NFL Draft change/proposal

[Figster]

The reward you may get for being one of the best college athletes playing in your position is to end up playing for one of the worst coached and managed teams in the NFL. In many instances the best college QB's end up in places destined for failure. So why reward poorly coached and managed teams in this manner? Why do we reward the best college athletes entering the NFL draft in this manner? I get trying to even the playing field. My idea is to make teams work for the rights to the best college athletes. Show that you can coach and manage well enough to give star athletes a chance for success in the NFL. My idea is to give the best team/record to not make the playoffs the 1st pick in the draft and go from best to worst record. Teams on the brink of becoming playoff caliber getting the best college athletes available. Win, win for both the player and team. Playoff teams pick last and still go from best to worst. Stop rewarding perennial bad teams for failure. 

 

Any thoughts on this idea my fellow Bills fans?

 

Some of my favorite posters have chimed in now and I just have one thing to say.

 

"Ouch"

 

  

Edited April 1 by Figster

[Breakout Squad]

I firmly believe the worst team should get the 1st pick. It’s the best system for the NFL. Other sports can have their lotteries. Tanking is not the problem like it is in other pro sports. 
 

Nice example of a different system though. 

[FireChans]

3 minutes ago, Figster said:

The reward you may get for being one of the best college athletes playing in your position is to end up playing for one of the worst coached and managed teams in the NFL. In many instances the best college QB's end up in places destined for failure. So why reward poorly coached and managed teams in this manner? Why do we reward the best college athletes entering the NFL draft in this manner? I get trying to even the playing field. My idea is to make teams work for the rights to the best college athletes. Show that you can coach and manage well enough to give star athletes a chance for success in the NFL. My idea is to give the best team/record to not make the playoffs the 1st pick in the draft and go from best to worst record. Teams on the brink of becoming playoff caliber getting the best college athletes available. Win, win for both the player and team. Playoff teams pick last and still go from best to worst. Stop rewarding perennial bad teams for failure. 

 

Any thoughts on this idea my fellow Bills fans?

 

  

A terrible idea. 
 

A good to great QB can turn a bad franchise into a good one. See: The Bills.

 

The NFL wants the bad teams to eventually be good. Otherwise folks stop watching. 
 

You also can’t say we’re rewarding bad teams for failure and in the same breath argue that it’s not a reward because they are bad teams and destined for failure. Pick a lane. 
 

0/10

[Figster]

9 minutes ago, FireChans said:

A terrible idea. 
 

A good to great QB can turn a bad franchise into a good one. See: The Bills.

 

The NFL wants the bad teams to eventually be good. Otherwise folks stop watching. 
 

You also can’t say we’re rewarding bad teams for failure and in the same breath argue that it’s not a reward because they are bad teams and destined for failure. Pick a lane. 
 

0/10

Stafford is a good example...

[FireChans]

12 minutes ago, Figster said:

Stafford is a good example...

Of what? 
 

Stafford took over on a terrible team (0-16) and led them to a better win total every single year he started there. He also led them to 3 playoff appearances and 5 seasons with a winning record, and ultimately trading him got them to the NFCCG last season.

 

So what is he a good example of? 

[Figster]

14 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Of what? 
 

Stafford took over on a terrible team (0-16) and led them to a better win total every single year he started there. He also led them to 3 playoff appearances and 5 seasons with a winning record, and ultimately trading him got them to the NFCCG last season.

 

So what is he a good example of? 

Yet no championship until he is traded so go figure...

 

...Detroit goes further with good coaching then they ever did with Stafford...

Edited March 31 by Figster

[FireChans]

9 minutes ago, Figster said:

Yet no championship until he is traded so go figure...

 

...Detroit goes further with good coaching then they ever did with Stafford...

No championship is your definition of “destined for failure?”

 

So drafting Josh Allen was a failure, I suppose.

[Figster]

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

No championship is your definition of “destined for failure?”

 

So drafting Josh Allen was a failure, I suppose.

Does Eli win a Championship with San Diego? Probably not...

 

Not winning a Championship with Josh would be a failure ...

[Jay_Fixit]

I think this is a terrible idea.

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, Figster said:

Does Eli win a Championship with San Diego? Probably not...

 

Not winning a Championship with Josh would be a failure ...

Every player that gets drafted to any team and you ask, “do they win a championship,” the answer will always be probably not.

 

Why do you think it would be better for the league if NE got the first overall pick in Trevor Lawrence and the pitiful Jags got Mac Jones?

[Figster]

3 minutes ago, Jay_Fixit said:

I think this is a terrible idea.

Star collegiate athletes probably think the current Drafting procedure is terrible.

 

I'm just trying to fixit Jay ;  )

[Figster]

11 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Every player that gets drafted to any team and you ask, “do they win a championship,” the answer will always be probably not.

 

Why do you think it would be better for the league if NE got the first overall pick in Trevor Lawrence and the pitiful Jags got Mac Jones?

For the league, Trevor Lawrence, or Buffalo? Do you think losing a perennial Super Bowl contender helps the league?

 

I would say yes on the 1st two...

[FireChans]

10 minutes ago, Figster said:

For the league, Trevor Lawrence, or Buffalo? Do you think losing a perennial Super Bowl contender helps the league?

 

I would say yes on the 1st two...

Yeah, you’re wrong. The idea of parity is what gets fans buying tickets for crappy teams.  It’s far worse for the league if crappy teams are crappy in perpetuity without the hope of getting a top flight player, namely QB. 
 

Your idea takes that all away, just so the #1 pick gets to go to a better team AND make $40M on their first contract. Who cares? The #1 pick already makes the most money. Why turn the NFL into college football where the same 3 or 4 teams are the best for 20 years?

 

And yes, 1000% dynasties rising and falling helps the league. Because the league is a zero sum game. Every year a team wins 13 games, that means 13 teams are losing. 
 

Look how many Jags games are empty nowadays that they got Trevor. There’s your answer to what’s “better for the league.”

[Figster]

13 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Yeah, you’re wrong. The idea of parity is what gets fans buying tickets for crappy teams.  It’s far worse for the league if crappy teams are crappy in perpetuity without the hope of getting a top flight player, namely QB. 
 

Your idea takes that all away, just so the #1 pick gets to go to a better team AND make $40M on their first contract. Who cares? The #1 pick already makes the most money. Why turn the NFL into college football where the same 3 or 4 teams are the best for 20 years?

 

And yes, 1000% dynasties rising and falling helps the league. Because the league is a zero sum game. Every year a team wins 13 games, that means 13 teams are losing. 
 

Look how many Jags games are empty nowadays that they got Trevor. There’s your answer to what’s “better for the league.”

Parity achieved through draft picking order rarely happens IMO. Good players end up going to bad system matches and teams because of poor management IMO.

Edited March 31 by Figster

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, Figster said:

Parity through draft picking order is an illusion IMO. Good coaching and management creates the proper setting for athletes to succeed in the NFL.

Your opinion is wrong.

 

Jags record 3 seasons before picking Lawrence:

5-11

6-10

1-15

 

Jags record since picking Lawrence:

3-14

9-8

9-8

 

Yes Urban Meyer sucked as a coach. Yes Doug Pederson is better. But the Jags are better now than the garbage they were before probably 90% because of Lawrence. Hell, he had the team 66% better despite worse coaching.

 

Bengals record 3 seasons before picking Burrow:

7-9

6-10

2-14

 

Bengals record since picking Burrow:

4-11 (Burrow hurt)

10-7

12-4

9-8 (Burrow hurt)

 

Did Zach Taylor wake up and learn how to coach after the 2-14 season?  Or do we think maybe Burrow by himself is worth about 8 wins?

 

We could do this all day with the top QB's drafted. It's obvious. Sure, some of the QB's bust. Some folks even argue that the teams "ruined" the players. But they really don't.

 

McVay made Goff look better than what he is. Jeff Fisher obviously made him look worse. But Goff is who Goff is, which is a good starter in the NFL, but not in the upper echelon. He never will be.

 

Justin Fields will almost certainly never be good, and probably never would have been good. He may have looked better than what he was in Chicago with awesome coaching, but he wouldn't have been good.

 

Mac Jones will never be good. He was made to look better than he was in 2021 with a team built around his strengths, but you can only hide a bad QB for long. And now we all know he sucks. Because he sucks.

 

Brock Purdy is decent. But his system makes him look great. Just like the system made Jimmy G look great, when he wasn't. It doesn't make them better players. They are who they are. No matter how great Brock looks up 30 against a bad team with Shanahan, he's still closer to Mac Jones than Josh Allen.

 

The game changers at QB, the guys who can turn around a franchise, sometimes despite bad coaching or management, are by and large picked in the top 10. Therefore, it makes total sense that the bad teams that may or may not have bad coaching/management get first crack at them.  This is the whole point of the draft. Why should a team like the Bengals who lost their superstar QB to injury and barely missed the playoffs get that shot instead?  It makes no sense.

 

[Figster]

9 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Your opinion is wrong.

 

Jags record 3 seasons before picking Lawrence:

5-11

6-10

1-15

 

Jags record since picking Lawrence:

3-14

9-8

9-8

 

Yes Urban Meyer sucked as a coach. Yes Doug Pederson is better. But the Jags are better now than the garbage they were before probably 90% because of Lawrence. Hell, he had the team 66% better despite worse coaching.

 

Bengals record 3 seasons before picking Burrow:

7-9

6-10

2-14

 

Bengals record since picking Burrow:

4-11 (Burrow hurt)

10-7

12-4

9-8 (Burrow hurt)

 

Did Zach Taylor wake up and learn how to coach after the 2-14 season?  Or do we think maybe Burrow by himself is worth about 8 wins?

 

We could do this all day with the top QB's drafted. It's obvious. Sure, some of the QB's bust. Some folks even argue that the teams "ruined" the players. But they really don't.

 

McVay made Goff look better than what he is. Jeff Fisher obviously made him look worse. But Goff is who Goff is, which is a good starter in the NFL, but not in the upper echelon. He never will be.

 

Justin Fields will almost certainly never be good, and probably never would have been good. He may have looked better than what he was in Chicago with awesome coaching, but he wouldn't have been good.

 

Mac Jones will never be good. He was made to look better than he was in 2021 with a team built around his strengths, but you can only hide a bad QB for long. And now we all know he sucks. Because he sucks.

 

Brock Purdy is decent. But his system makes him look great. Just like the system made Jimmy G look great, when he wasn't. It doesn't make them better players. They are who they are. No matter how great Brock looks up 30 against a bad team with Shanahan, he's still closer to Mac Jones than Josh Allen.

 

The game changers at QB, the guys who can turn around a franchise, sometimes despite bad coaching or management, are by and large picked in the top 10. Therefore, it makes total sense that the bad teams that may or may not have bad coaching/management get first crack at them.  This is the whole point of the draft. Why should a team like the Bengals who lost their superstar QB to injury and barely missed the playoffs get that shot instead?  It makes no sense.

 

Without injury Joe Burrows and the Bengals in all likelihood would be drafting near the end of the 1st round. Bad example IMO. Trevor Lawrence almost makes my argument for me IMO. To good to be watching the playoffs instead of participating IMO. 9 - 8 record doesn't get the job done.

Edited March 31 by Figster

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, Figster said:

 

Without injury Joe Burrows and the Bengals in all likelihood would be drafting near the end of the 1st round. Bad example IMO.

 

Without being the worst team in the NFL, they wouldn't have Joe Burrow at all!.

 

Trevor Lawrence almost makes my argument for me IMO. To good to be watching the playoffs instead of participating IMO. 9 - 8 record doesn't get the job done.

 

They made the playoffs, and won a game against Herbert (another top 10 QB drafted on a bad team) his second season, and only missed the playoffs this season because he got hurt.

 

In any case, your plan still wouldn't work. What would happen is a team with a franchise QB that barely missed the playoffs (Bengals/Jags last season for example) would get a top 3 pick, and they would trade it for multiple first rounders to a really bad team without a franchise QB. So what you'd really be doing is sending a prospect like Caleb or Jayden Daniels or Drake Maye to a bad team made even worse with depleted draft capital in the future.

 

The system works. Your system does not.

[Aussie Joe]

The whole point of the draft is to give the shyte teams some hope to improve …

 

 

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Figster said:

The reward you may get for being one of the best college athletes playing in your position is to end up playing for one of the worst coached and managed teams in the NFL. In many instances the best college QB's end up in places destined for failure. So why reward poorly coached and managed teams in this manner? Why do we reward the best college athletes entering the NFL draft in this manner? I get trying to even the playing field. My idea is to make teams work for the rights to the best college athletes. Show that you can coach and manage well enough to give star athletes a chance for success in the NFL. My idea is to give the best team/record to not make the playoffs the 1st pick in the draft and go from best to worst record. Teams on the brink of becoming playoff caliber getting the best college athletes available. Win, win for both the player and team. Playoff teams pick last and still go from best to worst. Stop rewarding perennial bad teams for failure. 

 

Any thoughts on this idea my fellow Bills fans?

 

And more money.  Don't cry too hard for them.

[Figster]

Just now, Doc said:

 

And more money.  Don't cry too hard for them.

Good point, thanks

[Figster]

13 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Without injury Joe Burrows and the Bengals in all likelihood would be drafting near the end of the 1st round. Bad example IMO.

 

Without being the worst team in the NFL, they wouldn't have Joe Burrow at all!.

 

Trevor Lawrence almost makes my argument for me IMO. To good to be watching the playoffs instead of participating IMO. 9 - 8 record doesn't get the job done.

 

They made the playoffs, and won a game against Herbert (another top 10 QB drafted on a bad team) his second season, and only missed the playoffs this season because he got hurt.

 

In any case, your plan still wouldn't work. What would happen is a team with a franchise QB that barely missed the playoffs (Bengals/Jags last season for example) would get a top 3 pick, and they would trade it for multiple first rounders to a really bad team without a franchise QB. So what you'd really be doing is sending a prospect like Caleb or Jayden Daniels or Drake Maye to a bad team made even worse with depleted draft capital in the future.

 

The system works. Your system does not.

My system has not been tested.

 

Teams losing on purpose to gain an advantage in the draft does not help the league from an entertainment standpoint.

 

My system makes teams work to improve...

Edited March 31 by Figster

[FireChans]

1 minute ago, Figster said:

My system has not been tested.

 

Teams losing on purpose to gain an advantage in the draft does not help the league, its viewers, or fans of the losing team buying tickets.

Why would the Bengals not trade the #2 overall pick for 3 firsts and a second from a team with a bleak future like the Pats? 
 

How does that help “reward” the top QB prospects? 
 

There are two ways to get top prospects in the NFL draft. Lose a lot, or trade a lot of future picks (thus doubling down on a potentially losing proposition). Your plan would eliminate the first option and thus bad teams would be even WORSE more often than not. Because they would be FORCED to trade a bunch of picks that could potentially make their team better in order to have a shot at a top QB prospect. It would effectively cripple most bad organizations in perpetuity. 

 

Your system even theoretically does not hold up to scrutiny, let alone in practice.  It wouldn’t work and it would be counterproductive to “rewarding the top prospects” entirely. 
 

Would Drake Maye rather go to the 2024 Pats as is, or the 2024 Pats that had to trade pick 14, their 2025 first and second and 2026 second?

 

Everyone knows the answer. Dropping you down to -1/10.

 

[Figster]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Why would the Bengals not trade the #2 overall pick for 3 firsts and a second from a team with a bleak future like the Pats? 
 

How does that help “reward” the top QB prospects? 
 

There are two ways to get top prospects in the NFL draft. Lose a lot, or trade a lot of future picks (thus doubling down on a potentially losing proposition). Your plan would eliminate the first option and thus bad teams would be even WORSE more often than not. Because they would be FORCED to trade a bunch of picks that could potentially make their team better in order to have a shot at a top QB prospect. It would effectively cripple most bad organizations in perpetuity. 

 

Your system even theoretically does not hold up to scrutiny, let alone in practice.  It wouldn’t work and it would be counterproductive to “rewarding the top prospects” entirely. 
 

Would Drake Maye rather go to the 2024 Pats as is, or the 2024 Pats that had to trade pick 14, their 2025 first and second and 2026 second?

 

Everyone knows the answer. Dropping you down to -1/10.

 

Again, Bengals are a bad example and without injury to Burrow would still be drafting near the end of the 1st. 

 

Bad ownership and management is what cripples teams IMO.

 

Did the Pats even need a 1st round draft pick at QB to win championships?

 

 

[FireChans]

5 minutes ago, Figster said:

Again, Bengals are a bad example and without injury to Burrow would still be drafting near the end of the 1st. 

 

Bad ownership and management is what cripples teams IMO.

 

Did the Pats even need a 1st round draft pick at QB to win championships?

 

 

This is not a refutation. Burrow DID get hurt and the Bengals WOULD have probably gotten a top 3 pick in your system. So again, they would almost certainly take advantage of a bad team that needs to take a shot on a QB. 
 

Answer my question. What Pats team does Drake Maye want to go to?
 

The Pats got the greatest QB of all time in the sixth round. They got lucky. Most great QBs go far higher than that.!Do you think they thought Brady was going to be that guy when they passed on him 5 times in the same draft? 

[Figster]

2 hours ago, FireChans said:

This is not a refutation. Burrow DID get hurt and the Bengals WOULD have probably gotten a top 3 pick in your system. So again, they would almost certainly take advantage of a bad team that needs to take a shot on a QB. 
 

Answer my question. What Pats team does Drake Maye want to go to?
 

The Pats got the greatest QB of all time in the sixth round. They got lucky. Most great QBs go far higher than that.!Do you think they thought Brady was going to be that guy when they passed on him 5 times in the same draft? 

Answer my question, does Tom Brady win even one championship If he's drafted by lets say the Browns? Doubtful IMO

 

Does Stafford wait over a decade to win a Championship If he's drafted by the 49ers? Probably not

 

 We have a system that sends the best college recruits to the worst coached and managed teams.

 

The best players from the draft does not fix badly coached and managed teams.

 

It does give enough reason for badly managed teams to keep spinning their collective wheels ... 

 

 

Edited March 31 by Figster

[FireChans]

30 minutes ago, Figster said:

Answer my question, does Tom Brady win even one championship If he's drafted by lets say the Browns? Doubtful IMO

 

Does Stafford wait over a decade to win a Championship If he's drafted by the 49ers? Probably not

 

 We have a system that sends the best college recruits to the worst coached and managed teams.

 

The best players from the draft does not fix badly coached and managed teams.

 

It does give enough reason for badly managed teams to keep spinning their collective wheels ... 

 

 

Tom Brady would’ve still been a great QB. Matt Stafford would’ve been a great QB. Regardless of who drafted them or where they played. EJ would’ve sucked everywhere. Maybe the finer details of their careers change a bit, but they would’ve been great. 

 

This is the phenomenon I like to call “drought brain.”

 

Somehow, a collective of Bills fans believe it’s not mostly just the QB. They believed it during the drought because they couldn’t just admit all our QB’s sucked and now they have to continue to believe it for god knows why. 
 

They think the reason the Pats made the playoffs every year, and the Bills didn’t was somehow because the Pats organization was great and the Bills just weren’t developing QB’s right. It wasn’t that Brady was great and Trent and Tyrod and JP and EJ sucked.

