2 1st Round QBs or Trading up for 1

[Ittakestime]

This has been discussed a couple times throughout other franchises that were QB needy with multiple picks and I think it is an interesting discussion.  A lot of people feel that QBs are like lottery tickets.  There really is no guarantee with any of them so the more you draft, the better your chances of hitting is.

 

Let's assume Rosen and Darnold go 1 and 2.  That leaves Mayfield, Allen, Rudolph and Jackson as the remaining QBs.

 

Mayfield and Allen are projected between 5-12 while Rudolph and Jackson are projected later.

 

Would you rather package the 2 1sts for Mayfield or Allen OR draft both Rudolph and Jackson at 21 and 22?

[JohnBonhamRocks]

If it only took two 1sts to get Mayfield, right now I really like him as a prospect, so I would choose that. BUT, I think he's going to go higher than two 1sts will get us, so I choose Rudolph and Jackson. BUT BUT, I also am not convinced that Rudolph and/or Jackson even make it to 21. I think there is going to be a run on QBs in the first and there are a lot of teams ahead of us who could go that route. 

 

Either way, I fully support taking 2 QBs. Mayfield & Falk, Rudolph & Jackson, Allen & Lock, whoever. Hedge your bets is my point. 

[Dr. Who]

Just now, JohnBonhamRocks said:

If it only took two 1sts to get Mayfield, right now I really like him as a prospect, so I would choose that. BUT, I think he's going to go higher than two 1sts will get us, so I choose Rudolph and Jackson. BUT BUT, I also am not convinced that Rudolph and/or Jackson even make it to 21. I think there is going to be a run on QBs in the first and there are a lot of teams ahead of us who could go that route. 

 

Either way, I fully support taking 2 QBs. Mayfield & Falk, Rudolph & Jackson, Allen & Lock, whoever. Hedge your bets is my point. 

I'd be surprised if at least one of them isn't there at 21.  I think both of them might be.  I'd trade up for Mayfield, btw.  I think the two firsts will do it, but combine, Senior Bowl, etc. will probably affect current assessments.

[jr1]

they have too many holes like DL and LB to take more than 1 QB

[JohnBonhamRocks]

1 minute ago, Dr. Who said:

I'd be surprised if at least one of them isn't there at 21.  I think both of them might be.  I'd trade up for Mayfield, btw.  I think the two firsts will do it, but combine, Senior Bowl, etc. will probably affect current assessments.

 

Yeah, I already kind of regret voting how I did if this is assuming availability of these options. 

 

Mayfield is my favorite prospect who we stand a chance to draft. Very interested to see his height, although if he's 5'11" I'm not going to count him out anyways. Heck, maybe that drops him a bit... in a good way. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Selecting two QBs in the first round?  No!

[JohnBonhamRocks]

2 minutes ago, jr1 said:

they have too many holes like DL and LB to take more than 1 QB

 

Pick one:

 

(A) best front 7 in the league but Peterman starts

 

(B) below average front 7 but we have a franchise QB

[klos63]

13 minutes ago, Ittakestime said:

This has been discussed a couple times throughout other franchises that were QB needy with multiple picks and I think it is an interesting discussion.  A lot of people feel that QBs are like lottery tickets.  There really is no guarantee with any of them so the more you draft, the better your chances of hitting is.

 

Let's assume Rosen and Darnold go 1 and 2.  That leaves Mayfield, Allen, Rudolph and Jackson as the remaining QBs.

 

Mayfield and Allen are projected between 5-12 while Rudolph and Jackson are projected later.

 

Would you rather package the 2 1sts for Mayfield or Allen OR draft both Rudolph and Jackson at 21 and 22?

I think I could say with confidence that no team would ever pick 2 QB's in the first round.

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

That would probably be the first time ever that a team drafted two QBs in the first round, so I don't see that happening regardless of how the draft/FA shakes out.

 

The way it's set up now, I think the Bills bring in a vet QB, and use those picks on other positions or to move around in the draft. They played their way out of the top QBs lottery, and the Chiefs pick is not high either. It would take a pretty massive package to move up ahead of QB needy teams to draft one of the top 2, and the Bills have plenty of  holes and aging players. I  don't think they'll be willing to move up to draft the 3rd-4th best prospect. 

7 minutes ago, JohnBonhamRocks said:

 

Pick one:

 

(A) best front 7 in the league but Peterman starts

 

(B) below average front 7 but we have a franchise QB

 

Free agency could change things dramatically...

[JohnBonhamRocks]

7 minutes ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

That would probably be the first time ever that a team drafted two QBs in the first round, so I don't see that happening regardless of how the draft/FA shakes out.

 

The way it's set up now, I think the Bills bring in a vet QB, and use those picks on other positions or to move around in the draft. They played their way out of the top QBs lottery, and the Chiefs pick is not high either. It would take a pretty massive package to move up ahead of QB needy teams to draft one of the top 2, and the Bills have plenty of  holes and aging players. I  don't think they'll be willing to move up to draft the 3rd-4th best prospect. 

 

Free agency could change things dramatically...

 

I agree FA could change things. I do think that if they think the 3rd QB in the draft is still a franchise caliber prospect, then who cares if he's the 3rd QB? Eli Manning and Rivers have had great careers, but I would go back and trade the farm for Roethlisberger, wouldn't you? I mean I love Lee Evans, but c'mon now. 

[NewEra]

Mayfield is the only other guy I’d trade into the top 10 for.  I’d be happy if Jackson or Allen fell to us at 21, but I expect both to be gone by then.  If we draft Rudolph, I’ll root for him like I rooted for ej. You’re my qb, but I don’t expect much.  If we trade up for Rudolph I’d throw up in my mouth.

 

jacksons potential really is amazing,  I’d lean that he flops over turns into the next best thing.  If we draft him, we better fire Dennison.  Which is the main reason why I think he’s close to off of our draft board.  Sigh.  Could be fun and special in the fu system with coaches and weapons around him, gonna take the perfect situation imo.

 

allen.  Don’t know what to think.  He’s teammates were really bad.  His tool are great.  Do they translate with a great team around him?  Maybe.  I really have no idea but wouldn’t want to trade both 1st rd picks for him.

 

mayfield.  Love his attitude. Maybe because I haven’t paid a lot of attention to his outbursts. Throws a nice ball with accuracy.  Nice intangibles. Bad footwork. I’d be ok if we traded our 2 firsts for him I suppose,   Definite flop potential imo.  Just like his upside and never give up attitude, 

 

rudolph. Bleh.  If we drafted him in rd 4 I’d be excited,  if we draft him rd 3 I wouldn’t be pissed. Anytime before that and I don’t really want the guy.  

[Batman1876]

For Mayfield we would need to get to 4 to Jump ahead of the Broncos and Jets. Even if the Broncos land Cousins I would think you would need to trade into 4 so that the Jets don't. I think that drafting 2 first rounders would be a franchise killer unless one quickly demonstrated they were head and shoulders above the other. If they were anywhere close to one another in production then you are committing yourself to 4 years of QB controversy, which I imagine would have a negative impact on development. So I'm in favor of trading up if there is a guy that is worth it. If our scouts tell us that this is 2004 2.0 then go get the best guy you can get and go as high as you can get to get him. You are better with Eli, Rivers or Ben than you are with Lossman and shaub. If this is another 2011 where there is more hype than quality QBs then take the one you feel is the best when 22 rolls around. in other words it depends on scouting, and evaluation. 

[Fadingpain]

1 hour ago, JohnBonhamRocks said:

 

Pick one:

 

(A) best front 7 in the league but Peterman starts

 

(B) below average front 7 but we have a franchise QB

This question answers itself.

 

Look at New England; all the names come and go.  And yet they are always in the Superbowl, winning the Superbowl, or almost in the Superbowl.

 

The only 2 names that remain constant are Brady and Belichick.

 

 

[ndirish1978]

1 hour ago, JohnBonhamRocks said:

 

Pick one:

 

(A) best front 7 in the league but Peterman starts

 

(B) below average front 7 but we have a franchise QB

 

This obviously is correct. We need to do whatever it takes to get a QB now. Waiting around is a recipe for disaster. Would you rather have Wentz or Kizer? Because that's what you get when you settle for a later pick QB

[JohnBonhamRocks]

Just now, ndirish1978 said:

 

This obviously is correct. We need to do whatever it takes to get a QB now. Waiting around is a recipe for disaster. Would you rather have Wentz or Kizer? Because that's what you get when you settle for a later pick QB

 

Irish fan bias aside, I guess I'll go Wentz. 

[ndirish1978]

3 minutes ago, JohnBonhamRocks said:

 

Irish fan bias aside, I guess I'll go Wentz. 

 

Lol. I wish I didn't have to use him as an example, but he has played quite poorly. Unfortunately, he would probably get 3 years in Buffalo to prove the FO wrong. 

[Chicken Boo]

I'm going to take great pleasure in the Bills NOT going after Baker Mayfield and subsequent Mayfield fan meltdowns on this board.

[Prickly Pete]

3 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

I'm going to take great pleasure in the Bills NOT going after Baker Mayfield and subsequent Mayfield fan meltdowns on this board.

 

He is a douchebag.

[Augie]

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

Selecting two QBs in the first round?  No!

 

So, you need at least one guy who’s actually played in the NFL. You need one vet. Do you have 3 QB’s active? If you put a first round QB on the paractice squad, he’ll get poached for sure. How would this work exactly? 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, Augie said:

 

So, you need at least one guy who’s actually played in the NFL. You need one vet. Do you have 3 QB’s active? If you put a first round QB on the paractice squad, he’ll get poached for sure. How would this work exactly? 

 

I'm against the idea of two QBs in rounds 1 so I'm not sure why you are posing these questions to me. 

[Augie]

Just now, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

I'm against the idea of two QBs in rounds 1 so I'm not sure why you are posing these questions to me. 

 

I’m agreeing with you, and asking what I feel are obvious questions about that path. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, Augie said:

 

I’m agreeing with you, and asking what I feel are obvious questions about that path. 

 

My bad. 

[Ittakestime]

1 hour ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

That would probably be the first time ever that a team drafted two QBs in the first round, so I don't see that happening regardless of how the draft/FA shakes out.

 

The way it's set up now, I think the Bills bring in a vet QB, and use those picks on other positions or to move around in the draft. They played their way out of the top QBs lottery, and the Chiefs pick is not high either. It would take a pretty massive package to move up ahead of QB needy teams to draft one of the top 2, and the Bills have plenty of  holes and aging players. I  don't think they'll be willing to move up to draft the 3rd-4th best prospect. 

 

Free agency could change things dramatically...

 

I don't understand the strategy of not taking two QBs.   You get double the opportunity to evaluate two top prospect at the most important position in football. You find out which one is better and trade the other. One thing we have seen is that QBs that don't really play but have potential keep their value. It's time to think outside the box. 

[Augie]

Just now, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

My bad. 

 

No problem! I do wonder about the answers that might be given, though. I get the desperation, but let’s trust the FO to do better than that. Oh, and maybe fill a few more holes....

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, Augie said:

 

No problem! I do wonder about the answers that might be given, though. I get the desperation, but let’s trust the FO to do better than that. Oh, and maybe fill a few more holes....

 

It's not a plausible or practicle idea so I'm certain that it's nothing to give any serious consideration. 

Edited January 9, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, Ittakestime said:

 

I don't understand the strategy of not taking two QBs.   You get double the opportunity to evaluate two top prospect at the most important position in football. You find out which one is better and trade the other. One thing we have seen is that QBs that don't really play but have potential keep their value. It's time to think outside the box. 

 

You won’t know by week one who the better option is. It may take years to know who the better option is. You will lose draft capital by having a guy you have to dump because you can’t afford the roster spot. 

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, klos63 said:

I tinink I could say with confidence that no team would ever pick 2 QB's in the first round.

In '89 the Pokes took Aikman in the 1st & Walsh w/ the equivalent of a 1st in the supplemental draft.

 

My preference would be to use the 2 1sts to move up & get Mayfield if possible.  If not, stay put & use 1 1st on best available QB.

[Clemfield2622]

Silliest thing I've read all day.

 

thanks!

[Ittakestime]

6 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

You won’t know by week one who the better option is. It may take years to know who the better option is. You will lose draft capital by having a guy you have to dump because you can’t afford the roster spot. 

 

Huh?  Patriots held onto Jimmy G. Cincinnati supposedly had a deal in place for McCarron. Teams wanted Cousins bad when RG3 was the starter. It's fine to hang onto the QB. 

[wagon127]

You can sometimes find a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round worth starting in their rookie year. They have to take at least 1 QB in the first round, but maybe get another guy in the 2nd or 3rd round. They have other holes they need to fill. I feel we should stay put and not trade up, because its such a scratch off lottery ticket type deal.

Edited January 10, 2018 by wagon127

[sullim4]

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

Selecting two QBs in the first round?  No!

 

It's not as crazy an idea as it seems on its face.  If both work out, you have an immediate trade asset.  If one works out, then be happy you drafted two of them.

 

If neither of them work out, well, it's no different than drafting one of those quarterbacks and an OL that turns out to be like Mike Williams or a DT like Dareus.

[Augie]

5 minutes ago, Ittakestime said:

 

Huh?  Patriots held onto Jimmy G. Cincinnati supposedly had a deal in place for McCarron. Teams wanted Cousins bad when RG3 was the starter. It's fine to hang onto the QB. 

 

Pats and Bengals had vets ahead. RG3 was a TOP guy, not late first gamble. Not sure if they had a vet. Two late first round gambles creates issues in devoting roster spots. A guy in the third might be able to learn on the PS. I understand your frustration, and I’m sure you like your idea. I’m just not on board. One guy’s opinion. 

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, sullim4 said:

 

It's not as crazy an idea as it seems on its face.  If both work out, you have an immediate trade asset.  If one works out, then be happy you drafted two of them.

 

If neither of them work out, well, it's no different than drafting one of those quarterbacks and an OL that turns out to be like Mike Williams or a DT like Dareus.

 

Not buying it. 

[Ittakestime]

It is tough to find a year where this many QBs will go in the first but here are some comparables:

 

2012 - 4 QBs went in 1st, the 5th and 6th were Osweiler and Russell Wilson.

2011- 4 QBs went in 1st, the 5th and 6th were Dalton and Kaep.

2004- 4 QBs went in 1st, the 5th and 6th were Shaub and Luke McCown.

 

In this instance where so many QBs are drafted early, there is obviously less chance of the guy you drafting being great.  In this situation, it would suck to get the guy that turned out bad, but at least if you take both, you would have got a good QB.

[rocky61]

I've been a football fan for over 40 years of both the CFL and my favorite team, the Bills. No matter what, we won't get a draft pick by 21 and 22...and what do we lose by bumping up? What QB would be available?  We need more help than just a QB...I know Peterman has not had a good start. But he is a very good QB, that needs a chance to become accustomed to the NFL. The Calgary Stampeders have the QB the Bills could use. Bo Levi Mitchel. 6' 2" Texas man. Most Outstanding Player in 2015. Dennison needs to go, and we know Tyrod won't be around past this Spring. I "think" his contract is up? (Mitchell) Check his Stats, just a thought.

[The_Dude]

We’re in for a show this offseason, that’s for sure. 

 

Im positive Tyrod isn’t on this team next year. 

 

They HAVE to do something huge. Even drafting Rudolph is huge. 

 

I dont think Jackson isnt our guy only because Rudolph is the most “process” guy in the draft class. Seriously, look him up. Rudolph is going to be the apple of McBeane’s eyes he’s so processy. 

Edited January 10, 2018 by The_Dude

[Kirby Jackson]

Where is other? I’d like to take 4 QBs in the 1st 2 rounds. 

 

..or we can do what any normal franchise would do and identify a guy and pull the trigger?

[klos63]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

In '89 the Pokes took Aikman in the 1st & Walsh w/ the equivalent of a 1st in the supplemental draft.

 

My preference would be to use the 2 1sts to move up & get Mayfield if possible.  If not, stay put & use 1 1st on best available QB.

I think it's stretch to call the supplemental draft the equivalent of the regular draft.

[xRUSHx]

I did not vote because I would want Rudolph Mayfield. I do not like Allen/Jackson for the Bills. Allen needs too much development and Jackson is Tyrod 2.0 IMO. No way they get two first round QBs but I can see one in the 1st and one in a later round.

Edited January 10, 2018 by xRUSHx

[Kirby Jackson]

7 minutes ago, klos63 said:

I think it's stretch to call the supplemental draft the equivalent of the regular draft.

The point he was making is that they used a 1st to take Walsh in the supplemental. That means they forfeit their 1st in the next draft (hence 2 1sts).

1 minute ago, xRUSHx said:

I did not vote because I would want Rudolph Mayfield. I do not like Allen/Jackson for the Bills. Allen needs too much development and Jackson is Tyrod 2.0 IMO.

I’m not a Rudolph guy. Allen and Jackson have big upside but are a year away at least. You’d have to have a vet if you drafted one of them. Baker is my choice of realistic guys (excludes Rosen/Darnold).