Would this regime survive a trade up miss at QB?

[bigK14094]

12 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

This regime won’t survive not taking a shot.  Period.

disagree

[Hapless Bills Fan]

12 hours ago, Commonsense said:

When you accumulate the draft capital that Beane has the only thing that makes a trade not happen is his unwillingness to part with picks. 

 

Do you honestly think that's true? 

 

It seems to me that the other team being unwilling to part with this year's draft capital, either because they want to use it on a high-ranked player or because they don't want to move down as far as you're offering, would be actually the deciding factor.

1 hour ago, the skycap said:

I think you guys are wrong. If they build a top 10 defense and flop at QB, then they survive. If they flop at QB and waste their assets, then they're toast. The Bills have 6 picks in the top 100 choices in the draft. This is the opportunity to build a team. Yes Brady, Brees, Roesthlisburger, and even Foles won SB but look at see where their defenses were ranked. Defenses win championships!!

 

As evidence, I give you Minnesota.  Now, in 2 years, you can't exactly say Bridgewater was a bust nor did they trade up to the top of the first for him.  But they did trade up for him and he wasn't setting the league on fire with his passing game, either.  By becoming seriously injured, he's effectively a bust for them, just as RGIII became for the Redskins despite a rookie-of-the-year 1st season and a good 2nd year.

 

And Spielman and Zimmer are still there.  But when Bridgewater went to the ER, they didn't stand there wringing their hands.  They made a move for Bradford.  They signed Keenum.  And they went to the NFC championship.  Then they signed Cousins.

 

Now if Cousins busts, they may be gone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BuffAlone]

1 hour ago, Derby Dan said:

We have agreed to a trade with the giants in principle but McDermott is holding out for right now

Says WHO? This is just your fantasy. As you stated in other threads, keep this a football topic. Not some bold faced, unsubstantiated lie that you continue to spew

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

I disagree if the Bills trade up into the top five and only get a Dalton/Flacco type QB.  If they stay where they are and get a Dalton/Flacco type QB at #12 or #22, then that's okay.

A QB taken in the top 5 who can do no better, over his career, than an Andy Dalton or Joe Flacco would be a big disappointment.

 

I see you would have been up in arms when the Chargers franchised Brees, and all about letting him walk to the Saints.

 

In Flacco's rookie season, the Ravens played for the conf. championship.  In his first 5 years, they were playoffs every year including 2 conf. championship games and a SB win.  While Flacco was certainly not carrying the team those years or lighting the league on fire, his QB play was extremely respectable.  You could count on him for 60% completions, twice as many TDs as INTs after his 1st season, and generally 7 YPA.  Good team guy, doesn't pout.

 

If you'd feel "big disappointment" with that, you're nuts.

 

Similar things to be said about Dalton - his team saw playoffs his first 5 years in the league, and his respectable QB play has been a big part of that.  In his 3rd and 6th year he was been better than respectable, he's been good, Smith or Cousins like.

 

If you'd feel "big disappointment" with that, you're also nuts.

 

JMO.

Edited April 15, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan

[CommonCents]

Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Do you honestly think that's true? 

 

It seems to me that the other team being unwilling to part with this year's draft capital, either because they want to use it on a high-ranked player or because they don't want to move down as far as you're offering, would be actually the deciding factor.

It is true. There will be trades into the top 7 or so. If he doesn't move up he didn't want to pay the price or he likes what's coming at 12.

 

Sure the Giants could stay at two. The Browns could stay at 4. The Colts at 6. The Bucs at 7. The 9ers at 9. 

 

I will go on the record, atleast one of those teams will trade down. If a Mayfield or Rosen are there at 4,6,7 Beane can move up.

 

I still think he gives away a ton and does a deal with Gettleman. The wait and see approach at QB during FA tells me they have a real solution to the QB problem. 

[1st Ammendment NoMas]

This year is almost a giveaway. No team can take the dead cap hit we have and not feel pain in some areas. If we win at least 6-7 games, and continue to build talent for the long term, the FO will get 5 years to ride that talent out.

 

We were very active with FA on a limited budget.  If 75% of Star, Bodine, Newhouse, P. Gaines, AJ, Ivory, Murphy become major contributors, and we pull 3-4 starters/contributors from the draft this year, then the McBean combo will be revered at OBD and this team will win at least 8, with AJ literally being being the wildcard. If he plays better than TT, we may even win 9-10 and be in the hunt. 

 

I do not agree that we will see a recession on defense. With the system kicking into year 2 and some quality D-line additions, I expect improvement.  I think Milano takes a big step up and we take an MLB in rd 1-2 (depending on QB trade) who makes immediate impact.   

 

The ? will be the offense, most particularly the line. But I hope and believe that they will also address this and perhaps Bodine, Newhouse will step up along with McDermott and Miller. I think that the FO saw the departure of Wood and Richie, but it came a year early.  They knew last year Cordy was not in the long term plan. I believe another low price vet may come in to challenge OT and they will draft C/G early,

 

My gut says QB/MLB/C-G/WR/RB in their first 5 picks with any combination in play due to BPA. They will draft smart and see how it all plays out.

 

GO BILLS!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[stuvian]

8 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

Its not excuse making....it is reality

 

- We currently are not in the position we need to be in to get one of the top 3 qbs

- We dont know what other teams are doing or plan to do.....the jets move for instance was completely out of nowhere

- The teams that sit at those picks might have someone they like and not be willing to move

 

I TOTALLY am for using draft capital that has been aquired to move up......Rosen is the guy I want.  BUT....what if it takes more then that....what if the asking price is crippling to this organization not just now but in the future?  What if they ask for 3 number 1's?  That is if they are even willing to move.

 

It makes NO SENSE to give away picks to that magnitude when you can sit right at 12 and take Lamar Jackson who at the end of it all could end up being the best of all of them.

 

The hype from building up draft capital is reaching fever pitch and like any good fan I am caught up in it. I think at the end of the day Beane and McDermott will get the greenlight to  follow their draft board. However, politically, I don't see how we can go into the season with just McCarron and Peterman. 

 

If we can get Jackson without giving away the future I will be ecstatic. My concern is that there will be a rush for QBs with the likes of Arizona and Miami looking to pick ahead of us to get ANY QB thereby driving up demand to nosebleed levels. I'm sure Beane has a plan for such a scenario but IMO either way we will have to overpay for a QB beyond what our draft board would indicate. 

[OldTimer1960]

10 minutes ago, stuvian said:

The hype from building up draft capital is reaching fever pitch and like any good fan I am caught up in it. I think at the end of the day Beane and McDermott will get the greenlight to  follow their draft board. However, politically, I don't see how we can go into the season with just McCarron and Peterman. 

 

If we can get Jackson without giving away the future I will be ecstatic. My concern is that there will be a rush for QBs with the likes of Arizona and Miami looking to pick ahead of us to get ANY QB thereby driving up demand to nosebleed levels. I'm sure Beane has a plan for such a scenario but IMO either way we will have to overpay for a QB beyond what our draft board would indicate. 

I am not anti-Lamar Jackson, but I would prefer Rudolph over him.  I see Jackson as very hit or miss while I think Rudolph is a pretty safe choice.  I agree that Rudolph’s arm isn’t at the top of this group, but I think his arm is more than good enough and he appears to have the leadership, smarts, work ethic and size that can make him a long-term answer.

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Derby Dan said:

Jackson will be a bust.  Rudolph would be a great fit into our scheme

Everyone's an expert

[17 Josh Allen]

Not if they draft SJW Rosen it won’t survive. 

Edited April 15, 2018 by Thurmanator 12074

[oldmanfan]

18 minutes ago, Derby Dan said:

Not true.  Some of us are football junkies that truly study the data points to connect the dots to make intelligent statements.  I watch hours of film and listen to a variety of people in the know before I post.  

You're just another guy with an opinion.

[Mikie2times]

My response to my own question. It depends on the performance of the team (duh). That said it's unlikely the performance of the team ascends if we miss. It's likely we give up a good degree of assets in order to trade up. We gave up a good number of assets in order to get in position to trade up. We can talk about that in more granular fashion now. How Sammy was out the door, we had a replacement for Glenn, what great moves we made now to get something instead of nothing. Three years from now people won't be talking in those terms. They will just be saying we lost x/y/z players and draft picks for a bust QB. If the QB position is neutral or worse I would think it's game over. Throw in potential good play from Watson or Mahomes, players we could of had last year. Again people won't be saying well Tre White was a great pick. It will just be more gas on the can't find a QB fire.

 

As for people that have changed the question toward us passing on QB being just as significant? That's really hard to say. At that point I still think it would depend on resolution to the QB issues, but in such a scenario you would think we would have one hell of a roster with how many picks we would spend on positional players and cap space in future years. So resolution to the QB issue might now be as a clear, but perhaps we have a very competitive team.   

 

I don't think our regime is ruled by the question posed in this thread, but how can't that question have some influence? These are still human beings that want to do human being things like maintain employment. We won't get fleeced for a trade up. As we keep hearing, if a deal is to be made we will be open to such a deal, but we won't get fleeced just because we need a franchise QB and have a lot of collateral.        

Edited April 15, 2018 by KzooMike

[RochesterRob]

3 hours ago, Derby Dan said:

We are taking a qb. Silly question don’t you think

  We may very well take a QB but that does not mean a move up or taking one at pick 12.  Anything is possible despite the wishes of anybody here.

[billspro]

2 hours ago, BillsRdue said:

This year is almost a giveaway. No team can take the dead cap hit we have and not feel pain in some areas. If we win at least 6-7 games, and continue to build talent for the long term, the FO will get 5 years to ride that talent out.

 

We were very active with FA on a limited budget.  If 75% of Star, Bodine, Newhouse, P. Gaines, AJ, Ivory, Murphy become major contributors, and we pull 3-4 starters/contributors from the draft this year, then the McBean combo will be revered at OBD and this team will win at least 8, with AJ literally being being the wildcard. If he plays better than TT, we may even win 9-10 and be in the hunt. 

 

I do not agree that we will see a recession on defense. With the system kicking into year 2 and some quality D-line additions, I expect improvement.  I think Milano takes a big step up and we take an MLB in rd 1-2 (depending on QB trade) who makes immediate impact.   

 

The ? will be the offense, most particularly the line. But I hope and believe that they will also address this and perhaps Bodine, Newhouse will step up along with McDermott and Miller. I think that the FO saw the departure of Wood and Richie, but it came a year early.  They knew last year Cordy was not in the long term plan. I believe another low price vet may come in to challenge OT and they will draft C/G early,

 

My gut says QB/MLB/C-G/WR/RB in their first 5 picks with any combination in play due to BPA. They will draft smart and see how it all plays out.

 

GO BILLS!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think there is a better chance they go QB and CB early.

25 minutes ago, Thurmanator 12074 said:

Not if they draft SJW Rosen it won’t survive. 

 

When they draft Rosen are you going to leave the board? Will you switch teams?

Edited April 15, 2018 by billspro

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Probably not unless we win with McCarron, then it won't matter.

 

 

[Dr. K]

They should probably take the shot, but they will indeed pay the price if whoever they pick is a bust. Look at the grief Whaley got on Manuel (who did not cost them much of anything--they traded DOWN and got him, and Robert Woods in the bargain) and on moving up to draft Watkins. No matter how justified--and after the years of bad QB play the Bills have suffered, it is definitely justified--drafting the wrong QB will define Beane and McDermott.

 

Especially since they dumped a lot of talent to obtain these draft picks in the first place. This is not a strong roster right now.  

[Pete]

Yes.  If we trade all those picks and don't hit on QB- we are set back at least 3 seasons IMO.  We will be a top 5 pick if we trade for QB IMO.  Whichever QB we draft- they won't help us much in 2018.  And we still have glaring holes at LG C RG RT SAM MLB WR CB.  But I read all that matters is the QB.  Forget about depth and quality offense, defense, and special teams

[SoTier]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I see you would have been up in arms when the Chargers franchised Brees, and all about letting him walk to the Saints.

 

In Flacco's rookie season, the Ravens played for the conf. championship.  In his first 5 years, they were playoffs every year including 2 conf. championship games and a SB win.  While Flacco was certainly not carrying the team those years or lighting the league on fire, his QB play was extremely respectable.  You could count on him for 60% completions, twice as many TDs as INTs after his 1st season, and generally 7 YPA.  Good team guy, doesn't pout.

 

If you'd feel "big disappointment" with that, you're nuts.

 

Similar things to be said about Dalton - his team saw playoffs his first 5 years in the league, and his respectable QB play has been a big part of that.  In his 3rd and 6th year he was been better than respectable, he's been good, Smith or Cousins like.

 

If you'd feel "big disappointment" with that, you're also nuts.

 

JMO.

 

Both Flacco and Dalton have benefited immensely with their teams having been loaded with talent on both sides of the ball when they were drafted.  They are both successful starters -- and Flacco especially so  -- but they need to have strong support around them.  When their teams were loaded with talent, they looked much better than more recently when their teams have lost a considerable amount of that original talent. They aren't busts, but neither are they likely to be future HOFers based on their careers so far -- and neither was a top five pick nor did their teams trade away a cartload of draft picks/players to get them  (although the Ravens did do some horse trading of picks to wind up picking at #18 in 2008). 

 

When a player gets drafted at the top of the draft, especially the top five, fans expect him to be a star, a "difference maker".  Look at how Bills fans viewed Sammy Watkins.  Solid player, top ten at his position, occasional Pro Bowl appearances = disappointment, especially for a QB.  I think if you claim you wouldn't be disappointed with a Flacco/Dalton level QB at #2, #4 or #5, then you're lying to others as well as to yourself.

[Reed83HOF]

2 minutes ago, Pete said:

Yes.  If we trade all those picks and don't hit on QB- we are set back at least 3 seasons IMO.  We will be a top 5 pick if we trade for QB IMO.  Whichever QB we draft- they won't help us much in 2018.  And we still have glaring holes at LG C RG RT SAM MLB WR CB.  But I read all that matters is the QB.  Forget about depth and quality offense, defense, and special teams

And look back at the last 20 years Pete....

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...so McBeane misses on his FIRST draft in hitting on a (hopefully) successful QB and his survival is in question?.............a GM turnstile should work wonders.......name on the door with velcro and a FIFTEEN MINUTE PARKING sign in your lot spot sound like a winner.....anybody have Marv & Buddy on speed dial?....SMH...........

[Chicharito]

I guess it all depends on "if" AJ McCarron is a homerun. Nobody knows how he will perform. All I can say if you take the words from the people in Alabama this kid is Tom Brady 2.0!

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, Derby Dan said:

Not true

Ok Mel.  You're a genius and we should all be honored you're here.

[MrEpsYtown]

I think it's funny that people think that Rosen will get killed behind our o-line, but a less athletic, slow footed guy who has never played under center will not. 

[DrDawkinstein]

17 hours ago, KzooMike said:

A miss would mostly likely leave us out of the playoffs for a few years as the QB is given every opportunity. It seems crazy to think a GM/HC who have shown very positive things early could just as easily be on the hot seat two or three years from now with a miss. Overblowing it or do you agree?

 

17 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

This regime won’t survive not taking a shot.  Period.

 

17 hours ago, Dadonkadonk said:

No regime survives missing on a first round QB especially if they trade up. Whaley didn't survive a trade up for a WR.

They must draft a QB or turn AJ into a ProBowl QB.

 

 

If the Pegulas are serious about changing the culture at OBD, the current regime should survive a swing and a miss at QB. The important part is the swinging though.

 

As long as they are aggressively persuing an answer at the QB position, they should be allowed to work.

 

Ozzie Newsome took a 1st round swing on his first drafted QB, and missed big time on Kyle Boller. But he identified that miss within a couple years, and had McNair in to shore it up within 2 seasons. And then he did better his 2nd swing, getting Flacco in the middle of the 1st years later.

 

The Ravens were smart not to clean house in 2005 when it was determined Boller was a miss. They did the smart thing and owned up to the issue and moved to correct it.

 

If the Pegulas only give these guys one shot and then clean house, it will be more of the Same Ol Ralph's Bills. Revolving doors in the Front Office, and no respect from personnel around the league, no respect from players and agents, and more losing.

 

side note: Whaley stupidly selling the farm to move up 5 spots for a WR in a WR-rich draft is nothing like making moves for a QB. Not a good comparison.

[John from Riverside]

3 hours ago, Derby Dan said:

Not true.  Some of us are football junkies that truly study the data points to connect the dots to make intelligent statements.  I watch hours of film and listen to a variety of people in the know before I post.  

Is this before or after your 3rd person posts

[Pete]

2 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:

And look back at the last 20 years Pete....

I shall-

1st round pick for Rob Johnson

1st round pick for JP Losman

1st round pick Drew Bledsoe

 

0-3 - we were better off using picks at other positions

 

the best QB the Bills have had this millennium has been a 5" 10 NFL castoff via CFL 

 

 

[LeGOATski]

I can't imagine this regime missing on the QB. I guess I can imagine it, but I don't expect it.

 

They've shown to be so much more competent than past regimes. They have a process and just need a guy that fits it.

 

On a related note: McDermott is like Marrone, but without the huge ego. And he has a good partnership with his GM.

 

I'm just waiting to hear some story about how McDermott is a huge !@#$....

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

17 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

Thank you. You'd think the last 20+ years would get people over their fear of taking a shot at a QB.

 

I know, look at all the teams that have moved up in the draft for a QB in the past twenty years and all the super bowls those QBs have won! 

 

There is the Giants with Eli , and then the...um... er and the... I guess the colts with his brother? Sort of...

 

 

 

[KD in CA]

33 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

I know, look at all the teams that have moved up in the draft for a QB in the past twenty years and all the super bowls those QBs have won! 

 

There is the Giants with Eli , and then the...um... er and the... I guess the colts with his brother? Sort of...

 

 

 

 

Yeah, because 'moving up' vs getting the guy in your existing slot is a determining factor in how a QB pans out.   Good grief, the stupidity around here really reaches a fever pitch this time of year.

[DrDawkinstein]

41 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

I know, look at all the teams that have moved up in the draft for a QB in the past twenty years and all the super bowls those QBs have won! 

 

There is the Giants with Eli , and then the...um... er and the... I guess the colts with his brother? Sort of...

 

 

 

 

Literally the team that just won the last Super Bowl.

[John from Riverside]

2 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Literally the team that just won the last Super Bowl.

All that showed me is that there are different ways to biuld a team

 

If you look at them they biult their team first....THEN moved up for their QB.

 

The problem being that you have to be careful just how much you give up to get the QB before you biuld the team....or you end up with the Andrew Luck situation.

[DrDawkinstein]

Just now, John from Riverside said:

All that showed me is that there are different ways to biuld a team

 

If you look at them they biult their team first....THEN moved up for their QB.

 

The problem being that you have to be careful just how much you give up to get the QB before you biuld the team....or you end up with the Andrew Luck situation.

 

Bolded doesnt make sense. The Colts gave up nothing to get Luck. The failure to build the team around him was strictly due to Grigson being an incompetent GM (possibly one of the worst in league history). I trust that Beane will be a better GM than Grigson.

 

WRT building a team, regardless of which way you prefer, reality is that the Bills are currently in the best position to nab a potentially franchise QB than they've been in for 20 years. The time is now. Go get your guy, trust the GM to build the team.

[John from Riverside]

Just now, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Bolded doesnt make sense. The Colts gave up nothing to get Luck. The failure to build the team around him was strictly due to Grigson being an incompetent GM (possibly one of the worst in league history). I trust that Beane will be a better GM than Grigson.

 

WRT building a team, regardless of which way you prefer, reality is that the Bills are currently in the best position to nab a potentially franchise QB than they've been in for 20 years. The time is now. Go get your guy, trust the GM to build the team.

Dr. what I mean is the complete inability to biuld anything around the QB and what seemed to be the total want of the franchise QB itself.

 

I have no problem with a trade up.....but teams are not biult in free agency they are biult through the draft...I am very worried about how much this trade up is going to cost us....I am willing to give up a ton....but what if its more then a ton.

[Doc]

17 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Literally the team that just won the last Super Bowl.

 

And they won it with a QB they drafted in the 3rd round 5 years ago, who left and came back. 

[DrDawkinstein]

20 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Dr. what I mean is the complete inability to biuld anything around the QB and what seemed to be the total want of the franchise QB itself.

 

I have no problem with a trade up.....but teams are not biult in free agency they are biult through the draft...I am very worried about how much this trade up is going to cost us....I am willing to give up a ton....but what if its more then a ton.

 

That's why it was great foresight by the FO to be proactive and acquire picks this year to use, instead of having to trade away all of our future. We have 6 picks in the first 3 rounds this year, all in the top 100. Half of those are house money to be used to move up, so we're already ahead of the game. We may have to give up a pick in 2019, but we'll be in a better position going forward than any other team who has moved up this far recently.

[Pete]

48 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Bolded doesnt make sense. The Colts gave up nothing to get Luck. The failure to build the team around him was strictly due to Grigson being an incompetent GM (possibly one of the worst in league history). I trust that Beane will be a better GM than Grigson.

 

WRT building a team, regardless of which way you prefer, reality is that the Bills are currently in the best position to nab a potentially franchise QB than they've been in for 20 years. The time is now. Go get your guy, trust the GM to build the team.

sure it does.  No doubt Grigson sucked at GM.  But we would give up all those draft picks for a lottery ticket and not have any high draft picks for two season.  Grigson also drafted TY Hilton, so without 1,1,1,2,2  we are 0-5 with opportunity cost.  Grigson +1 for TY

Edited April 15, 2018 by Pete

[DrDawkinstein]

9 minutes ago, Pete said:

sure it does.  No doubt Grigson sucked at GM.  But we would give up all those draft picks for a lottery ticket and not have any high draft picks for two season.  Grigson also drafted TY Hilton, so without 1,1,1,2,2  we are 0-5 with opportunity cost.  Grigson +1 for TY

 

It's Sunday so Im not going to spend the time to pick apart everything wrong with your opportunity cost analysis. But, it's a completely inaccurate and incomplete representation of the facts and situation. So, nah.

 

 

 

[Adam727]

20 hours ago, KzooMike said:

A miss would mostly likely leave us out of the playoffs for a few years as the QB is given every opportunity. It seems crazy to think a GM/HC who have shown very positive things early could just as easily be on the hot seat two or three years from now with a miss. Overblowing it or do you agree?

If the Bills take a QB at 12 and miss, I don't think that's necessarily it for Beane/McD, but it definitely could be.  If they trade up to 2 and miss on a QB (essentially trading Glenn, Watkins, Darby, plus multiple 1sts/2nds for a QB and whiffing) I can't see this front office lasting beyond next year.  

 

 

[Dadonkadonk]

7 minutes ago, Adam727 said:

If the Bills take a QB at 12 and miss, I don't think that's necessarily it for Beane/McD, but it definitely could be.  If they trade up to 2 and miss on a QB (essentially trading Glenn, Watkins, Darby, plus multiple 1sts/2nds for a QB and whiffing) I can't see this front office lasting beyond next year.  

 

 

Agree but they will get two years for that QB to succeed or fail not one.

[stinky finger]

22 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

That's an oversimplification. If you mean unwillingness to part with all of their picks then yes. Even an unwilling trade down partner could probably be convinced to accept 4 first rounders and all of this years 2s and 3s. And Beane wouldn't be willing to offer that. 

Yep.

 

Nor should he lose his job for not doing so.