 

Even when Brady left NE and they turned into a total dumpster fire, with the exact same HC and FO and Brady won a ring in Tampa immediately, they refuse to believe their eyes. I guess somehow the Bills turned into a superstar organization overnight along with the Bucs and BB and NE just forgot how to do it?
 

Even when we cruise to division titles and playoff berths every year and we have far and away the best QB in the division, it can’t just be that we have a great QB.

 

Bizarre to say the least. You’d have to willfully ignore like the entire last 20 years of the NFL to still hold these opinions. Nothing matters until the Bills get the QB, right? Now we got the QB and every team in division doesn’t and all the sudden the QB doesn’t matter lol.
 

Ultimately, as this is a massive tangent, you seem to be operating under the assumption that the first overall pick shouldn’t just get paid way more than everybody, but they should also be encouraged to go to good teams so they can win a Super Bowl? Why? What has Caleb Williams done to deserve to go to a good team to win a Super Bowl? What has he done that makes him more deserving than Allen or Burrow or Lamar?

 

The answer: nothing. Being good in college doesn’t mean you deserve to go to a great organization that’s a QB away from making postseason runs. You go where you’re selected and if you get selected first, you make the most money. That’s how it goes.

[Buffalo03]

4 hours ago, FireChans said:

Your opinion is wrong.

 

Jags record 3 seasons before picking Lawrence:

5-11

6-10

1-15

 

Jags record since picking Lawrence:

3-14

9-8

9-8

 

Yes Urban Meyer sucked as a coach. Yes Doug Pederson is better. But the Jags are better now than the garbage they were before probably 90% because of Lawrence. Hell, he had the team 66% better despite worse coaching.

 

Bengals record 3 seasons before picking Burrow:

7-9

6-10

2-14

 

Bengals record since picking Burrow:

4-11 (Burrow hurt)

10-7

12-4

9-8 (Burrow hurt)

 

Did Zach Taylor wake up and learn how to coach after the 2-14 season?  Or do we think maybe Burrow by himself is worth about 8 wins?

 

We could do this all day with the top QB's drafted. It's obvious. Sure, some of the QB's bust. Some folks even argue that the teams "ruined" the players. But they really don't.

 

McVay made Goff look better than what he is. Jeff Fisher obviously made him look worse. But Goff is who Goff is, which is a good starter in the NFL, but not in the upper echelon. He never will be.

 

Justin Fields will almost certainly never be good, and probably never would have been good. He may have looked better than what he was in Chicago with awesome coaching, but he wouldn't have been good.

 

Mac Jones will never be good. He was made to look better than he was in 2021 with a team built around his strengths, but you can only hide a bad QB for long. And now we all know he sucks. Because he sucks.

 

Brock Purdy is decent. But his system makes him look great. Just like the system made Jimmy G look great, when he wasn't. It doesn't make them better players. They are who they are. No matter how great Brock looks up 30 against a bad team with Shanahan, he's still closer to Mac Jones than Josh Allen.

 

The game changers at QB, the guys who can turn around a franchise, sometimes despite bad coaching or management, are by and large picked in the top 10. Therefore, it makes total sense that the bad teams that may or may not have bad coaching/management get first crack at them.  This is the whole point of the draft. Why should a team like the Bengals who lost their superstar QB to injury and barely missed the playoffs get that shot instead?  It makes no sense.

 

Agree with everything you said except about Jimmy G. He never looked "great" in the 49ers system. He looked average instead of crappy like he did in other systems

[papazoid]

3 hours ago, Figster said:

My system has not been tested.

 

Teams losing on purpose to gain an advantage in the draft does not help the league from an entertainment standpoint.

 

My system makes teams work to improve...

 

the closest thing to your idea is tested constantly in the NBA & NHL.....it's called the draft lottery....and it's a disaster.

see the buffalo sabres losing out on drafting connor mcdavid as a prime example.

 

 PLAYERS & COACHES will NEVER lose on purpose...please sight one example in the NFL.

now, i concede that a GM & OWNER can hinder a teams success by not spending to the cap max or upgrading the roster as best they can in hopes of improving their draft spot for maybe one season. but even then, you will never get players and coaches to play along and lose on purpose (see the NY JETS). their future livelihoods are at stake. the colts and andrew luck is the last best example of this by a GM & OWNER not trying their best. it just doesnt happen often enough to completely change the system.

 

take the rams, one year they win super bowl, the next year they miss the playoffs....coached the same.

 

PARITY is good. the current draft format is one of many ways the NFL achieves parity. a semi-hard Salary cap. free agency. roster size.  the schedule where 1st place teams play each other, so one must lose, while 4th place teams play each other, so one must win. last to first place stories happen more in the NFL than the rest of the major sports combined.

 

nobody is losing on purpose. badly managed teams get GM's & Coaches fired pretty quick.

 

besides, somebody could game your system too if they wanted. whats better, being the last team in the playoffs and losing first game or being the first team out of playoffs and getting the first pick ?......getting the first pick will almost always be better.....therefore the potential for losing on purpose still exists.

[FireChans]

6 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

Agree with everything you said except about Jimmy G. He never looked "great" in the 49ers system. He looked average instead of crappy like he did in other systems

Meh, he had a passer rating of 97 in SF. Josh Allen’s career passer rating is 92.

 

He was playing well above his skis.

[Buffalo03]

9 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Meh, he had a passer rating of 97 in SF. Josh Allen’s career passer rating is 92.

 

He was playing well above his skis.

I don't care about passer rating. He didn't pass the eye test. Passer rating is overrated. You can tell just by watching him he was barely above average

[FireChans]

1 minute ago, Buffalo03 said:

I don't care about passer rating. He didn't pass the eye test. Passer rating is overrated. You can tell just by watching him he was barely above average

That’s where we agree

[schoolhouserock]

6 hours ago, FireChans said:

A terrible idea. 
 

A good to great QB can turn a bad franchise into a good one. See: The Bills.

 

The NFL wants the bad teams to eventually be good. Otherwise folks stop watching. 
 

You also can’t say we’re rewarding bad teams for failure and in the same breath argue that it’s not a reward because they are bad teams and destined for failure. Pick a lane. 
 

0/10

This explanation, coming from the field goal kick revolutionary, is wonderful. I very much agree. However, one might ask what the heck kind of lane you have picked!

[Figster]

1 hour ago, FireChans said:

Tom Brady would’ve still been a great QB. Matt Stafford would’ve been a great QB. Regardless of who drafted them or where they played. EJ would’ve sucked everywhere. Maybe the finer details of their careers change a bit, but they would’ve been great. 

 

This is the phenomenon I like to call “drought brain.”

 

Somehow, a collective of Bills fans believe it’s not mostly just the QB. They believed it during the drought because they couldn’t just admit all our QB’s sucked and now they have to continue to believe it for god knows why. 
 

They think the reason the Pats made the playoffs every year, and the Bills didn’t was somehow because the Pats organization was great and the Bills just weren’t developing QB’s right. It wasn’t that Brady was great and Trent and Tyrod and JP and EJ sucked.

 

Even when Brady left NE and they turned into a total dumpster fire, with the exact same HC and FO and Brady won a ring in Tampa immediately, they refuse to believe their eyes. I guess somehow the Bills turned into a superstar organization overnight along with the Bucs and BB and NE just forgot how to do it?
 

Even when we cruise to division titles and playoff berths every year and we have far and away the best QB in the division, it can’t just be that we have a great QB.

 

Bizarre to say the least. You’d have to willfully ignore like the entire last 20 years of the NFL to still hold these opinions. Nothing matters until the Bills get the QB, right? Now we got the QB and every team in division doesn’t and all the sudden the QB doesn’t matter lol.
 

Ultimately, as this is a massive tangent, you seem to be operating under the assumption that the first overall pick shouldn’t just get paid way more than everybody, but they should also be encouraged to go to good teams so they can win a Super Bowl? Why? What has Caleb Williams done to deserve to go to a good team to win a Super Bowl? What has he done that makes him more deserving than Allen or Burrow or Lamar?

 

The answer: nothing. Being good in college doesn’t mean you deserve to go to a great organization that’s a QB away from making postseason runs. You go where you’re selected and if you get selected first, you make the most money. That’s how it goes.

Drought brain, lol, ok

 

How about scrambled brains for all the good QB's ruined behind bad Olines.  Piss poor management like putting Aaron Rodgers behind the Jets Oline. Lets ruin Zach Wilson since brainstorm idea number one doesn't work.

 

Brilliant... 

[MJS]

I'm very much against this. This is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard.

 

The NFL draft works better than any other sport. Don't mess with it.

[BillsFanForever19]

And then the worst teams just stay the worst forever with no chance of ever possibly turning it around unless they luck out and land on a Diamond in the Rough. Ridiculous idea.

[strive_for_five_guy]

4 minutes ago, MJS said:

I'm very much against this. This is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard.

 

The NFL draft works better than any other sport. Don't mess with it.

Think this board has started eating krayonz this weekend.

[Buffalo716]

10 minutes ago, Figster said:

Drought brain, lol, ok

 

How about scrambled brains for all the good QB's ruined behind bad Olines.  Piss poor management like putting Aaron Rodgers behind the Jets Oline. Lets ruin Zach Wilson since brainstorm idea number one doesn't work.

 

Brilliant... 

Because it is the best system

 

Parody is real... Hooking up 8-8 teams and giving them potential superstars... Isn't fair to a team that won three games

 

The difference between college and the pros is your brand and finances... Can't buy a player until he hits free agency

 

A draft pick has four years minimum of loyalty... Which is why parody is real

 

You hit on three or four draft picks in one draft... You are going to be a different franchise in a few years 

 

Rewarding mediocrity in pro sports in not the way ... The NFL is so popular because the Texans can go from bottom 10 to playoffs... The jaguars can go from last place... To a team that won a playoff game recently 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

I think it is fixing a problem that doesn't exist. In my near 25 years watching the league the only true intentional tank job was the Browns in 2016 and 2017 and the lesson from that period has been that if you don't then get the Quarterback right it doesn't matter a jot. What they have ended up with is a pretty talented team. But they had a good not great QB and so ended up trading the farm for one they thought was better and with a whole cargo train full of baggage. 

 

Yes, well run and well managed teams in the main maximise potential better than badly run teams. The Bengals are still a badly run franchise. They just have Joe Burrow. Conversley the Steelers are still a well run franchise. They just don't have a Quarterback. The idea to fix that by giving Pittsburgh a chance to get its QB after finishing 9-8 just means the Bengals and others will be perennial bottom feeders and in a franchise league with no relegation that is bad for business. 

[Process]

It's a nice thought and I see your point, but it has to be the way it is. 

[Punching Bag]

9 hours ago, Figster said:

The reward you may get for being one of the best college athletes playing in your position is to end up playing for one of the worst coached and managed teams in the NFL. In many instances the best college QB's end up in places destined for failure. So why reward poorly coached and managed teams in this manner? Why do we reward the best college athletes entering the NFL draft in this manner? I get trying to even the playing field. My idea is to make teams work for the rights to the best college athletes. Show that you can coach and manage well enough to give star athletes a chance for success in the NFL. My idea is to give the best team/record to not make the playoffs the 1st pick in the draft and go from best to worst record. Teams on the brink of becoming playoff caliber getting the best college athletes available. Win, win for both the player and team. Playoff teams pick last and still go from best to worst. Stop rewarding perennial bad teams for failure. 

 

Any thoughts on this idea my fellow Bills fans?

 

  

 

Make it about money like current NFL - let all players be able to be auctioned to highest bidder.  Then players will be more accurate it at calling it a slave auction.