mannc
-
Posts
18,539 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mannc
-
-
The point I made on Wilson was that he was available for us in the third round. Nix moved up in the third round to acquire a track receiver who didn't come close to working out. It was rumored that Nix was going to take a qb, maybe Cousins, but Washington beat us out in the round. In addition, the Bills could have drafted Carr or Bridgewater with trade downs in the first but this stolid organization didn't seize the opportunity to acquire a qb. It was also reported that Whaley ranked Prescott higher than Cardale and waited until the fourth round pick to take a qb. Instead of taking Prescott in the third, who he was interested in, he instead took a raw and lazy DT from Ohio State.
The point in listing the above qbs is highlighting the fact that this organization has had plenty of opportunities to select good prospects at reasonable spots in the draft. This organization that hasn't had a legitimate franchise qb in over twenty years didn't act with any sense of urgency resulting in an inadequate staffing at the most important position.
Now there are loud rumblings that Whaley's job is in jeopardy. His job is in jeopardy because based on his lackluster performance it should be in jeopardy.
John, you are absolutely correct that under Nix/Whaley, the Bills have failed to draft quality QBs at a time when the team was in desperate need. Passing on Cousins and Russell Wilson is the most egregious example of this. I don't buy the "everyone else passed too" argument. Sure, other teams should have pulled the trigger, too (Jacksonville passed on R. Wilson for a punter) but few other teams were as QB-needy as the Bills were at that time. And then, the next year, they used the 16th overall pick on a guy most teams graded at the end of the third round. (McShay this week said one team had a sixth round grade on EJ--as a TE!)
I don't think its fair, though, to criticize the Bills for failing to trade up for Carr. We have no idea what it would have cost or whether Oakland would have made the deal. And I'm certainly shedding no tears over losing out on Teddy Bridgewater. Although it was outrageous that Whaley traded away two fourth round picks to move up for Ragland, I think it's premature to complain about the failure to nab Dak because we did at least take a shot with Cardale a few picks later and, who knows, Cardale might turn out OK.
-
Perfect. Then the team saves money on the fifth year option!Whaley will negotiate a trade down to 13 but McDermott nixes it. Doug & Sean start wrestling.
We get our pick to the podium after three teams pile on and get their picks in before we get ours in.
We pick 13th and get nothing in return.
-
If Trubisky (or whomever) looks that good, they won't be sitting on the first overall pick.What if Trubisky looks like Mariota as a rookie? Or Dak? Or Wentz? Or Jameis? Where would it make sense for them to hold Trubisky and sell the pick? There is a level of play that will force them to pass on QB.
-
I agree. It will be a fun night for Browns fans. They deserve it.I have taken some flack for this, but I love what Cleveland has done (provided the FO & scouts can hold up their end of the bargain and Haslam keeps his hands off). This is a ton of talent in this draft for them...
Does anyone think the Browns might actually be ok with going into 2017 with Cody Kessler as their starter? I thought he played pretty well before he got hurt.
-
Exactly. There is basically one way to get the "next big thing" at QB: get lucky and bottom out at the right time.
Sure you can find guys later in the draft. Look at Brady. Look at Dak last year. You just have to be right and get the right guy.
In your first sentence, you say that bottoming out and getting lucky is the only way to get the proverbial Franchise QB, but in the next sentence, you give two examples of teams that found one without doing any such thing. You could also have mentioned the Steelers, Saints, Packers, Redskins, Ravens and Raiders as teams that did not have to "bottom out and get lucky" to find a franchise QB, thus completely obliterating your initial point.
-
It wasn't Wilson. He was taken in round 3. Cousins went in round 4. I think Nix opted for a DB from Wake Forest in that round.Russell Wilson and Cousins were there to be had for us in that draft year but Nix dithered. It was a disastrous decision that has had lasting repercussions on this troubled franchise. Nix commented after that particular draft that he was eyeing a qb that was taken just before us in the fourth round. I believe it was Cousins while some say it was Wilson. I never believed it was Wilson because Nix had the old school bias of a preference for prospects to meet a physical profile.
-
RG3 was 3 like 3 1sts and a 2nd. If the Bills traded down this year and picked up an extra 1st they can do something like their 2 1sts next year, a second next year or (2020) and a 1st in 2019. They would still have the player this year at 25. If they were to trade up this year as an example it will cost their 2nd at least. For me I would rather:
- pick 25, pick 44 & Darnold or Rosen
Over
- Trubisky, 1st in 2018, 1st in 2019 and 2nd in 2020 (if the price was that extreme)
It really amounts to Trubisky + a 1st vs. Darnold/Rosen. I'd rather the latter but everyone is different.
I just think a trade up like that is a terrible idea. If there is a bona fide can't miss QB, the price will be extortionate. Look how much the Lambs had to pay to move up for a middling prospect like Goff. It puts way too many eggs in one basket and puts an enormous amount of pressure on the guy you draft to be "The Savior." Despite all the scouting and heavy breathing, the guy might not pan out, and of course, the player you draft can get hurt. I know, any player can get hurt (like RGIII), but you are giving up a ton of premium picks for ONE GUY.
-
The problem is that if you build yourself a nice mediocre KC or Houston type team you'll win 11 games each season, have zero chance of going anywhere in the playoffs and lose early every year for 5-6 years.
Then your core players get older, teams poach your free agents or you sign players to huge contracts to keep them and maintain the mediocrity and suddenly the window of being somewhat decent but going nowhere closes and you're back to square one.
That's the plan if you do not have a QB.
KC and Houston will never advance to the Super Bowl, let alone win without a real QB. Both teams have stacked rosters and good coaching. They will win a bunch of games, then lose in either the Wild Card or Divisional round again, depending on who they draw for matchups.
So what's the point?
Worst of all, your mediocre "no chance in the post-season" team will never be up high enough to take a top QB prospect.
The bolded sentence is demonstrably false. Rogers, Brees, Wilson, Brady, Carr, Cousins, Prescott etc. all taken outside the top 20 picks in the draft.
I don't disagree (which is why I want another 1st). If the Bills are around .500 they are picking between about 8-15. If the Texans are 10-6 and are picking 24 you'd have a tough package to beat. Not many teams can give you something like 12 and 24 as a starting point.
If there is a "can't miss", Andrew Luck-type QB at the top of the draft, you aren't going to get him with picks 12 and 24. You either won't be able to get him for any price, or you'll have to mortgage your future, like the Redskins had to do to get RGIII.
-
I would be willing to bet that a QB at 10 would have a similar rate of becoming a franchise QB as a second round QB historically.
In reality, the best QBs are drafted in the first few picks, definitely before 10, and then the late gems. (wilson 3rd, brady 6th, etc...) My opinion is you draft a QB in the first 3 picks or you wait until later rounds. No need in wasting picks (like the jets) just drafting a qb yearly for the sake of it. OP wants to believe all you need is QB but that is only true with the Cheaters. Even Peyton Manning and Drew Brees needed significant help getting rings, and only did when they had defenses that were class of the league. Are you suggesting we will get a QB better than Manning or Brees at the tenth overall freakin pick?
The theory that you can't get a franchise QB drafting in the middle of the first round, but you can in the later rounds makes no sense whatsoever and is easily disproven. (A. Rogers, B Roethlisberger, to name two off the top of my head.)
Very good to great QBs can be found anywhere in the draft, and even in UDFA.
-
Go back through your research and count the number of franchise quality starters that were drafted outside of the top 3. Also go through all of the other QBs drafted and double check the percentage of them that are franchise guys. Franchise QBs are picked at the beginning of the draft and once every few years a mid round guy comes along. About 10% of drafted QBs end up as franchise guys. In a class where their are question marks you don't take those chances imo. You set yourself up to get a guy that's more likely to hit.
Actually, I think your numbers are, if anything, overly optimistic. There are franchise QBs and there are true Franchise QBs, guys who will raise the play of everyone around them and get a team with otherwise mediocre talent to the playoffs and beyond, year after year. There are really only 3 or 4 of the latter in the league right now and none of them was drafted in the top 3 or even the top 8. There are other guys who are good, but not good enough to literally change the fortunes of a franchise and keep his team in contention every year (Matt Stafford, Matt Ryan, Phillip Rivers) and then there are a few up and comers who might get there (Winston, Mariota, Carr). A team should always be trying to find a franchise guy, but that doesn't mean they have to be reckless in doing so, by trading up or by using first round picks on guys who have only started one year in college. If there is one thing we have learned, it's that no one really knows where the next great QB is going to come from. Use your picks wisely to build a platform from which your QB can be successful, once you find him. Dallas comes to mind...
-
Thanks! What kind of grade did you have on Shaq last year? Did you have him rated higher than his teammate, Kevin Dodd?Since, unlike some others, you asked nicely, I'm happy to oblige because I'm a lovely fella
I've already gone into the athletic restrictions on Barnett which is a big part of why he's outside the 1st round for me. He's also a snap jumper and lines up offside a ton (which isn't always called). As Gunner said, his hands are really impressive (up there with Jon Allen for sheer brutality) and he plays with a high motor. I think he can be a 6-8 sack type of guy but I'm not investing a premium pick into that type of player.
Taco is an interesting player because he's got really solid hands and he has the length that allows him room to work them. I think he's still fundamentally quite raw but he's not at the peak of his powers yet. He can be a quality speed-to-power rusher from the LDE spot but I don't see a lot of bend with him. He needs to develop some consistency with his counters because he has to win with power/technique rather than with athletic ability. Can be a really good player by Year 2-3 but his body of work leaves him as a project for now. If he made it to 44, I'd bite your hand off for him.
Harris is the one I struggle with the most because the coaching changed at Mizzou last year and he struggled. He was well taught under Craig Kuligowski until the end of 2015 so you hope that he's not a problem child buying into a new system. His spin move is the trump card but his testing was borderline atrocious (even with his improvement at his Pro Day, it was only comparable to Yannick Ngakoue). He definitely plays faster/more agile than he tests though. Like Ngakoue (8 sacks as a rookie), I think he's fairly one-dimensional for now and suited to being a designated pass rusher. I think he's scheme-versatile as well, which boosts his stock.
Just because I don't have a 1st rounder on a player doesn't mean that I hate him. It's just that athleticism on the edge matters and I can't take Barnett/Harris really early because they fall short of certain benchmarks. That's not to say that they can't be good players and, if I'm wrong on them, I'll admit to my mistakes.
-
Thanks, C.Biscuit. To me, this kind of write up is more interesting than another mock draft. Agree with you regarding Adoree Jackson. Love his return game, and with Goodwin's departure, the Bills have a need for another world class long jumper!
-
But Dave, I read that the only passing stat that matters is total passing yards and that our passing game is "bottom of the barrel."One could argue Tyrod is more of a pocket passer than Cam Newton is.
Tyrod ran a combined 199 times in his last 2 years as a starter.
Cam Newton ran a combined 222 times in his last 2 years.
Tyrod outgained him though because he is more athletic than Cam Newton.
Newton gained 995 yards. Tyrod gained 1148 with less runs.
By the way, Tyrod also beat him in passing stats. Tyrod was more accurate - considerably more so. Higher completion percentage. Higher yards per pass.
Face it. For as much flak as Tyrod has gotten from Bills "fans" - he has actually been a better player than Cam Newton who is held in such high regard around here.
How many people would have guessed that? Weird huh?
-
29 starts. Of course he can get better.Where is the evidence that a QB going into his 7th year suddenly becomes better? Why is this an argument? If you like TT, fine. But don't tell us he is going to get better.
-
I am a Mahomes fan now. If the Bills don't draft him I will enjoy watching him school other teams.
Of course I wish the Bills would wake up and get a gunslinger in here. Last time we had one it worked out ok...
One thing we can agree on: I like Mahomes better than any other QB in this class, by quite a bit. I don't think it's the way the Bills should go, but I certainly would not be unhappy if we land him at 10.
-
That's the thing, you've got to figure out how much is scheme-driven. Mitch Trubisky completed 68.2% of his passes but I still think he's got some potentially fatal accuracy/placement issues.
I wish things like average depth of target and yards after catch were more closely tabulated in the college ranks. It's a pain doing it myself.
Yep. It's easy to complete lots of short passes in some systems. That is one of my criticisms of the Roman/Lynn system: It does not seem to be a system that creates the opportunity for the type of easy, short completion that keeps drives going. In fairness, one of my biggest criticisms of Tyrod is that he has poor touch on those sorts of passes. From what I have seen, Cardale seems to excel at them.
-
Not to turn this into a Watson thread, but i will try.
He passes my test unlike Cardale, he has at least three years of experience with a completion percentage above 60. That's what I look for in QBs.
CAREER STATS
- SEASON CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT RAW QBR ADJ QBR
- 2016 388 579 4593 67.0 7.93 65 41 17 17 151.1 73.3 84.9
- 2015 333 491 4104 67.8 8.36 67 35 13 15 156.3 77.9 86.7
- 2014 93 137 1466 67.9 10.70 74 14 2 8 188.6 87.1 90.9
Did you also advocate drafting Kellen Moore? He started four years and had a career completion percentage of almost 70 percent. What about Tim Tebow?
-
Wouldn't that result in us having FEWER picks?Thank god, that other thread can die.
I'll miss him, but man I want more picks. Maybe trade the Pats and Dallas fifths for a fourth.
-
Um, no.What?
That makes no sense what-so-ever. You are making an argument that Taylor is fine because our ground game produced a majority of the points?
-
But John, passing TDs are worth more than rushing TDs.bla bla bla
bla bla bla
bla bla bla
Top 10 in the league in points DING DING DING
-
I agree. This is why the "draft a QB every year" refrain is nonsense.And by the way, if we take another mid round QB, suddenly we're the NY Jets. Buncha mediocre QB prospects who will never get enough reps to see their development through anyway cause there's too many of em on the roster. Take one if you love one but if you honestly think there isn't one worthy, do NOT take one for the sake of taking one. It's really not that complicated.
-
The Bills ranked 30th out of 32 teams in passing yards last year. That is bottom of the barrel.
A meaningless statistic given the fact that they were the top ranked rushing team and threw the ball less than any other team in the NFL. When they threw the ball, the Bills did so pretty effectively. With a new OC, they will probably throw the ball more this year.
-
If we perform on offense the way we did last season, top 10 in scoring and first in rushing (second season in a row)
Yes, I believe getting a Rueben Foster at 10 would change the overall defense, I mean they're comparing him to Luke Kuechly. When he went down that defense in Carolina didn't perform close to the level they were when he was in there.
I'm not against taking a QB in the draft, just not at 10.
Foster might very well slip into round 2, just like Ragland did.
-
the Bills stubbornly believe they can win with bottom of the barrel passing offenses.
Now you're just spreading disinformation. In his first 29 NFL starts, Tryod's numbers have been more or less on par with the numbers put up by Jameis Winston and Marcus Mariota in their first two years. At this point, the statistics show that Tyrod ranks near the middle of the pack of NFL starters, with potential to improve. And then there's the fact that, with their "bottom of the barrel" passing offense, the Bills ranked in the top quarter of the league in TDs in 2016.
I'll leave this list here for the non-QB in the 1st people
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted