Cash

Brandon Weedon's the only guy who's even eligible for Congress, right? But I don't think he can get elected.

After reading this breakdown, I'd be very comfortable with Wilson as a mid-round pick. The height thing is always gonna be there, but I don't worry about it too much. In the first round, especially the top of the first round, you should stick to guys with no perceived holes in their game: prototypical size, great athleticism, no off-field problems, great college production, great work ethic, etc. But once you get to the later rounds (at all positions, but especially at QB), the only way a guy is going to come through is if he's being overlooked for some reason. And there is definitely a strong bias against short QBs. There's also legit reasons why you want a tall QB, sure. But if Flutie can be a good NFL starter, and Brees can be an elite NFL starter, then someone else in that height range can have success, too*. I don't know if it'll necessarily be Wilson, but someone will, and whoever it is will probably be drafted later than he should because there's a bias against short QBs. In a similar vein, I don't worry about Brock Osweiler being too tall at 6'7". "But there's never been a good QB that tall!" Yeah, because very few humans get to that height in the first place, and the ones that do are mostly unathletic. And then, the miniscule amount who are that tall and athletic enough to play sports at an extremely high level usually go into basketball or volleyball, not football. So the sample size is ridiculously small, and nothing can be drawn from it. Eventually there will be a good QB that tall (for the record, I don't think it'll be Osweiler). And unlike short QBs, where their height really does pose a greater challenge than a 6'5" QB, there's no reason I can think of that a 6'7" or 6'8" guy would be hurt by his height. *I could also count 6'0" Mike Vick here, but I don't think that's fair. His athleticism at the QB position, both in terms of arm and legs, is so far away from any other QB I've seen that he's really in a class by himself.

1. Okay, not bad, let's hope he's as good as advertised. 2. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU... 3. Alright, that's solid, let's hope he's as good as advertised. 4. Wow, that's surprising. Let's hope Why So Serious knows what he's talking about. Now, to the youtubes! 5. (Assuming no trade down) Wow, didn't see that coming. Hope this means they were sandbagging b/c they didn't want his stock to rise, and not that they panicked or got overruled by Ralph. 6. Nice! What'd we pay? Ugh, that's a lot. Oh well, still psyched to get Kalil. 7. MY MIND IS BLOWN

But didn't she win the 1984 gold medal for gymnastics?

"Buddy Nix fills a pressing need..." What need is that, exactly? Upgrading Dime safety from Bryan Scott? Pushing team captain George Wilson to the bench?

Not trying to pick on you, but I hope people aren't confusing direct statements that Nix and Gailey make in interviews and press conferences with anonymous rumors such as this one. First, we don't know where Casserly got his info from -- it could easily be the Vikings claiming that they got an offer from the Bills, in order to entice a bigger offer from someone else. Second, regardless of where it came from, it could easily be a lie. There's a big difference between anonymously leaking misinformation to a reporter and lying right to the camera at a press conference. My recommendation is to ignore everything on Pro Football Talk and stick to verified quotes from Nix and Gailey. Those are ambiguous enough that we can't guarantee who the pick will be, but they give us an idea.

1. Kalil (Mike Lombardi thinks it's realistic, though not likely) 2. Gilmore? 3. Kuechly? I guess? I'm assuming the Bills don't love any of the 2nd-tier OTs enough to make them the pick at #10. If they did, then I guess whichever one(s) they loved would be #2.

The bigger issue is that he shouldn't have had Spiller ranked so high in the first place. He thought he was drafting Chris Johnson, and he was wrong about that. And yes, it was possible to see that at the time.

I think you mean Benoit Benjamin. He was saying he had a better career than Shawn Marion.

Yeah, I headed out a few picks after we took Byrd so I could get to my friend's party across town. Between that shenanigan and the Levitre pick, I missed out on a lot.

I'd take Freeman first, Flacco second, and Fitzpatrick third if I was building for the next 10 years. For next year only, I'd probably flip Flacco and Freeman, and Fitz would be a lot closer to both. Yep, Easterbrook sure loves cherry-picking. So disingenuous, and he's smart enough to know better. But if you look at long-term results, the success rates are highest for first round QBs, then a step down to second round QBs, then a step down to third, then a big step down from there. (Except for the sixth round, which looks like a goldmine thanks to Brady, Hasselbeck, and Bulger.) So it seems like Easterbrook has a valid point. EXCEPT! The supply of QBs is fixed; the only way for more teams to draft QBs in the first round is to take them from the second round or later. This does not improve them as prospects, except in that a first round QB will get more investment and chances from the team, and that probably does improve the chance of success a little bit, but not very much. Bust rates are already very high for first round QBs. This is because of two factors. First, it's really hard to be a good NFL QB, and really hard to project who can become a good NFL QB. Second, it's so important to have a good QB, and so hard to find one, that teams are willing to take big chances to try to find one. This is also why first round Safeties and Guards almost never bust: because the positions aren't as important, and replacements can be found relatively easily, teams aren't willing to spend a first-rounder on a S or G unless he's a can't-miss prospect. So what's my point? Easterbrook's argument is terrible, because teams are already prioritizing QB about as much as possible. Any team that doesn't have an established QB will usually talk themselves into a QB in the first round. And if they don't, it usually means that they have such poor scouting reports on the available QBs that they can't even talk themselves into it. And the scouting reports, while not perfect, are generally pretty good, because QBs get less and less successful as you go deeper into the draft. (Again, with the exception of the 6th round, but I'm certain that that's just sampling error. Give us a couple hundred years to get an appropriate sample size, and the 6th round will drop right back into place.)

Is Mitch Absolon on the show every week, or was he just there promoting his book?

Good question! I have no idea. I would guess that there is a rule about it, though. My best guess would be something like there's no jumping of the pick Thursday night, but if the Giants don't get it in on time, they can't submit it until the draft re-opens Friday night. At which point it would be open season between the Giants and Rams as to who picked first.

Wait, they did a Mitch Hedberg hologram on The Sports Reports a la Tupac at Coachella? Awesome!

Rieff played LT in college, not G. I don't think the Jauron Principle applies here. Maybe you were thinking of Cordy Glenn? Even then, he started 18 games at LT in college, including every game his senior year.

Blackmon over Kalil? That's a surprise. Any particular reason why? I would definitely have Kalil #3 on my big board.

Okay, now I think I've got it straight. In a Roger Rabbit-style animated/real life crossover, the Venture Brothers appeared on the Maury Povich show and revealed their mock draft. Who'd they have the Bills taking?

Wait a minute, I'm confused. Brutus "The Barber" Beefcake revealed that he has a twin brother? What does that have to do with the NFL draft?

I think you're thinking of the Bears' running back who pancaked Aaron Maybin last preseason.

Nix also specifically mentioned depth at both DE and DT in the middle rounds. I would expect probably one of each. Right now the backup DTs are Torrell Troup and Alex Carrington, and I doubt the Bills are super into that. Totally disagree on the smokescreen idea. But we'll see. Regarding Kuechly, there's a chance the Panthers take him at #9, so it's still possible he's the no-brainer Nix is thinking of. Plus Nix specifically said the depth at LB is not great, so it could be a situation where he feels he has to get one high or not at all. Not predicting it, just saying you can't rule it out from this chat. I personally am ruling out Floyd based on this and other quotes, though. And if I'm wrong, I'll... not really care, because there's nothing at stake.

Obviously that's the standard move, but Buddy's pretty honest & forthright. If the guy he has in mind is the guy we pick, he'll definitely tell us. If not, he can't come out and crap on the guy he winds up picking, but he'll probably say that the no-brainer was gone without saying who it was. You never know, though. Last year Nix & Gailey made it pretty clear in their post-draft press conference that Dareus was #2 on their board behind Newton. We could see a similar situation this year.

Comment From George WR don't usually make an impact as a rookie is that go into who you might pick at 10. 12:27 Buddy Nix: yes it does. We want somebody to make an impact at 10.

You beat me to it on this one. Very intriguing. Hopefully Buddy tells us who it is after the draft.

12:13 Comment From Nathan Any chance you guys will draft a Tight End at some point? 12:13 Buddy Nix: No, probably not.

More importantly, why was he skipping Mavs practice to talk about the NFL draft?