Buffalo Hasn't Conducted Itself This Offseason Like They'll Trade Most/All High PIcks for #2

[Midwest1981]

Let me preface my post with the recognition that Buffalo has a whopping $30 million in dead cap this year, which leads the league by nearly double.  So our cap space this offseason has been finite.  Still, Buffalo DID spend some $$$ this offseason (5 years, $50 million for Star; up to $27 million for 3 years for Trent Murphy) and very little of it was used in any way that would meaningfully assist or complement a rookie QB, particularly one that we would trade up to #2 for and potentially sacrifice all of our 1st-3rd round 2018 picks (12, 22, 53, 57, 65, & 96) OR both 1st's, our 2019 1st, and a little more.

 

None of that is to say that the Bills won't still do that, but it seems like an odd course of action if they did.  

 

Buffalo still has virtually no speed at WR.  Kaelin Clay- our only move at wideout- may offer some, but he's a marginal player to begin with.  

 

At RB, Chris Ivory is an improvement over Mike Tolbert, but that isn't saying much.  

 

At TE, we've been static but Charles Clay's knee condition is chronic.  

 

And finally along the OL, we're still poor on the right side and our only move was signing Russell Bodine, a player Bengals' fans couldn't were ecstatic to rid themselves of, to compete with Ryan Groy, to replace a better and established player in Eric Wood.

 

Two last notes:  1) I like McDermott but he still hails from the defensive side of the ball.  And our new OC- Brian Daboll- has a little experience with the innovative FBS offenses being integrated in the NFL.  But even granting him little talent to work with in previous stops, he doesn't have a track record of success.

 

Anyway, this just seems like an odd tack to take if you plan to trade all/most of the meaningful draft assets you've amassed for a rookie QB, who needs help even in the BEST situation and with the MOST innate talent.  Which brings me to point #2...

 

2) The fallacy for believing Buffalo can just spend their way out of this problem in 2019 with our cap space ignores many facts, including that many teams will be equipped with considerable cap space (a result of the cap rising $10 million each of the last 5 years with no end in sight, plus the ability to carry over cap from year to year).  AND in the NFL it's rare to spend your way into contention.  It can be done; the Jaguars have demonstrated that.  But with the existence and prevalence of the franchise tag it's generally rare that truly high-quality "unblemished" FA's, guys with no question marks or concerns like age, injury, or character issues, hit the market.  As I heard someone describe NFL free agency this offseason:  "You have to not only buy into the player; you also have to buy into the reason they're a free agent."

 

Eschewing cheap labor in draft picks and trusting the Bills to spend their way to an offense in FA (where players are almost invariably overpaid) seems like a dicey proposition.

Edited April 20, 2018 by Midwest1981

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

[Nineforty]

All of their moves in regards to acquiring more draft capital seem to indicate otherwise but doesn't have to mean I'm right either.

 

I've always felt get the qb, evaluate him and build based off those details and the talent that becomes available next year in FA and the draft.

 

Get a qb and if you hit, we have time to fill in blanks.

[Chuck Wagon]

I didn't realize we wouldn't be able to add players in the 2019 draft or that the 2020 offseason won't happen.

[Nineforty]

And I'm not sure many expect us to build an entire offense through one FA period. 

[Midwest1981]

Let me be clear:  I'm actually NOT opposed to moving up for a QB- I'm still just very leery of the cost to go from 12 to 2, given the draft chart which already places a very disproportionate value of top-5 picks and given the premium the Jets paid to go from 6 to 3 which set the precedent/price.

 

And especially leery of doing so for a QB like Josh Allen, given the time he needs to sit/wait (up to two whole years) before even being ABLE to competently to play the position.  But that's not the material point.

 

ALL of these QB's need better help than we've surrounded them with to this point.  And the idea that we can spend our way out of the problem next offseason when A) FA prices are always inflated, B) we're competing with most of the league because of the league has significant cap space (or projects to/will in a year), and C) when it's rare that high-quality players with no baggage even make it to the market... that just doesn't seem like a highly plausible answer.

19 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said:

I didn't realize we wouldn't be able to add players in the 2019 draft or that the 2020 offseason won't happen.

Your resort to sarcasm (and what biting sarcasm it was) to make your point doesn't speak too well for your character.  But I don't know you so maybe I'm wrong.

 

To indulge you despite your dismissive sarcasm, we don't know what picks we'd have left in 2019 if we traded up to #2, for one.  At minimum, the rising expectation is that we'd have to trade our 2019 1st, meaning our first pick won't come until the 40's to begin with.  Second of all, there are two sides of the football- it's unreasonable to think that other teams won't prop up on defense that will need addressing and that we'll need to allocate resources for.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Midwest1981

[KDIGGZ]

Rookie QB is 3 yr process. Year 1 is learning, making mistakes, fighting through advertisity. Year 2 is progress and you watch them become a franchise type QB. Year 3 is when you are a contender. The exact plan the Rams are following now. They had no issues trading away their entire draft for Goff and now they are right there with Minnesota as the super bowl favorites from the NFC.

[Marv's Neighbor]

No disputing, we need a QB, BUT we also need so many other players that a huge move up, for a QB, seems very unwise.

[Chuck Wagon]

11 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

Rookie QB is 3 yr process. Year 1 is learning, making mistakes, fighting through advertisity. Year 2 is progress and you watch them become a franchise type QB. Year 3 is when you are a contender. The exact plan the Rams are following now. They had no issues trading away their entire draft for Goff and now they are right there with Minnesota as the super bowl favorites from the NFC.

 

 

Shhh

 

The doom and gloomers don't want to hear the reality of what teams like Seattle, Philly, LA have built around cheap young good QBs.  

[1st Ammendment NoMas]

For what we are working with, I think they did a great job.  The move up won't make or break us this year, but it could impact the next 3. If we truly identified the "franchise QB" we want to build around for the next 5-10 years, then we must give up whatever it takes to make the move.  

 

The defense should be equally good or better this year, which was good enough to carry a terrible OC and run first QB. I think McCarron will be an upgrade over TT.  If we can walk into the season with 3 more starters at RT, MLB and WR, then C,  we can stay in the playoff talk.  With 4 picks in the first two rounds smart drafting can solve this. If we trade it all for the future QB, then he has to be the one who is so much better than McCarron that he elevates the offense.  With the luck of a Kamara type back in the 3rd or 4th and a solid #2 WR then things may evolve even quicker.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

27 minutes ago, Midwest1981 said:

And finally along the OL, we're still poor on the right side and our only move was signing Russell Bodine, a player Bengals' fans couldn't were ecstatic to rid themselves of, to compete with Ryan Groy, to replace a better and established player in Eric Wood.

 

Kind of interesting that people who do this for a living and are not actual fans so are more objective don't see it that way

 

Mark Gaughan analyzes the Bills' offensive line continuity, which ranked near the top of the league last season but could be disrupted by the retirement of Eric Wood. 

 

 

I don't disagree with your overall thought, that yes the Bills weren't able to fill their other areas of need thru FA due to lack of money so giving up alot of picks now would still leave them overall weak.

 

If the Bills can trade up and still keep 4 of their top 7 picks (I'm including next years 1st round pick) I'd be OK with moving up as could still fill enough other holes, but doubt you can do that and move up to #2.  That may get you to #5 or lower.

 

There was an article the other day on BN that showed of all the past 30 or so draft classes with multiple top QB picks, only around 33% panned out to be franchise level QB's and 38% were either busts or not much better than that, so again hate to give up all that draft capital for a 1 in 3 shot of success.

 

I do recall one time a quote from Marv Levy "Free agents typically hurt the team they are leaving more than they help the team they are going too"

 

Edited April 7, 2018 by Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

[DrDawkinstein]

3 minutes ago, Marv's Neighbor said:

No disputing, we need a QB, BUT we also need so many other players that a huge move up, for a QB, seems very unwise.

 

Any Bils fan that's been watching the last 20 years should know that no need or hole is as important as QB. And filling every other need except QB will get you nothing more than a 7-9 loser team. This has been proven time and time again by our own team.

 

This is the best chance the Bills have had in landing a franchise QB, and will probably be our best chance for years to come.

 

A little pain, a little investment now, will pay dividends through the future. Gotta take a shot.

[Midwest1981]

8 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

Rookie QB is 3 yr process. Year 1 is learning, making mistakes, fighting through advertisity. Year 2 is progress and you watch them become a franchise type QB. Year 3 is when you are a contender. The exact plan the Rams are following now. They had no issues trading away their entire draft for Goff and now they are right there with Minnesota as the super bowl favorites from the NFC.

I thought that the Rams might be mentioned. I would argue are situation isn’t entirely the same because Los Angeles had in place more existing talent, including a couple of top-10 talents in Aaron Donald (THE best defensive player in the NFL) and Todd Gurley. Secondly, the draw and appeal of playing in L.A. greatly trumps the draw and appeal of playing in Buffalo. Even excluding FA’s and talking about guys we could trade for, a Marcus Peters or Talib come to Los Angeles with excitement- they’d come to Buffalo with reluctance.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Midwest1981

[WideRightRevenge]

There is a happy medium here .. I hope ... in the way the draft unfolds ... move into picks 6-9 and get a quality QB ... right now we have 4 guys and no one has separated themselves from one another depending on which pundant you listen too (Darnold, Mayfield, Rosen, Allen) ... you have to figure Chubb and Barkley get taken in the top 5 picks .. so one of those guys has to drop to 6 or later.

[KDIGGZ]

35 minutes ago, Midwest1981 said:

I thought that the Rams might be mentioned. I would argue are situation isn’t entirely the same because Los Angeles had in place more existing talent, including a couple of top-10 talents in Aaron Donald (THE best defensive player in the NFL) and Todd Gurley. Secondly, the draw and appeal of playing in L.A. greatly trumps the draw and appeal of playing in Buffalo. Even excluding FA’s and talking about guys we could trade for, a Marcus Peters or Talib come to Los Angeles with excitement- they’d come to Buffalo with reluctance.

It is what it is. You need a QB to win in the NFL. Our situation is that we pick at 12 and the best ones are available top 5. Perhaps if they had the foresight to trade Tyrod before the season to ensure a top 5 pick in the best QB draft of the decade then they wouldn't have to give up so many of their picks to get their guy but that is the situation they put themselves in so I would assume have a plan to deal with it. It would seem their plan is to use the extra picks they have accumulated to trade up. Those picks were never intended to be used on anything else if that is indeed the plan. They are just extra draft capital for the sole purpose of getting a QB.

 

They said they wanted to win now AND build for the future. Those are conflicting goals. I'm into working out and that's like when people say I want to lose weight AND get big muscles. You can't do both at the same time. If this is all part of Beane's "process" then he must have a plan in place to get his QB plus fix the holes on the roster. If he doesn't then I think we can agree that he's not very good at his job. Let's see what his plan is.

Edited April 7, 2018 by kdiggz

[DrDawkinstein]

10 minutes ago, Midwest1981 said:

I thought that the Rams might be mentioned. I would argue are situation isn’t entirely the same because Los Angeles had in place more existing talent, including a couple of top-10 talents in Aaron Donald (THE best defensive player in the NFL) and Todd Gurley. Secondly, the draw and appeal of playing in L.A. greatly trumps the draw and appeal of playing in Buffalo. Even excluding FA’s and talking about guys we could trade for, a Marcus Peters or Talib come to Los Angeles with excitement- they’d come to Buffalo with reluctance.

 

More self-defeating, self-loathing, passive, losing attitude from/about this team. (Not calling YOU any of those things, just that pervasive attitude among Bills fans)

 

The Bills have landed plenty of FAs lately. That is the one good thing Buddy did. Fixed our FA draw.

[artmalibu]

All the QB speculation is BS at this point for 3 reasons.

 

1.  No one knows if the NYG are willing to trade out, and there is a possibility QBs could go 1,2,3 and possibly 5.  

 

2.  No one knows how much they are willing to give up to move up.

 

3.  No one know how many QBs are in the draft they feel its worth moving up for.  If they dont love 2 of them getting to #2 may not matter anyway. 

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

49 minutes ago, Midwest1981 said:

Let me preface my post with the recognition that Buffalo has a whopping $30 million in dead cap this year, which leads the league by nearly double.  So our cap space this offseason has been finite.  Still, Buffalo DID spend some $$$ this offseason (5 years, $50 million for Star; up to $27 million for 3 years for Trent Murphy) and very little of it was used in any way that would meaningfully assist or complement a rookie QB, particularly one that we would trade up to #2 for and potentially sacrifice all of our 1st-3rd round 2018 picks (12, 22, 53, 57, 65, & 96) OR both 1st's, our 2019 1st, and a little more.

 

We have plenty of cap space next year to do enough. The 30 in dead cap is known and not applicable to the plan.

 

Try some of the mock draft sim programs. It is possible to trade up from 12 to 2 and still maintain draft capital to help a rookie QB.

 

None of that is to say that the Bills won't still do that, but it seems like an odd course of action if they did. Not odd at all makes sense to me

 

 

Quote

 

Buffalo still has virtually no speed at WR.  Kaelin Clay- our only move at wideout- may offer some, but he's a marginal player to begin with.  

 

At RB, Chris Ivory is an improvement over Mike Tolbert, but that isn't saying much.  

 

At TE, we've been static but Charles Clay's knee condition is chronic.  

 

And finally along the OL, we're still poor on the right side and our only move was signing Russell Bodine, a player Bengals' fans couldn't were ecstatic to rid themselves of, to compete with Ryan Groy, to replace a better and established player in Eric Wood.

 

Two last notes:  1) I like McDermott but he still hails from the defensive side of the ball.  And our new OC- Brian Daboll- has a little experience with the innovative FBS offenses being integrated in the NFL.  But even granting him little talent to work with in previous stops, he doesn't have a track record of success. Alabama?

 

Quote

 

Anyway, this just seems like an odd tack to take if you plan to trade all/most of the meaningful draft assets you've amassed for a rookie QB, who needs help even in the BEST situation and with the MOST innate talent.  Which brings me to point #2...

 

2) The fallacy for believing Buffalo can just spend their way out of this problem in 2019 with our cap space ignores many facts, including that many teams will be equipped with considerable cap space (a result of the cap rising $10 million each of the last 5 years with no end in sight, plus the ability to carry over cap from year to year).  AND in the NFL it's rare to spend your way into contention.  It can be done; the Jaguars have demonstrated that.  But with the existence and prevalence of the franchise tag it's generally rare that truly high-quality "unblemished" FA's, guys with no question marks or concerns like age, injury, or character issues, hit the market.  As I heard someone describe NFL free agency this offseason:  "You have to not only buy into the player; you also have to buy into the reason they're a free agent."

 

Eschewing cheap labor in draft picks and trusting the Bills to spend their way to an offense in FA (where players are almost invariably overpaid) seems like a dicey proposition. Where do you get that as the plan?

 

Edited April 7, 2018 by horned dogs

[The Now Moment]

Maybe it's better to let the rookie QB play with what we have and assess what he needs to be more successful in his rookie year and then get him what he needs in the following offseason.  Philly didn't pick up Ajayi and Jeffrey until Wentz's sophomore season

[NewEraBills]

This draft just needs to hurry up and get here LOL.  Too much anxiety in the fanbase.  In any case I do think we will trade up and take a QB.  I think it'll be with the Bears at 8.  But we'll see.

[BillsFan17]

Beane stated the Bill's were not going to move on from Tyrod without a plan in place. I highly doubt that AJ and Peterman were their plan.

 

In turn, you stay at 12 and you run the risk of missing out on your guy immensely.

 

Sounds like too much of a gamble to take not to trade up.

[KDIGGZ]

8 minutes ago, NewEraBills said:

This draft just needs to hurry up and get here LOL.  Too much anxiety in the fanbase.  In any case I do think we will trade up and take a QB.  I think it'll be with the Bears at 8.  But we'll see.

Why 8? I have a whole thread about how they have been in talks with Tampa at 7

[JerseyBills]

1 hour ago, Nineforty said:

All of their moves in regards to acquiring more draft capital seem to indicate otherwise but doesn't have to mean I'm right either.

 

I've always felt get the qb, evaluate him and build based off those details and the talent that becomes available next year in FA and the draft.

 

Get a qb and if you hit, we have time to fill in blanks.

It could also be as simple as Watkins, Darby , Glenn , Dareus and Tyrod not fitting the grand vision. We pretty much replaced them , KB,Tre, Dawkins, Star and AJ , at a much lower price tag and better fit and in return got some nice draft capital to further build on the foundation.

 

I see McD and Beane being here a long long time, they just strike me as extremely professional and thorough and are very good at what they do. 

 

I guess we'll find out in 3 weeks. Im personally against trading the farm for a QB but I trust their decision making skills no matter what happens, we're in good hands for once

[Midwest1981]

33 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

More self-defeating, self-loathing, passive, losing attitude from/about this team. (Not calling YOU any of those things, just that pervasive attitude among Bills fans)

 

The Bills have landed plenty of FAs lately. That is the one good thing Buddy did. Fixed our FA draw.

I disagree with the premise that Nix “fixed our FA draw.” Other than Mark Anderson, who was a sizable bust, you’re just talking about Mario Williams. And our offer was 6 years, $96 million (over half guaranteed)... six years ago. And even Williams took two whole days to decide to accept.

 

My point wasn’t so much as self-defeating as it was the unvarnished truth. It’s not that Buffalo can’t appeal to anyone, though generally we have to demonstrably overpay. It’s that Buffalo doesn’t have the natural appeal of Los Angeles and most other markets.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Midwest1981

[OldTimer1960]

54 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

Rookie QB is 3 yr process. Year 1 is learning, making mistakes, fighting through advertisity. Year 2 is progress and you watch them become a franchise type QB. Year 3 is when you are a contender. The exact plan the Rams are following now. They had no issues trading away their entire draft for Goff and now they are right there with Minnesota as the super bowl favorites from the NFC.

I'll keep saying it: the Rams had A LOT more talent in place before their big draft trade to get Goff than do the Bills.

[KDIGGZ]

2 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:

Im personally against trading the farm for a QB but I trust their decision making skills no matter what happens, we're in good hands for once

It's not trading the farm. They wanted a new prized calf and the other farmer said it will take 5 chickens if you want to do a trade. They only had 2 chickens so they got a few more and now they have enough to make the deal.

3 minutes ago, OldTimer1960 said:

I'll keep saying it: the Rams had A LOT more talent in place before their big draft trade to get Goff than do the Bills.

And yet we beat them. Just because you have heard of some of their players doesn't mean they had a better team

[BigBuff423]

1 hour ago, Midwest1981 said:

Let me preface my post with the recognition that Buffalo has a whopping $30 million in dead cap this year, which leads the league by nearly double.  So our cap space this offseason has been finite.  Still, Buffalo DID spend some $$$ this offseason (5 years, $50 million for Star; up to $27 million for 3 years for Trent Murphy) and very little of it was used in any way that would meaningfully assist or complement a rookie QB, particularly one that we would trade up to #2 for and potentially sacrifice all of our 1st-3rd round 2018 picks (12, 22, 53, 57, 65, & 96) OR both 1st's, our 2019 1st, and a little more.

 

None of that is to say that the Bills won't still do that, but it seems like an odd course of action if they did.  

 

Buffalo still has virtually no speed at WR.  Kaelin Clay- our only move at wideout- may offer some, but he's a marginal player to begin with.  

 

At RB, Chris Ivory is an improvement over Mike Tolbert, but that isn't saying much.  

 

At TE, we've been static but Charles Clay's knee condition is chronic.  

 

And finally along the OL, we're still poor on the right side and our only move was signing Russell Bodine, a player Bengals' fans couldn't were ecstatic to rid themselves of, to compete with Ryan Groy, to replace a better and established player in Eric Wood.

 

Two last notes:  1) I like McDermott but he still hails from the defensive side of the ball.  And our new OC- Brian Daboll- has a little experience with the innovative FBS offenses being integrated in the NFL.  But even granting him little talent to work with in previous stops, he doesn't have a track record of success.

 

Anyway, this just seems like an odd tack to take if you plan to trade all/most of the meaningful draft assets you've amassed for a rookie QB, who needs help even in the BEST situation and with the MOST innate talent.  Which brings me to point #2...

 

2) The fallacy for believing Buffalo can just spend their way out of this problem in 2019 with our cap space ignores many facts, including that many teams will be equipped with considerable cap space (a result of the cap rising $10 million each of the last 5 years with no end in sight, plus the ability to carry over cap from year to year).  AND in the NFL it's rare to spend your way into contention.  It can be done; the Jaguars have demonstrated that.  But with the existence and prevalence of the franchise tag it's generally rare that truly high-quality "unblemished" FA's, guys with no question marks or concerns like age, injury, or character issues, hit the market.  As I heard someone describe NFL free agency this offseason:  "You have to not only buy into the player; you also have to buy into the reason they're a free agent."

 

Eschewing cheap labor in draft picks and trusting the Bills to spend their way to an offense in FA (where players are almost invariably overpaid) seems like a dicey proposition.

 

Pretty well thought out post and I can’t argue the merits entirely. However, I also think it’s a reason why AJ was acquired. Because the Bills anticipate the sacrifice they’ll make this year and don’t want to put a Rookie QB in a situation where he is essentially set-up to fail. 

 

That said, I am not a fan of trading up unless it’s to #7 where the Bills only need to give up a 3rd this year or something comparable. I feel the Bills need all these Draft picks and I think a QB like Jackson will be there - admittedly I’m a Jackson convert.

[NastyNateSoldiers]

49 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

Kind of interesting that people who do this for a living and are not actual fans so are more objective don't see it that way

 

Mark Gaughan analyzes the Bills' offensive line continuity, which ranked near the top of the league last season but could be disrupted by the retirement of Eric Wood. 

 

 

I don't disagree with your overall thought, that yes the Bills weren't able to fill their other areas of need thru FA due to lack of money so giving up alot of picks now would still leave them overall weak.

 

If the Bills can trade up and still keep 4 of their top 7 picks (I'm including next years 1st round pick) I'd be OK with moving up as could still fill enough other holes, but doubt you can do that and move up to #2.  That may get you to #5 or lower.

 

There was an article the other day on BN that showed of all the past 30 or so draft classes with multiple top QB picks, only around 33% panned out to be franchise level QB's and 38% were either busts or not much better than that, so again hate to give up all that draft capital for a 1 in 3 shot of success.

 

I do recall one time a quote from Marv Levy "Free agents typically hurt the team they are leaving more than they help the team they are going too"

 

We shouldn't be using statistics from 30yrs ago to base our draft strategy especially since the game has changed drastically since then . Maybe they should do it based on the last 7 yrs . If so i don't have the numbers in front of me but the success rate should go up past 50% . Teams are starting to use these young QBs more and more with elements of the college gm and its making it much easier to transition to the NFL. 

[BuffaloMatt]

Two Words........Thad Lewis.

[US Egg]

1st round QB's are far more miss than hits. Bills were an ugly 9-7 team and have many needs.

 

If the price to move up is giving up 1st 4 picks this year and next years 1st, that is too steep. imo.

[dave mcbride]

The Bills don't have a real qb qnd replaced their average one with a less than average one. That is pretty much all you need to know. They are trying to move up to get a real qb.

[DrDawkinstein]

5 minutes ago, Midwest1981 said:

I disagree with the premise that Nix “fixed our FA draw.” Other than Mark Anderson, who was a sizable bust, you’re just talking about Mario Williams. And our offer was 6 years, $96 million (over half guaranteed)... six years ago. And even Williams took two whole days to decide to accept.

 

My point wasn’t so much as self-defeating as it was the unvarnished truth. It’s not that Buffalo can’t appeal to anyone, though generally we have to demonstrably overpay. It’s that Buffalo doesn’t have the natural appeal of Los Angeles and most other markets.

 

Nope, Shawn Merriman was first. Nix was close with Merriman and brought him into Buffalo. Regardless of how Merriman played out, he then was on the phone recruiting other FAs like Nick Barnett, Andra Davis, Drayton Florence, etc. That kept ramping up until we eventually signed the (2nd) biggest name in FA 2011 with Mario, and establish the Bills as a potential landing spot for big names.

 

There was a definite FA process. Buddy had a lot of misses, but the franchise he inherited was dead on the rocks. He got the ship back in the water, and able to sign FAs again.

[JerseyBills]

9 minutes ago, kdiggz said:

It's not trading the farm. They wanted a new prized calf and the other farmer said it will take 5 chickens if you want to do a trade. They only had 2 chickens so they got a few more and now they have enough to make the deal.

And yet we beat them. Just because you have heard of some of their players doesn't mean they had a better team

Well said on both points. This staff is super aware of the value of building a team and not just a collection of talent and I love it and I think it equals sustainable success.

 

[What a Tuel]

19 minutes ago, Midwest1981 said:

I disagree with the premise that Nix “fixed our FA draw.” Other than Mark Anderson, who was a sizable bust, you’re just talking about Mario Williams. And our offer was 6 years, $96 million (over half guaranteed)... six years ago. And even Williams took two whole days to decide to accept.

 

My point wasn’t so much as self-defeating as it was the unvarnished truth. It’s not that Buffalo can’t appeal to anyone, though generally we have to demonstrably overpay. It’s that Buffalo doesn’t have the natural appeal of Los Angeles and most other markets.

 

You are largely overplaying that factor, and underplaying a player's desire to go somewhere where they will have a chance to prove their abilities to 1) get a big payout and 2) get fame and recognition.

 

Not to mention the vast majority of NFL Cities could be called about as undesirable as Buffalo, and we don't see a consistent trend of players going to Miami, or LA. It evens out pretty well. The "club" factor in free agency is such a poor excuse.

[MrEpsYtown]

I think we are fine. We need a franchise quarterback, a Mike, a receiver, and maybe a tackle(though I do like the potential of Conor McDermott). This is not a terrible roster by any means. In terms of reciever KB is so much better than he showed played hurt and with Tyrod. Jones still has more potential than a lot of the recievers in this draft. I still like him a lot. 

 

Mike is a glaring black hole and that is a problem. But I feel like we are in a great position to trade up and sacrifice picks. Our secondary and d line are really good. We have a left tackle. We have essential pieces. I still think we trade up for Rosen when it is all said and done. 

[What a Tuel]

19 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

1st round QB's are far more miss than hits. Bills were an ugly 9-7 team and have many needs.

 

If the price to move up is giving up 1st 4 picks this year and next years 1st, that is too steep. imo.

 

1st round QBs hit at a much higher rate than any of the other rounds combined, because they are evaluated to be the best prospects.

 

So if we don't want to take that chance, then what's the plan? Wait until we get a top 3 pick naturally? Doesn't that mean losing anyway?  You guys keep thinking we will run or luck into a QB at some point, but its been 18 years. Come to terms with the fact that it isn't going to happen. We need to reach out and take one, and hopefully Beane is the right GM to identify the QB that will be a success.

 

Edited April 7, 2018 by What a Tuel

[BillsMafioso]

1 hour ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Any Bils fan that's been watching the last 20 years should know that no need or hole is as important as QB. And filling every other need except QB will get you nothing more than a 7-9 loser team. This has been proven time and time again by our own team.

 

This is the best chance the Bills have had in landing a franchise QB, and will probably be our best chance for years to come.

 

A little pain, a little investment now, will pay dividends through the future. Gotta take a shot.

I’m all in with this dude except One correction: you don’t need 20 years...I’ve been a fan for 10 years and it still baffles me how some dudes are against a QB. 1 year bandwagon fans, perhaps ?

Edited April 7, 2018 by BillsMafioso

[Midwest1981]

14 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Nope, Shawn Merriman was first. Nix was close with Merriman and brought him into Buffalo. Regardless of how Merriman played out, he then was on the phone recruiting other FAs like Nick Barnett, Andra Davis, Drayton Florence, etc. That kept ramping up until we eventually signed the (2nd) biggest name in FA 2011 with Mario, and establish the Bills as a potential landing spot for big names.

 

There was a definite FA process. Buddy had a lot of misses, but the franchise he inherited was dead on the rocks. He got the ship back in the water, and able to sign FAs again.

I guess I just don’t find those guys you mentioned to be a different caliber of guys than the type we were bringing in before Nix became GM in 2010: Dockery and Langston Walker in 2007, Kawika Mitchell in 2008, Owens in 2009, etc.

[DrDawkinstein]

3 minutes ago, Midwest1981 said:

I guess I just don’t find those guys you mentioned to be a different caliber of guys than the type we were bringing in before Nix became GM in 2010: Dockery and Langston Walker in 2007, Kawika Mitchell in 2008, Owens in 2009, etc.

 

Regardless of when it started, the point still stands, the Bills can sign FAs. I'll never argue that Buffalo is more attractive than LA, and we certainly do have to deal with that, but we can sign FAs as needed. There isnt that big of a difference.

[Chris66]

I dont know if Spending quality picks to move up is the right move or not, but I know that there are only about 8 top end qbs in the league right now and to expect 5 to come out in this draft is statistically not reasonable.