Draft another qb next year

[Mark Vader]

2 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

If we suck badly enough, and say the Oregon kid is there....yep. Sign me up. Long shot, I know....

No thank you.

[/dev/null]

1 hour ago, Buffalo Bills Fan said:

Bills do need a number 2 QB

 

For the last 20 years or so, most of the Bills QBs have been number two

[#34fan]

 

Wonder what the Niners would take for Nick Mullens?... He seems like a great young prospect.

[Fadingpain]

1 hour ago, Rocbillsfan1 said:

If you have to draft a qb then beane should be fired first. That’s the only way it’s happening idk how people don’t realize this. You don’t give up multiple assests and bail on a top 10 qb and get to keep your job and pick a qb next year . Just stop with the non sense. 

Drafting another QB does not have to amount to "bailing" on Josh Allen.

 

You are analyzing the situation in a very simplistic way and relying on what football teams have tended to do in the past, none of which is relevant to what the Bills could or should do in 2019.

 

 

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Yeah sure, Will Grier in the 4rth.

 

 

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

There REALLY needs to be a negative rep option on this board........

 

Thumbs down option would be nice.

 

 

[billsfan714]

Peterman does not belong on an NFL roster, Derek Anderson  is JAG on a 1 year deal, yeah I say in round 3 or 4 you draft a QB.    This team has to have a plan B at qb and should also have a plan C.  

[jrober38]

The Bills need to pick another QB in round 1.

 

The defense is elite, the kicking game is elite, and the run game can be good. 

 

All we need is a decently good QB. That's by far the biggest thing holding this team back at this point. 

[Augie]

14 minutes ago, Mark Vader said:

No thank you.

 

Until you KNOW you have your guy....

 

They will give Josh more time, but (while he’s ours and I love him) he looks like what I expected. 

[Happy]

22 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea I think somewhere you look for a new developmental guy. 

 

Not with this offensive (in more ways than one) staff.  Otherwise there will be two developmental QBs next year, neither of which will be developed properly.

[Guest Mike147]

2 hours ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

Let's try getting an OC and QB coach who can actually develop a young QB that was know to actually need development help when he was drafted.  Getting another QB and doing the same thing we're doing now will only lead to more futility.  So we want two QBs who struggle next year?

 

The main issue with Josh Allen coming out of college was that he completed well under 60 percent of his passes and did so in the Mountain West Conference, which is hardly a powerhouse conference. The issue with drafting quarterbacks that had accuracy problems in college is they don't always fix those problems in the pros. Yes mechanics can be worked on, but a lot of that has already become muscle memory and it can be very hard to make those changes, not impossible, but difficult. With the right coaching and work ethic, Josh Allen could become a more accurate, or at least consistent quarterback. 

 

In regards to another quarterback, it would depend on the prospect we decided to draft. If we targeted Drew Lock for example, he is another mid-50 completion quarterback. The difference with him is he plays in the SEC and has been far more prolific, but the question mark over accuracy would still be an issue to fix. Now if we looked at Justin Herbert from Oregon, he's a 64.7 PCT player; Ryan Finley from NC State, is a 63.7 PCT player; or Dwayne Haskins from Ohio State, is a 71.9 PCT player. If we drafted someone with a good arm, that has solid mechanics, and is accurate, then we might not face the same issues as we currently face with Josh Allen because we aren't having to fix or coach the player up as much because they have a more NFL ready skill set. 

 

2 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

If I see zero progression from Josh the rest of the year I would say why not select another QB high and let them fight it out. We have to get this crap right. Not sure Beane should be around if we have to consider this though. 

 

I'm still in Josh's corner though. He deserves more time before placing any label on him. 

 

The way I see it is drafting a quarterback one year shouldn't prevent a team from drafting a quarterback the following year. If the quarterback you took in 2018 hasn't shown enough progress, and the prospect available in 2019 is a can't miss kinda prospect, then realistically I would argue that our front office would be doing this team a disservice if they didn't take that quarterback. Granted this is not the greatest example but Jimmy Clausen was drafted in the second round by the Carolina Panthers, he was terrible, and the Panthers landed the first overall pick in the draft. Who declared? Cam Newton. Now granted the Panthers didn't give up what we did to draft Jimmy Clausen, nor did they draft him as high as we drafted Josh Allen. However, they made the smart choice in taking Cam Newton and haven't looked back. If we ended up in a similar position in next year's draft (i.e. Josh Allen hasn't shown enough promise, and a can't miss prospect is available), then I'd argue we should take a quarterback and let them fight it out.

 

I'd love to see Josh Allen be the guy for us, but it really is one of those situations where he is going to need a lot of work to get up to the required standard. If our front office think someone in next year's class is a can't miss prospect and can upgrade our position, then they need to draft that player and not pass on them out of loyalty to Josh Allen because they think they owe it to him to give him a few seasons before moving on. 

 

2 hours ago, Codyny13 said:

Almost every GM in football drafts for potential and ceiling. Allen is nowhere close to where he’ll be. You can teach accuracy to a point, by correcting mechanics. He’s not ready and wasn’t even supposed to be playing yet. The split second reaction of this board to toss players after a cpl of games is crazy. 

 

There aren't many examples of inaccurate college quarterbacks fixing their accuracy issues in the pros. Most inaccurate quarterbacks tend to remain inconsistent at the next level. Yes mechanics can be fixed but it is difficult for those quarterbacks to overcome the muscle memory when the pressure is on. Blake Bortles is a prime example of that. He went away and worked on his mechanics and came back "improved", but he still falls back into old habits when put under pressure and still has consistency issues. One week he'll be like Tom Brady, the next he'll be like his former backup Chad Henne. 

 

Now I do agree that we shouldn't toss Josh Allen on the scrap heap, however I do think that some of the concerns that people raised about his mid-50 PCT from college are starting to haunt our front office's decision to draft him. Fingers crossed Josh Allen can become the guy for us - I hope he does - but based off what we have all seen he just doesn't look ready for the NFL. The worst decision this team made was trading AJ McCaron because he could have started for us while Josh Allen sat for at least a season if not more while he worked on what he needed to. Essentially the issue here is that we drafted an inaccurate quarterback based on his size, athleticism and rocket arm. Those things are great don't get me wrong, but a QB needs to have touch and accuracy to be consistently successful at the highest level. So while I wouldn't give up on Josh Allen at this stage, I can appreciate why our fans might want to see us draft another quarterback in 2019 if Josh continues to struggle. 

 

2 hours ago, Green Lightning said:

The problem is is that he's the same quarterback he was in college. He does the same things, has the same shortcomings and hasn't made any leap yet. His accuracy is awful. Just like it was in college. Okay so 5 games in, but you know what? Sit him. Let's find somebody who can at least move the chains while we wait for this guy to develop. 

 

The problem we have now is who can we turn to if Josh Allen returns to the bench? 

 

Nathan Peterman is terrible. Derek Anderson is a solid backup but not a starting caliber quarterback. The guy we should have kept was AJ McCaron but he's now in Oakland. I'm not sure there is anyone available on the street that we could sign that could improve our quarterback situation. For me I don't think we can return Josh Allen to the bench because we don't have anyone that can move the chains consistently. Put Peterman back out there next week and as soon as he struggles the call to bring in Allen will be too loud to ignore, and the same goes for Derek Anderson. I think we've just got to ride it out with Josh Allen and see what happens. 

 

2 hours ago, Codyny13 said:

You don’t have an offense in place for any Qb on this roster to do anything with. You think we’re a playoff team w Andersen in the game cmon. There’s no better way to learn than to play. Running the scout team for opposing team looks and little to no first team reps isn’t the way to get him up to snuff. If you have a legit starter on your team like Rodgers w Favre or Garoppolo w Brady ok, we don’t, so develop the kid on the field 

 

I think the point when it comes to quarterback play is that we might not necessarily be a play off team with another quarterback, but would we be a better team? 

 

You mention Garoppolo. The 49ers were 1-10 after twelve weeks. CJ Beathard goes down injured during their week 13 contest against the Bears and Garoppolo drives down the field and scores to win the game. He then starts the final four games and they win against the Texans, Titans (play off team), Jaguars (play off team) and Rams (play off team). He threw for 1560 yards, 7 TDs and 5 INTs over those games. He was working with the same O-Line and receivers as Beathard, yet the difference between them is Garoppolo's completion percentage was more than ten better than Beathard. Essentially if we had a more accurate quarterback on the roster - we don't - then it is possible that quarterback could have more success than Allen with the existing group. By no means would we be a play off team but an accurate and more consistent quarterback can usually get more out of the same group of players. 

1 hour ago, K-GunJimKelly12 said:

How many of you were putting the bust label on Goff after his rookie year?  Allen is 5 games in with nothing around him.

 

Jared Goff was not inaccurate in college. He ran a no-huddle style offense with Cal and was very prolific and accurate. In college the no-huddle system worked so well because of his accuracy and ability make quick reads, but the transition he needed to make in the pros was being able to run a pro style offense and command the huddle. Obviously he had his struggles as a rookie but that was partly down to an inadequate O-Line, questionable supporting cast outside of Todd Gurley who in fact had a terrible second season, and a poor coaching staff led by Jeff Fisher who somehow managed to retain the Rams job longer than he realistically should have done. The best thing for Jared Goff was getting Sean McVay as his head coach, had the Rams stuck with Jeff Fisher or hired someone of that ilk he might not have broken out like he did. 

With that said, Josh Allen is a totally different prospect to Jared Goff. The issue with Josh is that he was a mid-50 PCT player in college and those accuracy issues were the major question mark next to his name. The question mark next to Goff was over whether he could make the transition from no huddle to a pro system in the NFL, but accuracy, touch, decision making (etc) were not really brought into question anywhere near to the same level as they were for Josh Allen. So while you are correct that Jared Goff struggled as a rookie and he came good, it would be worth noting that he was a different prospect to Josh, and had different things he needed to work on as a pro to Josh. That's not to say that Josh can't make the same jump that Goff did in year two, but in order to do that he would need to significantly improve his accuracy, touch and decision making - and like I've said already, inaccurate QBs in college don't tend to fix that issue in the pros.  

[Bangarang]

2 hours ago, Codyny13 said:

Almost every GM in football drafts for potential and ceiling. Allen is nowhere close to where he’ll be. You can teach accuracy to a point, by correcting mechanics. He’s not ready and wasn’t even supposed to be playing yet. The split second reaction of this board to toss players after a cpl of games is crazy. 

 

The EJ Manual argument all over again. Terrific.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

2 hours ago, ******* said:

Please please please . Allen is atrocious can’t teach accuracy 

 

2 hours ago, Rocbillsfan1 said:

If you have to draft a qb then beane should be fired first. That’s the only way it’s happening idk how people don’t realize this. You don’t give up multiple assests and bail on a top 10 qb and get to keep your job and pick a qb next year . Just stop with the non sense. 

 

I''ll agree Allen's progress has been tough to watch and had hoped he'd look better by now.  However the problem with this in today's NFL there's not enough practice time to evaluate a rookie and 2nd year guy who's still developing.  You'll then have two guys and little idea if either will develop.  Allan probably had some of the biggest question marks going into the draft, but also the most upside so they drafted him.  He needs playing time, ideally it shouldn't have come this season, but it is.  His stats this year are still better than Mahomes rookie year and over 16 games about even with Mitch T.  Mahomes couldn't beat out Alex Smith last season, but now he's tearing things up.

 

Allen's accuracy wasn't looking bad during training camp, drills, etc.  Supposedly he worked with some QB whisperer who helped straightened him out and made him look serviceable  But now with the real bullets flying, he doesn't have time to think and is back to all his old habits.  Let him get some playing time, maybe the game starts to slow down for him and he can start to think about what he is and isn't supposed to do out there.  He does have pretty brutal weapons too all around, both WR and O-line.

 

Will time and and a better team around him help, who knows it might help, he also doesn't need to have the accuracy of a Rodgers either, just throw for 250+ yard a game and they could be a very good team.  I also know that no one knows for certain it won't improve.  If it doesn't likely the team won't be much better next year or the year after and they'll be drafting early again and can get their guy then. (doesa't appear to be any can't miss prospects coming out this coming draft anyway)  As I stated in the beginning taking another rookie now will just give you two guys with not enough time to develop.

[Beast]

2 hours ago, peterpan said:

Trade mCcoy for foles.  It makes too much sense.  If he walks as a fa we get a third round comp pick.  We can tag him for a few years if Allen does develop.  Sign him long term if he works out

 

Yeah, let’s tag Nick !@#$ing Foles and pay him top QB money.

 

Damned good idea, twinkle toes.

[HumbleAndHungry]

The quarterback position is so important that drafting a quarterback every year should be a no brainer, especially with the new rookie wage scale.  Unfortunately teams need to surround their quarterback with a line, offensive weapons etc. etc. before they can make their judgment call.  But the biggest reason the bills wont draft a quarterback next year is because it would publicly be admitting they Missed on Allen .  But I believe that it shouldn't have to be that way. Keep drafting quarterbacks in the first and second rounds let them compete.  The quarterback is the easiest tradable asset on a NFL roster especially if they're decent.   So usually you will be able to recoup some of the value of the selection anyway.  The position is just way too important not to get it right and each year it will only get more vital

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, Finkle Is Einhorn said:

The quarterback position is so important that drafting a quarterback every year should be a no brainer, especially with the new rookie wage scale.  Unfortunately teams need to surround their quarterback with a line, offensive weapons etc. etc. before they can make their judgment call.  But the biggest reason the bills wont draft a quarterback next year is because it would publicly be admitting they Missed on Allen .  But I believe that it shouldn't have to be that way. Keep drafting quarterbacks in the first and second rounds let them compete.  The quarterback is the easiest tradable asset on a NFL roster especially if they're decent.   So usually you will be able to recoup some of the value of the selection anyway.  The position is just way too important not to get it right and each year it will only get more vital

 

The Bills don't need to admit they missed on Allen and have it count against them.

 

The issue is that this GM and HC need to be winning next year, or else they risk getting fired. 

 

If they hitch their wagon to Allen without any plan B, and the defense remains dominant but the team is held back by inept QB play, there's a real problem.

 

This team is a QB away from being really good. They need to continue doing everything possible to find a top 10 QB. 

[HumbleAndHungry]

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

The Bills don't need to admit they missed on Allen and have it count against them.

 

The issue is that this GM and HC need to be winning next year, or else they risk getting fired. 

 

If they hitch their wagon to Allen without any plan B, and the defense remains dominant but the team is held back by inept QB play, there's a real problem.

 

This team is a QB away from being really good. They need to continue doing everything possible to find a top 10 QB. 

I agree that just because you're drafting another quarterback high doesn't necessarily mean you're admitting a mistake, but in the NFL world that's how it's perceived. There isnt much thinking outside the box. If we are in a position to draft another solid quarterback prospect I'm all for it but I just don't see our GM doing that , especially since they gave up assets to move up and select Allen 

[downunderbill]

2 hours ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

Let’s revisit in 10 weeks.

 

Doesn't matter if you do. The chance they are taking another QB next year is minimal. Especially if they win a few more games they will move into a position where they'll either have to give up bulk picks to get another, or take a later early round QB that no one will agree on.

Wouldn't it be better to surround him with weapons and if he fails then, look at other options? At least a new QB coming in will have better players around him from the beginning.

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, Finkle Is Einhorn said:

I agree that just because you're drafting another quarterback high doesn't necessarily mean you're admitting a mistake, but in the NFL world that's how it's perceived. There isnt much thinking outside the box. If we are in a position to draft another solid quarterback prospect I'm all for it but I just don't see our GM doing that , especially since they gave up assets to move up and select Allen 

 

Unfortunately I agree, but I think they have to bring in some sort of plan B.

 

If they tie their wagon to Allen again, and he's no better than the crap we've watched this year, they're all getting fired. 

 

I dunno which veteran QBs are available, but a high end backup plus a 2nd round QB makes a lot of sense.

 

The defense is elite, and we have $90 mil in cap space to spend on a WR and an Offensive Lineman (the line has been much better the last few weeks), and then keep plugging holes on the defense. 

The only remaining hole which will hold us back is QB, and they need to actually bring in help at that spot next season. 

[Guest Mike147]

2 minutes ago, Finkle Is Einhorn said:

I agree that just because you're drafting another quarterback high doesn't necessarily mean you're admitting a mistake, but in the NFL world that's how it's perceived. There isnt much thinking outside the box. If we are in a position to draft another solid quarterback prospect I'm all for it but I just don't see our GM doing that , especially since they gave up assets to move up and select Allen 

 

Our GM, like McDermott, will want to do whatever they feel is best to secure their long term futures in Buffalo. If they watch Josh Allen struggle as a rookie and we end up in a position to draft a quarterback that could be an upgrade, then they would be foolish to bet their careers on Josh Allen making a miraculous improvement from year two. Head coaches and GMs don't always get second chances, so while drafting another QB high is unlikely, it would be naive of them to not do it if they felt this team is a QB away from being good and someone is available in the draft when we are on the clock.

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, Mike147 said:

 

Our GM, like McDermott, will want to do whatever they feel is best to secure their long term futures in Buffalo. If they watch Josh Allen struggle as a rookie and we end up in a position to draft a quarterback that could be an upgrade, then they would be foolish to bet their careers on Josh Allen making a miraculous improvement from year two. Head coaches and GMs don't always get second chances, so while drafting another QB high is unlikely, it would be naive of them to not do it if they felt this team is a QB away from being good and someone is available in the draft when we are on the clock.

 

This feels like the EJ Manuel situation all over again. 

 

The Bills brought in no plan B for EJ's 2nd year. He was so bad in preseason they had to bring Kyle Orton out of retirement. That team went 9-7.

 

The Bills would be wise to bring in someone like Orton as soon as free agency starts. If Allen stinks in preseason again, you go to the vet immediately and try to ride a great defense to the post season.