Koufax

Exactly. Taking him at #1 would have been silly. Taking him in the second round is fine if you think he has a chance to be your guy. In between, taking him #8 is closer in nature to that #1 than it is to the second round. I would argue that #16 is a lot like #30 in that all blue chip performers are gone, and you are adding in either some limits or some risk. If we could have traded down again that would have been nice, but letting him get to Philadelphia hoping he slides to #41 would have been silly if you really like him, and also taking the chance that a team moves ahead of you if you somehow got to #25 or so just isn't worth the risk. Trading down for an extra quality pick AND getting your top QB in the second half of the first round is completely fine outcome to me. Maybe there was a more profitable poker game to play and still get your guy, but you sure feel like an idiot if you misread the tea leaves and end up with your second favorite QB instead of your top guy. So there are two arguments against what happened: 1) REACH: Nobody else thought EJ was the top QB and he would have lasted until the 3rd round and you should have waited for him at #41 if you couldn't trade down a little further in round 1 (if anybody would take him in the second they would also consider trading up a little to get him and must really like him afterall). This seems pretty impossible to tell and again is a dumb strategy if there is a real risk you miss out on your guy. 2) WORHTLESS: He is not going to be a good QB, and you shouldn't pick him ahead of the other guys. Only time will tell here, but that means you are calling out the Bills scouting on their evaluations and QB projections. Could be true, but I don't see a strong enough argument in its favor to decide so emphatically and risk looking like an idiot if he pans out. It will take a little patience, but I am optimistic that he can improve on the decision making part of the game that is so crucial to go with good arm strength, mobility, accuracy, and leadership. Only time will tell, and if it were a certainty he wouldn't even have fallen to #8 with his physical tools, but I am happy to have him. I will keep an eye on Geno and Barkley (Nassib falls into the Mallett won't know anytime soon category), but I like our chances.

I think he has to be better than halfway decent to start week 1. You would want him to be enough better that it doesn't stunt his development, create controversy, put pressure, etc. If Kolb goes 1-3, it is a great situation for EJ after a month of learning and getting used to NFL speed and the offense. If EJ goes 1-3 he gets labeled as a bust, starts pressing, risks losing his job, etc. I'm happy for them to say it is a competition, and I would love EJ to come out with enough of an edge to win the job outright, but I think if it is close it is in the best interest of the team to have Kolb do his best John Kitna impression until he struggles, gets hurt, or EJ starts to separate himself. While not being a world beater, Kolb has struggled more with injuries than incompetence, and should be fine to have us ready to win on week 1 setting up a perfect situation for EJ who most everyone agrees is rough and unfinished.

They are certainly very similar, but I think that if they both prove to be in our top 3-4 receivers they can easily have one go deep taking a corner and bringing safety help, and have another in the slot using elusiveness on a short crossing route. And the attention that will have to get doesn't leave a lot of coverage for Stevie and Woods in four receiver sets, and Spiller out of the backfield. I like our offense with Stevie and Woods running precise intermediate possession routes with great hands and ball skills, while the fast guys spread the coverage and open things up for Spiller and EJ. But just as seventh round Stevie outplayed higher picks, I think there is a reasonable chance the topic of this thread could keep one of those early round picks off the field. Also don't forget that the uptempo offense can easily make use of rotating deep threats as the opposing defense gets worn down.

Fungible position. I want to have a very good LG, but I think that it shouldn't be Dockery, and between other team salary cap cuts and our current roster, someone completely reasonable will emerge by the start of the season, and I would rather have a competition than an overpriced starter (but most of all I would rather have Leveitre at a bargain rate, but that wasn't possible).

I think this nails it on the head. If we hadn't taken EJ, Nassib might have been a great value gamble in the third (I think if you aren't willing to take a QB in the third, then he probably isn't going to be a guy you are counting on for anything...even with Brady, the Patriots weren't ready to spend a FIFTH rounder on him). I think with EJ, it becomes a pick that probably adds very little value (if he really is ahead of Kolb/TJax as short term starter or longer term backup?), and creates a controversy on the player you are grooming, because of the coach connection and the headstart on the scheme. Simply put he had to be better than Kolb right now to make a 3rd (or 4th) worth it, and I think it is pretty clear that he is not better than Kolb right now. And I think a QB controversy would be more of a detriment to our team right now, than any "pushing and making both better" benefit. We handle the next two seasons with the full faith that EJ is going to be our franchise QB, and do everything possible to develop him, and to win with experience when he isn't ready to start. If something really major shows up in his rookie year before next year's draft that makes you realize he was a huge mistake, you can consider looking at the 2014 QB class, but absent something hugely disappointing, we have bet the 2013 and 2014 seasons on this guy and expect him to take over for Kolb within that window, and can evaluate how it all played out prior to the 2015 draft if necessary.

Kevin Kolb. Manuel isn't going to be ready, and he isn't going to be better than Kolb in week 1. His growth and progress is best if he has some more time to really learn the system and the NFL speed in practice, and wait for Kolb to stumble or get hurt later in the year. I would like if he can get some snaps on the field earlier, but I'm fine if he doesn't start any of our first 8 games.

I think you must have not counted the fact that we gained pick #16 or that New England didn't gain #52 as an extra pick, but as the swap for their pick. To simplify, I am going to drop off the seventh rounders and our third round swap: Rams moved 8 spots from 16 to 8 and paid #46 Vikings Moved 23 spots from 52 to 29 and paid #82 and #102 Falcons moved 8 spots from 30 to 22 and paid #92 49ers moved 13 spots from 31 to 18 and paid #74 Fish moved 9 spots from 12 to 3 and paid #42 The Raiders got hosed on value, but got the player they were going to pick at #3 anyway. The Bills got pretty good value and the player they wanted while picking up a top 50 pick. I am fine with this. I also think we could have picked Tavon at #8 if we liked him, and paid something like a third to move up from the second to the late first and still get Manuel, but again that is risking losing the guy you want. Even in comparing those, you have to decide between Tavon vs #41 AND #46 AND our 3rd. I think we very likely get two good starters at #41 and #46 and am happy with our moves. We didn't squeeze every drop of value possible, but a second trade down or staying at #8 and waiting or trading back up are both gambles, and not getting the QB you want is too big a price to pay for that.

I don't consider it a reach at #16, even if you think the player could be available #17-#32. They got an extra second rounder by trading down, and while they probably could have traded back further, it also could have turned on them and had them lose the quarterback they want. I'm completely fine with the draft pick strategy as a result of using their #8 pick to get their top QB and a seventh round pick. What this all comes down to is whether they picked the right top QB. Manuel is the one I have seen play the least, but as I read more I am encouraged. We don't need an Andrew Luck day 1 QB thrown to the wolves with Kolb and TJax, so he can play when ready and take time to learn. My biggest worry with him, and I hope the scouts and coaching staff knows much better than I do, is the things that people talk about over and over with him are the Jamarcus Russel/Ryan Leaf/Jeff George qualities of arm and athletic ability. My top two qualities I wanted in this draft were #1 Intermediate Accuracy (without which you aren't a viable QB no matter what other qualities you have), and #2 Decision Making (which makes your #1 useful). These are the Joe Montana/Tom Brady/Drew Brees qualities, and you have to hit on both of these to be successful. If you add in rocket arm or scrambling ability, all the better, but only as additions, not as primary abilities. I am confident and hopeful that he will be excellent at both of these, and able to add to it his great physical tools, hopefully some leadership, etc. But on draft day I think that someone like Barkley had the edge in each of the top two items that matter, so it is up to Manuel and the coaches to prove he can excel in these things and combine his other strengths into a dynamic quarterback. One positive that I think people have mentioned with taking the upside risk is that while the short term goal is getting back to the playoffs, the real goal is winning a Super Bowl (we went to four, but it was never quite right without the ring), and taking a little risk on upside over certainty and polish is probably a wise move in maximizing our chances of winning the big one. But this will all come down to field vision and decision making at NFL speed (I think his intermediate accuracy will be fine), and the day after the draft I have no idea what to realistically expect.

If we wanted Geno wouldn't we have taken him at #8? I think that they like several QBs the same, or have someone at the top of their board who they don't think other teams have at the top.

I wasn't sold on Austin, and although I am intrigued with Geno, I am not sure he is better than Barkley. I like this a lot with all the QBs on the board. One of them will definitely be there at 16, and probably our first choice (because if we wanted Geno we would have taken him 8th most likely).

I'm skeptical of the small size, but the production is there, as well as the elite speed, and maybe he would end up being what we hoped for out of Roscoe. I'm a little wary of him at #8, but getting him and Barkley wouldn't ruin my day.

I don't like the idea of the pick, but there might be a CJ Spiller best playmaker element to it, where he is the most valuable commodity at #8, and there is confidence to get a QB later in the round with a trade up, or sliding all the way to #41. I ***HATE*** a guard at #8. The difference between good and great at that position is probably less than anywhere else on the field. I am sure those guys will be great players, but I think what they would add to the Bills ahead of who we have or who we could pick in the 3rd is so so so much less than what a QB adds or a LB/CB/WR/TE/DE for that matter. Those guys will do less to make this team better than many other players available, and it isn't their fault, but the nature of the position. I wouldn't select a hall of fame punter at #8, and I wouldn't select World's Greatest Equipment Manager there either.

If he was better than those guys, NE would ask for more. They don't want a Brady injury to ruin their team, and they don't know how many more years Tom will actually play. I am sure he has learned a lot in his time with NE, but hasn't he been third on their depth chart in garbage time reps (i.e. when Gronk is breaking his arm on PATs)? Big arm is fun, but I don't think he has Barkley's football IQ, mid range accuracy, or decision making, and those are the traits we need most.

I think we pick a QB at #8, and I hope we do. I don't think that the 8th best player in this draft is a QB, but at a certain point the void needs to be filled, and the dice need to be rolled just like they are on every Whitner and Maybin non-QB. 1) Is you absolute favorite QB who doesn't get picked in the top 7 going to be available at #41? With a trade down? With a trade back into the first? While Geno could be gone and the lines pretty fine between Barkley/Nassib/Manuel, I think you don't risk it and get the guy you want most of that group. 2) Is the best QB available at #8 going to outperform Kolb in 2013? If you don't think this is more than 50/50, you can consider waiting for the 2014 draft and going with Kolb for a year, but I think there is a guy available at #8 who can outperform Kolb by week 9 of this season. 3) Is the best QB available at #8 going to outperform the best QB available in the 8-15 range of the 2014 draft in 2014? If you really think that this year's draft class is weak compared to next, and that a QB will be available when our pretty good team picks next year that as a rookie will outperform Barkley/Nassib/Manuel as a second year player, you could make a case for waiting and letting Kolb bridge to a stronger draft class. I think this is highly unlikely. 4) Do you need a week 1 starter? No, with Kolb and TJax, you clearly can let the best performing veteran break camp and start the season, waiting for the right moment to insert your draft pick after a little more practice experience. This in many ways lessens the Nassib advantage of knowing the coaches and playbook. There is no way that through training camp plus six or eight regular season games on the bench Barkley doesn't close that gap completely given his football IQ. I think that makes Nassib's familiarity an advantage from a scouting perspective, but not from a jumping right in perspective, and pushes things towards Barkley. It also gives a little more room to consider Manuel who is considered a project, because if you have your QB of 2014+ but he isn't ready to beat Kolb until later in the year or even his second year, that is fine if the long term progress is correct and the talent is there. All that said, I definitely hope to see a QB picked at #8, because that means that our scouting department thinks one of these guys is good enough. I read what others say and watch some highlights, but I don't really know in detail what our football guys do about any of these players, so I heavily trust their actual scouting and evaluations, while they can leave the big picture strategy to me :-). The #1 think I want out of our QB is medium range accuracy, hitting receivers in stride 10-20 yards downfield. The #2 thing I want out of our QB is vision and decision making, which are crucial to make #1 valuable. Arm strength, running ability, size and toughness, downfield touch, are all secondary to these #1 and #2 in my eyes. For me right now that puts Barkley as the top guy. I would still be very happy if Nassib/Smith/Manuel goes at #8 because that means that the coaching staff looked at all this stuff compared to Barkley, and decided that the other guy was better. But for now I am on the Barkley bandwagon, and hoping to hear a QB at #8. It wouldn't surprise me to see them try to get one with their second pick whether at #41 or trading up, and I could see Buddy going the Spiller route with Travon, but I think our QB void is too significant and that strategy risks missing the best signal caller for our team.

I think Nassib and Barkley are more similar than most people realize, and I see them both being successful in the NFL, and I would be happy with either. Both have the arm strength thing going against them, but I don't know that that will matter as much as release and accuracy or be the reason that either fail in the NFL. Two reasons I prefer Nassib to Barkley right now are the shoulder injury to Barkley, and the Syracuse connection where I think Nassib would be ready to start sooner. The fact that they are pretty similar in my book also means that it gives us a backup option to trade up/down and not reach at #8 if we don't think either of them are a lock at #8, and view them somewhat interchangeably. It would seem that one of the two will likely slide until late in the first round or into the second round, and also that both will be there still at #8. It is a little bit of a gamble, but waiting while they are both on the board, and then trying to trade up once one goes off the board (or even when both are on the board to get the first choice later in the round) could get us the QB we need and maximize the value of our draft. If however things don't play out that way, or the team doesn't view them as quite as similar and has a stronger preference, I am happy with them taking either (or Geno) at #8.

1) We just lost a very good LG because we don't value the difference of very good to good at that position a ton! Guards cannot make the difference that other positions can, and if a very angry and green Bruce Banner were available at #8, I would still pass. 2) I think our depth at guard is fine for the positional importance, and I would be fine to see a later round pick at the position. 3) And if there was a hall of fame punter I wouldn't take him at #8 just based on value added above a good player at that position. 4) Nasty is a reason he is a great guard, not a reason a great guard is worth a #8 pick. 5) Another reason he is a great guard is his SEC excellence. Still doesn't make me want a guard at #8.

I have some concerns about his accuracy and the likelihood he is a playoff winning franchise QB, but I don't follow college football as closely as many people here, so I am open to being wrong on that. What I take issue with is people talking about anybody being a reach at #8. There is no franchise QB who is a reach at #8. And if you are taking a guy you don't think will have a good shot at being a franchise QB he shouldn't be anywhere in the first or half of the second because that is too high for a backup QB. And thinking that a franchise QB is poorly enough thought of by the other 29 teams that he falls a full round really indicates some serious doubts of whether he really is a franchise QB. Manuel and Nassib are instead RISKS not REACHES. A reach is when you take a player who is useful but not valuable enough to warrant his round and he should have been picked later or not worried about because there is more value elsewhere with that pick. Manuel, Nassib, and Barkley are all either a great pick at #8, or a waste of a #41. I don't see any scenario where they are good enough for a #41 but not worth a #8. The only reason to wait is if you think the chances of them being a franchise QB are low enough that sure thing at another position is more valuable. I just don't see that at #8 and think the blue chip too valuable certainties to pass on are off the board at that point. Guys like Brees, Kaepernick, Dalton who are taken in the second round and succeed are all in the first four picks of the second round. Meaning those teams would have had to use a top four pick on them to pick them a round earlier, when a roll of the dice would be more costly. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see our franchise QB at #41, or see us trade back into the first or down within the first and still get our guy. But if there is someone who we think has any reasonable chance of being our franchise guy, waiting and hoping he slides instead of getting him at #8 is really dumb. And if we don't think someone will be our guy but are just rolling the dice or adding depth, I would rather not waste #41 on that either and settle for a 3rd round Mallet type. I will be very happy if the team picks Nassib, Manuel, Smith, or Barkley at #8, because it means that our coaching staff and talent evaluators think that guy has a good shot at being our franchise QB, and right now that is our black hole, and I trust their evaluation a lot better than mine. I won't care at all if he might have been available later, etc. Maximizing draft value is awesome across just about every position, but QB is something special, and if anybody seems like a reasonable chance at #8 take them. If not I don't know why we would spend #41 on them.

Who do you like at #8 that is more valuable to our team than a potential franchise QB? There are four reasons not to pick Geno at #8: 1) He is picked in the first seven picks 2) You think the % chance he becomes a playoff winning caliber starter is not very high 3) There is a monster player at another position ahead of him 4) You prefer Barkley apples to apples You are implying #3, and I'm wondering who that player is. Just like all the talk about wasting the spiller Pick, etc. I don't see the consensus Orakpo/Ngata here. I'm fine if our strategy to get our franchise QB involves drafting him with the #41 pick or in the 2014 draft, but only if we don't think there is a guy available at #8, which is our first choice. I happen to think both Geno and Barkley have a pretty good shot at becoming "playoff-winning caliber" eight year starter QBs. I would put the chances for Geno at about 70%, Barkley at about 50%, and Nassib at about 20%. Unless he is off the board or you think my numbers are way off, you take him at #8.

Seems like a really good football player. I don't see him falling to #41 though, so too bad we will miss him. I assume everyone here is enough in the 21st century to laugh at choosing a OG at #8 of course, and nobody would actually suggest that.

There is no guard at #8 who is good enough to be our best value there. We really need to roll the QB dice, but if we don't like what is there / trust Kolb for a year / think there will be a Dalton/Kaepernick bunching when we pick later, then they need to get a better and more impactful player here. I like good guards, I liked Levitre, and I hope we find a good guard to replace him. I also like gook punters, and I like good equipment managers, and I like good fullbacks. It is just that none of those positions have enough difference between great and good to use a #8 pick on. I really hope that careful scouting and draft evaluations and the first seven picks set us up to smartly pick a QB at #8, but if not we need to take a LB or WR or DE or position where the difference between good and great is more significant to the win total of a team. If there is a QB that you would be disappointed using a 3rd round pick on, then he probably isn't the QB you want and not likely to be better than what we have on the roster. Later round QBs are for depth or taking a small chance on a jackpot, but if there is a guy you think can be your QB and you pass on him to keep a 3rd round draft pick, I think that is a mistake. If you think he isn't worth a third rounder or even a second rounder, then I think you are probably looking at a backup QB which isn't a position to get "thrilled" about anyway.

I like this, but we also need to be prepared that we draft someone who needs some time and need a starter for half a year or a whole year. In that case I am fine with the winner of the Kolb / Tavaris battle in camp, and think it would likely be Kolb.

A lot of assumptions. As I mentioned before, Kolb has never started 10 games, thrown for 10 TDs or 2000 Yds. Fitz is coming off three straight 13 game, 3000 YDs, 22 TD seasons. So expecting Kolb to be better than Fitz seems like a little too much speculation. I think he could be, but the odds are less than 50/50. However, we had no chance to have Fitz at the cap and dollar numbers we paid for KK, and there would be the always disruption and controversy element of demoting a three year starter to backup, no matter how much Fitz might have agreed. And I agree that the likely difference between the two is not significant enough (neither would win likely win us a playoff game before our 2013 pick is the starter, and neither would be so terrible as to hold back the team). I am very happy with the Kolb signing, for depth, competition, backup potential, and potentially biding time for a draft pick to develop, but anybody who preorders their Officail Kolb Jersey is probably going pretty far out on a limb.

If by "dilemma" you mean picking Geno Smith at #8, and deciding who to release between TJ and KK at the end of camp, then yes, that would be a "dilemma". There is no way we should pass on Geno at #8 for a less important position. We need a franchise QB more than anything else, and an amazing guard or a talented linebacker or any other need can't interfere with that. Kolb gives us much more flexibility not to reach at #8 if we think there is only #41 talent on the board, or if the chips fall badly, even push our QB pick to 2014. But it does not give us any chance of passing on a QB we think could be (50/50 or greater, not a Luck lock) a playoff caliber starter. I think Geno is very clearly in that "could be" category, and Barkley might very well be as well. I think everybody else falls into the less than 50/50 chance hope or project and would be fine with taking at #41 or later in the first, but I would be very skeptical about taking at #8.

I am quite excited to add Kolb who can compete to be the backup if we get a star in the draft and can be our John Kitna if our QB of the future isn't game ready or isn't there until the 2014 draft. But the Drew Brees comparison is completely unreasonable. He was coming off two Pro Bowl caliber years in a row, and his numbers were pretty similar to his first years in NO other than NO didn't have Tomlinson and his pass attempts went up. Kolb has never had a 2000 yard or 10 touchdown season or played 10 games in a season despite being 28 years old. Those are thresholds that Tavaris Jackson and even Trent Edwards have reached, and Fitzpatrick just put up three 13+ game 3000+ yds, 23+ TD seasons in a row. I like Kolb's potential with a strong O-Line, and I like having Aaron Corp slide down the depth chart. But we can't get ahead of ourselves with expectations.