MikeSpeed Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I mentioned this before, but it went mostly unnoticed. So I thought I'd topic it to see if I can get more feedback. I've read many posts that want the Bills to draft a QB at #3 and then sit him for or year or 2. I can not believe we are in a position to do that. The #3 pick better be a starter day one, even if he is not completely ready. Ask any QB in the NFL, and they will tell you that they didn't really start learning the game until they got on the field. Also the veteran players will be questioning the FO for not giving them help NOW. The first interception Fitz throws and Bills nation will be calling for the back-up, and a QB controversy will ensue. A few posters have referenced the Aaron Rodgers and the Philip Rivers drafting as their reasoning. Both those situation were different than what the Bills are in. Green bay was a perennial playoff contender during the Favre years and could afford a luxury pick. Rodgers was drafted #24 in the first round not #3. It was also believed that Rodgers got no help from Favre while he was the back-up, so grooming was a non-factor. San Diego was disenchanted with Brees and would have preferred Rivers to start day one. Brees woke up that season and gave them no choice but to sit Rivers until Brees was traded. San Diego was not drafting Rivers to sit him though. Lastly it would be a PR and marketing nightmare to have a first round pick sitting on the bench again. I believe our situation is more like Atlanta's, the Rams, the Lions, and similar to the Jets when comparing recent drafts. The Bills do not have the talent level to have any luxury picks. For the record I do not believe we should draft a QB at #3 but if we do, he should be starting day one. Thanks for the time. I hope this spawns some discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Anyone taken at #3 better be starting... and producing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Anyone taken at #3 better be starting... and producing. ....on the defensive line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Sorry, but it's going to be situational. No success that a first year QB has had, or a QB who waited a couple years has had, will play into this. Every player is different and will develop at their own pace. Luckily, if we do draft a QB, we have Fitz who is more than capable of steering the ship until the new kid is ready. After what we saw on the field this year, do you think this team is really ready to throw a rookie QB onto the field and expect to "win right now"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STLBILLS15 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 ....on the defensive line. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) Yeah because letting #4 pick Philip Rivers sit was a huge mistake. They should have just let him start day 1 like Ryan Leaf. Since you can read Buddy Nix mind and know that they drafted Phillip Rivers to start him then you must know what Buddy Nix is going to do in this years' draft. Why don't you just spare us the anticipation and tell us what Buddy Nix is thinking now. What is the detriment to sitting a rookie QB for a year? Edited January 7, 2011 by Why So Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I mentioned this before, but it went mostly unnoticed. So I thought I'd topic it to see if I can get more feedback. I've read many posts that want the Bills to draft a QB at #3 and then sit him for or year or 2. I can not believe we are in a position to do that. The #3 pick better be a starter day one, even if he is not completely ready. Ask any QB in the NFL, and they will tell you that they didn't really start learning the game until they got on the field. Also the veteran players will be questioning the FO for not giving them help NOW. The first interception Fitz throws and Bills nation will be calling for the back-up, and a QB controversy will ensue. A few posters have referenced the Aaron Rodgers and the Philip Rivers drafting as their reasoning. Both those situation were different than what the Bills are in. Green bay was a perennial playoff contender during the Favre years and could afford a luxury pick. Rodgers was drafted #24 in the first round not #3. It was also believed that Rodgers got no help from Favre while he was the back-up, so grooming was a non-factor. San Diego was disenchanted with Brees and would have preferred Rivers to start day one. Brees woke up that season and gave them no choice but to sit Rivers until Brees was traded. San Diego was not drafting Rivers to sit him though. Lastly it would be a PR and marketing nightmare to have a first round pick sitting on the bench again. I believe our situation is more like Atlanta's, the Rams, the Lions, and similar to the Jets when comparing recent drafts. The Bills do not have the talent level to have any luxury picks. For the record I do not believe we should draft a QB at #3 but if we do, he should be starting day one. Thanks for the time. I hope this spawns some discussion. I'm sorry, but you're way off base with this logic. You're not seeing the big picture. You're assuming the Bills will be able to compete for a title in 2011. They won't. They will have to have an amazing off season and season to even compete for a wild card spot. This team has SO many holes, so many needs it's unrealistic to expect them to turn it around in one season. That being the case, there's absolutely no need to rush your Franchise QB into the fray and risk derailing his development or getting him injured. IF the Bills take a QB at 3 (or even in the second round) that they feel is their franchise QB (I don't know if there is one in this draft by the way), but there is absolutely NO need to start him this year. QB is a very different position than any other on the field. When you pick a QB that high, you have to protect him. Starting him behind this crap-tastic offensive line would get the guy killed and you run the risk of making him gunshy and ruining any chance of developing him. The posters who are arguing that they need to build the lines before drafting a QB are right in one sense -- in that you need a line to protect your investment to make it pay off. But they're not right in the sense that you have to get the OL before getting the QB. Truth is, finding a franchise QB is more difficult than finding a Pro Bowl caliber offensive tackle or guard. So, if there's a Franchise QB staring you in the face, you take him. End of story. That's the beauty of having Fitz. Fitz gives the Bills the freedom to do exactly that. The rational fans out there know that Fitz isn't anything more than a placeholder. And drafting a QB high and sitting him behind Fitz is a wise move (again, if they grade a QB worthy of being a franchise type guy). In fact, it's a necessary move. Even if he doesn't see the field in 2011. Any other position taken in rounds 1 or 2 in this draft however NEEDS to not only see the field, but be a play maker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Yeah because letting #4 pick Philip Rivers sit was a huge mistake. They should have just let him start day 1 like Ryan Leaf. Since you can read Buddy Nix mind and know that they drafted Phillip Rivers to start him then you must know what Buddy Nix is going to do in this years' draft. Why don't you just spare us the anticipation and tell us what Buddy Nix is thinking now. What is the detriment to sitting a rookie QB for a year? The OP is under the incorrect impression that Nix and CO. are somehow going to right the ship in one offseason, and that we will be competing for the playoffs next year as long as we get production out of our rookies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 The OP is under the incorrect impression that Nix and CO. are somehow going to right the ship in one offseason, and that we will be competing for the playoffs next year as long as we get production out of our rookies... IIRC, the same people were under the same impression and saying the same things a year ago. So, how did that rookie production from the 2010 draft work out for everyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealityCheck Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 ....on the defensive line. Si! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Si! Yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I mentioned this before, but it went mostly unnoticed. So I thought I'd topic it to see if I can get more feedback. I've read many posts that want the Bills to draft a QB at #3 and then sit him for or year or 2. I can not believe we are in a position to do that. The #3 pick better be a starter day one, even if he is not completely ready. Ask any QB in the NFL, and they will tell you that they didn't really start learning the game until they got on the field. Also the veteran players will be questioning the FO for not giving them help NOW. The first interception Fitz throws and Bills nation will be calling for the back-up, and a QB controversy will ensue. A few posters have referenced the Aaron Rodgers and the Philip Rivers drafting as their reasoning. Both those situation were different than what the Bills are in. Green bay was a perennial playoff contender during the Favre years and could afford a luxury pick. Rodgers was drafted #24 in the first round not #3. It was also believed that Rodgers got no help from Favre while he was the back-up, so grooming was a non-factor. San Diego was disenchanted with Brees and would have preferred Rivers to start day one. Brees woke up that season and gave them no choice but to sit Rivers until Brees was traded. San Diego was not drafting Rivers to sit him though. Lastly it would be a PR and marketing nightmare to have a first round pick sitting on the bench again. I believe our situation is more like Atlanta's, the Rams, the Lions, and similar to the Jets when comparing recent drafts. The Bills do not have the talent level to have any luxury picks. For the record I do not believe we should draft a QB at #3 but if we do, he should be starting day one. Thanks for the time. I hope this spawns some discussion. A quarterback drafted at #3 on a good team (obviously a team that traded up) should have him starting right out of the gate, but there is no such rush on a terrible team like ours. It is no harm to have him hang around for 7-10 games to learn the system and get the feel for the speed of the NFL on the sideline before you feed him to the wolves. If you put a rookie, epecially a pocket passer behind the line they have in Buffalo right now, he might not make it to his second or third season in one piece. Like I said in another post, just about any position if the guy is gonna make it in the NFL he can learn on the fly, the QB needs groomed and nurtured. Any other position you can tell within the first year or so if he is gonna suck (Maybin) but at QB not so much so (Manning had a zillion picks his rookie year). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 That's right! They can't afford to sit and groom the next great Bills QB! After all, they're just one or two players away from greatness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 If we grab a QB at #3, I want him to sit behind Fitz for a year or two. Now if we get a DL or LB, he should be starting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealityCheck Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I'm sorry, but you're way off base with this logic. You're not seeing the big picture. You're assuming the Bills will be able to compete for a title in 2011. They won't. They will have to have an amazing off season and season to even compete for a wild card spot. This team has SO many holes, so many needs it's unrealistic to expect them to turn it around in one season. That being the case, there's absolutely no need to rush your Franchise QB into the fray and risk derailing his development or getting him injured. IF the Bills take a QB at 3 (or even in the second round) that they feel is their franchise QB (I don't know if there is one in this draft by the way), but there is absolutely NO need to start him this year. QB is a very different position than any other on the field. When you pick a QB that high, you have to protect him. Starting him behind this crap-tastic offensive line would get the guy killed and you run the risk of making him gunshy and ruining any chance of developing him. The posters who are arguing that they need to build the lines before drafting a QB are right in one sense -- in that you need a line to protect your investment to make it pay off. But they're not right in the sense that you have to get the OL before getting the QB. Truth is, finding a franchise QB is more difficult than finding a Pro Bowl caliber offensive tackle or guard. So, if there's a Franchise QB staring you in the face, you take him. End of story. That's the beauty of having Fitz. Fitz gives the Bills the freedom to do exactly that. The rational fans out there know that Fitz isn't anything more than a placeholder. And drafting a QB high and sitting him behind Fitz is a wise move (again, if they grade a QB worthy of being a franchise type guy). In fact, it's a necessary move. Even if he doesn't see the field in 2011. Any other position taken in rounds 1 or 2 in this draft however NEEDS to not only see the field, but be a play maker. Awesome points brother. It's like waiting till you have a great o-line before you draft a talent like Spiller. Who says that after building the o-line that a premier QB or RB will be available when we supposedly need him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple haze Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I mentioned this before, but it went mostly unnoticed. So I thought I'd topic it to see if I can get more feedback. I've read many posts that want the Bills to draft a QB at #3 and then sit him for or year or 2. I can not believe we are in a position to do that. The #3 pick better be a starter day one, even if he is not completely ready. Ask any QB in the NFL, and they will tell you that they didn't really start learning the game until they got on the field. Also the veteran players will be questioning the FO for not giving them help NOW. The first interception Fitz throws and Bills nation will be calling for the back-up, and a QB controversy will ensue. A few posters have referenced the Aaron Rodgers and the Philip Rivers drafting as their reasoning. Both those situation were different than what the Bills are in. Green bay was a perennial playoff contender during the Favre years and could afford a luxury pick. Rodgers was drafted #24 in the first round not #3. It was also believed that Rodgers got no help from Favre while he was the back-up, so grooming was a non-factor. San Diego was disenchanted with Brees and would have preferred Rivers to start day one. Brees woke up that season and gave them no choice but to sit Rivers until Brees was traded. San Diego was not drafting Rivers to sit him though. Lastly it would be a PR and marketing nightmare to have a first round pick sitting on the bench again. I believe our situation is more like Atlanta's, the Rams, the Lions, and similar to the Jets when comparing recent drafts. The Bills do not have the talent level to have any luxury picks. For the record I do not believe we should draft a QB at #3 but if we do, he should be starting day one. Thanks for the time. I hope this spawns some discussion. Disagree. A team should play their QB when he is ready to play. Putting him in too soon could lead to a busted pick down the line. Fans have got to get out of this NOW NOW NOW mentality. An organization will be playing football years after they draft a player. The sooner they can play the better, but playing them when they are ready is a better operating procedure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I mentioned this before, but it went mostly unnoticed. So I thought I'd topic it to see if I can get more feedback. I've read many posts that want the Bills to draft a QB at #3 and then sit him for or year or 2. I can not believe we are in a position to do that. The #3 pick better be a starter day one, even if he is not completely ready. Ask any QB in the NFL, and they will tell you that they didn't really start learning the game until they got on the field. Also the veteran players will be questioning the FO for not giving them help NOW. The first interception Fitz throws and Bills nation will be calling for the back-up, and a QB controversy will ensue. A few posters have referenced the Aaron Rodgers and the Philip Rivers drafting as their reasoning. Both those situation were different than what the Bills are in. Green bay was a perennial playoff contender during the Favre years and could afford a luxury pick. Rodgers was drafted #24 in the first round not #3. It was also believed that Rodgers got no help from Favre while he was the back-up, so grooming was a non-factor. San Diego was disenchanted with Brees and would have preferred Rivers to start day one. Brees woke up that season and gave them no choice but to sit Rivers until Brees was traded. San Diego was not drafting Rivers to sit him though. Lastly it would be a PR and marketing nightmare to have a first round pick sitting on the bench again. I believe our situation is more like Atlanta's, the Rams, the Lions, and similar to the Jets when comparing recent drafts. The Bills do not have the talent level to have any luxury picks. For the record I do not believe we should draft a QB at #3 but if we do, he should be starting day one. Thanks for the time. I hope this spawns some discussion. You seem to be defining a luxury pick as a player who won't start his rookie year. My definition is different: I think a pick is a luxury pick iff it's at a position where the Bills are already strong. (The Spiller pick comes to mind.) If you wanted to argue for an expanded definition of "luxury pick," you could include reaches such as Donte Whitner. You could even include luxuriously replacing good players in the primes of their careers. For example, the Bills drafted McKelvin as a replacement for Greer, instead of just giving Greer an extension. You could argue that the best Bills' DBs generally go first-contract-and-out, so any first round pick on a DB should be considered a luxury pick. But if the Bills don't have a franchise QB--which they don't--and if there's a franchise QB waiting for them at 3rd overall, drafting that QB would be the very opposite of a luxury pick. QB is the single most important position on the field; and the position where elite play produces the greatest impact in comparison with merely solid play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 ....on the defensive line. anywhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 as Gailey himself said, the draft is not about 1 yr. It is about long term upgrades. If they take a QB at 3 and he sits for a year behind FItz, thats fine as long as he eventually becomes a great QB. Keep in mind, we have drafted in the top 11 picks for most of the last decade and most of those picks did not start immediately and produce anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 IIRC, the same people were under the same impression and saying the same things a year ago. So, how did that rookie production from the 2010 draft work out for everyone? How did that Luck leaving school prediction work out for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeSpeed Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 Some great responses people! I guess I envision the following scenario next year where we start 0-4, with a #3 pick QB sitting on the bench. Can you truly say that you would not be calling for him to start game 5 ready or not? I think Ralph would be. I think the locker room would be stressed and the pressure on the coaches to start him would be high. So maybe we don't expect him to start day 1, but sometime early in season 1 I think is imperative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Some great responses people! I guess I envision the following scenario next year where we start 0-4, with a #3 pick QB sitting on the bench. Can you truly say that you would not be calling for him to start game 5 ready or not? I think Ralph would be. I think the locker room would be stressed and the pressure on the coaches to start him would be high. So maybe we don't expect him to start day 1, but sometime early in season 1 I think is imperative. Depends. Your scenario sounds like we're 0-4 and everyone is blaming Fitz. If it is directly and obviously Fitz's play that causes us to be 0-4 then yes, I can see people calling for the rookie. And if that truly is the case, then I wouldn't be against tossing the kid in to see how he does. However, if it is the more likely scenario and its our Run Defense, lack of passrush, erratic Oline play, WRs dropping game winning TDs, CBs fumbling kickoffs with the lead, etc... then I don't think people will want to pull Fitz too quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDRupp Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I'm sorry, but you're way off base with this logic. You're not seeing the big picture. You're assuming the Bills will be able to compete for a title in 2011. They won't. They will have to have an amazing off season and season to even compete for a wild card spot. This team has SO many holes, so many needs it's unrealistic to expect them to turn it around in one season. That being the case, there's absolutely no need to rush your Franchise QB into the fray and risk derailing his development or getting him injured. IF the Bills take a QB at 3 (or even in the second round) that they feel is their franchise QB (I don't know if there is one in this draft by the way), but there is absolutely NO need to start him this year. QB is a very different position than any other on the field. When you pick a QB that high, you have to protect him. Starting him behind this crap-tastic offensive line would get the guy killed and you run the risk of making him gunshy and ruining any chance of developing him. The posters who are arguing that they need to build the lines before drafting a QB are right in one sense -- in that you need a line to protect your investment to make it pay off. But they're not right in the sense that you have to get the OL before getting the QB. Truth is, finding a franchise QB is more difficult than finding a Pro Bowl caliber offensive tackle or guard. So, if there's a Franchise QB staring you in the face, you take him. End of story. That's the beauty of having Fitz. Fitz gives the Bills the freedom to do exactly that. The rational fans out there know that Fitz isn't anything more than a placeholder. And drafting a QB high and sitting him behind Fitz is a wise move (again, if they grade a QB worthy of being a franchise type guy). In fact, it's a necessary move. Even if he doesn't see the field in 2011. Any other position taken in rounds 1 or 2 in this draft however NEEDS to not only see the field, but be a play maker. I can't agree more. There is only 1 college QB ready to start day 1 as a rookie and he is staying at Stanford this year. I am not saying one will not start and might develop into a good QB, but look at River in SD. Drafted by Buddy Nix. He was the 3rd string QB in SD his rookie year. Brees started 15 games and Flutie started 1. In '05 Brees started all 16 with Rivers as the number 2 QB. When Rivers took over in '06 in his third year he was ready to roll and has done very well. YEs, different team and different circumstances than our '11 Bills will be but very effective approach.. Aaron Rodgers watch farve for 3 years as the #2 and barely saw the field. He looked like a shell of a man holding the clipboard watching Farve and what is he now? A top 5 QB and we'll see how he does moving forward. Good approach. I say draft a QB in round 1 and even at 3 and let him learn from Fitz and if we can get a decent vet behind Fitz (longshot) let him learn as #3. I could care less that he is not helping the '11 team on the field. It will pay off, in my humble opinion. pEace. Go Bills! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 That's why I'm hoping we don't take a QB at #3 and instead take someone that plays a position we really need help at and can start and be productive opening day. Taking a QB at #3 and letting him ride the pine behind Fitz next year or two would stink in my book. We'd be no better off AND we'd have wasted high picks the last two years on guys that aren't helping us. So, I hope we take a defensive front 7 hoss and play Fitz and bring in a FA QB or two such as Vince Young or Alex Smith or Troy Smith or Tavaris Jackson or whoever else might be out there to back up Fitz. You do have to have a franchise QB, but you don't have to get him first. I wonder what David Carr could have done if he'd have been a team with an offensive line? Playing behind our line can ruin a young QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 (edited) That's why I'm hoping we don't take a QB at #3 and instead take someone that plays a position we really need help at and can start and be productive opening day. Taking a QB at #3 and letting him ride the pine behind Fitz next year or two would stink in my book. We'd be no better off AND we'd have wasted high picks the last two years on guys that aren't helping us. So, I hope we take a defensive front 7 hoss and play Fitz and bring in a FA QB or two such as Vince Young or Alex Smith or Troy Smith or Tavaris Jackson or whoever else might be out there to back up Fitz. You do have to have a franchise QB, but you don't have to get him first. I wonder what David Carr could have done if he'd have been a team with an offensive line? Playing behind our line can ruin a young QB. It's not 2008. The days of complaining about our O-line are done. We have two top 40 picks and Karl Malone's bastard son. If we add a RT in round 2-3 like Solder or Love or FA and or we get a player like Moffit in the 4th the line goes from slightly below average to average to above average. In no way is it the 2008 death squad oline, there wouldn't even be 1 starter from that year on the roster anymore. Not to mention it is miles better than that Houston o line Carr had or that Cleveland oline that Ouch had. It's a different team. 2/5 of the O-line is good to great. 1/5 is average to improving. And with Hangman out 2/5 are ? That can be addressed in the offseason. If the rookie sits a year and let's the new RT or LG or both gel they will inherent a good to great line 2012. Edited January 8, 2011 by Why So Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDVA Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I am one of the firm belief that every single one of our draft picks this year should be someone that can stop the run. However, I am warming up to the idea of taking a QB at number three, but only if that QB is Cam Newton. Reason being, he does not have to start next year, Fitz can handle the starting duties. But Newton can give us 6-10 plays out of the wildcat. Meaning the pick is not totally wasted for immediate impact. With Cam running the WC, opposing defenses would have to honor the pass, for sure him running or flipping to Spiller. Meanwhile, Fitz is running the every down offense, Cam is learning hopefully, and we end up with our franchise QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I mentioned this before, but it went mostly unnoticed. So I thought I'd topic it to see if I can get more feedback. I've read many posts that want the Bills to draft a QB at #3 and then sit him for or year or 2. I can not believe we are in a position to do that. You have a sound point about the need for impact from our top draft choices. Chan went on record saying Fitz is his starter for next year and can take us to the playoffs, but that doesn't mean we won't draft a QB at #3 if one is available we could groom as "the man" for the next decade, because how often will we have the chance to draft at #3? Translation: If Chan and the Bills draft a QB at #3, they plan to do EXACTLY THAT. Get used to it. Yell all you want, fans. It is what it is and will be what it will be. My personal feeling is if we don't spend our #3 draft pick on a dominating defensive player (think: Bruce Smith) who can make an immediate impact, we'll have plenty of chances to continue to draft high in subsequent years. If we play Wonderboy Rookie QB behind our line, he's gonna get killed and Fitz will be starting in 3 weeks anyway. Heck, St Louis got 2 years of #2 overall 1st round draft picks to use on a OT and a DE before they took Bradford #1 overall. So take heart, everyone. If we do it wrong, there's always the chance at next year's high draft pick to do-over. Keep in mind misinformation is part of the draft for canny teams. Are the Bills a canny team, or should we all pay attention to Ralph's mid-season dictum "we will draft a QB next year"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I mentioned this before, but it went mostly unnoticed. So I thought I'd topic it to see if I can get more feedback. I've read many posts that want the Bills to draft a QB at #3 and then sit him for or year or 2. I can not believe we are in a position to do that. The #3 pick better be a starter day one, even if he is not completely ready. Ask any QB in the NFL, and they will tell you that they didn't really start learning the game until they got on the field. Also the veteran players will be questioning the FO for not giving them help NOW. The first interception Fitz throws and Bills nation will be calling for the back-up, and a QB controversy will ensue. A few posters have referenced the Aaron Rodgers and the Philip Rivers drafting as their reasoning. Both those situation were different than what the Bills are in. Green bay was a perennial playoff contender during the Favre years and could afford a luxury pick. Rodgers was drafted #24 in the first round not #3. It was also believed that Rodgers got no help from Favre while he was the back-up, so grooming was a non-factor. San Diego was disenchanted with Brees and would have preferred Rivers to start day one. Brees woke up that season and gave them no choice but to sit Rivers until Brees was traded. San Diego was not drafting Rivers to sit him though. Lastly it would be a PR and marketing nightmare to have a first round pick sitting on the bench again. I believe our situation is more like Atlanta's, the Rams, the Lions, and similar to the Jets when comparing recent drafts. The Bills do not have the talent level to have any luxury picks. For the record I do not believe we should draft a QB at #3 but if we do, he should be starting day one. Thanks for the time. I hope this spawns some discussion. The only thing is if we put a new QB behind a line that can't protect him what will that do to his future ?? And you know that if we draft a rookie and he doesn't immediately start out at a high level the fans will be calling for his head . If you don't believe it look at what some are saying about CJ !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 ....on the defensive line. That would be my preference, but I ain't running the Bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 (edited) Lastly it would be a PR and marketing nightmare to have a first round pick sitting on the bench again. I believe our situation is more like Atlanta's, the Rams, the Lions, and similar to the Jets when comparing recent drafts. The Bills do not have the talent level to have any luxury picks. For the record I do not believe we should draft a QB at #3 but if we do, he should be starting day one. Thanks for the time. I hope this spawns some discussion. The best marketing this franchise can do is to start making decisions based on what is best for the long term success of the franchise and not the short term marketing gimmickery used for selling tickets. The last time the team took the marketing approach was in the Terrell Owens acquisition. What was the long term advantage for the team? There was none. In fact, it kept a young receiver, Johnson, off the field stunting his development. Although you claim that Rogers situation is not going to be similar to our situation next year, if we take a qb with the first pick, because Fauvre was not willing to tutor Rogers you are missing the point over what happened in Green Bay. Whether Fauvre tutored Rogers or not is irrelevant. Rogers had time to be coached up and learn how to become a good qb. He is now one of the most dynamic qbs in the league. Are you saying that you wouldn't want that caliber of qb on your team, even if it takes time to develop? The notion that fans influence coaching staff and personnel decisons in a credible organization is outright lonney. Any staff that makes any decisons based on the what the mostly moronic fans want should not be involved in the professional ranks. If the Bills organization truly believes that there is a franchise qb available when the Bills pick they would be foolish not to seize the opportunity. Fitz is a nice person. That doesn't change the fact that he is a mediocre starting qb in a league whose winners mostly have high quality starters. Edited January 8, 2011 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 this team needs players to come in and produce right away. the packers had the luxury of taking a qb and putting him on the bench because they had favre and also a team that was a playoff contender. we need to take this draft and get some solid nfl players...not projects that will help two or three years down the road. we need to build on the team that we saw this past season that showed heart but just didnt have the talent to win. if you take projects it just stunts this team's growth and direction. if we take a qb at 3 he better play immediately and help this team win next year not the year after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatlebum Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 i understand what the OP is getting at, but don't agree, especially in the context of the bills O-line as it will be next year and this years draft class. who in the draft can you plug-and-play? obviously not newton with his run tendencies and unfamiliarity with a prostyle offense. mallet's got a hell of a gun but i don't believe he can read a book, let alone defensive schemes. gabbart has horrible footwork and cumbersome throwing motion and is uncomfortable under pressure (huge mistake to draft top 10). that leaves the guy from washington who's name i forget and i've never seen tape of, but he doesn't generate the same chatter as the afore mentioned, so i'm assuming it safe to say: there are simply no quarterbacks in the current class worth a top 10 pick. if we can get newton or mallet in the second, it might be worth a shot, but neither of them have repeated successful years at the div 1 college level... i don't trust 'em. pick DL. most mocks i've seen have us doing it, and it's a good idea. we need to shore up our d line with big bodies. please god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 So if the Bills don't take a QB this year, other than Luck, who are the best QBs projected to come out in 2012 who would be worth a 1st round pick? I figure the Bills will be in the 6-8 win range next year, and won't have a top 5 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Gun Special Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 The only thing is if we put a new QB behind a line that can't protect him what will that do to his future ?? And you know that if we draft a rookie and he doesn't immediately start out at a high level the fans will be calling for his head . If you don't believe it look at what some are saying about CJ !! Look up the stats on sacks, you will find Fitz wasnt sacked nearly as much as some top tier QBs. And we had a middle of the road run game. Our Oline isnt good but it isnt all that bad, especially with his holiness eric wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Look up the stats on sacks, you will find Fitz wasnt sacked nearly as much as some top tier QBs. And we had a middle of the road run game. Our Oline isnt good but it isnt all that bad, especially with his holiness eric wood. And Fitz's willingness to throw the ball also helped make them better. The line isnt great, and there is room for improvement, but it's coming along and not nearly as bad as it has been. I'm excited to see Wood, Bell, and Levitre grow as they go into their 3rd year, and more importantly, start it healthy. I think we have a couple of ok prospects for depth. If we could add a talent at RT I think we could have a pretty good line soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Gun Special Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 And Fitz's willingness to throw the ball also helped make them better. The line isnt great, and there is room for improvement, but it's coming along and not nearly as bad as it has been. I'm excited to see Wood, Bell, and Levitre grow as they go into their 3rd year, and more importantly, start it healthy. I think we have a couple of ok prospects for depth. If we could add a talent at RT I think we could have a pretty good line soon. Right, lets not kid ourselves, they have a ton of newer WRs, we need a TE and one or two OL to add. Fitz is merely a placeholder. Defense needs a lot of work, they lack talent in the front 7. The question for the front office is at #3 who is the best player, bc clearly they will pick the best player available and NOT draft for need. Look at the best franchises who are routinely successful, they dont draft need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Right, lets not kid ourselves, they have a ton of newer WRs, we need a TE and one or two OL to add. Fitz is merely a placeholder. Defense needs a lot of work, they lack talent in the front 7. The question for the front office is at #3 who is the best player, bc clearly they will pick the best player available and NOT draft for need. Look at the best franchises who are routinely successful, they dont draft need. Well, the good(?) news is that we have so many needs, we can go BPA at #3 and still fill a hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Gun Special Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Well, the good(?) news is that we have so many needs, we can go BPA at #3 and still fill a hole. Ha thats my thinking exactly. This team is not nearly as close as some on there believe. there is a huge talent gap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts