Do we really need to draft a new Quarterback?

[dpberr]

Depends on the draft. If there is a can't miss second coming of Anthony Munoz sitting there, the Bills would have to take him.

[shrader]

I'm not sure what the free agency class looks like, but whether it's that route or the draft, a QB absolutely has to be added to this roster next year. If it winds up being the draft, I'm more curious to see if Fitzpatrick is the guy who can fill that mentor role that is so important.

[Ozymandius]

We will see. I go back and forth on this a lot. I just wish there were a 2011 college QB that stood out as a stud so we can take him as a top 3 pick. Andrew Luck is probably going in the 2012 draft.

 

Maybe playing next season with Fitzpatrick at QB is tolerable if we build the o-line in this draft and then pray for Luck in the following draft somehow.

[NaPolian8693]

Depends on the draft. If there is a can't miss second coming of Anthony Munoz sitting there, the Bills would have to take him.

 

Mike Williams

[tennesseeboy]

It depends.

If the Bills are in a top 5 slot and a qb is there that they think will be a great one, they will probably not be able to pass up the chance to take him.

A team which picks that early is well placed to fill other needs after round 1. For instance, a solid RT can sometimes be found late in the 2nd round (see Jeremy Trueblood). Very early 2nd round picks also have much value in terms of trading down.

 

With all of the differing opinions on this board (a good thing imo), one thing I think most of us can agree on is the fact that in April/11, the Bills will be well situated to make vast improvements to the team.

I agree Bill, whatever the pick we get we will be looking at a quarterback or a left tackle. We can argue over which way to go, but those are the critical areas of need. I'm starting to think a case might be made for a true blue chip linebacker as well.

[buffaloaggie]

We have to build the line first. We have the interior set fairly well, but we need that stud LT and a good RT for that matter. There is a possibility that Mallett could stay in school, and I would expect Luck to stay at Stanford. In the meantime, Fitzpatrick could get us to 8-8 behind an improved line next year. This is not going to be a quick fix. We are looking at a team with ten years of poor drafting and poor free agent movement. The Jets had a great line in place when they got their QB. That is how you build. You don't draft a QB and let him get his brains scrambled because of little to no protection. I also agree that Luck is the only can't miss prospect, after seeing Mallett against Bama this past Saturday.

 

Mike Williams

Bryant McKinnie was there and the Bills f'd up. Tom Donahoe would have taken Ryan Leaf had he been in that position in 1998.

[Rob's House]

BPA - You don't want to pass on the next Randy Moss, Jonathan Ogden, or Bruce Smith because some guy who could be Matt Ryan or Joey Harrington is available. If you have enough stud athletes on your team, the pieces usually fall into place, and the holes you have seem easier to fill.

[CosmicBills]

I really don't want to get you guys started this morning but let me share my opinnion.

 

I have seen all the great quarterbacks suffer with less starts then Fitzpatrick. My guess is he has around 12.

 

The offensive line is still a problem but Fitpatrick handles the rush differently. He will lead a receiver rather then take the sack and this is the main reason for inconsistancy and poor accuracy.

 

At this point I stick with Fitzpatrick until I find an uncorrectable problem.

 

So do we need to draft and gamble on a Rookie QB in the first round?

 

You tell me?

This isn't a serious post is it? If you think Fitz is an elite QB in the NFL, or even a true starter on any other team in the league, you're just nuts.

 

The dude played well in NE but showed his true colors with some horrible throws and two costly picks that cost the game. That's his MO. He's mobile, will wing the ball around the field, but isn't nearly accurate enough to win consistently. He's a number 2 QB in this league. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[Alphadawg7]

I really don't want to get you guys started this morning but let me share my opinnion.

 

I have seen all the great quarterbacks suffer with less starts then Fitzpatrick. My guess is he has around 12.

 

The offensive line is still a problem but Fitpatrick handles the rush differently. He will lead a receiver rather then take the sack and this is the main reason for inconsistancy and poor accuracy.

 

At this point I stick with Fitzpatrick until I find an uncorrectable problem.

 

So do we need to draft and gamble on a Rookie QB in the first round?

 

You tell me?

 

Personally, I want to see Brohm get some time with the starters before I trully want us to take a QB in the top 10. I dont see the point in drafting a prospect before our own prospect has not gotten some in game action with our starters.

 

However, if Brohm gets in and struggles, or even doesnt get in and is still an unknown next year, I would pull the trigger for sure if we can get Luck (which is unlikely right now since as of now he doesnt plan to come out). I am starting to cool on Locker as I am dissapointed in his development this year, and I just dont see Mallet as a safe enough pick to warrant taking him over and offensive lineman. So, I would say yes, lets take Luck in the top 10, otherwise I would definitely go offensive lineman.

 

I just dont see Fitz being a long term starter. He could prove me wrong and develop under Chan, but his inaccuracy issues are going to keep him from being consistent. But if Chan helps him develop and Fitz finishes this year really strong or if Brohm does get a chance to start a handful of games and shows strong potential, then I say lets address the offensive line and defensive front 7 in the first 3 rounds next year.

[Bill from NYC]

I agree Bill, whatever the pick we get we will be looking at a quarterback or a left tackle. We can argue over which way to go, but those are the critical areas of need. I'm starting to think a case might be made for a true blue chip linebacker as well.

 

Again, it depends. The need for a LB is clear, especially given the constant injuries to Poz. But, if the Bills are in the top 5, a LB would have to be quite exceptional to go that high. If you think there is a Lawrence Taylor, etc. out there, you take him. However, it is the QBs and LTs that go early year after year as you stated.

 

Also, I have not given up on our rookie defenders. Guys get hurt and they will get their chances to perform. We must hope that the defense looks better at the end of the season, and logic tells me that it will. Next year will probably dedicated to the offense, and I look forward to it.

[The Big Cat]

Those saying that DL is a higher priority than LB are HIGH!!

 

Right now offensive tackle and linebacker are our two biggest needs. BY A LONG SHOT.

 

EDIT: *offensive tackle

Edited September 27, 2010 by The Big Cat

[JPS]

The Bills have major holes on the o-line, d-line, linebacker and QB. These are the same holes they had going into this past draft. Just pick someone who can play. If it happens to be a QB, fine. If it's the next Ray Lewis, Pat Williams or Jake Long, I'm okay with that too.

[Rob's House]

The Bills have major holes on the o-line, d-line, linebacker and QB. These are the same holes they had going into this past draft. Just pick someone who can play. If it happens to be a QB, fine. If it's the next Ray Lewis, Pat Williams or Jake Long, I'm okay with that too.

What are these holes on the D-line of which you speak? At DE we have D. Edwards and Carrington is being groomed to take over the other spot. K. Williams could potentially be moved to DE and Troup is the prototypical NT also being groomed. So unless we're ready to call these guys busts 3 games into their careers, I think we're ok for now.

 

I agree with your broader point of getting a guy who can play even if it's not a QB.

Edited September 27, 2010 by Rob's House

[opfball91]

If Fitz can perform close to how he did Sunday for the rest of the year, I have no problem having him stick around and mentor the new guy for a year or two a la Carson Palmer.

[Albany,n.y.]

What are these holes on the D-line of which you speak? At DE we have D. Edwards and Carrington is being groomed to take over the other spot. K. Williams could potentially be moved to DE and Troup is the prototypical NT also being groomed. So unless we're ready to call these guys busts 3 games into their careers, I think we're ok for now.

It looks more like Carrington is being groomed to become the next Victor Allotey, although I think Allotey's inactive string is as untouchable as Joe Dimaggio's hitting streak.

[yungmack]

I really don't want to get you guys started this morning but let me share my opinnion.

 

I have seen all the great quarterbacks suffer with less starts then Fitzpatrick. My guess is he has around 12.

 

The offensive line is still a problem but Fitpatrick handles the rush differently. He will lead a receiver rather then take the sack and this is the main reason for inconsistancy and poor accuracy.

 

At this point I stick with Fitzpatrick until I find an uncorrectable problem.

 

So do we need to draft and gamble on a Rookie QB in the first round?

 

You tell me?

One thing about Fitz, he gives you everything he has. Unfortunately, that isn't enough. What you saw yesterday was "The Full Fitzy." He's smart, he's tough, he's ballsy...and he is erratic. We could HOPE for more from him, but we can't EXPECT more. He is what he is, with all the good and bad. Just as we can say about TE, "We've seen him play enough to know he's not the answer," we can say about Fitzpatrick that "He's played long enough in the NFL to know this is as far as he is going to develop." There will be no blossoming into Philip Rivers or even Mark Sanchez. He has developed as far as he's going to.

 

But he sure is a big improvement over TE (Gotta think the Bills would have won that Miami game with Fitz under center, don't you?).

[Mike in Syracuse]

You don't need a hall of fame QB to win a Super Bowl but it helps. Dilfer was an average qb that rode an insane defense to a SB win.

 

Pittsburgh is playing guys from the stands and DOMINATING people.

 

If you don't have an elite QB you better be elite everywhere else. What you do need is a QB that doesn't hurt your team.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

The Answer is no a new QB is not a must. The team can instead continue to wallow in mediocrity for the foreseeable future, while fans for teams with good QB’s talk about playoffs and Super bowl contention year after year after year.

 

 

[DrDawkinstein]

yes, if the tiny step up from Trent to Fitz made such a difference, imagine what would happen with a real franchise QB. Add a couple linemen, and we've got a pretty good O.

 

I'd take Mallet #1 and find some tackles.

Edited September 27, 2010 by DrDankenstein

[buffaloaggie]

yes, if the tiny step up from Trent to Fitz made such a difference, imagine what would happen with a real franchise QB. Add a couple linemen, and we've got a pretty good O.

 

I'd take Mallet #1 and find some tackles.

I really don't think Mallett is worth a #1 overall, considering he will be playing behind a crappy line. (crappy Tackles, actually) We need the LT first, in my opinion.

 

You look at QBs that have won as rookies, Roethlisberger, Brady, Sanchez, Marino were all playing on teams that had established winning records before they arrived and these guys were just icing on the cake, so to speak. The one exception that I can think of where a QB taken with a high draft pick that came in and immediately turned around a losing record was Matt Ryan. We need to surround any QB drafted with good players. If we don't, they can be like Archie Manning, a good QB on a crappy team that runs for his life his whole career.