MAJBobby Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 12 hours ago, KelsaysLunchbox said: Oh, we have no way of knowing who the HoF talent is in this draft. Which is why I said earlier and I maintain that trading up simply to swing for a QB is a bad idea. Frankly speaking, You have a better chance hitting on a HoF type player than you do a franchise QB. This team needs a QB, but is far from just a QB away from serious Super Bowl contention. There is no reason to burn draft assets on one guy that may be Peyton Manning...but just may be Christian Ponder. The theory that you just need that "franchise QB" is becoming a dated notion. You need more than that. Lets not build to be the Packers or Colts of the world. It is not becoming a dated notion. The Position is the MOST important on the field. And if you identify your guy go get him. The reality every position has just as much of a chance to bust as a QB. However no matter what happens you need a QB. That one position fixed hides and makes up for so many other flaws on the football field and team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillyG Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 41 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: It is not becoming a dated notion. The Position is the MOST important on the field. And if you identify your guy go get him. The reality every position has just as much of a chance to bust as a QB. However no matter what happens you need a QB. That one position fixed hides and makes up for so many other flaws on the football field and team. It does. Can't dispute that. But look to the past and the present of QB play. Used to be that a good number of QBs were able to call their own plays. Not just audibles at the line. Now, more QBs than not don't have the permission to audible. More QBs then not are not NFL ready as they don't play anything near an NFL offense in college anymore. Look to the future of the position. Either have to run college offenses in the NFL or find a new way to evolve. Minnesota evolved quite well building a team and finding a capable starter. Jacksonville built quite smart. I'm betting we see more teams built like that than the never ending quest of finding a Luck or Rogers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 5 minutes ago, KelsaysLunchbox said: It does. Can't dispute that. But look to the past and the present of QB play. Used to be that a good number of QBs were able to call their own plays. Not just audibles at the line. Now, more QBs than not don't have the permission to audible. More QBs then not are not NFL ready as they don't play anything near an NFL offense in college anymore. Look to the future of the position. Either have to run college offenses in the NFL or find a new way to evolve. Minnesota evolved quite well building a team and finding a capable starter. Jacksonville built quite smart. I'm betting we see more teams built like that than the never ending quest of finding a Luck or Rogers. I am betting they wont. See Den. Denver window slammed shut why? Because they had no QB and you cannot afford to keep an elite defense. So what do you want to build for one run? Or sustained success? Teams that sustain success have what at the QB position? Not described as a capable starter is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillyG Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 1 hour ago, MAJBobby said: I am betting they wont. See Den. Denver window slammed shut why? Because they had no QB and you cannot afford to keep an elite defense. So what do you want to build for one run? Or sustained success? Teams that sustain success have what at the QB position? Not described as a capable starter is it? Sustain success...such as Drew Brees? Aaron Rodgers? Each with one Super Bowl win. Why? They are all time greats at the position. Definitely "franchise quarterbacks". Luck? Stafford? Rivers? Not even a Super Bowl appearance between them. Why? Difference between those guys and a Big Ben or Eli Manning? Ben and Eli have had actual teams built around them. That's why when you have as many holes as we have now you can't afford to blow all you picks on one guy. Build the team. Get a serviceable guy for a year or two. If a QB you like slips and you can slide up a bit for him, sure. But don't mortgage the farm when your crops are pretty dry to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 2 hours ago, KelsaysLunchbox said: Sustain success...such as Drew Brees? Aaron Rodgers? Each with one Super Bowl win. Why? They are all time greats at the position. Definitely "franchise quarterbacks". Luck? Stafford? Rivers? Not even a Super Bowl appearance between them. Why? Difference between those guys and a Big Ben or Eli Manning? Ben and Eli have had actual teams built around them. That's why when you have as many holes as we have now you can't afford to blow all you picks on one guy. Build the team. Get a serviceable guy for a year or two. If a QB you like slips and you can slide up a bit for him, sure. But don't mortgage the farm when your crops are pretty dry to begin with. How mant years are those teams with QBs in the race for playoffs? You can spin it how you want. Without a legit QB and a modern Passing offense in the NFL you do not have ANY window. Maybe a slight crack at best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillyG Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 57 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: How mant years are those teams with QBs in the race for playoffs? You can spin it how you want. Without a legit QB and a modern Passing offense in the NFL you do not have ANY window. Maybe a slight crack at best It's not really "spinning it" either way. We just differ on team building principles. You can point to ways your way works and mine does not and I can do the same. At the end of the day, as long as there is a long term plan in place so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 9 hours ago, SoTier said: The Bills traded their 2005 first rounder, their 2004 second, and a fifth rounder to get Dallas' 2004 first rounder to pick JP Losman, who not only turned out to be a bust, but lost them the opportunity to draft Aaron Rodgers the next year. THAT was easily "the worst GM move that the Bills have made on draft day in decades." No because it was an attempt to solve qb. Not to draft a wr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 The Bennett trade was prior to free agency right? Totally different calculus when you don’t have to worry about losing the guy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) On 1/18/2018 at 9:23 AM, FearLess Price said: The Bills won that trade. Lot of picks for CB And people sometimes win a lot of money when they bet it all on double-zero. But that doesn't mean an intelligent person determined to maximize his chances of success should make that bet. Same with major tradeups of two 1sts or more for non-QBs. It's possible to win one. It just happens around 20% of the time, and therefore is a terrible idea. And the academic