often use up two blockers also. When the Bills switched from the 3-4 to the 4-3, he became less good of a fit. As he started to reach an age at which defensive linemen often decline, TD made the decision to let him go. However, it turned out that the summertime of Williams' career lasted considerably longer than one might have expected. > Now Levitre's gone and maybe Byrd. I'd wanted the Bills to re-sign Levitre. The problem is that the Titans had a ton of extra cap space, and greatly overpaid for him. Had the Bills similarly overpaid for him, they would have created two sources of salary cap problems for themselves. 1) The money expended on overpaying for Levitre. 2) Other Bills' OL would compare any offers the Bills might make to Levitre's inflated contract. This would create huge problems when the time came to re-sign players like Wood or Glenn. (Much like the Bills' decision to overpay for Kelsay drove up the contract for Schobel.) If you overpay for a player on a particular unit, you always want it to be your most valuable player on that unit.

> I glad I never had you as a teacher. When I try to teach someone something, I suspend judgment about whether the person can perform a task, and make it my responsibility to teach them that task. > I can't really agree or disagree with anything you said here -- time will tell -- but it seems as if most, if all, of your posts are of a pessimistic tone I'm not always gloom and doom. I was one of Stevie Johnson's early supporters; and felt he had great potential. Same with Fred Jackson. I also saw potential in Trent Edwards; which shows that I'm capable of falling prey to false hope. > which in hindsight is acceptable given the fact we have the worst team in football for the > past 12 years. (I believed we were a 10-6 team last year, you probably thought 6-10). I don't remember exactly what I'd predicted, but 6-10 sounds about right. I predicted Fitz would not be the answer at QB; which turned out to be correct. I failed to predict the defensive collapse the Bills experienced. I thought, incorrectly, that Wannestedt was a reasonably credible coordinator, and that with the infusion of talent from guys like Mario Williams, our defense would significantly improve. Another case of me falling prey to false hope. > You draft a guy in the first, then give him mixed messages by drafting another in the 3rd? Barkley was a much better QB prospect than you'd normally expect to see in the third. If Barkley's presence on the roster would be sufficient to crush Manuel's confidence, then that would imply a fragile psyche. Anyone with a psyche like that will fail sooner or later anyway. The correct response to a situation like that is, "If those jerks drafted another QB to compete against me, I'll show them I'm better than him. Every practice I'll practice better than him, and every game I'll play better than he would have played." I'm not accusing Manuel of having a fragile psyche--I have no reason to suspect he does--but I don't feel that sending "mixed messages" should be a concern.

Good posts. I appreciate the time you took to describe your insight into FSU football. I read up on each of the main QBs before the draft. I formed my opinion then, before the Bills had committed themselves to any guy in particular. On the day of the draft, I got out of work around 9:00, changed into exercise clothes, and went to my apartment complex's exercise room. I turned on the T.V., changed the station to the draft, and got on the elliptical machine. I needed the exercise, plus I figured that I'm watching a draft about athletes, I may as well do something athletic. Each time when a team picked someone other than Barkley, I felt a sense of relief. By the time the Bills' pick came up, I was in the midst of my cool down. (Having finished half an hour of hard interval work.) I remember thinking, "Okay. The Bills got away with trading from #8 down to #16, without losing out on Barkley. Now only one last positive thing has to happen for me to be very happy." When that pick was announced, I felt something powerful. To describe what I felt, imagine a pretty woman you have a crush on. You're confident she likes you, and will say yes when you ask her out. Instead she strongly rejects you. That sudden feeling of unexpected, negative shock is exactly what I felt when Manuel was picked. Disgusted, I finished my cool down, turned off the television, and walked back to my apartment. I didn't even bother watching the rest of the draft; convinced that nothing positive the Bills might do in rounds 2 - 7 would compensate for the lack of a quarterback. I entered a state of football-related mourning. (As a Bills fan, I'm no stranger to this.) As you've seen, there have been those in this thread who have tried to sell me on the idea that my concerns about Manuel are misplaced. That I'm being unduly pessimistic in my assessment of him. But if Manuel does have Losman-like bandwidth limitations--as your post strongly suggests he does--it's much better for me to start dealing with those now, than it is to once again embrace false hope.

> So I am just curious what substantiated this knowledge you possess about his lack of mental bandwidth? From CBS Sports: " Has a tendency to stare down primary target. Average accuracy in the pocket and will get 'happy feet' when pressured." From Walter Football: Weaknesses Not a natural passer Decision-making Field vision Struggles to work through progressions From NFL.com ********* NFL Comparison: Blaine Gabbert . . . Manuel has the velocity and mobility teams look for in a project quarterback. ********* If the only criticism of Manuel was coming from biased FSU sites, I wouldn't be concerned. But a number of credible sources have raised serious concerns about his ability to handle the mental aspects of the game. Maybe those concerns are misplaced. Maybe he'll become Aaron Rodgers, except with better physical tools. But I'm not counting on it. If multiple credible sources raise concerns like the above about a QB, if he gets the "project QB" label slapped on him, it's usually a sign he's destined to be a bust. Peyton Manning was labeled "polished, ready to play." Ryan Leaf was considered more of a "project" who supposedly had higher "upside" due to his greater physical gifts. Not just Ryan Leaf, but every single last first round QB who was labeled a "project" went on to become a bust. (At least, as far as I remember.)

Excellent read. For those who haven't yet taken the time to read it, below is a quote: *************** He really doesn't have a good feel for the game. Manuel is very slow to recognize and react on the field. He doesn't recognize blitzes well, doesn't sense pressure (making it too late to use his athleticism to avoid it), is often slow to get through his reads, and struggles to read coverage in general, both pre and post-snap. FSU had to dumb down its offense a lot for Manuel, as Alan and I have noted many times when people claimed it was too complicated. The reason for this, IMO, is because of his lack of mental ability on the field. But don't take my word for it. Here is Mike Mayock, head scout for the NFL Network: ____________ . . . . "And as for me, E.J. Manuel didn't get asked to do a lot [at Florida State], and I don't think you can ding the kid. A lot of people say, ‘Oh, can he read defenses?' But I don't think they asked him to do it a lot. So we don't really know that. ___________ [Emphasis mine] Mayock says that FSU didn't ask Manuel to do much, but from my perspective, the reason behind this is important: he never demonstrated that he could handle more. Manuel also struggles to throw with anticipation. The next time he bangs the post route before the receiver breaks open will be the first. He is very much a rudimentary "see it, throw it" player. That doesn't work well in the NFL. In the league, certain routes demand that the ball comes out before the receiver is open or out of his break. ***************

I gave the Bills' draft a D. Below is my reasoning. 1. E.J. Manuel. Like Losman, Manuel has great physical tools. Also like Losman, Manuel did nothing in college to demonstrate he could handle the mental complexity associated with NFL offenses. On the contrary: even though his college offense was very simple, he still struggled with pocket awareness. If he doesn't have the bandwidth to handle a simple offense + pocket awareness, how is he supposed to handle the NFL? This pick hurts us twice. First, the pick itself has been squandered. Secondly and more importantly, the Bills are very unlikely to do much of anything at the QB position as long as they're deluding themselves into thinking Manuel is the answer. They even passed on Nassib and Barkley in the third! 2a. Robert Woods. A good pick. 2b. Kiko Alonso. The Bills chose him significantly higher than where the consensus had him slotted. This is not the first time the Bills have taken a player much earlier than he was slotted. Previous examples include Donte Whitner, Torrell Troup, and T.J. Graham. 3. Marquise Goodwin, WR. I have nothing against Goodwin as a player. But the Bills had already addressed the WR position with Woods; plus they had Johnson and Easley on the roster. Spiller and Chandler can also be used as receiving threats. Maybe "luxury pick" is too strong a phrase to describe this selection. But going into the third round, the Bills had a decent stock of talent at WR, and nothing at all at QB. That being the case, why not take Barkley? Even if there's a 70% chance his arm will never recover, a 20 - 30% chance of getting a franchise QB is well worth the use of a third round pick!

From dictionary.com: ***************** Bray noun 1. the loud, harsh cry of a donkey. 2. any similar loud, harsh sound. verb (used without object) 3. to utter a loud and harsh cry, as a donkey. 4. to make a loud, harsh, disagreeable sound. verb (used with object) 5. to utter with a loud, harsh sound, like a donkey. ************************* I agree with those who wanted the Bills to add another QB after the first round, in case Manuel is a bust. (Which he will be.) But Bray is not the answer. I recall reading an article indicating Bray had been in danger of being benched due to poor play. Not something you necessarily look for in your QB of the future.

Good post. You are correct to state that there is no way to directly measure the myelination level of a living human's brain. (Maybe if a neurosurgeon was doing surgery anyway, he could help himself to just a little extra healthy tissue. "The patient didn't seem like he was using his brain much anyway.") However, nerve conduction velocity can be directly measured. Note that low myelination levels are given as one possible cause for abnormal/disappointing results for a nerve conduction velocity test. Nerve conduction velocity can also be indirectly measured, through the use of reaction time tests. ********************** Ian Deary, University of Edinburgh, and Geoff Der, MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Glasgow, report on a study from the MRC Unit that measured both the IQs and the reaction times of middle-aged subjects. Both tests of mental ability were associated with life span, but reaction time was the stronger indicator. . . . Reaction time is moderately related to IQ, but is a simpler assessment of the brain's information-processing ability - one that doesn't bear so much on other, possibly confounding factors like knowledge, education, or background. *********************** Tests used to measure reaction time are generally along the lines of this one. Any reasonably competent front office should be giving tests like that to every QB prospect they're considering drafting.

I will give you a multi-part answer. 1. My post pertains to the NFL draft. 2. The NFL draft is sometimes described as a "crap-shoot." 3. The game of craps involves rolling six sided dice. 3.5 When rolling a single six sided die, the expected value is 3.5. Hey, don't blame me for any of this. You're the one who asked the question!

Suppose you were to build a virtual reality simulation which exactly replicated the decisions a QB has to make. You'd put on the VR goggles; and you'd see the defense lined up. The play clock would be ticking, so you'd have to quickly make an accurate pre-snap read. Then the ball is snapped! In the space of about 3.5 seconds, you'd have to take the (virtual) snap, drop back, set, sense and adjust to pocket pressure, modify your pre-snap understanding of the defense based on what it's actually doing, go through your first 2 - 4 reads, maybe look off a DB, and throw the ball. Oh, and the throw has to be accurate--ideally hitting your target in perfect stride. That's a lot of information to process in such a short amount of time. Suppose you were to take 10,000 people chosen at random, and allow them to play this game to their hearts' content. They'd get better with practice and with coaching. But as with any other video game, everyone who played this game would eventually reach a ceiling. A guy like Aaron Rodgers would have a very high ceiling--much higher than almost anyone chosen at random from off the street. A guy like Losman or Rob Johnson would have a much lower ceiling than Rodgers'--much closer to what you'd expect from an average member of the population. A person's ceiling in a simulation like the above is determined by the physical characteristics of his brain. Nerve Conduction Velocity (NCV) refers to the speed at which signals travel through your brain. It's been said that after the snap, Bledsoe took over a full second longer than Brady to make the same reads. It's likely that Brady has significantly faster nerve conduction velocity than Bledsoe. A second important characteristic is myelination levels. In electronics, insulation is used to prevent the signal from one wire from interfering with the signal from another wire. The more insulation, the less "cross talk," and the better the electronic device will likely work. Human brains are the same way: the higher your brain's myelination level, the better your brain will work. Aaron Rodgers likely has a very high myelination level, because he's able to keep track of many different information streams at once without getting the information scrambled. One of the most important things you can look for in a college QB is evidence of fast nerve conduction velocity and a high myelination level. If a college QB plays in a complex offense, if he consistently demonstrates the ability to rapidly and accurately process large amounts of information; odds are he has the mental upside you need. If on the other hand he plays in a very simple offense, and if he struggles with pocket awareness even within that simple offense, then it's very unlikely his brain's nerve conduction velocity or myelination levels are remotely comparable to Aaron Rodgers'.

> I wasn't happy with the first pick. Nor was I. Without a QB you don't have a chance. The Bills made errors of commission (taking Manuel) and errors of omission (not taking Barkley or Nassib, even though both were available in the third). I realize that neither Barkley nor Nassib are guarantees. But for a third round pick, why not take a chance? Either one of them would have been more likely to be The Guy than Manuel. A number of other Bills' picks look like they have potential. That's great. But if you don't have a QB, it won't matter. The Bills have painted themselves into a corner; such that they are virtually guaranteed not to have a QB for the next 3 - 4 years. Even after the Bills finally give up on Manuel and take another QB in the first round, who's to say they'll do any better the next time around than they did this time?

Not going to happen. I disagree with the Manuel pick for many of the same reasons I disagreed with the Losman pick.

Excellent comparison.

The Bills added another Kelly Holcomb in the form of Kolb. They completed the other half of the task today by adding the next Losman. Both Losman and Manuel have good physical tools. Neither had good pocket presence. Neither had done much, in college, to show they had the ability to quickly process complex information--an ability absolutely required to be successful at the NFL level. Manuel is more accurate than Losman at short to intermediate passes; whereas Losman was probably the more accurate of the two in the deep passing game. Manuel is the more confident of the two, and a better leader. It will probably take the Bills about four years to figure out he's not the answer. Four years of passing up other QB prospects. The first year or two may see a Kolb/Manuel competition, much like the Holcomb/Losman competition. To confuse the situation further, the Bills have Travaris Jackson waiting in the wings. Eventually, I expect Manuel to emerge victorious from that competition; and to have 1 - 2 good years. (Much like Losman's good year.) When I went to Yahoo!, one of the headlines was about how the Bills had shocked the NFL by taking a QB that most hadn't projected to go in the first round. This isn't exactly the first time the Bills have delivered this kind of shock. The Whitner pick was similarly shocking. I felt that the Bills had a chance to finally find a successor to Jim Kelly. They realized they needed one. My choice would have been Barkley. But if Barkley's arm was an issue, or if there were other problems with him, Nassib would have been a nice consolation prize. Or they could have waited until the 2014 draft. I really thought the Bills were going to get their QB situation fixed; which makes this pick more disappointing than the Whitner pick had been. More disappointing than the Music City Miracle. The last time I remember feeling this much sports-related disappointment was either No Goal or Wide Right. Maybe I'm wrong--both about Barkley and Manuel--and San Jose Bills Fan is right. For the Bills' sake, I hope that's the case. But right now, my instincts tell me Manuel is going to be another Losman or Sanchez. I should be sleeping right now. But I can't, because of the feeling that the Bills once again let a golden opportunity slip through their grasp. I hope, rather than believe, that this is merely a case of me indulging in unfounded paranoia.

Guilty as charged. I'm tired of being stuck with a name like Edwards' Arm! One reason I've kept it for so long is because I feel that if the Bills have the misfortune of not having a real QB, I should have the misfortune of not having a real screen name. The Bills could solve both problems later tonight! I agree that Ponder has thus far been mediocre; though he appeared to improve during the last four games of this past season. The point I was making with Ponder is that a QB who in the past might have gone late first/early second will now be off the boards early. If the Bills want that particular QB, they need to either take him early or not take him at all. > All one can do is select a course of action based on present knowledge... Agreed. > and based on present knowledge, Nassib and Barkley are late first round / early second round prospects > with potential (not certain) upside to become franchise QBs. Not convinced. Had Barkley come out after his junior year, he would have been long gone by 8th overall. So he didn't produce the same statistics in his senior year as he had as a junior. He was playing behind a nonexistent OL. It's hard to look like Joe Montana when you have no offensive line whatsoever. If he was an accurate QB, with great intangibles and a decent set of physical tools after his junior year, how did he suddenly become completely unworthy of the 8th overall pick after his senior season?

The Bills have had one franchise QB in their history: Jim Kelly. A few years ago, I remember reading and hearing that the Bills liked Ponder, and were considering taking him in the second round; or else trading back into the first for him. That plan didn't work as expected--and the Bills were stuck going another year without a successor to Kelly. It's great if you can get an Aaron Rodgers or a Joe Flacco--guys who were taken late in the first, and who turned out to be franchise quarterbacks. The teams that drafted those players certainly maximized the value of their draft picks. Suppose the Bills take Barkley 8th overall; and suppose he goes on to have as good a career as Flacco's. You could point out that this was a lesser accomplishment than Ozzie Newsome's; because Newsome had spent less (in terms of draft picks) to achieve the same result. And you'd be right. But at this point, finding a successor to Kelly greatly outweighs the importance of squeezing every last possible drop of value out of our 8th overall pick. If Barkley will fill the void left by Kelly, he makes sense at 8th overall. If he won't fill that void, it would be a mistake to draft him at all. If Barkley is the guy they want, it would be a mistake to let teams like the Jets have multiple opportunities to take him.

Jaws is just as wrong about Geno Smith as he was about Losman.

A song from the '70s. The last time an OG was taken in the top-10 was probably back in the '70s. Suppose the Bills used the 8th overall pick to add Warmack to their war machine. The logic would probably be, "we will build an elite running game with players like this." This is '70s logic: most teams have come to realize that the importance of the passing game has greatly eclipsed the importance of the running game. Taking Warmack 8th overall would be like the Dilbert episode in which Wally was hypnotized so that he could relive his life experiences from the '70s.