Jump to content

Would you draft 2 QBs?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You don’t draft 2 QBs. You use the resources to go get a QB. You must understand that? That’s why the Eagles, Rams, etc... trades up instead of staying put and taking whatever was left and another later. 

 

Exactly. Trade up.

 

If yiu get thd right QB you wont need another one 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The issue there if the stories are true is Shananhan wanted Cousins all along. The owner and GM wanted RGIII. 

 

In the end it kind of worked for Washington and they still found a way to balls it up. Just what they do. 

 

What about my very specific circumstances Kirbs.... you have traded up and taken say Rosen at #3 given up both 1s and a 2 to do it and then you are there mid 4th and the guy sticking out as the BPA by your board is a QB with a 2nd round grade... a full round higher than your next BPA - say the White kid. Very hypothetical I know but are you still saying "no"? 

I suppose that I could get behind that. If only, Rosen or Baker is the pick. I think that they can act as vets/day 1 guys. With FA being first though the Bills will already have a guy capable of starting opening day. Not sure it actually works unless they cut Tyrod and punt on a decent vet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair question, but I would prefer to draft a QB high in the 1st, then bring in a veteran.

 

If they do draft 2 QBS, I wonder would it would mean for Nate Peterman? Probably cut?

 

Unless they decide to carry 3 young QBS, but I think that would be unlikely

Edited by billsfan11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the idea of taking two with 21-22 If both were one of the top 6 from this draft. You find the one you like the most and sell the other for a kings ransom, sure it does not add to this year's roster but it give us two real chances to land the better one while the other gives us our draft pick and then some back IMO. Maybe even trade him during this draft for more picks, player and a 1st in next year's draft. 

To have 3 QBs on rookie contracts fighting to be the franchise guy is something this team has never done. With QB stock at a premium buy low sell high.

 

Rudolph and Allen is a possibility.

 

Doubt it would happen but one hell of a idea IMO.

6 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

Fair question.

 

If they do draft 2 QBS, I wonder would it would mean for Nate Peterman? Probably cut?

 

Unless they decide to carry 3 young QBS, but I think that would be unlikely

Peterman would end up backup to whomever wins the battle IMO with the other being traded at a maximum price.

 

Of course two would have to be there at 21-22, highly unlikely but man that sure would get another team mad thinking they would get one of them after the Bills pick and boom we take both..

Edited by xRUSHx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, xRUSHx said:

I love the idea of taking two with 21-22 If both were one of the top 6 from this draft. You find the one you like the most and sell the other for a kings ransom, sure it does not add to this year's roster but it give us two real chances to land the better one while the other gives us our draft pick and then some back IMO. Maybe even trade him during this draft for more picks, player and a 1st in next year's draft. 

To have 3 QBs on rookie contracts fighting to be the franchise guy is something this team has never done. With QB stock at a premium buy low sell high.

 

Rudolph and Allen is a possibility.

 

Doubt it would happen but one hell of a idea IMO.

I would personally prefer to trade both those picks to get a QB higher. 

 

I would rather the Bills get the 1st or 2nd best QB in the draft, rather than have both the 3rd and 4th best

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, billsfan11 said:

I would personally prefer to trade both those picks to get a QB higher. 

 

I would rather the Bills get the 1st or 2nd best QB in the draft, rather than have both the 3rd and 4th best

I agree but this is just throwing ideas around.

Edited by xRUSHx
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Like the Redskins did with RG3 and Cousins. Don't trade up but take the QB that falls to you, plus a next-rung QB in a lower round like White or Lauletta? As a hedge against busting out our as an asset to deal later? 

The Redskins did it another time with Heath Shuler and Gus Frerotte. It's not a bad plan but think would need to do it with a later pick aka Round 6 or 7, so would do if can acquire a few more picks in the 3rd day of the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might in some circumstances.  I would not anticipate doing so in the upcoming draft primarily because I have not written off Nate Peterman.  I woud most certainly draft one QB and then plan for a competition in training camp with Peterman, the rookie and the veteran I plan on signing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

The Redskins did it another time with Heath Shuler and Gus Frerotte. It's not a bad plan but think would need to do it with a later pick aka Round 6 or 7, so would do if can acquire a few more picks in the 3rd day of the draft.

That was a typical Redskin scenario.  Shuler wouldn't sign, missed most of his rookie preseason, and never caught up.  Yet they continued to play him in the hopes he'd earn his pay.  Frerotte was promising until he celebrated a touchdown throw by concussing himself or severely spraining his neck when, in celebrating, he banged his head into a concrete wall.  No joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You don’t draft 2 QBs. You use the resources to go get a QB. You must understand that? That’s why the Eagles, Rams, etc... trades up instead of staying put and taking whatever was left and another later. 

 

I agree to an extent. After 5th rd maybe even after 4th if the guy is on the roster in two years it's a decent pick.  If it costs both 1sts a 2nd and a later rd pick to move up to get Darnold or Rosen I'd rather do that than take 2 QB's.

 

Draft capital to me is like a new car. It's always more valuable until a player is picked.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Like the Redskins did with RG3 and Cousins. Don't trade up but take the QB that falls to you, plus a next-rung QB in a lower round like White or Lauletta? As a hedge against busting out our as an asset to deal later? 

 

The Skins drafted 2 QBs only because Snyder had to have RGIII.  Shanahan was against it.

Edited by Chicken Boo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

The Skins drafted 2 QBs only because Snyder had to have RGIII.  Shanahan was against it.

The why isn't so important as the end result. It may not have been the smartest front office decision ever but it did work out when RG3 became injured. I don't know. If a Lauletta were still there in the 4th, is it that crazy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It happened once (that I can think of) and arguably the worst owner in sports was at the helm. Trade up and have a vet, that’s the best course.

Precedent.

 

If they didn't mishandle the negotiations 6 years later, they would have had their franchise QB for a long time. It literally worked for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Precedent.

 

If they didn't mishandle the negotiations 6 years later, they would have had their franchise QB for a long time. It literally worked for them.

It did. The Cowboys once used a supplemental 1st round pick on a QB. They took another the next year in the 1st and he went to the HOF. Still no team has done it again almost 30 years later. 

 

So while precedent exists in both cases there is a reason that teams don’t do it more. It’s a poor strategy and use of assets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It did. The Cowboys once used a supplemental 1st round pick on a QB. They took another the next year in the 1st and he went to the HOF. Still no team has done it again almost 30 years later. 

 

So while precedent exists in both cases there is a reason that teams don’t do it more. It’s a poor strategy and use of assets. 

What makes it unlikely that Buffalo or most teams  draft two qbs in the same draft is that there is much  more qb movement in this cap era. Take Minnesota as an example. They have three qbs on the roster, Keenum, Bridgewater and Bradford. Bradford is likely to move on and there is a possibility that one of the two others could move on for contract reasons. 

 

There are just more qb options in this era. The Skins could not get a deal done with Cousins. So they dealt for Alex Smith. It must be noted that Alex Smith made it clear to KC that if he were to be traded that he wasn't going to sign a deal if that team was going to use a high pick on a qb. Washington assured him so a deal was consummated and a contract was signed. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

What makes it unlikely that Buffalo or most teams  draft two qbs in the same draft is that there is much  more qb movement in this cap era. Take Minnesota as an example. They have three qbs on the roster, Keenum, Bridgewater and Bradford. Bradford is likely to move on and there is a possibility that one of the two others could move on for contract reasons. 

 

There are just more qb options in this era. The Skins could not get a deal done with Cousins. So they dealt for Alex Smith. It must be noted that Alex Smith made it clear to KC that if he were to be traded that he wasn't going to sign a deal if that team was going to use a high pick on a qb. Washington assured him so a deal was consummated and a contract was signed. 

Good point here too John. Early on the draft is likely where you find your franchise QBs. Capable QBs are not hard to obtain in FA or via a trade. You take one of each and that’s your QB room. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It did. The Cowboys once used a supplemental 1st round pick on a QB. They took another the next year in the 1st and he went to the HOF. Still no team has done it again almost 30 years later. 

 

So while precedent exists in both cases there is a reason that teams don’t do it more. It’s a poor strategy and use of assets. 

Both of them worked.  They are literally 2/2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Both of them worked.  They are literally 2/2.

Yep, we are in agreement. Still no one does it for a reason. It’s a bad allocation of resources. Someone wins the Powerball too; it doesn’t mean it is a good investment strategy.

 

Of course there are other cases of multiple QBs (just looked some up). Brohm & Flynn, Clausen & Pike, the Colts took another QB in the Luck draft, Matt Mauck & Bradlee Van Pelt, Carmazzi & Tim Rattay

 

So while I guess more teams than I realized did it. It doesn’t look like it worked much though. 

Edited by Kirby Jackson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yep, we are in agreement. Still no one does it for a reason. It’s a bad allocation of resources. Someone wins the Powerball too; it doesn’t mean it is a good investment strategy.

If 100% of the people who played powerball won it, it might quite possibly be the BEST investment strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Wayne Cubed said:

 

Not that it was 2 draft picks but the Bills did it in 2013. EJ Manuel and Jeff Tuel.

I guess that I’m not against bringing in a UDFA that could be a developmental prospect on the PS. I don’t see the value in using a draft pick on a guy that almost certainly won’t be on your roster. I doubt that the keep 3 but if they do it is vet, early pick and Peterman. If they keep 2 subtract Peterman. Where does that leave the guy that they take in the 5th or whatever?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I guess that I’m not against bringing in a UDFA that could be a developmental prospect on the PS. I don’t see the value in using a draft pick on a guy that almost certainly won’t be on your roster. I doubt that the keep 3 but if they do it is vet, early pick and Peterman. If they keep 2 subtract Peterman. Where does that leave the guy that they take in the 5th or whatever?

 

Oh and I don’t either. If they can find an UDFA QB, I’m fine with that. The amount of depth they need, I just can’t see it happening this draft year. There are starting holes AND depth that need filling. 

 

I suppose if the teams depth looked better, I would be opposed to a 5th or 6th round pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Wayne Cubed said:

 

Oh and I don’t either. If they can find an UDFA QB, I’m fine with that. The amount of depth they need, I just can’t see it happening this draft year. There are starting holes AND depth that need filling. 

 

I suppose if the teams depth looked better, I would be opposed to a 5th or 6th round pick.

Yeah, the way that I look at it is “would I rather have a rotational player that contributes on ST or a guy that won’t make the team?” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I guess that I’m not against bringing in a UDFA that could be a developmental prospect on the PS. I don’t see the value in using a draft pick on a guy that almost certainly won’t be on your roster. I doubt that the keep 3 but if they do it is vet, early pick and Peterman. If they keep 2 subtract Peterman. Where does that leave the guy that they take in the 5th or whatever?

We kept 3 all year last year. Why would you doubt it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not.  Get the right guy with the potential to be your franchise QB and develop him as soon as possible.  Not enough reps to go around under the current CBA that limits football activities.  Beyond that there are too many other needs that have to be addressed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a few questions for all of you who want to draft 1 or 2 QBs in the first round.

 

Define "Develop" in terms of snaps. How many snaps do these rookies get?

 

How many quarters of football do they get to play to prove themselves?

 

IF one or all of them play "bad" for x amount of quarters, can we dump them before the football year is over?

 

Logically, there is no sense letting such a loser take up a roster spot for a whole season, right?

 

/sarcasm

 

It seems that too many of you ONLY like a QB who has never taken an NFL snap. (for the Bills)

 

Edited by cd1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

1/2 of a QB? A guy that plays ST and is capable of playing QB (as is Logan Thomas). That’s all the more reason to only keep 2. You already have guys on the roster (assuming that they are back) capable of playing in a pinch. 

So we're pretending he wasnt really the #3 QB even though he took snaps at QB?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

So we're pretending he wasnt really the #3 QB even though he took snaps at QB?

I don’t know what type of semantical argument you are trying to make? I don’t know why you care what he is called? He’s listed as a WR and is a big part of ST. He is certainly capable of playing QB. Call him whatever you want.

 

I think Webb may be back next year. If he is I think that the Bills keep a vet and a young guy that they drafted early. If Webb isn’t back, I think that they keep a vet and a young guy that is drafted early. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think there's potential with NP, so no.

People are nuts to judge him over that charger game.

What a horrible decision to throw him in, that game,

under those circumstances, anyways.

I've been skeptical of the coach after that game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Like the Redskins did with RG3 and Cousins. Don't trade up but take the QB that falls to you, plus a next-rung QB in a lower round like White or Lauletta? As a hedge against busting out our as an asset to deal later? 

 

Maybe if a 2nd QB had potential as WR, TE or RB.  Do not believe Bills can afford to have a starting QB, Peteredman to practices throwing balls to DBs, a higher round QB and a lower round QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...