Over 29 years of fanhood Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 26 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said: Because people like to make up predictions without any factual basis. First, elway (2), Eli (2), and Peyton (2) all won in the last 20 years, add Steve young (1) and aikman (3) if you babe it 22 (let's make it 25, rounder number and includes all 3 if aikmans wins, and to to give a better range less skewed by Brady) So that's 10 of 25 won by 5 guys, another 5 by Brady alone. A better number is #1 picks who started QB in super bowl (win or lose) because, frankly, that's a better number in my eyes, that just who won (since Brady has started 7 and won 5 not counting what happens this year) Aikman 3 Young 1 Bledsoe 1 Elway 2 Peyton 4 Eli 2 Cam Newton 1 Matt Ryan 1 Expanding to top 5 also adds: Steve McNair (1) #3 overall Kerry Collins (1) #5 overall Donovan McNabb (1) #2 overall (I can throw in Trent dilfer who was #6 overall, he also won) So in the last 25 years, there have been 50 starts, two guys each game, we've 8 guys #1 overall start a Superbowl, 15 times between them, 12 guys and 17 total starts of the 50 if you expand to top5 plus dilfer@6 So 17 out of 50 Superbowl starters were top5, 15 were #1 overall. I'm just saying. Top picks are a crapshoot always, but 1/3 the starters were top5 Elway wasn’t in the past 20 years and young was a suplimental draft then a trade. but ok go with your info- so we agree a team has a much better chance of making a super bowl without a top 5 QB than with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthNYfan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 12 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: Elway wasn’t in the past 20 years and young was a suplimental draft then a trade. but ok go with your info- so we agree a team has a much better chance of making a super bowl without a top 5 QB than with. I misread I thought he said #1s that won Not the year they were selected Apologies I misread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 hours ago, SouthNYfan said: Because people like to make up predictions without any factual basis. What is your factual basis to refute what I said? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthNYfan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, reddogblitz said: What is your factual basis to refute what I said? You asked why somebody would do that I was agreeing with you that they wouldn't That the guy saying they would make that trade (tyrod for Smith) had zero reasoning behind it other than just making it up and didn't look into any reasoning behind it I should have quoted him too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsredneck1 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 23 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: I don't want the Bills to spend a lot of money to get a veteran QB because I want them to trade up to 3 or 4 for Rosen or Darnold, but probably Darnold. My gut says that's what the Bills brass is planning right now and I suspect they'll keep Taylor on the roster til draft time to offer as part of a package to trade up to #4 with the Browns. The only vet QB we might acquire and still do this with is Alex Smith since his contract will expire in one year. i think it's going to have to be the no.3 pick or someone will leapfrog us.....that's if the browns take rosen and the giants go a different position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw66 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I think if you're trading up to the top of the draft, you keep Taylor and don't sign another veteran. Reason? You're betting the farm on the new QB, and you're going to play him in 2019, if not 2018. So you may as well have the cheapest alternative veteran, and that's Tyrod. No point in giving Smith a three-year deal (which is what he'll want), because it costs too much money. If you've traded up to the top, you won't have good picks left, so you'll need cap room to sign free agents. 4 hours ago, BigBuff423 said: Hmmmm, I feel like I've seen this thread before.... Then what are you doing here? If you've read this thread before and you remember it, good for you. If you want to read it again, great. If not, great. Other people may not have read this thread before, or they may want to read it again. Was it really necessary that you tell us YOU'VE read it before? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBuff423 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 37 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: I think if you're trading up to the top of the draft, you keep Taylor and don't sign another veteran. Reason? You're betting the farm on the new QB, and you're going to play him in 2019, if not 2018. So you may as well have the cheapest alternative veteran, and that's Tyrod. No point in giving Smith a three-year deal (which is what he'll want), because it costs too much money. If you've traded up to the top, you won't have good picks left, so you'll need cap room to sign free agents. Then what are you doing here? If you've read this thread before and you remember it, good for you. If you want to read it again, great. If not, great. Other people may not have read this thread before, or they may want to read it again. Was it really necessary that you tell us YOU'VE read it before? Settle down Sparky...it was more a reflection of this type of discussion appears to be a daily occurrence in a new thread....nothing more than a sarcastic observation. Enjoy your day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 56 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said: i think it's going to have to be the no.3 pick or someone will leapfrog us.....that's if the browns take rosen and the giants go a different position. Yeah I've thought about that, too. 3 might be the spot. Or the Colts might be the trade for Luck 18 hours ago, SouthNYfan said: How are they they "same type of personality" Denver is the frontrunner. Then there is everyone else. Cousins wants a team without drama, who are ready to win. Denver is ready to win. You think the Bills are a team with drama? How are the Bills not ready to win? We just made the playoffs? I don't even particularly want Cousin's... but this is just a really weird post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoTier Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) The only 2 veteran QBs who might be available who are actually good are Cousins and Smith. Cousins might not be available and will be expensive. The Bills would have to trade for Smith, and they've been fleeced so many times by Andy Reid that I'd leery of him. Bradford can't stay healthy. Keenum had a great year, but Minny is loaded with talent on both sides of the ball, so it's impossible to predict what he'd do on any other team. The Vikes will probably keep him anyway. Since his big 2013 season, Foles has played 1 great game: the NFC Championship game for Philly, and he's under contract. All the rest are journeymen who at best are about on the same level as Taylor, and many not even that good. Edited January 25, 2018 by SoTier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthNYfan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 32 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said: Yeah I've thought about that, too. 3 might be the spot. Or the Colts might be the trade for Luck You think the Bills are a team with drama? How are the Bills not ready to win? We just made the playoffs? I don't even particularly want Cousin's... but this is just a really weird post. I wouldn't say we are drama, i was stating that cousin's preference is drama free. I think MCD is big on removing that, but in the last few years we've been a circus between marrone drama, dareus, Tyrod's constant uncertainty, the Ryan brothers circus... We are looking to be drama free now, but as I said, recent history and perception isn't "drama free" even with mcd at the helm, but it's on it's way there Yes we made the playoffs, we got in on a hail mary by the Bengals. Denver has a much better defense and wr core, as well as 2 recent Superbowl trips, and the #5 pick in the draft. If I'm Kirk, I'm going to Denver over Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 11 hours ago, reddogblitz said: Why would KC do this? I though the whole trade Alex thing was due to them being in bad cap shape. Hotrod and Alex make about the same. The only reason I think this is a possibility is if the Taylor/OBD relationship is truly as irreparable as a lot of people seem to believe it is based on the benching. I personally looked at the firing of Dennison as a sign that a lot of the offensive troubles this season and particularly the reported decision to bench Taylor in favor of Peterman because he could execute Dennison's system better were more Dennison centered than anything. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 17 hours ago, SouthNYfan said: Dever had the #1 defense for total yards given up They were basically #2 in every measurable defensive statistic other than PPG, which is mostly attributed to the fact that they had the second most offensive giveaways in the league, and their abysmal offense giving the opponents the ball back all game in good position. We were middle of the road defensively overall. Denver is a better team than us, with a worse QB situation. Give us cousins, we are a playoff team no doubt. Give Denver cousins they are probably #2 or #3 (with NE and Pitt) in the AFC, and top 5 in the league as Superbowl contenders. Sorry to burst your bubble, but one decent season with McDermott at the helm doesn't change the perception of two decades worth of ineptitude overnight. We are an inferior team to Denver I'm not sure what your are smoking to think otherwise, but I'd love to have some. We had a better record than the Packers, the raiders, and Cardinals. same record as the Seahawks, Ravens, and chargers. I would say they are all better than us. Record doesn't always mean a team is better. Injuries and schedule are factors that affect a team's record. I disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 11 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: Only 2 #1 overall selected QBs in the past 20 years with rings. It’s not the sure thing people want to contend it is It's not, because the coach, the coaching staff, and the offensive system is equally if not more important. I think we should basically be operating under the belief that we have the coach in McDermott (good evidence of this based on this past season) along with the coaching staff and offensive system. Dabol had enough time with the Patriots and did some good things at Alabama last year with a QB who couldn't pass, so I think operating under this belief is reasonable. We might not just be a QB away. But considering how successful the team was last year with relatively inferior talent especially compared to the other teams that got to the playoffs, I hope McBeane operate as though we're a QB away. 2 hours ago, Shaw66 said: I think if you're trading up to the top of the draft, you keep Taylor and don't sign another veteran. Reason? You're betting the farm on the new QB, and you're going to play him in 2019, if not 2018. So you may as well have the cheapest alternative veteran, and that's Tyrod. No point in giving Smith a three-year deal (which is what he'll want), because it costs too much money. If you've traded up to the top, you won't have good picks left, so you'll need cap room to sign free agents. Agreed. This is pretty much why I think Taylor is likely still on the roster for one more year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 2 hours ago, Shaw66 said: I think if you're trading up to the top of the draft, you keep Taylor and don't sign another veteran. Reason? You're betting the farm on the new QB, and you're going to play him in 2019, if not 2018. So you may as well have the cheapest alternative veteran, and that's Tyrod. No point in giving Smith a three-year deal (which is what he'll want), because it costs too much money. If you've traded up to the top, you won't have good picks left, so you'll need cap room to sign free agents. Then what are you doing here? If you've read this thread before and you remember it, good for you. If you want to read it again, great. If not, great. Other people may not have read this thread before, or they may want to read it again. Was it really necessary that you tell us YOU'VE read it before? Whether or not I’ve read this thread before I do like your point about Alex being a pricey bridge as Compared to keeping TT. Does keeping him turn him into a pricey bridge based on his deal though? Either way it’s cheaper than Alex, but yeah at some point they are going to need to bet the farm on someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoTier Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said: It's not, because the coach, the coaching staff, and the offensive system is equally if not more important. I think we should basically be operating under the belief that we have the coach in McDermott (good evidence of this based on this past season) along with the coaching staff and offensive system. Dabol had enough time with the Patriots and did some good things at Alabama last year with a QB who couldn't pass, so I think operating under this belief is reasonable. We might not just be a QB away. But considering how successful the team was last year with relatively inferior talent especially compared to the other teams that got to the playoffs, I hope McBeane operate as though we're a QB away. The only problem with this idea is that there may not be an upgrade QB available. This is why there are so many "QB needy" teams. Taylor might the best the Bills can do, and if that's true, then they need to face that squarely and not do what they did in 2013 when they cut Fitzpatrick and picked $$$ over wins. We'll never know, but it seems likely Marrone and Hackett could have gotten the Bills to the playoffs with Fitzpatrick. The 2014 team missed by tie-breakers IIRC, and one of their losses came when Orton ran out of bounds rather than trying for the EZ. Fitz wouldn't have done that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw66 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 7 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: Whether or not I’ve read this thread before I do like your point about Alex being a pricey bridge as Compared to keeping TT. Does keeping him turn him into a pricey bridge based on his deal though? Either way it’s cheaper than Alex, but yeah at some point they are going to need to bet the farm on someone. Actually, as I look at the numbers, it may be that in actual cash Smith wouldn't cost much more than Taylor, but there'd be cap hit to make the move. I think Smith would strictly be a bridge, and for the one year he'd be used, I don't think it's worth paying any cash or cap space to get him. Plus you'd have to give up a pick to do it. Cousins isn't strictly a bridge. You'd get him thinking he's the future unless you find someone better. That's worth paying for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthNYfan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 29 minutes ago, John from Hemet said: I disagree What do you disagree on, in all seriousness. That Denver is better than us defensive? Those other teams being as good or better, even with worse records than us? We had a better record than the Packers, the raiders, and Cardinals. same record as the Seahawks, Ravens, and chargers You can't honestly say that, when healthy, we are better than any of those teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: Actually, as I look at the numbers, it may be that in actual cash Smith wouldn't cost much more than Taylor, but there'd be cap hit to make the move. I think Smith would strictly be a bridge, and for the one year he'd be used, I don't think it's worth paying any cash or cap space to get him. Plus you'd have to give up a pick to do it. Cousins isn't strictly a bridge. You'd get him thinking he's the future unless you find someone better. That's worth paying for. Cousins isn’t a bridge and won’t want a contract that smells like one. I personally do t like him as a QB. I’ve watched enough skins game to believe he’ll feel like the same QB purgatory we are in now. It’ll just be in different ways. He will amass waaaay more yards, but miss the clutch throws and ultimately also not be a guy that can carry a team in his back for the wins. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw66 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: Cousins isn’t a bridge and won’t want a contract that smells like one. I personally do t like him as a QB. I’ve watched enough skins game to believe he’ll feel like the same QB purgatory we are in now. It’ll just be in different ways. He will amass waaaay more yards, but miss the clutch throws and ultimately also not be a guy that can carry a team in his back for the wins. I don't agree about Cousins, but that isn't the point. I get that some people don't think that he's worth what he'll get. My point was they are two different cases. If you want Cousins, it's because you've decided to bet on him for the future. If you want Smith, it's because you've decided you need a bridge for the future. If all you're looking for is a bridge, there's no point in paying more than you'd pay to keep Taylor, because either way you're going to have a QB you don't expect can be a big winner for you. If you're looking for a guy who's your future, you should expect to pay more, whether it's more cash (in the case of Cousins) or more draft picks (in the case of one of the top rookies). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthNYfan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 10 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: I don't agree about Cousins, but that isn't the point. I get that some people don't think that he's worth what he'll get. My point was they are two different cases. If you want Cousins, it's because you've decided to bet on him for the future. If you want Smith, it's because you've decided you need a bridge for the future. If all you're looking for is a bridge, there's no point in paying more than you'd pay to keep Taylor, because either way you're going to have a QB you don't expect can be a big winner for you. If you're looking for a guy who's your future, you should expect to pay more, whether it's more cash (in the case of Cousins) or more draft picks (in the case of one of the top rookies). I mostly agree, except for the assessment that a bridge isn't worth paying for SOMETIMES. Example: Peyton Manning was a bridge in Denver. They knew they had a win now team, couldn't wait to develop a QB. They knew he wasn't the future. They didn't have anybody behind him work out though, so far Lynch isn't great either. I am not on board with Smith, for the record, unless we are getting a guy to groom for 1-2 years behind him this year as well. If you get Smith and DON'T go for a qb now, Smith is good enough that you'll be in the 7-9 to 10-6 range, fringe playoff, and in the 18-23 pick range again. That's not a good place to be in with a QB who is currently 33. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts