Reasons why we shouldn’t trade off our draft picks.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

2 minutes ago, BillsMafia13 said:

Did you just say Cousins is a "non-starter"? I really dont know if I can get past that awful statement haha.  That mixed wanting Rudolph, who again stinks worse than a day old beach diaper, shows you're really dumber than a bag of rocks.  My hypotheticals might be a reach but your best case scenarios are plain awful.  Thats how I know you dont know anything about whatever you're spewing.  

 

Your plan isn't a reach, it's an IMPOSSIBILITY.

 

Cousins is going to end up in Minnesota, Denver, or New York.

 

Buffalo isn't on the radar, in case you haven't been paying attention. So, again, twatwaffle...since we know that Cousins is out that leaves Foles and Keenum. You gonna part with a 1 and 4 for Foles, or pin your hopes on Case !@#$ing Keenum?

 

Genius, that.

 

Just now, BillsMafia13 said:

Aaaaaahaahah dude said Cousins is a non starter, what a joke.  You saw that big steaming pile of turd and dove right in it huh hahaha. I cant get over that, in case you havent been paying attention, for the 3rd time, I clearly stated it was a dream scenario.  But it is possible if we got rid of the right contracts, I dont think you really understand caps or dollars and cents. Twatwaffle,  thats pretty good, coming from a guy who think the highest paid qb next year wont be a starter.  Oh man good luck getting over that one

 

Do you know what a non-starter is?

 

Do you even understand basic English? I'm starting to think not. COUSINS IS NOT COMING HERE.

 

What point is there speculating on Cousins or dreaming for him, when the team:

 

1) Can't afford him

2) hasn't expressed any interest in him

 

and when he:

 

1) Is going to end up in Minnesota, Denver or NY?

 

I would have supported going after Cousins, but again I prefer to deal in reality.

 

So again, I'll ask you...are you willing to part with a 1 and 4 for Nick Foles? Or are you willing to give Keenum big dollars?

 

[BillsMafia13]

5 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Your plan isn't a reach, it's an IMPOSSIBILITY.

 

Cousins is going to end up in Minnesota, Denver, or New York.

 

Buffalo isn't on the radar, in case you haven't been paying attention. So, again, twatwaffle...since we know that Cousins is out that leaves Foles and Keenum. You gonna part with a 1 and 4 for Foles, or pin your hopes on Case !@#$ing Keenum?

 

Genius, that.

 

Aaaaahahaha this guys just said cousins is a non starter. Do you think team owners are willing to shell out 150+ million for a non starter?  You saw that big pile of turd and really jumped in it huh.

And I get its a reach, but its definitely not impossible.  Since you gave no reason why I would be wrong, why dont you now.  id love to hear this after the "cousins isnt a starter" comment.  That was very entertaining thank you, I thought you were being serious this whole time. 

[maryland-bills-fan]

[1] We have a number of holes on the team and the QB will not matter if they other team runs the ball down our throats or stops the QB and RB in the backfield.  We desperately need another DT and center. We badly need a linebacker, offensive lineman and wide receiver.  It does not make sense to give up 4-5 picks in the first two rounds of this year and next to take a crapshoot at a QB.  Wouldn't it be dumb to have all these needs as open wounds, while trying to break in a rookie QB?  How many years from now (actually 2-4) would it be before we filled these holes and others that would open up in the meantime?  Big uglies stay a while and are relatively cheap.

 

[2]  There are 4-5 shiny new toy QB's available.  I don't want to trade up to get one of them.  There are also 3-5 fair quality experienced FA or near FA QB's available this year.   These guys have experience and a track record- any one of them may bloom if they are surrounded by a good situation.  I would rather take one of them and give them 6 quality supporting cast people (this year and next), THAN have a hit-or-miss rookie and a weak supporting cast.

 

[3] The large number of shiny rookie QB's and available former-first-round veterans also means that some rookie QB's who look second tier (this year) are going to be available in the 3rd round.  We might be able to get some good guy this year, who in other years might be a fringe 1st round/early 2nd round guy.  Seems like a deal to me.

 

[4] Please don't use the patriots as a comparison. Brady is from another planet and Bellycheck somehow always finds near-all-pro's from the waiver wire.  You can't learn anything by trying to match their magic.

Edited March 8, 2018 by maryland-bills-fan

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, BillsMafia13 said:

And I get its a reach, but its definitely not impossible.  Since you gave no reason why I would be wrong, why dont you now.  id love to hear this after the "cousins isnt a starter" comment.  That was very entertaining thank you, I thought you were being serious this whole time. 

 

You idiot.

 

A non-starter is an idea that's dead, going nowhere.

 

 

[BillsMafia13]

Just now, maryland-bills-fan said:

[1] We have a number of holes on the team and the QB will not matter if they other team runs the ball down our throats or stops the QB and RB in the backfield.  We desperately need another DT and center. We badly need a linebacker, offensive lineman and wide receiver.  It does not make sense to give up 4-5 picks in the first two rounds of this year and next to take a crapshoot at a QB.

 

[2]  There are 4-5 shiny new toy QB's available.  I don't want to trade up to get one of them.  There are also 3-5 fair quality experienced FA or near FA QB's available this year.   These guys have experience and a track record- any one of them may bloom if they are surrounded by a good situation.  I would rather take one of them and give them 6 quality supporting cast people (this year and next), THAN have a hit-or-miss rookie and a weak supporting cast.

 

[3] The large number of shiny rookie QB's and available former-first-round veterans also means that some rookie QB's who look second tier (this year) are going to be available in the 3rd round.  We might be able to get some good guy this year, who in other years might be a fringe 1st round/early 2nd round guy.  Seems like a deal to me.

 

[4] Please don't use the patriots as a comparison. Brady is from another planet and Bellycheck somehow always finds near-all-pro's from the waiver wire.  You can't learn anything by trying to match their magic.

Thank you, thats why I hope cousins goes to the Jets.  They are terrible all over the roster, if he takes up 30 mil they will still be terrible.  You can put a ferrari engine in a jalopy but its going to break down eventually.

3 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

You idiot.

 

A non-starter is an idea that's dead, going nowhere.

 

 

Well thats in the top 2 for worst applied phrases ive ever heard.  Still havent rebutted my comments and you still think Rudolph is the answer.  Go sit in your corner.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

5 minutes ago, BillsMafia13 said:

 

Well thats in the top 2 for worst applied phrases ive ever heard.  Still havent rebutted my comments and you still think Rudolph is the answer.  Go sit in your corner.

 

College educated.

 

 

I've provided reasons your positions are ludicrous, and asked your opinion on Foles/Keenum, and you've yet to respond. So, try and focus you meth-squirrel. We'll get there eventually. I have faith in you.

From THREE POSTS UP:

 

Do you know what a non-starter is?

 

Do you even understand basic English? I'm starting to think not. COUSINS IS NOT COMING HERE.

 

What point is there speculating on Cousins or dreaming for him, when the team:

 

1) Can't afford him

2) hasn't expressed any interest in him

 

and when he:

 

1) Is going to end up in Minnesota, Denver or NY?

 

I would have supported going after Cousins, but again I prefer to deal in reality.

 

So again, I'll ask you...are you willing to part with a 1 and 4 for Nick Foles? Or are you willing to give Keenum big dollars?

 

Edited March 8, 2018 by joesixpack

[gobills1212]

13 hours ago, Tipster19 said:

1. First off the QB position isn’t our only need. There’s several positions that are either aged or totally lacking of top caliber talent. Plus the cost of moving up in the draft would not only gut this year’s picks but would more than likely tap into some of next year’s as well.

 

2. How many times has it been stated that the best way to build a roster is through the draft. A team can’t do it without and/or minimal picks.

 

3. It appears that we are plugging holes with FAs, especially with prove it type contracts.  Here’s the thing though, don’t lose sight that these will become holes to fill in the near future (2019?). That is why it’s important to retain our current top draft picks and use them on up and coming players with cap friendly contracts. The holes that Beane is filling today are holes that going to be filled tomorrow so to speak. Don’t be surprised that these are going to be the same positions that we draft for. We need better contracts with younger players and this is how you do it.

 

4. I would like to see us to keep on following this blueprint of plug and play veterans that give us roster depth for the time being until we can get through these next 2 years (2018 and 2019). Furthermore I think that the Bills should use this philosophy also in securing a QB (Keenum?) that replaces Tyrod. 

 

5. To elaborate more on the contract mindset just look at our DT position as an example. I’m paraphrasing here so bear with me, my numbers may not be completely accurate but this is really more about making a point. An aging Kyle Williams is still up in the air and we have 1, possibly 2 unproven DTs on the current roster. If I’m not mistaken Ndamukong Suh is going to count something like 26M towards Miami’s cap. The Rams’ Aaron Donald is up for a new contract, hence the Rams trading off some of their top defensive players (Alec Ogletree and Robert Quinn). They are prioritizing, creating cap space for re-signing and retaining some of their current players at other positions, Donald, Watkins etc etc. The Bills can’t afford contracts like Suh’s and soon to be re-signed Donald’s. Some of the reason for Dareus being traded was due to his absorbent contract, it was way out of whack.

 

In closing I want to point out one last thing. Beane inherited the current affairs, he didn’t create it. It’s going to take some time to turn things around and balance not only the caliber of player but also the caliber of their contracts. It’s a business and our books are in somewhat of a shamble. We haven’t had a real GM in God knows how long, it seems like it has been run by a committee for almost as long as I can remember. Now I don’t know how good of a GM Beane is or if he’s the right guy but at least this administration/front office is finally getting structured the proper way.

 

With all this being said I can hardly wait to see what the Bills are going to do in free agency and the upcoming daft!

 

Go Bills!

I worry about 11 rep points in just under 4k posts (4 of which are on this post alone) but it seems you have really thought this out so I gotta give you credit for that....

BUT I fundamentally disagree with the majority of this. 

Getting a QB that works out allows as well as forces a team to build through the draft.

As previously noted, drafting a QB means he comes FROM the draft.

Lasting success is generally achieved via a lasting star QB who tends to make others rise to his level and can make nobodies stars.   

Fluke years aside, w/o a qb you are just spinning your tires.

Many of the above points were tried both ways during the last 17 years to varying degrees of success but all fell short bc (say it with me now) we were unable to draft that franchise guy.

No matter how great or poor the roster was, the lack of qb to put it over the top made it a moot point.

 

game, set, match.

[BillsMafia13]

5 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

College educated.

 

 

I've provided reasons your positions are ludicrous, and asked your opinion on Foles/Keenum, and you've yet to respond. So, try and focus you meth-squirrel. We'll get there eventually. I have faith in you.

From THREE POSTS UP:

 

Do you know what a non-starter is?

 

Do you even understand basic English? I'm starting to think not. COUSINS IS NOT COMING HERE.

 

What point is there speculating on Cousins or dreaming for him, when the team:

 

1) Can't afford him

2) hasn't expressed any interest in him

 

and when he:

 

1) Is going to end up in Minnesota, Denver or NY?

 

I would have supported going after Cousins, but again I prefer to deal in reality.

 

So again, I'll ask you...are you willing to part with a 1 and 4 for Nick Foles? Or are you willing to give Keenum big dollars?

 

You are, in the simplest form, a pure idiot.  Ya I misinterpreted your awful attempt at dismissing the cousins topic.  Just because you suck at conveying a thought properly doesnt make me dumb, and using a term like "non starter". What do you think the majority of normal people would interpret that as.  

    But if im being honest, yes i'd roll the dice on the foles deal.  Highest potential upside for the next 4 years of any situation, id accept the possibility of him sucking for his contract and only spending a first rounder.  Because while he did have some bad years under bad coaches, he put up killer numbers before his injury and his last 2 games show what hes capable of.  Keenum wont cost big dollars, maybe a couple mil per year more than tyrod.  Theres even more options too Robot! I feel like ive been bashing my head against a brick wall trying to explain this to your slow ass

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, BillsMafia13 said:

You are, in the simplest form, a pure idiot.  Ya I misinterpreted your awful attempt at dismissing the cousins topic.  Just because you suck at conveying a thought properly doesnt make me dumb, and using a term like "non starter". What do you think the majority of normal people would interpret that as.  

    But if im being honest, yes i'd roll the dice on the foles deal.  Highest potential upside for the next 4 years of any situation, id accept the possibility of him sucking for his contract and only spending a first rounder.  Because while he did have some bad years under bad coaches, he put up killer numbers before his injury and his last 2 games show what hes capable of.  Keenum wont cost big dollars, maybe a couple mil per year more than tyrod.  Theres even more options too Robot! I feel like ive been bashing my head against a brick wall trying to explain this to your slow ass

 

Listen, you intellectual scrub. When you can't spell, can't understand sixth-grade vocabulary, and can't form a coherent argument you really shouldn't be calling anyone slow.

 

And you're willing to give up picks for Foles, but not for your own guy. That's nuts.

 

 

[Reed83HOF]

1 hour ago, GoBills808 said:

I legit do not understand this reply. I'm not sure you could have chosen a more confusing group of players with which to respond to my post. 

Sarcasm & also just wanted to remind the fans that don't want to trade up for a QB or ignore it; this is what you end up with when you try to fill holes on a roster...

 

You draft Dareus's & Sammy's in round 1 & keep signing dead beat QBs like Holcumb, Fitz, Kolb, TT and drafting a mid-round developer like Trent - just hoping they pan out (they rarely do)

 

Which is what I get from the half of this board that does not want to move up and argues that we need to spend our top 2 picks on a stout DT to stop the run (or fav LB) or a good WR to give to TT since we let all of ours go. In RD2 or 3 we can draft White, Falk, Laluulutttaa or whatever his name is for a QB...Its the same roster building crap that has been going on here for the last decade and a half...Those are the faces of this type of roster building, whereas yours is correct...

Edited March 8, 2018 by Reed83HOF

[BringBackOrton]

13 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

Trading up for a QB ... IS building through the draft.

 

People want to pretend it's not. It is. It's the best way to build through the draft, provided you get the right guy, of course.

 

The bottom line is that it's this simple. If you don't have a franchise QB, getting one is your number one priority. Same with about 17 other clubs at any given time. So if you have a chance to get one, you take it.

but but but we need a linebacker!

[Reed83HOF]

1 minute ago, jmc12290 said:

but but but we need a linebacker!

Or a DT and WR because we let ours go, now lets use the picks to fill their holes

Edited March 8, 2018 by Reed83HOF

[BillsMafia13]

24 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Listen, you intellectual scrub. When you can't spell, can't understand sixth-grade vocabulary, and can't form a coherent argument you really shouldn't be calling anyone slow.

 

And you're willing to give up picks for Foles, but not for your own guy. That's nuts.

 

 

Haha ok man, you win the spelling contest on here. Too bad you repeatedly got clapped up by a rookie

   But this was fun, I’m going to enjoy my social life. You keep holding down the fort as the king is 2BD. You’re a real winner ?

Edited March 8, 2018 by BillsMafia13

[Reed83HOF]

38 minutes ago, maryland-bills-fan said:

[1] We have a number of holes on the team and the QB will not matter if they other team runs the ball down our throats or stops the QB and RB in the backfield.  We desperately need another DT and center. We badly need a linebacker, offensive lineman and wide receiver.  It does not make sense to give up 4-5 picks in the first two rounds of this year and next to take a crapshoot at a QB.  Wouldn't it be dumb to have all these needs as open wounds, while trying to break in a rookie QB?  How many years from now (actually 2-4) would it be before we filled these holes and others that would open up in the meantime?  Big uglies stay a while and are relatively cheap.

 

[2]  There are 4-5 shiny new toy QB's available.  I don't want to trade up to get one of them.  There are also 3-5 fair quality experienced FA or near FA QB's available this year.   These guys have experience and a track record- any one of them may bloom if they are surrounded by a good situation.  I would rather take one of them and give them 6 quality supporting cast people (this year and next), THAN have a hit-or-miss rookie and a weak supporting cast.

 

[3] The large number of shiny rookie QB's and available former-first-round veterans also means that some rookie QB's who look second tier (this year) are going to be available in the 3rd round.  We might be able to get some good guy this year, who in other years might be a fringe 1st round/early 2nd round guy.  Seems like a deal to me.

 

[4] Please don't use the patriots as a comparison. Brady is from another planet and Bellycheck somehow always finds near-all-pro's from the waiver wire.  You can't learn anything by trying to match their magic.

 

I am not trying to come off like a dick here, but probably will:

 

1.) How old are you? Over 30+? I because if you are much younger than that, you may not have known how poorly this has worked for us and almost every other team in the past...You might as well as hire Jeff Fisher to be your HC, you will at best be 7-9 to 9-7... big uglies don't win you games, Franchise QBs do

2.) See my previous post of faces to see the QBs that have fit this mold since we drafted Losman. Journeymen FA QBs never workout. Brees is an entirely different case FYI...

3.) Second Tier QBs give you Trent Edwards, NFL draft history is letter with many more of these that the 1-off Wilson, 1-off Prescott and 1-off Brady.

4.) The rule changes in favor of QBs and offenses cause this position to be critically important in today's NFL and mean much more to a team's success than any point in the past....

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

5 minutes ago, BillsMafia13 said:

Haha ok man, you win the spelling contest on here. Too bad you repeatedly got clapped up by a rookie

   But this was fun, I’m going to enjoy my social life. You keep holding down the fort as the king is 2BD. You’re a real winner ?

Come back when you can make a point.

 

Say hi to the deer and your toothless girlfriend.

 

[BillsMafia13]

8 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

Come back when you can make a point.

 

Say hi to the deer and your toothless girlfriend.

 

The deer actually is my girlfriend ?

[maryland-bills-fan]

16 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

I am not trying to come off like a dick here, but probably will:

 

1.) How old are you? Over 30+? I because if you are much younger than that, you may not have known how poorly this has worked for us and almost every other team in the past...You might as well as hire Jeff Fisher to be your HC, you will at best be 7-9 to 9-7... big uglies don't win you games, Franchise QBs do

2.) See my previous post of faces to see the QBs that have fit this mold since we drafted Losman. Journeymen FA QBs never workout. Brees is an entirely different case FYI...

3.) Second Tier QBs give you Trent Edwards, NFL draft history is letter with many more of these that the 1-off Wilson, 1-off Prescott and 1-off Brady.

4.) The rule changes in favor of QBs and offenses cause this position to be critically important in today's NFL and mean much more to a team's success than any point in the past....

 

I was at the rockpile when Kemp was throwing the ball....................Let's see.  Tom Brady was selected with pick #199, a compensatory pick, in the sixth round of the 2000 NFL Draft.......................... There are 21 other people on the field other than a QB- you seem to forget.

 

Edited March 9, 2018 by maryland-bills-fan

[maryland-bills-fan]

https://www.milehighreport.com/2017/6/28/15880748/success-rates-of-drafted-quarterbacks

 

A good read.  Note the following table, where "success" means they started for multiple years:

QB's drafted 1990-2016
pick	success %
1-16	81%
17-32	65%
2nd round	48%
3rd round	25%
4th round	13%
5th round	6%
6th round	16%
7th round	6%

 

 

	What jumps out at me is that 1st round draft picks are not a sure thing (a two year starter, might have accomplished a 4-12 and 4-12 record on a terrible team with no support- but be counted as "a success")      Lets compare the strange but useful draft value chart with QB success and how efficient and costly it is to draft a "success". For draft value I've chosen the middle of the top 16 & bottom 16 of the first round and then middle of the 2nd, 3rd,4th round   pick              "success"     draft value       100x success/draft value ==================================================== 1-16 (#8)      81%                1403                   5.77 17-32(#24)  65%                    740                   8.78 2nd rd           48%                   420                   11.4 3rd rd            25%                  190                   13.2 4th rd           13%                    70                     18.6          Yes you do have a much better shot at getting a success in the first round.  But the 2nd round is not too shabby either.   There is a limit as to how many QB's you can have on the roster and develop. There is a limit to how much playing time is available in practice and preseason. BUT, you could draft in the 3rd round, three years in a row and have about the same success as having spent a ~ #8 pick.   The cost?  3x190= 570 points compared to 1403.  Those surplus points could be used to get 3-4 good starters at other positions.     " Moving up"   in the draft is actually a lot more expensive than just a draft point swap.   A hint from life:  if you are begging to make a deal, the seller raises his price a lot and you pay more.   Moving into the top 5 (where the top QB's are likely to go this year) is a LOT more expensive-   average cost is 2260.  Or the same as the "cost" of FIVE middle of the second round players. OUCH. A complete offensive line.

[Reed83HOF]

1 hour ago, maryland-bills-fan said:

I was at the rockpile when Kemp was throwing the ball....................Let's see.  Tom Brady was selected with pick #199, a compensatory pick, in the sixth round of the 2000 NFL Draft.......................... There are 21 other people on the field other than a QB- you seem to forget.

 

Nah I didn't forget, aside from QB the next most important position is your Bruce Smith, LT, Reggie White, JJ, & Bosa type pass rushers who can change the game in an instant by foring a fumble, getting a huge sack or forcing an early or bad bass that can result in an INT. Those are the 2 highest impact positions that can win or lose you games and really disrupt the other other.

59 minutes ago, maryland-bills-fan said:

https://www.milehighreport.com/2017/6/28/15880748/success-rates-of-drafted-quarterbacks

 

Going back to 1990 most likely skews this data. Scouting and analytics has changed the game a lot, as well as the rule changes that now favor the offense and QBs as well as the rookie cap allows teams to take more risks and not cost them a ton of money - teams are now more willing than ever to move up and take a swing at a QB...

[Cmdjr85]

get a good qb in draft you get 4 years until he kills the cap

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

21 hours ago, corta765 said:

 

How many QBs that are true studs leave their teams? Literally Cousins is the only example and that is after two franchise tags thanks to the Skins messing up doing a long term deal. That never happens.

 Brees.  Manning.  Smith if you give him that (x2)

[maryland-bills-fan]

3 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:

Nah I didn't forget, aside from QB the next most important position is your Bruce Smith, LT, Reggie White, JJ, & Bosa type pass rushers who can change the game in an instant by foring a fumble, getting a huge sack or forcing an early or bad bass that can result in an INT. Those are the 2 highest impact positions that can win or lose you games and really disrupt the other other.

 

Going back to 1990 most likely skews this data. Scouting and analytics has changed the game a lot, as well as the rule changes that now favor the offense and QBs as well as the rookie cap allows teams to take more risks and not cost them a ton of money - teams are now more willing than ever to move up and take a swing at a QB...

Well, the nature of the nfl changes every 5 years or so.    But wasn't Kelly a QB?  Hasn't the forward pass been around a while?  The college QB's are not perfect fits for the NFL of the day, but are pretty close.  You have to include a number of years in order for the sample size to be big enough to be meaningful.  That goes for a study like the one I wrote about as well as the seat of the pants BS or opinions that people float out there.

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 Brees.  Manning.  Smith if you give him that (x2)

Kelly

[Thurman#1]

On 3/9/2018 at 11:42 PM, maryland-bills-fan said:

https://www.milehighreport.com/2017/6/28/15880748/success-rates-of-drafted-quarterbacks

 

A good read.  Note the following table, where "success" means they started for multiple years:

QB's drafted 1990-2016
pick	success %
1-16	81%
17-32	65%
2nd round	48%
3rd round	25%
4th round	13%
5th round	6%
6th round	16%
7th round	6%

 

 

 

 

Wonder if I saw you at the Rockpile?

 

In any case, any study where "success" means they started for multiple years is missing the point by a long ways. Losman, Tyrod, Holcomb, Trent, Fitz, all started for multiple years. Not all for the teams that drafted them but they all started and not one was a real success. And there are plenty more where those five came from. 

 

Starting for multiple years often means teams drafted them early and are hoping and giving them time to prove themselves good or bad. That's a poor definition for success.

 

In any case, they need to trade up if they can get a franchise QB. Give up all six picks if they need to, maybe even Glenn as well or some other little lagniappe. Yeah, they've got holes and won't fill them. But next year won't matter in the long run either way, and round about 2021 or so this team will look radically better if we got a franchise guy than if we didn't.

Edited March 12, 2018 by Thurman#1

[maryland-bills-fan]

On 3/12/2018 at 8:26 AM, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Wonder if I saw you at the Rockpile?

 

In any case, any study where "success" means they started for multiple years is missing the point by a long ways. Losman, Tyrod, Holcomb, Trent, Fitz, all started for multiple years. Not all for the teams that drafted them but they all started and not one was a real success. And there are plenty more where those five came from. 

 

Starting for multiple years often means teams drafted them early and are hoping and giving them time to prove themselves good or bad. That's a poor definition for success.

 

In any case, they need to trade up if they can get a franchise QB. Give up all six picks if they need to, maybe even Glenn as well or some other little lagniappe. Yeah, they've got holes and won't fill them. But next year won't matter in the long run either way, and round about 2021 or so this team will look radically better if we got a franchise guy than if we didn't.

 I was the guy walking in with a 6 pack of Simon Pure in each hand.  Do you remember that they actually let you openly bring in a couple of 6 packs to the game?

[Buffalo Barbarian]

 

No.