Koufax

I'm rooting against the Chiefs 16 times this year, so Tom Terrific can have this one.

It is important to remember that today Beane did not turn a second into a fourth. He turned Reggie Ragland into a fourth. Whaley turned a second into Reggie Ragland, which clearly seems to be the place we lost value. If Ragland is/will be a decent and valuable player then today's trade is bad. If he is not/will not then today's trade is good. I'm disappointed the McDermott ended up thinking Ragland was that useless to our team, but better to pull the trigger and get something than to cut him or have him buried on the depth chart and not contributing. We know Ragland was not playing better than Brown in McDermott's eyes, so the question is what is more valuable, a 2019 4th (that can also be used to trade up in teh 2018 draft) or how much better Ragland is than Hodges as our backup MLB. But definitely a big indictment of the Ragland pick today.

So if they would trade him for a 2019 4th it means he likely didn't fit any meaningful role on the 2017 club. That isn't a big asset back. It may be an indictment of the original selection or a change in scheme, but what it likely is not is getting rid of a player who had meaningful value to us this year. My issue with it is that a 2019 4th is a very small amount of draft capital, and my concern on Ragland being valuable to KC since every win by them hurts our draft capital as well. I'm hopeful that this is part of the calculus and the Bills don't think that Ragland will impact the 2017 Chiefs by an actual entire victory anywhere, so won't change the value of their 2018 1st that we are getting, but in our dream scenario of them imploding, the less talent and depth they have the more likely that things go just wrong and we get the 12th pick and not the 26th pick. I'm all for a clean start as painful as it can feel, and hoping our coach and GM stick around long enough for it to not repeat in a few years as we have been doing for a while.

Play to win the game...Until at least week 17, you play to win football games, and if it weren't for the injury clause in his contract, Tyrod would have started that game too. The over-hyped draft is lots of entertainment fun, but it is not where championships are won, and for every Luck/Manning/Newton at the top, there are five Jamarcus Russell's. Brady in the sixth, Brees in the second, Russell Willson in the third, Rodgers at the bottom of round 1, but we will all die if you don't get to draft the franchise guy at #1 or #2. I look forward to the Bills winning their first game of the season as early as possible, preferably September 10th, so we can get to the business of winning our second game, and try really hard to put 10 or 11 bricks in that wall.

I like the pick at 27. Not glamorous, but the rest of the draft showed the emphasis on DBs, and I think we got a good one. White plus another first is better for the Bills than Lattimore, and we can root against the Chiefs all season to get a higher pick. But I still want to be on record that I like Watson and have some regret. I still have doubts about what Taylor has shown us and see a little more Cam Newton and less Vince Young in Watson (among national champion QBs) and think a few years from now we could regret passing on him. But I assume the coaching staff knows better than I do and they like Tyrod plus a CB plus a 2018 first more than Watson, so my fingers are crossed. We will find out soon because the Texans don't have a log jam ahead of him.

I like the name. I think it was featured in a Key & Peele episode once.

If your goal isn't to pick 32nd every draft, you shouldn't be in charge of any of those things. Tanking is an NBA thing, and the NFL structure shows again and again that when building a 53 man roster, picking smart players and trying to teach the 53 you have to play winning football is better than the occasional Andrew Luck moment. There are so many star players picked out of the top 15 and so many busts in the top 15, that come draft day I love the highest picks I can have, but factoring that into any decision to try to compete with the 53 you have many months earlier is dumb...and it is dumb over and over. Not picking Blaine Gabbert over JJ Watt. Tell me which of the 15 players taken ahead of EJ Manuel is really the guy who turns your team around? If we get the #1 pick some time, I hope we pick a really good football player, but in the meantime I just want us to pick the best we can at #10 or #15 or eventually #32, and take those best players we pick and try to win one game each Sunday until it is time to repeat that process again.

Huge, slightly inaccurate generalization: If you have Arm Strength, Decision Making, and Accuracy, you are a top five pick. If you have Arm Strength, and decent hope for the other two, you are a first round pick and usually are worth less than your draft pick. If you have arm strength and doubts about the other two you are a later round pick. If you have the other two but questionable arm strength you are Drew Brees/Tom Brady, you exceed your draft slot. EJ definitely paid the price for a lot of the turmoil and stuff, and didn't quite get a fair shake, but at the time of his draft, he was a question mark on accuracy, and a question mark on decision making, which makes him not really a first round pick. He proved those doubters (and most NFL team rankings of him) right, but never improving those two qualities enough to be an NFL QB. I'm not sure what Oakland is hoping for, but clipboard and keeping your starting QB healthy, and EJ seems like a good dude.

Why tank? Averaging 7 wins a season over the last 17 years hasn't worked because we have not found a franchise QB, and because we have had a lot of coaching turnover (and play in Brady's division...let's be honest about that part). I'm not sure how moving from #11 to a top three pick makes us better in the draft enough to offset the sucking and missing the chance of building winners and sneaking in to the playoffs with a one or two game improvement. There are plenty of top three QB busts, and plenty of franchise QBs found outside the top 3. If you really need a guy at the top of the 2018 draft, win anyway (even if 8-8 as you are trying to get to 10-6), and trade up. You give up less value to get there than you do by breeding suckitude. And don't ever make the fallacy of past performance being predictor of future in sports. Remember when the Patriots and Broncos were just super bowl losers without any rings? And I think the Cubs, Red Sox, and White Sox all also had "it will never happen" streaks a lot longer than ours. We need our ownership, front office, and coaching staff to commit to winning and doing the things to build a winning franchise, and a 2003 loss to the Steelers backups or a Scott Norwood kick don't have anything to do with that. Taylor was one play from beating the Seahawks in Seattle. Our team needs to try to get better, not worse.

I have no trouble picking someone at #10 who could be a franchise QB. Certainties are gone before #10. There are exactly two considerations that would keep me from selecting Watson #1 overall, the Brady tools: Decision Making, Accuracy. I don't question his makeup, intelligence, drive, arm strength, hand size, or athletic ability. So if you know he will have excellent accuracy and decision making he is a no doubter at #1. If you feel pretty confident that these two things will evolve into NFL Good or better, he is easy to pick at #10 or even trade up. If you think these will not develop and are pretty doubtful, then he isn't going to be better than Tyrod, and isn't worth your pick. I don't think the combine does anything to help you with his decision making, but I could be wrong and they picked up some things in the interview. If the throwing portion showed something that they didn't already know from game tape in terms of accuracy, then you could work on that. But for the most part, I think your evaluation of Watson's current and projected Decision Making and Accuracy would not be impacted in any direction by the combine, so you leave the combine with the exact same evaluation you had coming in. My gut feeling right now on projecting these two qualities and the QB he will become is that he is definitely worth a pick at #10, and probably worth a trade up to 4 to 9, but still a little too uncertain to consider a trade up to 1 or 2 or 3 (guessing on what those trades would cost...meaning I wouldn't RGIII to make it happen, but would give up something beyond #10).

I'm would be very worried about that stuff if we had hired an offensive experience HC who would rely on his DC to plan and invent everything. Given our HC is a defensive specialist, hard worker, hard thinker, I think there is little chance he is hands off of the defense. I think Frazier will have the responsibility of executing McDermott's vision, and Frazier's experience as a DC and HC and communication will be his primary value, not what schemes he like to run against Aaron Rodgers in 2014.

While I enjoyed listening to Rex, especially early in the process...a quick reminder that the most boring head coach in the league is also the best one (not that there is a correlation). So I hope he is working hard right now as his reputation would indicate, and that the roster decisions followed by the game plans and schemes speak for themselves.

If he is your guy, you move up and don't hope at #10. Teams at 1, 2, 3, 6 all need franchise QBs, and a couple other teams could trade up ahead of #10. It only takes one of those teams to agree with you that he is a franchise QB for him not to be available. I don't think he is a sure enough bet to move to the top, but I would be looking hard at what it would take to get 3,4, or 5 rather than see him taken by the Jets or have the Texans or Broncos or whoever trade into the top 10. All the other pieces are there, that if you think the two biggest franchise QB qualities (accuracy and decision making) can evolve and become strengths, you definitely want him on your team. If you have reservations about him developing those qualities you worry he is the next Vince Young and won't be able to succeed in the NFL as he did in college. But I have greater doubts about Tyrod developing those two missing qualities, so in my perfect world we keep Tyrod, and trade up to the top five to get Watson, and let Watson learn over his first season, and then figure out where we are and the best course of action after next season, likely trading or cutting Tyrod and playing Watson in year two if he has progressed how we hope.

Drafting a QB is always a gamble, but we should be looking for a franchise QB in every draft until we have one. For this year your options are really: 1) Keep Tyrod and start him (whether you draft a development franchise QB to sit or not depends on who is there). 2) Draft and throw to the wolves a not-ready starter for development and/or tanking. 3) Draft and play a ready to compete starter 4) Trade/sign for Romo or some other non-rookie to start I think #2 is pretty dumb, as I think playing when you aren't ready can stunt growth more than help it, and I think tanking is super dumb, especially when we have been a few plays from the playoffs the last couple years. I expect 2017 Romo will be better than 2017 Taylor, but we have no guarantee of landing him when he is released, so unfortunately is a bad idea to bank on, so #4 can be an afterthought, but the two contract situations and timing probably makes it impossible without significant risk of having neither. So that leaves you with either playing Tyrod, or drafting one of the three potentially day 1 QBs (Watson, Kizer, Trub.). However exciting these three might be, there is no guarantee any is available at #10, and the more "ready" they show to be through workouts and interviews, the more likely they are gone at #10. I'm open to taking them at #10, and I'm open to trading up if it makes sense. But that information doesn't happen until after the Tyrod decision is made. Paying just dollars (opportunity cost, cap, etc...I know it is still important) to potentially have one too many QBs on the roster is much better than having one too few. Keep Tyrod because the day you have to decide that, it isn't clear you can do better anywhere. Try at every possible point to upgrade the QB position until you have found a clear franchise QB, whether a complete surprise from Tyrod, a first round success, or a later round hidden gem. But keeping Tyrod shouldn't in any way keep them from drafting a QB at #10, trading up to get one they really like, etc. Tyrod can certainly get a paycheck and a uniform and start the off season at the top of the depth chart, but he is not a franchise QB at the moment and so until he proves otherwise, we should be as aggressive as possible with the position regardless of whether Tyrod is on the roster.

We need to get a QB better than Tyrod. In the meantime, the only reason to not have Tyrod is if it financially allows you to be better. I'm not sure who the QB better than Tyrod in 2017 is. Watson? I like the idea, and could take some lumps if he is a possibility for a bright future. Romo? Clearly better than Tyrod when healthy, a great buy low opportunity. But I don't see another option right now, and I don't think the idea of intentionally getting worse is how this NFL works with many Brees, Brady, Rodgers not at the top of the draft and plenty of Jamarcus Russells and Akili Smiths at the top. Play to win and draft smart. Play to win means Tyrod right now, and only a new addition or a big plan to get better with the money saved would push me away, even though I agree that he does not have the vision or accuracy to be an elite QB, and needs to be a stopgap. I don't mind pursuing 10-6 with Tyrod, even if we know the 13-3 will have to come from someone else not yet drafted.

If you only view him as worth a conditional 5th, you shouldn't trade for him. You trade for him if you think he is going to be someone who can get you to the playoffs and be better than Tyrod, and better in the short term than anybody at #10. Prior to 2015 he had one injury shortened season, and otherwise almost always started 15 or 16 games and performed well. If you think his 2015 and 2016 seasons are somehow predictive of his 2017 injury chances, or you think he is too old, and can't do 37-38 like Brees/Manning/Brady, then you can pass. But if you think he is at all likely to be what he was a couple years ago based on his injury history and physical, you pull the trigger and make him your QB for the next couple seasons. Dak forced the issue, and leaves the Cowboys in a sell low situation that could be more valuable to our football team than keeping Tyrod or starting a rookie.

And maybe you hire an OC and involve him in that decision since it isn't a rush, and in the meantime keep that door open by building the relationship back after the hurt feelings of the benching.

But it is relatively uncommon for a team to choose to block a "promotion" lateral move, and instead let their assistants who are not coordinators interview for coordinator position. Not sure on the full range and history of these, but blocking a promotion even when the NFL considers it officially lateral is bad interpersonal mojo. That said, with a rookie defensive HC, and an uncertain situation at QB, I think our OC hire is among our more important, and really hope for the certainty that comes with someone with experience with the role, or as a really top notch QB coach right on the cusp. Roman/Lynn both failed to develop Tyrod as a pocket passer, and while they utilized our run game and Tyrod's elusiveness, I think the failure to include accurate mid range between the numbers passes in our attack made us vulnerable to many situations and defensive alignments. I'm looking for a little genius and chess player savvy in our OC, even when the final play calling can be simple and predictable 80% of the time. I'm not sure who that could be right now.

Four years of HC experience is very valuable in a coordinator who is helping a rookie coach. I'm less worried about scheme and stuff on this side of the ball because McD will be much more involved on that side of the ball. Pleased with this hire, but I was also fine with a lower level coach with communication established like the Carolina LB coach if they went in that direction. Now we need an OC, and then possibly a QB of some sort.

Very optimistic about the McCoaching if true. I like it better than Lynn-Bradley. Here in San Diego I keep up with McCoy pretty well, and have liked what I have seen in terms of offense, and I think he was a big part of Rivers rebirth, even though the team didn't have enough talent to win. He hasn't had running talent here, and has passed a ton, so interesting to see if he can break that habit and adjust to our different talent, but he is a great mind so I would expect him to adapt quickly.

He won't be there at 10, but moving up is fine if he is the answer. The big game and championship drive attention, but accuracy and decision making is what will make him as an NFL QB. I think the Conversation Young pessimistic comparisons are a little unfair, because I see a more intelligent player, but he still has to evolve and improve, and unless you project him to do so more than Young, then he isn't your guy. Moving #10 to #1 for him is probably a little steep unless scouting is more bullish on the certainty he will improve accuracy than I am, as I would only move that far for a certainty. And if he gets to draft day as a realistic #1, the browns need a QB more than they need a DE. Definitely worth some strong consideration if he made it to #10, but also if he falls to a non QB slot in between, especially 3, 4, 5 if the DEs go top two. But again only if you project him to improve and evolve quickly from what he is now. I am cautiously bullish on him, but have seen a few too many throws slightly off target for the NFL, and know that is the hardest quality to evaluate and project, yet is vital to becoming an elite QB and NFL secondaries are less forgiving on inaccurate throws.

McDaniels is the best choice, but will get personnel control and a few years to rebuild. Working with Whaley, a short leash to win, and in the Pats division isn't going to get him. He will end up with the 49ers. Elway will get a specific type of coach that fits his mold, and not Lynn. I'm not interested in a college coach, as there have been lots of amazing college coaches having trouble adjusting to the NFL, and prefer the coordinator route. Schwartz is a choice I would love, Patricia is really appealing, but there are several others.

Broncos I get, as the defending Super Bowl Champs and 9-7 with a top notch president. Jags? 3-13, good Fantasy QB, but not a lot of talent on the roster. No history, weak fan base. Rams? 4-12, questionable QB you have no choice but to utilize, bad roster, no offense, missing draft picks 49ers? 2-14, owner who fired a coach after a single year, and purged of talent from a few years ago Chargers? 5-11, good QB, questionable ownership, uncertain future city/stadium, indifferent fan base, weak roster So if you aren't Elway's first choice, explain to me why Pegula pulling the trigger in the middle of a conversation one week early when challenged by a dead man walking with a big mouth is a big deal? Explain why management avoiding having an injury in a meaningless game causing them to pay huge bucks to a player they aren't sure about healthy is some huge deal (while other teams rest players week 17 for more admirable reasons). Explain why having a GM who focuses on adding talent to the roster and keeps his mouth shut all season long is some incredible impasse? This team is Tyrod or better at QB, the top rushing attack in the NFL, and hopes to add full seasons of healthy play by Watkins, Dareus, Ragland, and Shaq, plus drafts higher than any team that was even sniffing the playoffs and has salary cap flexibility. And has one of the crazy loyal fan bases around, a big home field advantage, and was likely one Reggie Bush end around away from making the playoffs (okay a stretch, but if we hit that field goal to beat the Fish, and then take out the Jets, all of our help ended up happening). And if you can somehow turn a 7-9 team into a lucky 9-7 team or a 10-6 team you are suddenly a multi-decade hero? Nah. I buy some of the disfunction, I wouldn't have minded if Whaley would have been fired, although it would have left a knowledge vacuum for the hiring process, and wouldn't have minded some better PR over the last couple weeks, but this is a great opportunity for a HC to step in to, and if he can't stand Whaley and needs complete control, just ask to speak to Terry privately after the interview process, because you know he has the guts to pull the trigger on that move if he feels it will be best for the team. Now we just have to ignore the talking heads, interview the strongest candidates, make a great offer, and add in a couple great coordinators as well.

I have some big doubts on Coughlin. I think the league is changing enough that a good coach of yesterday (if you want to throw Rex in that group) isn't going to be the same moving forward. If you can get one who is hands off enough to let talented coordinators do their thing on both sides of the ball, maybe leadership and discipline are enough. I also still don't get how the only HC concept and model is a full roster control one, and why there aren't HCs who would be happy to be an awesome HC and let the GM be a GM. And I'm also still not clear what the Pegulas have shown that makes them not a destination. Was it being involved with the Rex hiring? Being involved with the Rex firing (and specifically the timing when pushed on that). Not firing Whaley? Owner and GM realize the head coach is not living up to his billing and likely going to miss the playoffs. Owner and GM internally and in their weekly conversations probably get pretty sure that they are not going to keep him after the year. HC pushes the Owner in a private conversation without the GM, and Owner has authority and confidence to fire someone and release a statement. GM at subsequent press conference accurately indicates it was the ownership decision and he wasn't involved, but that doesn't mean he has to have a problem, wasn't part of the communication chain, hadn't already expressed an interest in firing him after the season if they missed the playoffs. I don't see the dumpster fire everybody else does. If Lynn doesn't want a HC opportunity, or is confident enough he will have it elsewhere to walk away, no problem. If some coaches are only interested if they are not under Whaley and have full control, interview and make that clear to ownership, and then not be offered the job if it isn't a fit. Our biggest issue is not the Ownership or GM right now. It is lack of a competent HC which we are remedying, and it is lack of an excellent QB which we will work on and have Tyrod or better when addressed.

I'm so confused at why this is a bad job. A place where if you go 9-7 or 10-6 and make the playoffs you are a hero, a place where you have enough talent to average 8 wins the last three years. Suddenly if you don't have Bellichick complete control and Whaley does had a big hand in building the roster it isn't worth doing? And the Pegulas are so impossible to work for because after throwing away a promising season with incompetent coaching and poor defense a disappointing coach was fired? I get the org chart is a little unclear but I don't see any reason why Pegula and Whaley aren't expected to give the new HC the support and freedom he needs, and don't see where that didn't happen with Rex and Marrone. I know Chip Kelly isn't coming (joking), but this seems like a great situation for a good coach to step in and succeed.