I am wondering if the bills end up overdrafting a QB but 2nd

[GunnerBill]

And that's the approach that's gotten us nowhere.

 

Which goes back to my point - it is ALL about talent evaluation. The scattergun "keep picking a QB and pure law of averages says you will get one" is nonsense. Nobody has picked more quarterbacks in the 1st the past decade than the Browns and nobody has taken more in the first 3 rounds than them since they returned to the league. Their situation is arguably the worst in the NFL.

 

EDIT: It is also not the approach the Bills have taken.... they have drafted running backs, safeties and centres in the first as well.

Edited November 28, 2015 by GunnerBill

[BADOLBILZ]

 

I'm sorry #Badol I cannot agree with your reasoning. It still comes down to talent evaluation.

 

I agree with your general premise that first round should be where you look for cornerstone positions of a modern NFL team - an elite pass rusher (whether an edge rusher or disruptive DT), a left tackle, a top flight corner, a genuine #1 receiver and, most obviously, Quarterback. Now if there isn't a guy that you had graded as a premium player at one of those positions when it comes to your first round pick and you don't have an established franchise QB - then you should pick a Quarterback. No disagreement from me there at all.

 

Now when you talk about the Daltons and the Brees of this world you can obviously say they were wrongly graded by the NFL as a whole because even if you get a guy who gives you the kind of production Dalton has thus far in his career for 10 plus years then he is worth a 1st round pick.

 

My point is simply that you will fail if you set yourself into a preconceived mindset that it "has to be a QB" every single year. There are many more guys that you would have reached for that would have been dreadful picks if you had taken that approach every year than there would have been Daltons and Brees and you would have missed some elite talents.

 

For me the approach to then 1st round of the draft should always be:

 

1) Do I have an established franchise Quarterback? If the answer is no then when it gets to your pick:-

 

2) Is there a Quarterback worth a 1st round pick? If there is you pick him. If there isn't?

 

3) Is there a player at a cornerstone position other than Quarterback that has a 1st round grade and I think has the potential to be an elite player? If there is you pick him. If there isn't you can consider trading back, otherwise...... you pick the highest Quarterback on your board.

 

That would be my approach until I had my guy.

 

We can agree that early picks should be used for prime talent and key positions......but the problem I see with your rationale wrt QB value is the concept of the value of a first round pick.

 

You say if you get 10 years of production from a QB like Dalton is worth a first round pick...........but a good QB ...or a decade oor more of excellent production........is worth FAR MORE than that.

 

It's hard to quantify exactly how much but the scale from a solid QB like Dalton up to a great QB like Peyton Manning is probably between 3 and 12 first round picks worth of value?

 

The longer they produce the greater that value becomes......because players at other positions are lucky to be effective even half as long as a QB.

 

I go back to the Drew Brees example.

 

If you get just one of those every 15 years then you've succeeded in the first round for that period.

 

And if you do a halfway decent job of evaluating QB's you will.

 

If the Bills had merely drafted the QB that was selected next after their pick since their playoff drought began they'd have selected Brees, Aaron Rodgers and Joe Flacco.

 

They'd have selected a dozen duds or middling QB's as well........but since the life cycle for first round picks........the amount of time you can go back and still find the majority of those picks still on your roster.......is *maybe* 6 years.....then it gets easier to understand why on-the-whole first round picks aren't really the building block of sustained success that people see them as.

 

For passing on Brees, Rodgers and Flacco the Bills have to show for it.......McKelvin, Gimore, Dareus and Watkins.....good players but besides the fact that they aren't HOF, franchise altering QB's like Brees and Rodgers and a SB winner like Flacco......there are only 4 starters left on the team from those 15 drafts!

 

And contrary to popular belief it's not because they drafted all busts in the first round.

 

In the end.....this is how it works out.

 

QB is BY FAR the better investment with your first round pick.

[GunnerBill]

 

And if you do a halfway decent job of evaluating QB's you will.

 

 

If you do that then my plan is a far better one. It comes down to talent evaluation first and last. I will grant you that the Bills have not done a good job of that and did not, as I am advocating, defer to Quarterback when there is any doubt.

 

There is a reason no NFL team has taken your first round pick every year until you hit approach and it is not because you are cleverer than all 32 existing GMs and all those that have gone before. It is because whilst a Quarterback is by far the most important piece you need other good players on a football team to be successful.

[John from Riverside]

 

why

Because other needs have emerged.

 

Do you see the rankings of our offensive line as of today? Glenn (who is set to be a free agent) and Cog (same) are doing well.....Wood is average......Glenn Miller is a rookie.....and RT is a burning bag of dog****. If you are a team that wants to run the ball then you NEED a good offensive line. If you trade up you are taking away picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds that can be used in this area.

 

also

 

Dont think for a minute that Rex Ryan will not continue to try to bring in "his kind of players" to fit his defensive scheme......he is gonna want draft picks for that.

 

Not all of these players can be 4th, 5th, 6th round guys......

 

WHen you have a QB in place that is actually playing like a NFL starter you are not going to give up your draft to move up in the first round for another QB......I just dont see that

 

What I see is the bills taking a QB if they feel one is worthy at their 1st round pick......or taking a Bryce Petty developmental guy as the draft goes on (I hope not too low) that has all the tools for the offense Roman wants to run but not give up picks

 

I agree that we NEED another QB that actually has talent....but I am not sacrificing this draft to do it in the hopes that one of these guys might be better then Tyrod Taylor.

 

If you do that then my plan is a far better one. It comes down to talent evaluation first and last. I will grant you that the Bills have not done a good job of that and did not, as I am advocating, defer to Quarterback when there is any doubt.

 

There is a reason no NFL team has taken your first round pick every year until you hit approach and it is not because you are cleverer than all 32 existing GMs and all those that have gone before. It is because whilst a Quarterback is by far the most important piece you need other good players on a football team to be successful.

THe problem is u could evaluate yourself right out of having a QB that can start on your roster.

 

I do get the arguement though

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Because other needs have emerged.

 

Do you see the rankings of our offensive line as of today? Glenn (who is set to be a free agent) and Cog (same) are doing well.....Wood is average......Glenn Miller is a rookie.....and RT is a burning bag of dog****. If you are a team that wants to run the ball then you NEED a good offensive line. If you trade up you are taking away picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds that can be used in this area.

 

also

 

Dont think for a minute that Rex Ryan will not continue to try to bring in "his kind of players" to fit his defensive scheme......he is gonna want draft picks for that.

 

Not all of these players can be 4th, 5th, 6th round guys......

 

WHen you have a QB in place that is actually playing like a NFL starter you are not going to give up your draft to move up in the first round for another QB......I just dont see that

 

What I see is the bills taking a QB if they feel one is worthy at their 1st round pick......or taking a Bryce Petty developmental guy as the draft goes on (I hope not too low) that has all the tools for the offense Roman wants to run but not give up picks

 

I agree that we NEED another QB that actually has talent....but I am not sacrificing this draft to do it in the hopes that one of these guys might be better then Tyrod Taylor.

THe problem is u could evaluate yourself right out of having a QB that can start on your roster.

 

I do get the arguement though

 

we either trade up or tank, is the only way to get a QB, Tyrod is a running QB and those guys don't win consistently in the NFL, we need a pocket passer

[GunnerBill]

THe problem is u could evaluate yourself right out of having a QB that can start on your roster.

 

I do get the arguement though

You could pick one in the first every year and not have a QB that can start on your roster. I keep saying it but the Browns have spent more firsts than anyone in recent years. They have no starting calibre QB.

 

Whichever road you take it is ultimately about evaluating talent.

Edited November 28, 2015 by GunnerBill

[John from Riverside]

 

we either trade up or tank, is the only way to get a QB, Tyrod is a running QB and those guys don't win consistently in the NFL, we need a pocket passer

Neither of those are an option

 

There is too much talent on this team right now

 

I know you have always been about the next bright shiny toy.....which is your right as a fan....but thats not how you run a team

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Neither of those are an option

 

There is too much talent on this team right now

 

I know you have always been about the next bright shiny toy.....which is your right as a fan....but thats not how you run a team

 

neither is not having a QB

[Rico]

 

We can agree that early picks should be used for prime talent and key positions......but the problem I see with your rationale wrt QB value is the concept of the value of a first round pick.

 

You say if you get 10 years of production from a QB like Dalton is worth a first round pick...........but a good QB ...or a decade oor more of excellent production........is worth FAR MORE than that.

 

It's hard to quantify exactly how much but the scale from a solid QB like Dalton up to a great QB like Peyton Manning is probably between 3 and 12 first round picks worth of value?

 

The longer they produce the greater that value becomes......because players at other positions are lucky to be effective even half as long as a QB.

 

I go back to the Drew Brees example.

 

If you get just one of those every 15 years then you've succeeded in the first round for that period.

 

And if you do a halfway decent job of evaluating QB's you will.

 

If the Bills had merely drafted the QB that was selected next after their pick since their playoff drought began they'd have selected Brees, Aaron Rodgers and Joe Flacco.

 

They'd have selected a dozen duds or middling QB's as well........but since the life cycle for first round picks........the amount of time you can go back and still find the majority of those picks still on your roster.......is *maybe* 6 years.....then it gets easier to understand why on-the-whole first round picks aren't really the building block of sustained success that people see them as.

 

For passing on Brees, Rodgers and Flacco the Bills have to show for it.......McKelvin, Gimore, Dareus and Watkins.....good players but besides the fact that they aren't HOF, franchise altering QB's like Brees and Rodgers and a SB winner like Flacco......there are only 4 starters left on the team from those 15 drafts!

 

And contrary to popular belief it's not because they drafted all busts in the first round.

 

In the end.....this is how it works out.

 

QB is BY FAR the better investment with your first round pick.

I think the only way that works though is if you are willing to quickly pull the plug on one that you have drafted as soon as it looks like he may not be the answer. With so little time for development, you're not drafting any project QBs either in the 1st-round. You'd obviously need a very understanding owner, and the QB fanboys in the fanbase would be none too pleased. Still, it's hard to argue that the Bills wouldn't have been better off by doing this approach over the past 15 years. Brees may have been an early cut though, and Rodgers may have really needed the development years.

[BmarvB]

How do you overdraft the most important position?

Ummmmmmmm

Ryan Leaf? JaMarcus Russell?, EJ?, Christian Ponder?, need I continue?

[BADOLBILZ]

 

If you do that then my plan is a far better one. It comes down to talent evaluation first and last. I will grant you that the Bills have not done a good job of that and did not, as I am advocating, defer to Quarterback when there is any doubt.

 

There is a reason no NFL team has taken your first round pick every year until you hit approach and it is not because you are cleverer than all 32 existing GMs and all those that have gone before. It is because whilst a Quarterback is by far the most important piece you need other good players on a football team to be successful.

 

The reason nobody does it isn't because it wouldn't produce near certain results over a 5-10 year period........and subsequently a legit chance to contend for another decade......it's because of impatience.

 

It's a what-have-you-done lately league and that's appropriate because most of the bad franchises operate only in the now and so they should be judged thusly.

 

The consistently competitive teams have good QB's.

 

Good QB's play for A LONG TIME.

 

I saw a graphic from the Giants/Patriots game a couple weeks ago that basically said that since they played in the SB 5 years earlier the only players still on either team are the QB's and the kickers.

 

Out of 106 roster spots over 100 had been turned over......and *somehow* they've managed to remain competitive and are likely playoff teams again this year.

 

Do the math.

 

The Bills roster is by any measure very good........and yet even they.....perennial losers with a high pick in round 1 most years....... only have 3 of their own first round draft picks starting.

 

You can choose to avoid the numbers but they spell out the fallacy of clutching to first round draft picks like the future of the franchise depends on which DE or CB you select in round one.

 

Do I want to pass on an exciting position player to pick a QB when it's been a tough position to evaluate? Of course not......but short term gratification has not paid off for this team.

 

The way the league is consituted there is only one position that really makes any kind of long term difference for your franchise.

[BADOLBILZ]

I think the only way that works though is if you are willing to quickly pull the plug on one that you have drafted as soon as it looks like he may not be the answer. With so little time for development, you're not drafting any project QBs either in the 1st-round. You'd obviously need a very understanding owner, and the QB fanboys in the fanbase would be none too pleased. Still, it's hard to argue that the Bills wouldn't have been better off by doing this approach over the past 15 years. Brees may have been an early cut though, and Rodgers may have really needed the development years.

 

It would have to start with ownership.

 

And it would require a different emphasis on training and evaluating QB's.

 

Sooner or later, you are bound to trade away a good one to make room........but the unused QB's can become valuable assets in trade.

 

I'd love to have the problem of Drew Brees career winding down in year 16 when I could still have a younger Aaron Rodgers in his prime if I hadn't traded him away before his third season.....NINE YEARS AGO......for picks that became players that are now retired!

 

People really underestimate the value that is provided by having the player at the most important position starting for 5X as long as the average NFL career.

[Rico]

 

It would have to start with ownership.

 

And it would require a different emphasis on training and evaluating QB's.

 

Sooner or later, you are bound to trade away a good one to make room........but the unused QB's can become valuable assets in trade.

 

I'd love to have the problem of Drew Brees career winding down in year 16 when I could still have a younger Aaron Rodgers in his prime if I hadn't traded him away before his third season.....NINE YEARS AGO......for picks that became players that are now retired!

 

People really underestimate the value that is provided by having the player at the most important position starting for 5X as long as the average NFL career.

True, none of your QBs would be cut like I said Brees might have... the one's you reject would be traded away long before they were greatly devalued. Like you said, it would have to start with ownership... you may have to explain why a QB you gave up on ended up panning out somewhere else after a few years. Not too bad though if you do end up hitting on a great one, so long as the one you stick with ends up being the best of all you drafted.

[John from Riverside]

 

neither is not having a QB

We DO have a QB....we need another one. There is a difference in that

[BADOLBILZ]

You could pick one in the first every year and not have a QB that can start on your roster. I keep saying it but the Browns have spent more firsts than anyone in recent years. They have no starting calibre QB.

 

 

So you are saying that at the end of 15 years of first round QB's there would actually be a chance that the team would NEVER become good? You know, like a playoff team? Impossible!

 

Actually, I think those short term rentals disguised very often as first round picks at random positions of need........they generally do more to create an environment of mediocrity....false competition....... which leaves you in what I call "Quarterback Purgatory".

 

More succinctly put........take Gilmore, Dareus and Watkins and how many players is this team away from being a SB contender?

 

Answer is STILL just one.

 

Franchise QB.

 

As for it all coming down to properly evaluating talent.........well, after getting a QB........YES.

 

But 95% of the opportunities to acquire talent come outside of round 1 of the NFL draft.

 

Rounds 2-7. Supplemental picks. UDFA. UFA. Trade.

 

That's how a good Bills 53 man roster can only have 3 first rounders starting.

 

If you do the job right in those phases of player acquisition.......you can play the odds and address QB first every time or AT LEAST until you get your franchise QB.

 

I know we are going to have to agree to disagree......if the two SB teams met and they each only had 2 non-QB first rounders starting most fans would STILL deny the actual lack of gravity of first round pick decisions.

 

It doesn't seem right.......but the NFL made up the rules and the reality is that only one position makes a real long term difference.

True, none of your QBs would be cut like I said Brees might have... the one's you reject would be traded away long before they were greatly devalued. Like you said, it would have to start with ownership... you may have to explain why a QB you gave up on ended up panning out somewhere else after a few years. Not too bad though if you do end up hitting on a great one, so long as the one you stick with ends up being the best of all you drafted.

 

In which case......worst case scenario......you become what the 21st century Buffalo Bills have been......irrelevant......for a long period of time.

 

As we can attest......they still keep playing football.

 

But if you don't get very serious about addressing your QB position......you can EASILY go without a very good one for decades.

[reddogblitz]

we either trade up or tank, is the only way to get a QB, Tyrod is a running QB and those guys don't win consistently in the NFL, we need a pocket passer

No it's not.

 

Saints didn't draft Blue DreEs. Cardinals didn't trade up or tank to get Kurt Warner or Carson Palmer. Packers and Steelers got their QBs without having to do this either. Neither did NE or Dallas for that matter. Seahawks drafted Russell Wilson in the 3rd round. Chiefs have made the playoffs WITH A QB (who is better than ours) that they didn't have to tank or trade up for.

 

I too prefer pocket passers, but yeah, Russell Wilson has never won anything.

 

Tanking or trading up can work but is far from the only way.

 

Explore ALL options IMHO.

Edited November 28, 2015 by reddogblitz

[John from Riverside]

No it's not.

 

Saints didn't draft Blue DreEs. Cardinals didn't trade up or tank to get Kurt Warner or Carson Palmer. Packers and Steelers got their QBs without having to do this either. Neither did NE or Dallas for that matter. Seahawks drafted Russell Wilson in the 3rd round. Chiefs have made the playoffs WITH A QB (who is better than ours) that they didn't have to tank or trade up for.

 

I too prefer pocket passers, but yeah, Russell Wilson has never won anything.

 

Tanking or trading up can work but is far from the only way.

 

Explore ALL options IMHO.

I dont want to tank with all this talent on the team......this D is just now coming around.....we would be wasting Shady's best years for us.....no tanks

 

I dont want to trade away 2nd round choices when Whaley has been SO GOOD with them......just look at the guys we have gotten?

 

Glenn

Darby

Kiko

Woods

 

That is just a short list

 

No.....when you are that low in the first you would have to give up the FARM to move up....just no

[GunnerBill]

 

That's how a good Bills 53 man roster can only have 3 first rounders starting.

 

I know we are going to have to agree to disagree......if the two SB teams met and they each only had 2 non-QB first rounders starting most fans would STILL deny the actual lack of gravity of first round pick decisions.

 

 

One minor point on your first line - we have 4. Eric Wood was a first round pick as well. Not that it makes any difference but just for accuracy.

 

We are going to have to agree to disagree I am afraid. I understand you point about first round picks - where I struggle to follow your argument is why that means just picking at QB in the first every year is the right strategy. I think there is a leap in logic somewhere there. I don't think accepting (which by and large I do) your argument about the importance and the additional longevity of the position necessarily brings me to the same conclusion you come to. To me your argument still comes down to "we don't really trust ourselves to talent evaluate properly so therefore we will just throw one at the wall every year and see what sticks."

 

Where we are in agreement, at least I think we are, is that the Bills have to take a QB early this year. I am saying first or second you would take one in the first every year.

No it's not.

 

Saints didn't draft Blue DreEs. Cardinals didn't trade up or tank to get Kurt Warner or Carson Palmer. Packers and Steelers got their QBs without having to do this either. Neither did NE or Dallas for that matter. Seahawks drafted Russell Wilson in the 3rd round. Chiefs have made the playoffs WITH A QB (who is better than ours) that they didn't have to tank or trade up for.

 

I too prefer pocket passers, but yeah, Russell Wilson has never won anything.

 

Tanking or trading up can work but is far from the only way.

 

Explore ALL options IMHO.

 

Add the Ravens and Flacco. They picked him in a similar spot as to where we would currently draft I think didn't they? High teens?

 

The only time I advocate tanking is when your season is basically already done. The Cam Newton year I couldn't for the life of me work out why we were not aiming for the number one pick when we opened 0-7 or whatever it was and completely stunk the joint up.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

No it's not.

 

Saints didn't draft Blue DreEs. Cardinals didn't trade up or tank to get Kurt Warner or Carson Palmer. Packers and Steelers got their QBs without having to do this either. Neither did NE or Dallas for that matter. Seahawks drafted Russell Wilson in the 3rd round. Chiefs have made the playoffs WITH A QB (who is better than ours) that they didn't have to tank or trade up for.

 

I too prefer pocket passers, but yeah, Russell Wilson has never won anything.

 

Tanking or trading up can work but is far from the only way.

 

Explore ALL options IMHO.

 

that's great but who is going to trade us a QB. Also the chances of a once great but injured QB hitting the market are slim. We messed up by not trying for Brees and Palmer when we had the chance.

 

Steelers, Seahawks and Packers were lucky to get QBs to slide down, which hopefully happens to us.

 

sure their other options but realistically trading up and having bad yrs are the best way to get a franchise QB

We DO NOT have a QB....we need another one. There is a difference in that

[John from Riverside]

 

that's great but who is going to trade us a QB. Also the chances of a once great but injured QB hitting the market are slim. We messed up by not trying for Brees and Palmer when we had the chance.

 

Steelers, Seahawks and Packers were lucky to get QBs to slide down, which hopefully happens to us.

 

sure their other options but realistically trading up and having bad yrs are the best way to get a franchise QB

Well that is irriitating rewording my post. What a schmuk