Buffalo is 1 of only 3 teams to NEVER select a QB in the top 10 of the Draft

[Lurker]

20 minutes ago, USABuffaloFan said:

 

They traded away a 1st for Rob Johnson and landed Flutie, a few years later when all that went away they traded a 1st to get Bledsoe, when that went away they draft Losman moving up in the 1st round, when that didn't work..............

 

None of whom were considered "blue chip" franchise-type guys.   

 

Johnson was a 4th round pick (#99) of the Jags who flashed enough in last two games of 1997 to fool the Bills into trading the 9th pick (plus a 4th rd) for him.   I guess that's an investment, but it feels more like a panic move.   Flutie was a fluke that actually worked out.   Bledsoe lost his job to a kid drafted in the 6th round.  Losman was another panic move.   

 

None had the feel of a well-thought out strategy for addressing the long-term future of the team...

[What a Tuel]

7 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Actually he cannot move up because each of the top 3 teams will be selecting a QB.  They control their picks and cannot be forced to trade by whiny whiners on a message board.

 

The Jets certainly got into the top 3 so no it wasn't impossible. I guess their message board whined harder?

 

I love how its always impossible for the Bills to get it done, but all these other teams do it all the time.

 

Eagles? Eh why not move up from 13th and grab Wentz.

Rams? Eh why not move up from 15th and grab Goff.

 

Now you'll say this year is different, but it really isn't. 3 of the top 4 teams in the draft weren't drafting a qb. (Browns weren't drafting 2, and Giants are borderline).

 

If Beane liked any of the top 4 QBs he should have gotten it done. If they all flop then he will get credit for not giving away the farm for a bust, but if they are successful especially whoever the Jets pick, then its a huge black mark on his record for being stingy on a position that has haunted the Bills for close to two decades.

Edited March 26, 2018 by What a Tuel

[Boatdrinks]

22 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:

 

The Jets certainly got into the top 3 so no it wasn't impossible. I guess their message board whined harder?

 

I love how its always impossible for the Bills to get it done, but all these other teams do it all the time.

 

Eagles? Eh why not move up from 13th and grab Wentz.

Rams? Eh why not move up from 15th and grab Goff.

 

Now you'll say this year is different, but it really isn't. 3 of the top 4 teams in the draft weren't drafting a qb. (Browns weren't drafting 2, and Giants are borderline).

 

If Beane liked any of the top 4 QBs he should have gotten it done. If they all flop then he will get credit for not giving away the farm for a bust, but if they are successful especially whoever the Jets pick, then its a huge black mark on his record for being stingy on a position that has haunted the Bills for close to two decades.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Jets had the 6th pick to offer. That's better than 12. They are also before the Bills in each round, so their 2nds are higher than Buffalo as well. You need the good fortune of a team being willing to trade down to the spot you have. Either the Rams or Eagles ( I don't recall which) had to move twice to get to the high pick they needed. The Bills moved to 12, but could be stuck there without a dance partner. It could still happen, but if a team is determined to land a specific player and won't move down then what can you do? Better have a backup plan( or two). 

[What a Tuel]

8 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

The Jets had the 6th pick to offer. That's better than 12. They are also before the Bills in each round, so their 2nds are higher than Buffalo as well. You need the good fortune of a team being willing to trade down to the spot you have. Either the Rams or Eagles ( I don't recall which) had to move twice to get to the high pick they needed. The Bills moved to 12, but could be stuck there without a dance partner. It could still happen, but if a team is determined to land a specific player and won't move down then what can you do? Better have a backup plan( or two). 

 

Philly was the one that gave up 2 players to Miami to move from 13 to 8 and then subsequently to 2. I agree, but I still see it as a failure of Beane not getting it done though. It stings a little bit more that it was a divisional opponent too. If we don't end up with a legitimate QB at the end of this, and the Jets start running the division, this will be remembered almost as well as the failure to trade up for Roethlisberger.

[NastyNateSoldiers]

12 hours ago, BigDingus said:

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2018/3/25/17129282/buffalo-bills-have-never-picked-a-quarterback-in-the-top-10-of-the-nfl-draft-three-teams

 

"Since the NFL merger in 1970, the Bills are one of three teams to never have used a top-10 draft pick at the most important position in the game. Buffalo is joined on this list by the Minnesota Vikings and Baltimore Ravens."

 

"Buffalo has only used a first-round draft pick on a quarterback three times, with one winding up as a Hall of Famer, and the other two leaving Buffalo after disappointing tenures. The last two times the Bills picked a quarterback in the first round, they missed badly on their quarterback of the future."

 

And we've only been to the playoffs a handful of times outside of the Kelly era... We always try the "build a strong team around a game manager" approach, and we end up with the same results. We bring a new coach who has a renewed commitment to a "strong running game, combined with a hard-nosed defense" philosophy. Then we end up as a mediocre, middle of the road team, coach gets fired, new guy comes in & guts the previous regime's roster, and starts the cycle all over again.

Hopefully Beane realizes this cycle needs to change & does what needs to be done. 

 

But we have needs man! Needs! . We got to add a guard a tackle maybe a RB of the future. We got holes.. lol

[4merper4mer]

6 hours ago, What a Tuel said:

 

The Jets certainly got into the top 3 so no it wasn't impossible. I guess their message board whined harder?

 

I love how its always impossible for the Bills to get it done, but all these other teams do it all the time.

 

Eagles? Eh why not move up from 13th and grab Wentz.

Rams? Eh why not move up from 15th and grab Goff.

 

Now you'll say this year is different, but it really isn't. 3 of the top 4 teams in the draft weren't drafting a qb. (Browns weren't drafting 2, and Giants are borderline).

 

If Beane liked any of the top 4 QBs he should have gotten it done. If they all flop then he will get credit for not giving away the farm for a bust, but if they are successful especially whoever the Jets pick, then its a huge black mark on his record for being stingy on a position that has haunted the Bills for close to two decades.

What I clearly meant was that as of now, he has no recourse to get a "top 3" QB.  Yet many on here post over and over about trading with the Giants.  It's just dumb IMO.  If it is so amazingly important to ignore 52 roster spots to get your guy then why haven't the Giants discovered this in their 90-ish years of history?  The QB at all costs crowd literally has to ignore their own argument for it to make any sense.

 

As as for your theory, the reality is that Browns at 1 and Giants at 2 were ALWAYS taking QB and never trading and the Colts have stated they did not want to move out of the top 10.  In case you hadn't noticed, 12 is out of the top 10.  In reality, the best case scenario for the Bills was to make three trades before the Jets, Dolphins, Broncos, or Cardinals made one.

4 hours ago, NastyNateSoldiers said:

But we have needs man! Needs! . We got to add a guard a tackle maybe a RB of the future. We got holes.. lol

We don't have a top 3 pick but we blew it when we had the chance and took some loser named Bruce Smith.  What ever happened to him?

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

17 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

While an interesting oddity, that the Bills haven't used a top ten pick on a QB isnt significant in and of itself. How many top ten selections have they had ( since say 1980 as the game in the 1970's was different and Ferguson was a solid starter. ) How many QBs selected in the top ten have the Bills actually passed on ? In other words, was the player actually available to them with their original draft spot? I'd wager that no, the Bills haven't passed on drafting a top QB that was available when they selected in the top ten of the NFL draft. We know the Bills have lacked top end QB play pretty much since the Kelly era. There is no magic bullet strategy that they obliviously failed to employ. They have tried and failed trading for other teams QBs. They have used their own first round selection . They have drafted QBs in other rounds. The greatest failure at drafting QBs has probably been not drafting enough of them. They could have landed Flacco, Dalton, Wilson, Brees, maybe even Rodgers if not for a (eventually) failed move up in round one the year before. A decent enough list. Their overall issue hasn't been the lack of spending a top ten pick, but not taking enough QBs in the draft overall. 

Deshaun Watson had 21 TDs in his first 7 games for one

[BillsFan17]

7 hours ago, What a Tuel said:

 

The Jets certainly got into the top 3 so no it wasn't impossible. I guess their message board whined harder?

 

I love how its always impossible for the Bills to get it done, but all these other teams do it all the time.

 

Eagles? Eh why not move up from 13th and grab Wentz.

Rams? Eh why not move up from 15th and grab Goff.

 

Now you'll say this year is different, but it really isn't. 3 of the top 4 teams in the draft weren't drafting a qb. (Browns weren't drafting 2, and Giants are borderline).

 

If Beane liked any of the top 4 QBs he should have gotten it done. If they all flop then he will get credit for not giving away the farm for a bust, but if they are successful especially whoever the Jets pick, then its a huge black mark on his record for being stingy on a position that has haunted the Bills for close to two decades.

You say that like the Eagles and Rams didn't have WILLING TRADE PARTNERS. Buffalo does not currently have that.

 

Ballard of the Colts said him self they didn't want to slide out of the top ten. Hence why Buffalo most likely wasn't a good trade partner for Indy.

[NastyNateSoldiers]

1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said:

What I clearly meant was that as of now, he has no recourse to get a "top 3" QB.  Yet many on here post over and over about trading with the Giants.  It's just dumb IMO.  If it is so amazingly important to ignore 52 roster spots to get your guy then why haven't the Giants discovered this in their 90-ish years of history?  The QB at all costs crowd literally has to ignore their own argument for it to make any sense.

 

As as for your theory, the reality is that Browns at 1 and Giants at 2 were ALWAYS taking QB and never trading and the Colts have stated they did not want to move out of the top 10.  In case you hadn't noticed, 12 is out of the top 10.  In reality, the best case scenario for the Bills was to make three trades before the Jets, Dolphins, Broncos, or Cardinals made one.

We don't have a top 3 pick but we blew it when we had the chance and took some loser named Bruce Smith.  What ever happened to him?

We got needs though. 

[What a Tuel]

37 minutes ago, BillsFan17 said:

You say that like the Eagles and Rams didn't have WILLING TRADE PARTNERS. Buffalo does not currently have that.

 

Ballard of the Colts said him self they didn't want to slide out of the top ten. Hence why Buffalo most likely wasn't a good trade partner for Indy.

 

Once again the Eagles and Rams both found a way to get it done with mid round picks. It confounds me that we just say "oh well, guess no one wanted to trade", especially since we lack the details to make that determination.

Edited March 26, 2018 by What a Tuel

[Tyrod's friend]

47 minutes ago, BillsFan17 said:

 

Ballard of the Colts said him self they didn't want to slide out of the top ten

And since then, he's said he's still willing to trade down ... which basically means out of the top 10. 

Post hoc, people will say anything that justifies an action. Just ask any policeman.

[4merper4mer]

21 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:

 

Once again the Eagles and Rams both found a way to get it done with mid round picks. It confounds me that we just say "oh well, guess no one wanted to trade", especially since we lack the details to make that determination.

Yet on the other side of the equation it is ok to assume that Beane is an idiot and the Giants prefer to not have a QB?

[mjt328]

When I look back at the Buffalo Bills through their 50+ year history, I think this information is eye-opening.  We've only taken 3 quarterbacks in the 1st Round during our history (Kelly, Losman, Manuel) and never taken one in the Top 10, despite being there 15-20 times.  Two of those QBs were our second pick of the day (Kelly, Losman) and one was after a trade down.

 

We can argue all day about who we "should and shouldn't" have drafted.  But I think it shows me a franchise that has always placed "less priority" on the Quarterback position than much of the competition.

 

Buddy Nix is probably a great example.  It took him 4 drafts as GM to finally take the chance on a QB. 

We can say he was "smart" for passing on Jimmy Clausen, Blaine Gabbert, Brandon Weeden, etc.  But he also passed on Russell Wilson.  Was he smart?  Or was he just lucky? 

You can't miss on the chances you don't take.  But you can't hit on them either.

 

 

 

 

 

[BillsMafia13]

17 hours ago, Bobby Hooks said:

Exactly. This is the draft we’ve been accruing picks for. This is the draft with three viable qbs (imo). This is the time. 

 

People would prefer we dabble in mediocrity another 17 years. Or worse yet wait until we actually have a four win season and pick top three where there would be no guarantees there would be a guy worth picking? 

 

Take the shot. 

You paint this situation as if picking a qb in the top 3 is automatic and the only possible solution.  While I agree, that would be ideal.  It is by no means the only way to be successful and incredibly narrow minded and lazy.  

[BillsFan17]

2 hours ago, Tyrod's friend said:

And since then, he's said he's still willing to trade down ... which basically means out of the top 10. 

Post hoc, people will say anything that justifies an action. Just ask any policeman.

Yet, his initial trade was in the top ten. What he may be willing to do now is different than what the original trade was.

 

If you can't separate the two that's on you not me.

[Tyrod's friend]

22 minutes ago, BillsFan17 said:

Yet, his initial trade was in the top ten. What he may be willing to do now is different than what the original trade was.

 

If you can't separate the two that's on you not me.

And if you can't understand GMs will tell you whatever you need to hear, that's on you. 

It's a truism for a reason, pal.

[BillsFan17]

1 minute ago, Tyrod's friend said:

And if you can't understand GMs will tell you whatever you need to hear, that's on you. 

It's a truism for a reason, pal.

Whatever we want to hear? Who would he be pandering to when saying he didn't want to trade out of the top ten and that's why he took the Jets offer?!?!?

 

Moreover, it's one thing to trade to six and then look to further more down and acquire more, than to trade down to 12.

 

Yeah, buffalo could have offered a nice package, but getting what he did from the Jets and still having the ability to move down again...

 

But what do I know...

[Jobot]

21 hours ago, BigDingus said:

 

No, it's definitely relevant in context of our franchise futility. 

It also goes hand in hand with our terrible GM's, coaches, and management philosophy prior to Beane.

 

And in terms of this board, we have yet again countless people in the "kick the ahead to next year yet again!" camp...the same people who always say "wait until next year" to draft a QB because they're afraid everyone is a bust if they're not automatically labeled the best QB of all time prior to stepping foot in the league.
 

100% relevant.

 

bleh...

 

It has zero relevance to the current management regime.  It's an interesting fact is all.  However your overly sensitive response to someone who disagrees, underscores the winy purpose of this thread..

[Bobby Hooks]

2 hours ago, BillsMafia13 said:

You paint this situation as if picking a qb in the top 3 is automatic and the only possible solution.  While I agree, that would be ideal.  It is by no means the only way to be successful and incredibly narrow minded and lazy.  

Where did I say it’s the only way? I said imo it’s the best course of action for this team, right now. 

 

If anyone’s painting anything it’s you painting me into a box to fit your narrative. 

 

That, IMO, is the lazy way to have a discussion. And as far as narrow minded goes nothing is more myopic than making general asinine assumptions about another human based on a cherry picked post on a football message board. 

Edited March 26, 2018 by Bobby Hooks

[What a Tuel]

3 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Yet on the other side of the equation it is ok to assume that Beane is an idiot and the Giants prefer to not have a QB?

 

Not assuming he is an idiot. If he couldn't get it done, he couldn't get it done. He better go to plan B then because his job is to find us a qualified QB, because his goal is to win consistently and we won't win consistently without one. If he ultimately fails then he wasn't up for the job.

Edited March 26, 2018 by What a Tuel