Massey-Thaler study, the Harvard Sport Collective study and more and more every time someone does a new one keep showing why it's not a good idea. 9 hours ago, KelsaysLunchbox said: It does. Can't dispute that. But look to the past and the present of QB play. Used to be that a good number of QBs were able to call their own plays. Not just audibles at the line. Now, more QBs than not don't have the permission to audible. More QBs then not are not NFL ready as they don't play anything near an NFL offense in college anymore. Look to the future of the position. Either have to run college offenses in the NFL or find a new way to evolve. Minnesota evolved quite well building a team and finding a capable starter. Jacksonville built quite smart. I'm betting we see more teams built like that than the never ending quest of finding a Luck or Rogers. Jax tried to find a Luck or Rogers. Bortles was their attempt. He may yet work out well, or not. But we have no idea whether Jax is a one or two-year phenomenon or a long-term success. Till we know, unless they win a Super Bowl this year, they make a terrible example for either side. We don't know what they are. Edited January 19, 2018 by Thurman#1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo1105 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 The Bills, IMO, are going to trade up into the top 5 , either pick 2,3,or 4, and will take one of Rosen, Darnold, or Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 On 1/18/2018 at 2:50 AM, Hapless Bills Fan said: The Eagles just called. Fletcher Cox says "how do you like me now?" Clay Matthews is on line 2 I would expect if they did that, it would be because they acquired a top-tier QB through FA and had a developmental QB they like later on. As far as the specific player, I don't watch enough college football to have an opinion, but if you get a game-changing guy who can "QB" your defense for years or be the lynchstone of your DL, it may be worth it. Agreed that it isn't no tradeups whatsoever. Fletcher Cox was brought in by moving up three spots at the cost of a 4th and a 6th. Fine!! For Matthews, it was no 1st rounder, it was a 2nd and two 3rds. But don't trade two 1sts up for anyone but a QB. There's a reason it's the rule. 19 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said: The Bills, IMO, are going to trade up into the top 5 , either pick 2,3,or 4, and will take one of Rosen, Darnold, or Allen If they end up having a shot, I hope they do, but no thanks on Allen. They could get him later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple haze Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 19 hours ago, PIZ said: Seeing lots of trade ideas involving Glenn, but is any team going to believe he is healthy enough or will stay healthy enough to trade for? If his surgery goes well I don't think it will be that hard to trade him. Especially if he is part of a package. The other team will get access to his medicals. And say it's a trade with Giants... Beane has a relationship there so there would be trust there. I would prefer they keep him, Good LT's aren't all that easy to come by. But Dawkins looked good for a young player and there's no reason to move him. The Rumors that the Seahawks wanted Glenn but the Bills wanted more than Seattle wanted to pay tells me it can happen. You look at the Giants at 2 and the Bengals at 11 needing O-lineman. And of course Seattle. I think it's a matter of how the trade happens not if it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuoteTheRaven83 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 On 1/17/2018 at 1:18 PM, hondo in seattle said: I'm against packaging our first two round draft picks for a QB, let alone a LB. The mere concept gives me Sammy Watkins nightmares. We have too many needs. I don't want to use both picks on one guy. (Then again, if we used two 1st round draft picks to get a 12+ year HOF signal caller, I'd change my tune). 2 completely different scenerios. 2014 was the deepest WR class in NFL history (IMO) and we traded up for Watkins. That's what was so retarded about that trade, not the fact that we just traded up. If Watkins was only 1 of 2 WR's with a first round grade, then I would've been OK with that trade. But with Beckham, Kelvin Benjamin, Brandin Cooks, Mike Evans, all their with first round grades...that trade was inexcuseable. Especially if you see that Jarvis Landry, Allen Robinson, Jordan Matthews, Davante Adams, Martavis Bryant, Donte Moncrief, all went in the later rounds, makes that trade even dumber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuoteTheRaven83 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 As I look at all the teams that traded up for a QB in the first round, the track record isn't all that great: 2016: Titans trade with Rams for Jared Goff 2016: Eagles trade with Browns for Carson Wentz 2014: Browns trade with Eagles for Johnny Manziel 2014: Vikings trade with Seahawks for Teddy Bridgewater 2012: Redskins trade with Rams for RG3 2011: Jags trade with Redskins for Blaine Gabbert 2010: Broncos trade with Ravens for Tim Tebow 2009: Jets trade with Browns for Mark Sanchez 2009: Bucs trade with Browns for Josh Freeman 2008: Ravens trade with Texans for Joe Flacco 2007: Browns trade with Cowboys for Brady Quinn 2006: Broncos trade with Rams for Jay Cutler 2004: Bills trade with Cowboys for JP Losman As I look at these trades, I also notice that the Browns are GOD AWFUL with their decision making... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 I love Roquan , I am a UGA fan. I wouldn’t be surprised if this happened in the least. Roquan should be that Kuechly that helps make the Bills D click. What would it cost the Bills to move up 10 spots to 10 in the draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TigerJ Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 I think if Buffalo covets Roquon Smith that much, they would probably get in position to draft him with a first and second round pick packaged together. I think Two firsts is overkill. Personally, I wouldn't do it. If I had to have a linebacker in the first round and Smith didn't drop, I might draft Rashaan Evans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 The plan has been and always was position and acquire enough capital to get a QB. That has not changed. It sure as heck wasnt get all this capital to spend on a LBer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hemma Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) Gak. He could be the Sammy Watkins of the Defense. Can't wait! Edited January 19, 2018 by hemma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 On 1/17/2018 at 12:29 PM, BuffaloBaumer said: NEVER EVER trade up again unless it is for a QB......or unless you are in the 3rd round or beyond and giving up a 7th or something for a couple spots. Fantastic avatar!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 Trade up for an undersized LB that can't take on big running backs or shed blockers? No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts