Leelee Phoenix Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 (edited) Next year's draft class is always better than this year's draft class. We hear it every year, so it must be true. Except last year. No you don't. You heard about last years for a while (suck for Luck). Next year has Bridgewater, Manziel, Murray, McCarron and Boyd. I like all 5 of those guys better than anyone this year except Smith (and I like Manuel more than a couple of those guys). Bridgewater is a stud. He has everything. We all know about Johnny Football, and if he'll translate to the NFL well. I'll bet he does. I'd like Murray too, even though he's kinda limited as a pocket passer without a great arm. Edited March 27, 2013 by Leelee Phoenix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 (edited) In my mind, unless both Geno Smith and Matt Barkley are off the board in the first round, that's who you draft. If they are, you wait until round 2 and see what happens. One of the 2nd tier QB's will be there and at that point maybe you draft them to hold a clipboard for Tarvaris Jackson for awhile. I agree with most of this. My first quibble is that I really don't like the idea of taking Barkley at #8, although I would probably talk myself into it after it happened. I'm not hung up on the whole USC thing like it's a curse or anything -- Barkley may well be successful in the NFL. I just can't imagine it happening in Buffalo. To go from being a major LA celebrity at USC to being QB of this moribund Bills team, I dunno. Sanchez worked for the Jets (for a while) because being QB of the Jets is a step up, rockstar-wise, from being QB for USC. If we draft Barkley, I hope I'm wrong. But for the record, I didn't even like Barkley last year, and his numbers took a significant hit this year. My other quibble is that if we do draft a guy in the 2nd, he pretty much needs to start. Maybe not the whole year, and maybe not Day 1, but we need to see at least 6-8 starts out of him to have an idea if he's got anything or not. Actually, it makes more sense to do it now then it ever has in the history of the league. Nobody is winning a Superbowl without a good quarterback. With the rule changes, if your passing game can't keep up with that of the opposition, you're toast. Washington recognized this and gave up THREE first rounders, plus a second rounder! And rightfully so, nobody rips them for it. Your options today are 1) do whatever it takes to get a good quarterback or 2) fail at your primary goal. I don't really disagree with your logic, but it seems to me that you and Kirby are arguing different things. You are advocating for what an NFL team SHOULD do in an ideal world; Kirby is arguing for what an NFL team WILL do in the actual world. I tend to agree with Kirby. I think it might* be great if a team could draft a QB at #8 overall, start him all year, then draft another QB in the top 10 the following year, and have a truly open competition for the starting job. But I don't see it happening any time soon, and especially not with the Bills. If it's anyone, it'll be a team with a rock-solid reputation in the media (the Patriots, Steelers, and Packers come to mind) who can safely pull such a move without getting pilloried in the media. I don't see the Bills as the franchise willing to take the heat for thinking so far outside of the box, or being willing/able to think that far outside the box in the first place. And they certainly haven't earned any benefit of the doubt from the fans/media. If they go against conventional wisdom, they will get ripped for it. *Or it might not be great -- perhaps the need to get practice reps/game time for both would stunt the development of both. Maybe they would usually both struggle during games, like most rookies do, and wind up being juggled in and out of the lineup until both of their confidences were destroyed. Maybe the coaching staff thinks they have a clear winner early on, commits to that guy, and chooses wrongly. Maybe one of the QBs holds out or demands a trade before you can even get them both into training camp. I don't know that any of these things would happen frequently or ever, but I don't know that the experiment would work, either. It would be interesting to see someone try it. If there was ever a good time for it, it was Jacksonville last year after Gabbert's disastrous rookie season. The Packers almost did a similar move after Favre left, when then-inexperienced former first-rounder Aaron Rodgers was poised to take over: They drafted Brian Brohm in the 2nd and Matt Flynn in the 7th, prompting pundits to suggest that they weren't super confident in Rodgers. However, I don't recall anything close to a competition for the starting job -- I think Rodgers was the presumed/unquestioned starter all through camp and preseason. Brohm and Flynn mostly just fought it out for the backup job. Edited March 27, 2013 by Cash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 That's a really good post. I still think it's what is best for us, but you raise legitimate points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts