Augie Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Just now, Augie said: I’m agreeing with you, and asking what I feel are obvious questions about that path. My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ittakestime Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 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.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 (edited) 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clemfield2622 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Silliest thing I've read all day. thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ittakestime Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagon127 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullim4 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ittakestime Posted January 10, 2018 Author Share Posted January 10, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocky61 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Dude Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klos63 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xRUSHx Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 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). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts