The Book is Closed on the Mahomes Trade

[BADOLBILZ]

 

The most interesting part to me is that the Chiefs got their QB from the pick they acquired from the Bills..............then turned around and signed the guy who had been the Bills #1WR in Sammy Watkins.

 

I felt that Tre White was going to be a stud when they drafted him............but it should be Mahomes or Watson throwing to Sammy Watkins in Buffalo this year.

 

I like the Josh Allen gamble but they kinda' kicked the QB decision down the road one season too many IMO.........lead to them dumping A LOT of talent......studs Watkins and Cordy Glenn at two of the leagues' "money" positions...........as they desperately tried to assure they had the draft assets to move up for a QB in 2018.

 

Now they have on paper a utterly suspect OL and a terrible WR corps.    All other things being equal KC's young QB has a MUCH better supporting cast than Buffalo's will and that matters a lot.    

 

The common thread between Goff and Wentz last year was their teams loading up on supporting talent.

 

People who assume the Bills will just spend a bundle in FA next offseason to replace lost or missing assets on offense are making a very big assumption.    

Edited May 27, 2018 by BADOLBILZ

[Buffalo716]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

The most interesting part to me is that the Chiefs got their QB from the pick they acquired from the Bills..............then turned around and signed the guy who had been the Bills #1WR in Sammy Watkins.

 

I felt that Tre White was going to be a stud when they drafted him............but it should be Mahomes or Watson throwing to Sammy Watkins in Buffalo this year.

 

I like the Josh Allen gamble but they kinda' kicked the QB decision down the road one season too many IMO.........lead to them dumping A LOT of talent......studs Watkins and Cordy Glenn at two of the leagues' "money" positions...........as they desperately tried to assure they had the draft assets to move up for a QB in 2018.

 

Now they have on paper a utterly suspect OL and a terrible WR corps.    All other things being equal KC's young QB has a MUCH better supporting cast than Buffalo's will and that matters a lot.    

 

The common thread between Goff and Wentz last year was their teams loading up on supporting talent.

 

People who assume the Bills will just spend a bundle in FA next offseason to replace lost or missing assets on offense are making a very big assumption.    

You assume that is if McDermott wanted Watson or Mahomes.

 

maybe he did not and he obviously didn’t want Sammy either.

 

its not an ideal situation for a young QB but Mahomes and Allen are both very similar prospects,I even had a higher grade on Allen. So at the end of the day I can live with Tre+ Allen

 

i didn’t like the Sammy trade but I’m over it. He’s cuckoo for coco puffs

[BADOLBILZ]

11 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

You assume that is if McDermott wanted Watson or Mahomes.

 

maybe he did not and he obviously didn’t want Sammy either.

 

its not an ideal situation for a young QB but Mahomes and Allen are both very similar prospects,I even had a higher grade on Allen. So at the end of the day I can live with Tre+ Allen

 

i didn’t like the Sammy trade but I’m over it. He’s cuckoo for coco puffs

 

I am not sure why people don't understand that a decision is not made right or excused merely by the degree of conviction of the decision maker.

 

Mahomes rode the pine all year but Watson had an absolutely historic start to his career...........how does saying McDermott didn't want Watson make McDermott look wise?

 

Beane and McD will most likely succeed or fail due to the QB decisions in the 2017/2018 drafts...............their conviction means nothing at all..........only the results matter.

 

Although I do sympathize with Beane if Allen doesn't work out because he is tied to McDermott so he will have to own McDermott's 2017 draft even though he was not with the organization.    Not hiring Beane in January made no sense but sure did confuse a lot of media who then wondered aloud........"hey it's so out of the box to bring in the matching GM AFTER the HC and lame duck GM have made a full offseason worth of key personnel decisions........maybe other teams will do the same!"?

 

 

[oldmanfan]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

The most interesting part to me is that the Chiefs got their QB from the pick they acquired from the Bills..............then turned around and signed the guy who had been the Bills #1WR in Sammy Watkins.

 

I felt that Tre White was going to be a stud when they drafted him............but it should be Mahomes or Watson throwing to Sammy Watkins in Buffalo this year.

 

I like the Josh Allen gamble but they kinda' kicked the QB decision down the road one season too many IMO.........lead to them dumping A LOT of talent......studs Watkins and Cordy Glenn at two of the leagues' "money" positions...........as they desperately tried to assure they had the draft assets to move up for a QB in 2018.

 

Now they have on paper a utterly suspect OL and a terrible WR corps.    All other things being equal KC's young QB has a MUCH better supporting cast than Buffalo's will and that matters a lot.    

 

The common thread between Goff and Wentz last year was their teams loading up on supporting talent.

 

People who assume the Bills will just spend a bundle in FA next offseason to replace lost or missing assets on offense are making a very big assumption.    

I liked Watkins a lot, thought it was a smart move to trade up and draft him, but time has shown he can't be considered a stud WR.

[thebandit27]

3 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

I am not sure why people don't understand that a decision is not made right or excused merely by the degree of conviction of the decision maker.

 

Mahomes rode the pine all year but Watson had an absolutely historic start to his career...........how does saying McDermott didn't want Watson make McDermott look wise?

 

Beane and McD will most likely succeed or fail due to the QB decisions in the 2017/2018 drafts...............their conviction means nothing at all..........only the results matter.

 

Although I do sympathize with Beane if Allen doesn't work out because he is tied to McDermott so he will have to own McDermott's 2017 draft even though he was not with the organization.    Not hiring Beane in January made no sense but sure did confuse a lot of media who then wondered aloud........"hey it's so out of the box to bring in the matching GM AFTER the HC and lame duck GM have made a full offseason worth of key personnel decisions........maybe other teams will do the same!"?

 

 

 

It seems that the deciding factor in kicking the decision down the road a year was that McDermott didn't have his GM and personnel department in place yet.

 

As a details guy who takes the long approach, I can understand why he felt that way. Doesn't mean I agree with the results.

[Buffalo716]

1 minute ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

I am not sure why people don't understand that a decision is not made right or excused merely by the degree of conviction of the decision maker.

 

Mahomes rode the pine all year but Watson had an absolutely historic start to his career...........how does saying McDermott didn't want Watson make McDermott look wise?

 

Beane and McD will most likely succeed or fail due to the QB decisions in the 2017/2018 drafts...............their conviction means nothing at all..........only the results matter.

 

Although I do sympathize with Beane if Allen doesn't work out because he is tied to McDermott so he will have to own McDermott's 2017 draft even though he was not with the organization.    Not hiring Beane in January made no sense but sure did confuse a lot of media who then wondered aloud........"hey it's so out of the box to bring in the matching GM AFTER the HC and lame duck GM have made a full offseason worth of key personnel decisions........maybe other teams will do the same!"?

 

 

 

I never made an excuse or said it was right. Watson can be a superstar and yea it would have been nice to draft him 

 

but if he wasn’t going to be a bill it’s a moot point. Of course McDermott and Beanes tenure are tied with Allen’s success or failure 

 

I don’t make excuses in football. Not injuries, not lack of talent, not lack of WRs, nothing. For 100 years it’s been next man up and everybody prepares as a starter, atleast on good teams

 

You are as good as your weakest link

[BuffaloTX]

On 5/25/2018 at 6:34 PM, Augie said:

 

To be fair, a book IS closed before you open it to read the first page, right? ?

Not if it's still being written

 

[JohnC]

On ‎5‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 8:05 PM, GunnerBill said:

 

My grade isn't about where I think they wil be picked. I know how the league works. My grades are entirely my take on what I see on their tape. 

I say this respectfully yet critically that your grades with respect to the qb position are skewed to the point that they lose relevancy and applicability when it comes to the draft. The point of evaluating and scoring players relates to the draft. If the draft positioning is left out of your laborious endeavor for the most important position in the game then what is the point of doing it?

 

You need to modify your scoring and incorporate it to the reality of the bigger picture. My point is simple: Being pure is not necessarily being real. Being hard headed may be useful in head butting an adversary in a fight but when it comes to the draft and evaluating qbs it loses its usefulness. I'm offering some friendly advice on this matter that you stubbornly adhere to.  ? 

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

I say this respectfully yet critically that your grades with respect to the qb position are skewed to the point that they lose relevancy and applicability when it comes to the draft. The point of evaluating and scoring players relates to the draft. If the draft positioning is left out of your laborious endeavor for the most important position in the game then what is the point of doing it?

 

You need to modify your scoring and incorporate it to the reality of the bigger picture. My point is simple: Being pure is not necessarily being real. Being hard headed may be useful in head butting an adversary in a fight but when it comes to the draft and evaluating qbs it loses its usefulness. I'm offering some friendly advice on this matter that you stubbornly adhere to.  ? 

 

Totally disagree. I have no desire for group think. 

[oldmanfan]

I wish they would have drafted Watson.  I'm glad they didn't draft Mahomes.  Has any guy coining out with his pedigree: Southwest Conference, single read offense, never playing from under center, ever done anything in the league?

[JohnC]

38 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Totally disagree. I have no desire for group think. 

The group think you claim not to want to be a part of are made up of the professionals who make the selections on draft day. As an example while you give Mahomes a third round grade Andy Reid who is considered knowledgeable about the qb position was willing to trade a future #1 pick to Buffalo last year in order to move up to select him. He saw enough of him in practice to be willing to trade his established franchise qb in order to risk him being the franchise qb with no safety net behind him. Yet you rated him as a third round prospect. There is a disconnect here. 

 

Again, the group think that you want no association with had all the four qb needy teams having Allen under serious consideration with their very high first round picks. Cleveland had the first pick in the draft and undoubtedly they were considering him as their first pick. The Bills were willing to deal with the Giants, Denver,Cincinnati and Indianapolis to move up near the top of the draft to select Allen while giving up significant assets to make a deal. Arizona tried to move up ahead of us to get Allen but couldn't do so then settled for moving up to get Rosen. 

 

Gunner, come back a little more to the working pack. Being outside the wide boundaries of the pros for the sake of being an outlier is not going to get your voice heard. If not, your voice will not be heard because it will be too far out in the distant. 

[BADOLBILZ]

5 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

It seems that the deciding factor in kicking the decision down the road a year was that McDermott didn't have his GM and personnel department in place yet.

 

As a details guy who takes the long approach, I can understand why he felt that way. Doesn't mean I agree with the results.

 

 

Shots not taken at the QB position that result in success for another team while you struggle at the position..........are absolutely no less damning than misses on your resume though.  

 

Buddy Nix and Russell Wilson are tied to each other in Bills lore.........he too would choose no QB until it's time.......so imagine actually trading a first round pick that turns into someone else's franchise QB........that is actually worse than whiffing on your own.

 

You really can't hide in the NFL..........you will be held accountable either way so it's a mistake to think that "I wasn't ready" is an excuse.   A reason?  Sure.  But not an excuse.

[GunnerBill]

29 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The group think you claim not to want to be a part of are made up of the professionals who make the selections on draft day. As an example while you give Mahomes a third round grade Andy Reid who is considered knowledgeable about the qb position was willing to trade a future #1 pick to Buffalo last year in order to move up to select him. He saw enough of him in practice to be willing to trade his established franchise qb in order to risk him being the franchise qb with no safety net behind him. Yet you rated him as a third round prospect. There is a disconnect here. 

 

Again, the group think that you want no association with had all the four qb needy teams having Allen under serious consideration with their very high first round picks. Cleveland had the first pick in the draft and undoubtedly they were considering him as their first pick. The Bills were willing to deal with the Giants, Denver,Cincinnati and Indianapolis to move up near the top of the draft to select Allen while giving up significant assets to make a deal. Arizona tried to move up ahead of us to get Allen but couldn't do so then settled for moving up to get Rosen. 

 

Gunner, come back a little more to the working pack. Being outside the wide boundaries of the pros for the sake of being an outlier is not going to get your voice heard. If not, your voice will not be heard because it will be too far out in the distant. 

 

I am not being outside for the sake of being an outlier. I am giving an absolute fair and unbiased evaluation of what I see. If Andy Reid sees something different good luck to him. Is he more likely to be right than me? Sure. But it is the people who start second guessing their own evaluations because of what the league might think that get themselves into trouble. 

 

I was higher on Dak Prescott than most of the league was if we apply your same criteria. I had Dak as a 2nd rounder and went in the 4th. Am I suddenly to be more trusted than the 32 GMs who passed on him twice more before he was picked in the 4th round comp pick zone? 

 

Some people you will be higher on, some people you will be lower on. Sometimes you will be right and sometimes you will be wrong. Have a process, be objective and stick with what you see and don't get drawn into seeing what other people tell you that you should. That is the only way to do it. 

[BADOLBILZ]

5 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

I never made an excuse or said it was right. Watson can be a superstar and yea it would have been nice to draft him 

 

but if he wasn’t going to be a bill it’s a moot point. Of course McDermott and Beanes tenure are tied with Allen’s success or failure 

 

I don’t make excuses in football. Not injuries, not lack of talent, not lack of WRs, nothing. For 100 years it’s been next man up and everybody prepares as a starter, atleast on good teams

 

You are as good as your weakest link

 

 

1) I don't think we are talking about the same league.   The NFL is not truly a next man up league.    It's not.    It's a who has the QB, who has the coach and who has health kinda' league.

 

2) Just because a QB wasn't the next man on your board doesn't mean it's a moot point when you don't take one and he pans out while you struggle to fill the position.    Fireable offenses aren't moot points.   Critical mistakes?  Yes. Moot points?   No.

 

Your pop warner rah-rah attitude is commendable but totally unrealistic wrt professional football.

 

[3rdand12]

6 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

It seems that the deciding factor in kicking the decision down the road a year was that McDermott didn't have his GM and personnel department in place yet.

 

As a details guy who takes the long approach, I can understand why he felt that way. Doesn't mean I agree with the results.

yep. agreed

 Perhaps no one trusted Whaley's scouts?  and McD knew he was over his head with Offense, aaaannnd Rico was not the long term answer.

Patience that few have left, I do.

They of course were setting up for this past draft in bringing in the QB.
I won't fault them for not taking a top ranked QB last year

Edited May 28, 2018 by 3rdand12

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I am not being outside for the sake of being an outlier. I am giving an absolute fair and unbiased evaluation of what I see. If Andy Reid sees something different good luck to him. Is he more likely to be right than me? Sure. But it is the people who start second guessing their own evaluations because of what the league might think that get themselves into trouble. 

 

I was higher on Dak Prescott than most of the league was if we apply your same criteria. I had Dak as a 2nd rounder and went in the 4th. Am I suddenly to be more trusted than the 32 GMs who passed on him twice more before he was picked in the 4th round comp pick zone? 

 

Some people you will be higher on, some people you will be lower on. Sometimes you will be right and sometimes you will be wrong. Have a process, be objective and stick with what you see and don't get drawn into seeing what other people tell you that you should. That is the only way to do it. 

You have your system and I respect that. Where I diverge from your approach is that I consider evaluating qbs different from evaluating other positions. In my mind every aspect/category in the evaluation of the qb has to be circumscribed with the consideration if the player under examination has the ability to be a franchise qb. With respect to the qb position, more than any other position, it's not about the breakdown of the parts but whether the whole goes beyond the particulars. 

 

What I'm saying is because of the nature of the position there needs to be a qualitative difference in the manner of evaluating the prospect. For me, apparently less so than for you, there should be an intuitive component for the evaluator when scrutinizing a player. That is a tricky challenge when you are scoring a player. In my view all the top four qbs in this draft class should have had first round grades attached to them. And from what I have read the top four qbs in this draft class did have first round grades attached to them by the overwhelming majority of teams. 

 

Make no mistake what I'm saying here. I'm not saying you are wrong; however, I am saying that I respectfully disagree with you. And so does the corpulent Andy Reid. 

[3rdand12]

2 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You have your system and I respect that. Where I diverge from your approach is that I consider evaluating qbs different from evaluating other positions. In my mind every aspect/category in the evaluation of the qb has to be circumscribed with the consideration if the player under examination has the ability to be a franchise qb. With respect to the qb position, more than any other position, it's not about the breakdown of the parts but whether the whole goes beyond the particulars. 

 

What I'm saying is because of the nature of the position there needs to be a qualitative difference in the manner of evaluating the prospect. For me, apparently less so than for you, there should be an intuitive component for the evaluator when scrutinizing a player. That is a tricky challenge when you are scoring a player. In my view all the top four qbs in this draft class should have had first round grades attached to them. And from what I have read the top four qbs in this draft class did have first round grades attached to them by the overwhelming majority of teams. 

 

Make no mistake what I'm saying here. I'm not saying you are wrong; however, I am saying that I respectfully disagree with you. And so does the corpulent Andy Reid. 

You certainly  make fine arguments for your case. No matter the topic.
Even Bill must take some pleasure as to how you described his thinking as outlier.
 

Well done to both of you for quality discourse !

i can see both points rather clearly and respect that .

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

You have your system and I respect that. Where I diverge from your approach is that I consider evaluating qbs different from evaluating other positions. In my mind every aspect/category in the evaluation of the qb has to be circumscribed with the consideration if the player under examination has the ability to be a franchise qb. With respect to the qb position, more than any other position, it's not about the breakdown of the parts but whether the whole goes beyond the particulars. 

 

What I'm saying is because of the nature of the position there needs to be a qualitative difference in the manner of evaluating the prospect. For me, apparently less so than for you, there should be an intuitive component for the evaluator when scrutinizing a player. That is a tricky challenge when you are scoring a player. In my view all the top four qbs in this draft class should have had first round grades attached to them. And from what I have read the top four qbs in this draft class did have first round grades attached to them by the overwhelming majority of teams. 

 

Make no mistake what I'm saying here. I'm not saying you are wrong; however, I am saying that I respectfully disagree with you. And so does the corpulent Andy Reid. 

 

I don't dismiss the value of the position at all. That is absolutely baked into my evaluations. My answer to your can they be a franchise QB test on Allen and Mahomes was "unlikely". 

 

Whether I am wrong on Josh Allen or not remains to be seen. I really hope I am. On Mahomes I don't really care one way or the other whether I was right... but my process did not fail to factor in how important QBs are. Your view seems to be "any consensus top prospect is worth a 1st round pick on them." History shows that is absolutely not the case. Where Allen or indeed Mahomes fall on that scale is a story yet to be written. 

 

I am going to leave it there because someone will no doubt take the opportunity to call me an Allen hater or a bitter Josh Rosen fanboy. Neither of which are the actual point of what I am saying in this thread. 

 

 

[JohnC]

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't dismiss the value of the position at all. That is absolutely baked into my evaluations. My answer to your can they be a franchise QB test on Allen and Mahomes was "unlikely". 

 

Whether I am wrong on Josh Allen or not remains to be seen. I really hope I am. On Mahomes I don't really care one way or the other whether I was right... but my process did not fail to factor in how important QBs are. Your view seems to be "any consensus top prospect is worth a 1st round pick on them." History shows that is absolutely not the case. Where Allen or indeed Mahomes fall on that scale is a story yet to be written. 

 

I am going to leave it there because someone will no doubt take the opportunity to call me an Allen hater or a bitter Josh Rosen fanboy. Neither of which are the actual point of what I am saying in this thread. 

 

 

We are two ships on the ocean passing in the night. That's alright. I have no problem with your take whether I agree with it or not. It is still well reasoned and worthy of consideration. 

 

With respect to the Rosen and Allen debate and comparison I had Rosen as my preferred qb. But I understand why the Bills selected Allen. As I have already stated I would have been more than satisfied with any of the top four rated qbs in this draft class. 

 

I must note that I disagree with how you interpreted my position. The highlighted comments regarding my acceptance of a consensus view on qb prospects is an over simplification that borders on distortion. But as it applies to this year's class the consensus view was my view. Not every year but certainly this year. And it was reflected by where these upper echelon qbs were taken.

 

Again, I want to emphasize that I'm not saying you are wrong but especially as your position applies to this draft class I respectfully disagree with your judgment. 

[Buffalo716]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

1) I don't think we are talking about the same league.   The NFL is not truly a next man up league.    It's not.    It's a who has the QB, who has the coach and who has health kinda' league.

 

2) Just because a QB wasn't the next man on your board doesn't mean it's a moot point when you don't take one and he pans out while you struggle to fill the position.    Fireable offenses aren't moot points.   Critical mistakes?  Yes. Moot points?   No.

 

Your pop warner rah-rah attitude is commendable but totally unrealistic wrt professional football.

 

 

It’s not a pop warner philosophy.

 

Its the philosophy I learned playing division 1 football and scouting and coaching

 

The NFL is all about coaching and staying healthy as a team., a backup QB just won the SB because his team was very well built

 

Building the best roster from the ground up so it can win with any QB is the recipe for success . Everyone wants a franchise QB but they don’t grow on trees

Edited May 28, 2018 by Buffalo716

[JohnC]

24 minutes ago, 3rdand12 said:

You certainly  make fine arguments for your case. No matter the topic.
Even Bill must take some pleasure as to how you described his thinking as outlier.
 

Well done to both of you for quality discourse !

i can see both points rather clearly and respect that .

One of us is a recalcitrant. Which one? It depends on one's perspective. ?

[BADOLBILZ]

34 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

It’s not a pop warner philosophy.

 

Its the philosophy I learned playing division 1 football and scouting and coaching

 

The NFL is all about coaching and health, a backup QB just won the SB.

 

Building the best roster from the ground up so it can win with any QB. Everyone wants a franchise QB but they don’t grow on trees

 

I don't care if you were a former Penn State LB and won SB's as a player and became GM of the Detroit Lions..........if you make dumb personnel decisions like passing on QB's and end up without one and are on the outside looking in at contenders you WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.  Whether you want to pretend it's a moot point because that guy wasn't at the top of your board or not.   That's a bad coach/GM's fantasy.   "There is nothing we can do now about all my bad decisions in the past........so I vote we just put those behind us and I will try harder this time.   Continuity......right?"     Your board being wrong is not an excuse.?

 

Capiche?

 

As for your other assertion that the goal is to build a team that can win without a QB..............again, no.     It's not about one-off's.    It's about being in consistent contention for and winning multiple SB's over a long period of time.    You don't achieve that in the 21st century without a franchise QB because you can't keep deep rosters together.   Even coaches like John Gruden and Brian Billick didn't get lifetime contracts for taking woeful franchises to one-time SB victories.   You want to last in the NFL you NEED a franchise QB.    

 

[John from Riverside]

54 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

It’s not a pop warner philosophy.

 

Its the philosophy I learned playing division 1 football and scouting and coaching

 

The NFL is all about coaching and staying healthy as a team., a backup QB just won the SB because his team was very well built

 

Building the best roster from the ground up so it can win with any QB is the recipe for success . Everyone wants a franchise QB but they don’t grow on trees

I just wanna point out that Pop Warner (or Junior All American Football where I coached kids among other places) is not truly "next man up"

If your starters get held out by their parents or god forbid actually get hurt you are gonna struggle now matter how well you coach fundamentals.....your best players play and the kids that are not as talented get sprinkled in to get their plays and you cover them up as best you can because all the kids deserve to play if they show up for practice.

 

I thought that our bills coaching staff got a lot out of a little last year when they started sending off our core players for draft picks.....I dont know if people understand what a great job that was by McDermott to even have us in a POSITION to be able to make the playoffs.

 

McDermott is gonna lean on his defense this year.

[Buffalo716]

14 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

I don't care if you were a former Penn State LB and won SB's as a player and became GM of the Detroit Lions..........if you make dumb personnel decisions like passing on QB's and end up without one and are on the outside looking in at contenders you WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.  Whether you want to pretend it's a moot point because that guy wasn't at the top of your board or not.   That's a bad coach/GM's fantasy.   "There is nothing we can do now about all my bad decisions in the past........so I vote we just put those behind us and I will try harder this time.   Continuity......right?"     Your board being wrong is not an excuse.?

 

Capiche?

 

As for your other assertion that the goal is to build a team that can win without a QB..............again, no.     It's not about one-off's.    It's about being in consistent contention for and winning multiple SB's over a long period of time.    You don't achieve that in the 21st century without a franchise QB because you can't keep deep rosters together.   Even coaches like John Gruden and Brian Billick didn't get lifetime contracts for taking woeful franchises to one-time SB victories.   You want to last in the NFL you NEED a franchise QB.    

 

 

I never said if you make dumb decisions you shouldn’t be held accountable,of course you should. If you suck as a GM you should be held accountable 

 

Of course the Goal Of EVERY TEAM is to find a franchise QB. But it’s way harder than you are making it sound. When you draft a QB just to draft one you end up with Manuel and Geno Smith and Gabbert etc

 

If you aren’t drafting top 5 or 10 in a good QB draft you need to find a guy who has the traits you look for in an offense. 

 

The one thing college coaches don’t do is prepare their QBs to be successful NFL QBs... It’s all about winning now in college 

 

Andrew Lucks and Peyton Manning’s are going to be rarer and rarer

8 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

I just wanna point out that Pop Warner (or Junior All American Football where I coached kids among other places) is not truly "next man up"

If your starters get held out by their parents or god forbid actually get hurt you are gonna struggle now matter how well you coach fundamentals.....your best players play and the kids that are not as talented get sprinkled in to get their plays and you cover them up as best you can because all the kids deserve to play if they show up for practice.

 

I thought that our bills coaching staff got a lot out of a little last year when they started sending off our core players for draft picks.....I dont know if people understand what a great job that was by McDermott to even have us in a POSITION to be able to make the playoffs.

 

McDermott is gonna lean on his defense this year.

 

Yes I agree there is no next man up in pop warner. You have the stars, then the kids who are playable and then the rest.

 

when your best kids go down in pop warner you can’t replace them

 

Everybody in the NFL is very talented no matter their stat line or pedigree. Some like Freddy or Victor Cruz or Adam Theilin or Kurt Warner were just waiting for their next man up opportunity 

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Buffalo716

[thebandit27]

13 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Shots not taken at the QB position that result in success for another team while you struggle at the position..........are absolutely no less damning than misses on your resume though.  

 

Buddy Nix and Russell Wilson are tied to each other in Bills lore.........he too would choose no QB until it's time.......so imagine actually trading a first round pick that turns into someone else's franchise QB........that is actually worse than whiffing on your own.

 

You really can't hide in the NFL..........you will be held accountable either way so it's a mistake to think that "I wasn't ready" is an excuse.   A reason?  Sure.  But not an excuse.

 

Oh I definitely believe that it was the wrong approach.

 

And yes, passing on those QBs and choosing instead to give up multiple valued assets to get Allen should be part of the evaluation.

 

All that said, Allen will (rightly or wrongly) be the bottom line on this one. If he ends up being the franchise guy, then this regime will live on.

[JohnC]

45 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Oh I definitely believe that it was the wrong approach.

 

And yes, passing on those QBs and choosing instead to give up multiple valued assets to get Allen should be part of the evaluation.

 

All that said, Allen will (rightly or wrongly) be the bottom line on this one. If he ends up being the franchise guy, then this regime will live on.

I liked the aggressiveness this regime exhibited in getting Allen. However, where I have a nuanced disagreement with your position is if Allen doesn't work out or is hurt that doesn't mean that the franchise is sunk. There is nothing mutually exclusive about dedicating resources to finding a franchise qb while at the same time continuing on with building the roster. The Eagles demonstrated that point. 

 

It's clear that one of the primary reasons that the Bills have been mired in generational mediocrity is that they didn't have a franchise qb, and to make matters worse seemed to have a perplexing languid attitude toward addressing that issue. But on top of that demonstration of nonfeasance/malfeasance the franchise was in general poorly run. Poor drafting, poor cap management, bad coaching and front office staffing and the constant churning within the organization have led to a hollowed out franchise competing with serious and focused franchises. 

 

I'm not disagreeing with your take. I'm simply adding to it. The source of this organization's historical failure had more to do with how the organization was being run than with a particular position (qb) requirement. Because the organization was shallow (front office and coaching staff) it's not surprising that its output was paltry. If there is to be success in the near distant future it will be more attributable to the selection of McDermott as the HC and Beane as the GM. Smartly working in tandem and sync is what is going to be the most influential factor for future success. Again, I'm aware that we are not in disagreement but wanted to add another layer to the discussion.  

[thebandit27]

32 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I liked the aggressiveness this regime exhibited in getting Allen. However, where I have a nuanced disagreement with your position is if Allen doesn't work out or is hurt that doesn't mean that the franchise is sunk. There is nothing mutually exclusive about dedicating resources to finding a franchise qb while at the same time continuing on with building the roster. The Eagles demonstrated that point. 

 

It's clear that one of the primary reasons that the Bills have been mired in generational mediocrity is that they didn't have a franchise qb, and to make matters worse seemed to have a perplexing languid attitude toward addressing that issue. But on top of that demonstration of nonfeasance/malfeasance the franchise was in general poorly run. Poor drafting, poor cap management, bad coaching and front office staffing and the constant churning within the organization have led to a hollowed out franchise competing with serious and focused franchises. 

 

I'm not disagreeing with your take. I'm simply adding to it. The source of this organization's historical failure had more to do with how the organization was being run than with a particular position (qb) requirement. Because the organization was shallow (front office and coaching staff) it's not surprising that its output was paltry. If there is to be success in the near distant future it will be more attributable to the selection of McDermott as the HC and Beane as the GM. Smartly working in tandem and sync is what is going to be the most influential factor for future success. Again, I'm aware that we are not in disagreement but wanted to add another layer to the discussion.  

 

Indeed

 

There's really no downside to being aggressive at QB; either you get it right, or you fail spectacularly enough to be drafting high again and take another shot.

[JohnC]

7 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Indeed

 

There's really no downside to being aggressive at QB; either you get it right, or you fail spectacularly enough to be drafting high again and take another shot.

I have to salute McDermott and Beane in mapping out a strategy to get a high end prospect qp from this draft class. They were really focused on this endeavor. They made moves  to acquire picks and traded Glenn to move up the board and on draft day after exploring their many options executed a deal that got Josh Allen. This was a many layered and complex operation. And they got the deal done for a reasonable price. And as a bonus they didn't give up any of their two first round picks or future picks. On top of that multi-pronged approach the McBeane tandem made a deal to get an exceptional talent in Edmunds for a pick they acquired in the trading of Tyrod. This was a tremendous execution that hopefully got us our franchise qb but also an anchor defensive player. While Whaley took a patchwork approach to addressing the roster this regime was much more strategic in reworking the roster and its structure. Kudos to them. 

[BigBuff423]

On 4/27/2018 at 4:20 PM, Zerovotlz said:

Chiefs Get : 

QB Pat Mahomes (R1 pick 10, 2017)

 

Bills Get:

CB Tre White (R1 pick 27, 2017)

Pick 91 (R3 pick 91, 2017) packaged with other picks for trade up to 37.  Rams used pick on S John Johnson.  Bills go to (R2 pick 37, 2017) and select WR Zay Jones.

Pick 21 (R1 pick 21, 2018) packaged with other picks for trade up to 16.  Ravens traded out with Titans who used the pick on LB Rashaan Evans.  Bills go to (R1 pick 16, 2018) and select LB Tremaine Edmunds.

 

Esentially, after it was all said and done, it was Mahomes for Tre White, Zay Jones and Tremaine Edmunds.

 

Thank you.

 

You’re missing a few components like trading Cordy Glenn to get to 12 and then trading assets up to 7 go get Allen. And the assets acquired as part of the Mahomes trade were part of the total evaluation because the forfeited the option of Mahomes knowing this was their QB selection year. So it’s more a part of the whole set of circumstances rather than direct link to what was actually traded. 

[3rdand12]

19 hours ago, JohnC said:

One of us is a recalcitrant. Which one? It depends on one's perspective. ?

Ha ! 

 I did chuckle reading this, thanks.
:  )

[3rdand12]

6 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Indeed

 

There's really no downside to being aggressive at QB; either you get it right, or you fail spectacularly enough to be drafting high again and take another shot.

There is a time and place to be aggressive. and by gosh you better pick the right ones. In life and the NFL draft for QB.
 These guys feel like they are in the beginning stages of what the Bills should look like to them. The general turnover is complete or will before the season begins.

This was a great shot to take in my very humble opinion. Was not sure before the draft which one they were focused on . But now i feel as if Allen might have been the guy they wanted all along !
Sure hope they got it right. I like these guys.

[BillsFan17]

So the careers of all involved in the trade have yet to be played out and the book is closed?

 

Just asinine.

[3rdand12]

23 minutes ago, BigBuff423 said:

 

You’re missing a few components like trading Cordy Glenn to get to 12 and then trading assets up to 7 go get Allen. And the assets acquired as part of the Mahomes trade were part of the total evaluation because the forfeited the option of Mahomes knowing this was their QB selection year. So it’s more a part of the whole set of circumstances rather than direct link to what was actually traded. 

You have to view this from 20 thousand feet i think. The Project which includes Building defense first year and preparing to be able to reach for the QB in the second make the direct comparison using statistics does not tell the whole story as to value of the individual decision making maybe ?

1 minute ago, BillsFan17 said:

So the careers of all involved in the trade have yet to be played out and the book is closed?

 

Just asinine.

it was explained upthread by the OP that was not the intention of the post.
I thought as you did till i read through.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, 3rdand12 said:

There is a time and place to be aggressive. and by gosh you better pick the right ones. In life and the NFL draft for QB.
 These guys feel like they are in the beginning stages of what the Bills should look like to them. The general turnover is complete or will before the season begins.

This was a great shot to take in my very humble opinion. Was not sure before the draft which one they were focused on . But now i feel as if Allen might have been the guy they wanted all along !
Sure hope they got it right. I like these guys.

This regime starting with McDermott felt that it was better to wait for the next draft class rather than select from the prior class. Maybe it was mostly due to the fact that McDermottt just took over and still was working with the Whaley regime that was going to be replaced. Contrast that more calculated approach than the Nix approach who was determined to draft a qb in the Manuel draft class in which none of the qbs in that class were ranked very high. What was obviously apparent was that Nix was determined to come out of that class with a qb regardless how good the class was. My problem was not in the drafting of Manuel as it was selecting a third or fourth round graded qb in the first round. It was an ill-conceived reach that set this franchise back. There is certainly no guarantee that Allen is going to be a franchise qb but it was still a reasonable selection. 

[GunnerBill]

7 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Indeed

 

There's really no downside to being aggressive at QB; either you get it right, or you fail spectacularly enough to be drafting high again and take another shot.

 

And I agree with this too. Ultimately if the ones they passed on last year and this year end up better than our boy they will get criticised and rightly so... but I prefer the identify a guy and be aggressive to the passivity of the past. 

 

If Allen fails then Beane better hope McDermott has kept the team sneaking into the post-season in order that it is he who gets the chance to take the next shot. 

[Doc Brown]

On 5/27/2018 at 1:51 PM, oldmanfan said:

I liked Watkins a lot, thought it was a smart move to trade up and draft him, but time has shown he can't be considered a stud WR.

He still has the physical tools and quickness to make occasional big plays and stretch the defense.  Him being a decoy allows other weapons on offense to have more room to work with.  Goff, Gurley, Kuff, and Woods all had their best years last year due in large part to defenses shading to Watson. The Rams wisely recognized this value and although Watkins was too expensive for them, they made a deal to Brandon Cooks who also can stretch a defense.

 

Watkins should make it easier for Mahomes to take advantage of his other weapons including Kelce, Hunt, Hill, and Albert Wilson.  Having said all that, I hope Watkins and Mahomes fail miserably.

[3rdand12]

45 minutes ago, JohnC said:

This regime starting with McDermott felt that it was better to wait for the next draft class rather than select from the prior class. Maybe it was mostly due to the fact that McDermottt just took over and still was working with the Whaley regime that was going to be replaced. Contrast that more calculated approach than the Nix approach who was determined to draft a qb in the Manuel draft class in which none of the qbs in that class were ranked very high. What was obviously apparent was that Nix was determined to come out of that class with a qb regardless how good the class was. My problem was not in the drafting of Manuel as it was selecting a third or fourth round graded qb in the first round. It was an ill-conceived reach that set this franchise back. There is certainly no guarantee that Allen is going to be a franchise qb but it was still a reasonable selection. 

Manuel was to satisfy us screaming Fans !
after long Fitz Nix had no option and it was a tough year to finally cannon ball into the pool of shallow water ( QB)
I have been of the opinion , McD wanted to get his Offensive Coaching and scouting in place via Beane. Before jumping of the high board into the deep end.
we shall see, but hope is what the offseason Bills Fans do best !
Go Bills !

[JohnC]

11 minutes ago, 3rdand12 said:

Manuel was to satisfy us screaming Fans !
after long Fitz Nix had no option and it was a tough year to finally cannon ball into the pool of shallow water ( QB)
I have been of the opinion , McD wanted to get his Offensive Coaching and scouting in place via Beane. Before jumping of the high board into the deep end.
we shall see, but hope is what the offseason Bills Fans do best !
Go Bills !

I have a different take on Nix's delaying in getting a qb. He was simply inept. He had an outdated philosophy of believing that you build up the roster before adding a qb instead of getting one when the opportunity exists. When you hire an old time scout ill equipped to be a GM there shouldn't be much surprise when the GM falters.  

[3rdand12]

17 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I have a different take on Nix's delaying in getting a qb. He was simply inept. He had an outdated philosophy of believing that you build up the roster before adding a qb instead of getting one when the opportunity exists. When you hire an old time scout ill equipped to be a GM there shouldn't be much surprise when the GM falters.  

That is not a disagreement on Nix.
He knew Bills needed a QB when the Fitz thing happened. He should have known Ryan was not the answer to begin with.
 Inept ? yes we agree.

 I am loathe to mention it.

 but Ralph was cheap  : )

[buffaloaggie]

20 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

He still has the physical tools and quickness to make occasional big plays and stretch the defense.  Him being a decoy allows other weapons on offense to have more room to work with.  Goff, Gurley, Kuff, and Woods all had their best years last year due in large part to defenses shading to Watson. The Rams wisely recognized this value and although Watkins was too expensive for them, they made a deal to Brandon Cooks who also can stretch a defense.

 

Watkins should make it easier for Mahomes to take advantage of his other weapons including Kelce, Hunt, Hill, and Albert Wilson.  Having said all that, I hope Watkins and Mahomes fail miserably.

Watkins won't fail, because all he'll be is a decoy, as you mention, for Kelce, Hunt, and Hill. A very expensive decoy though. Hill is gonna go nuts this year. Tyreek Hill's catch rate vs targets is right near the top of the league, and he's just scratching the surface.

 

Mahomes won't fail because he has Andy Reid.