Buddo

But that is how the big corporations would like for it to be, for sure. One of the fundamental problems with any of this, is the distinct perception that many 'net users have, from over the years, where they believe they have been ripped off by corporations, something which has been blatantly obvious with the differences in pricing of multimedia items, e.g. cds, dvds, blurays, where there have been, and often still are, disparities of pricing that simply aren't justifiable. The same thing with an awful lot of technology, which at a component level is largely sourced from a few places, yet again, the pricing is not equitable throughout the world market. I think the idea of micro payments would have a good degree of merit, and tbh, bigger news outlets might well be able to go down that route, but it's taken long time for them to become acceptable to many people, and it's only through having deep pockets that the music biz, has actually eventually, stumbled upon a more viable model. Even though a lot of the 'local' news outlets are now owned as part of 'portfolio' type groups, by larger corps, I don't see the will to stick with loss making until they can come up with a viable model for themselves.

According to PFT, he paid his signing bonus back. https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/15/report-lowell-lotulelei-retiring-from-football/ I have no idea if he had to or not, but it seems like a shrewd move if he genuinely wants to get into coaching, as it prevents any possible repercussions, either literal, or 'word of mouth'.

Irrespective of any other details, the one thing you simply cannot do, is lie to the boss. That gets you your cards immediately. I actually find it ridiculous that Brandon did so, when he should have known that an awful lot of people were aware of his transgression(s). As a bit of an aside, something I would comment on, in respect to Tim Graham saying that an awful lot of people will go to work a lot happier now, is that it might not be especially derogatory to Brandon, but more that it was a difficult position for employees to be put in, where they may have had to 'cover' for Brandon from time to time, and with him gone, that type of difficult/embarrassing situation, isn't going to arise again.

Quite honestly, for all of the options have some validity, my biggest concern would be to start him too soon. Imho, he needs a lot of time bench warming, to see what goes on with NFL defenses, and to hone his footwork. I'm concerned that he will look terrific in shorts, especially with the rocket arm he has, but not actually be a better QB now than McCarron, when proper games, and pads, go on. For the moment, it's good that they have him as the 3rd QB on the depth chart, I just hope it stays that way for a fair part of the season at least. The last QB we drafted in the 1st round, was also a guy who needed time to develop, and through roster mismanagement, and an element of bad luck, he never got it. At least this time around, we should have enough competency at the position ahead of Allen, for that not to have to be the case. Another 'issue' I can foresee, is that as and when Allen is 'ready', he is going to have to have a different offense to run than either McCarron or Peterman. Mainly so as to account for using that rocket arm to the best advantage. One thing that does seem as though it's a positive in that respect however, is that Daboll does appear to be capable of doing that sort of thing, as evidenced by the switch of QBs and approach to their offence, that he showed in that game for 'Bama.

TBH, with all the PED uses he's been caught with, imho, he shouldn't even be available in the league any more. It's one thing to be making a mistake, it's another entirely to be a serial offender, who appears to take PEDs as part of his daily diet.

There might be a few struggles at first, but his bloodlines say he'll get to grips with it sooner rather than later, imho.

I think you can make a genuine case that they actually drafted the guy who was top of their list. It's generally being accepted that Allen has far and away the most potential of any of the 'top 4' QBs. You then have to look at that information in relation to how the current Bills Brass, see their 'franchise QB'. They have said, often, that they like size. That's a knock on Mayfield, that I see compounded by first hand viewing of another short QB in Taylor. I also think that sets him at the bottom of that 'top 4'. There have been some interesting tidbits in the pressers the last couple of days also. The one that had me paying attention particularly, was one where they talked about Allen having played in conditions very similar to what we get in Buffalo, and his arm strength and big hand size were mentioned. That, to me, was a sign that Darnold may well have not been top of their list, as assumed by many. He (Darnold) doesn't have 'big' hands, and I believe that if you want to knock him, his ball security could be a big red flag - especially to a D minded HC who hates losing turnover battles. I think it was the same presser, where Beane almost went out of his way to be nice about Rosen, and if some late chatter about the Bills doubling down on their study of him is to be believed, he may well have been their fall back option, if they found out anything about the Allen tweets that they really couldn't live with. Now, while it wouldn't be my ranking, I can easily believe that the Bills could well have had the 'top 4' QBs ranked as Allen, Rosen, Darnold, then Mayfield. I think the combination of the attributes that they like, and the attributes they see as being 'desireable' to play in WNY, can get you to the above 'ranking' without too much trouble, especially as apparently Allen has terrific retention of information, and the highest wonderlic of the bunch.

Good stuff Shaw. In certain respects, it represents much of my feelings about the first two picks. Bottom line is that Beane has given McDermott his two field 'generals', and it's up to the coaches to get them up to speed. Thing is, with Edmunds age, and the longevity of QBs, it's a pairing that could exist for 15 years, if everything panned out, or at least both kids get close to their respective 'ceilings'. Allen, is obviously the bigger question mark of the two, at least in part due to the family DNA of Edmunds. But he's also pretty raw, and with his intelligence and willingness to work, has plenty of redeeming attributes, apart from the obvious physical ones. Personally, I'm worried by the inaccuracy numbers of Allen, as much as anything else. No matter how many 'excuses' about type of throws and lack of surrounding WRs you want to make, it still isn't going to account for enopugh of a difference to bolster the number to where it reaches the 'good'. I will also say that I've more than a sneaky suspicion that Allen was the #1 QB on their board. Comments about arm strength and hand size, that are lurking around in the pressers, alongside adverse conditions, make me believe that Allen was their top pick, but oddly enough, over Rosen, with Darnold 3rd and Mayfield last of the 'top four' QBs. They've also talked about size (height) in the past, which I think is why Mayfield was lower down, especially after having seen Taylor's struggles up close. Hand size, iirc, was a knock on Darnold, and Beane was pretty complimentary about Rosen even after taking Allen. There was also chatter about the Bills 'doubling down' on Rosen in the last hours before the draft, and I'd say that was because if they didn't like anything they found out about the tweets from Allen, they would have gone to their #2 guy, and double checked themselves at the death. Ultimately, I think they've 'swung for the fences' with their first two picks. I think Edmunds is highly likely to become the absolute stud forecast, as his ancestry just screams he will, but Allen is the guy by whom Beane and McDermott will stand or fall in the long run. They could be the foundation blocks of a dynasty rebuilt, but you need the QB to succed for any success the other guy has, to be truly relevant. The next couple of years are going to be very interesting, with hopefully more highs than lows, but I think we are getting both again.

From what I'm seing so far, Edmunds has a lot of work to do, but much like his companion pick at QB, has an enormous ceiling. I'm getting the impression with these two picks, that Beane and McDermott have gone hard for their two 'Generals', the obvious one on Offense at QB, but Edmunds on D also. Could be some growing pains, but if they both pan out, we will be contending for a long time, assuming they fill out other parts of the roster correctly.

I'm a little bemused, about all the nonsense being talked about, processing speed. Mainly because every college QB has to get quicker at it, due to the NFL being played at a far greater speed generally. Even though every rookie (not limited to QBs) gets told that the speed of the NFL is much quicker, they all seem to concur that it's one of the major differences, when it comes to the games, that really sticks with them. All the different quotes over the years, about 'the game slowing down' for guys, once they get adjusted to the speed things happen at, is just that. I see no evidence that Allen will be any different to any other guy in that respect, it just so happens that at the QB position, it has a greater effect. Allen will either make that 'transition', or he won't, in which case he won't last, but there's nothing to say he can't make it, at all.

I don't like the pick. Not because I can't see the awesome potential of the kid, but because of the cost of doing it, and the likelihood it will take a year of sitting, before he is ready to start. Unfortunately, there was no real middle ground. It was going to cost us to take one of the top 4 QBs, irrespective of who it was we wanted. I just wish we hadn't had to spend so much, on a guy who simply cannot be expected to start immediately. A few relatively random thoughts on it follow, both good and bad. I do admire the fact that the guy we picked, has the biggest ceiling as to how far he could develop. We definitely taking a shot. I do like that Allen (supposedly) has very good retention of stuff, and is, according to his 'wonderlic', one of the more intelligent QBs of the bunch. I did like the genuine delight on the kid's face, when he was announced as the pick, and the way he pretty much bounded up to the stage. That was good to see, tbh. I don't like his accuracy numbers. Irrespective of talent around him(drops), or the lack of designed short throws, I fail to see that the numbers can be massaged enough, to get him where he needs to be accuracy wise. It has to be a major concern. I suppose part of why I do dislike the pick, is that I would have taken Rosen over him, as I think Rosen is going to be able to start day 1, and being somewhat 'old school', I do expect top 10 picks, to be starting immediately. Tbh, I find it somewhat odd, that Rosen goes last of the 'big four', when he is the most ready to start, imho. Hopefully, we develop the kid in the right way, and actually put no pressure on him to start - although I do expect him to put his best foot forward in the TC competition at the position. I'm sure fans will 'come around' to the pick, as the kid has so much arm talent, that they are bound to be 'wowed' by a throw or two - if fans could go overboard for Losman, I'm sure they will get behind Allen.

Ideally, he sits, for a decent amount of time. From seeing the odd comment around though, I can see him lining up behind center for the first game. Mainly because of his intelligence, and reported (somewhere) ability, to retain information well. I'd much rather he sat a while, mainly to get some experience in reading NFL defenses, as while he may be able to get what we do down pat, I'd be pretty certain he won't have seen defenses like the NFL puts out, and you have to be a lot more certain with the football, because of it.

I think he's going to find out that what he wants, and what he gets, could well be two seperate things. Especially as his play dropped off after the last big contract he got. If I wanted to be particularly Machiavellian about it, I'd get him on a cheaper 1 year deal, let him play his socks off, after that next big deal, then let someone else overpay him, for the rest of his career.

I think it's a genuine consideration, but less so for other positions than QB. If you have faith in the guy, but you know he's going to take a year to be ready, then you want that year at the end of his deal, when you think he's going to be good. As regards trading down, well, I think you have to be especially careful about that, when it comes to QBs, as it only takes 1 team to mess things up. In the NFL these days, when picking QBs, I think a good observation is 'wait and be damned', as it's happened to the Bills a few times over the last 10 years.

Okay, any former or current scouts care to add to this? Please ?

Hard as nails, yet the definition of how you should conduct yourself. I’m sure some of his “elusiveness” was down to the opposition seeing how often guys got hurt trying to tackle him. ? Even JJ Watt came up with bruising that looked like he’d been in a car wreck after Fred blocked him.

Also, you can get some advantages from conditions and playing against QBs who mostly play in domes, so for me it’s either retractable and you play with it open, or open full stop.

Ross might be an idiot of an owner, but he does put his money where his mouth is

After a very nice start - getting up to #12 in the draft, the Jest kicked us in the teeth. Much like getting into the playoffs, we will be dependant on what others do, to snag the QB we want. That, to me, is losing the off season, irrespective of anything else, but I will give them credit for trying. Lots of holes that do need filling, especially with Incognito now retiring, and while the picks we have should go a long way to filling those holes, chances are we will be using them up to go get a QB. While you would think that 'plan A' was always to go get a QB, situations change, and we aren't best placed to do that now. 'Plan B', might have to come into effect, or existence. Which would involve using the picks to build the roster, and only getting a QB, if one we like falls to us.

True enough. I would question their man management abilities, tbh, as I'm not sure they have any.

There's a certain irony in this, in that we expect players to see contracts out, yet when teams mess with them, providing it's our team, we get all bent out of shape about it. This stuff really should work both ways, especially when you are talking about an odd million here or there. Like anything else in life, there are price points. These are likely to be very different for different people, but at a certain stage of a guys career, he can quite possibly put a price on what he is prepared to play for, or not. Training camps etc. when you are a veteran, are seemingly largely something to be endured, rather than embraced, and how hard the games are, and the recovery from them, is another aspect. Over the years, I've heard a few veterans say that they can still play, and would still play, but it's not worth it for the sort of money on offer - i.e. cheap. While this is little more than speculation, I wouldn't be overly surprised if the salary reduction was a straw that broke the camel's back when it came to thinking about retirement.

Probably depends on what you mean by 'help'. There are plenty of things that can 'help' athletes, but would be classed as 'banned' supplements, or substances. I'm no expert on the subject, but I do know there are a lot of supplements available, some of which have banned extra ingredients, and some of which are perfectly okay. Going back a few years, there was a skier got banned, as he used an inhaler, of a type common in europe, that was perfectly legal, but the US 'version', which actually had an extra stimulant in it, was the one he used. This was 'over the counter medication. I don't know what forms some of this stuff comes in, but HGH would be something that could help significantly, and is banned. (Human Growth Hormone) And there are, I believe, synthetic forms of that that are available. Steroids will also be helpful. Supplements themselves, aren't necessarily wrong, at all, it's what goes to make them up. And if they weren't believed to give an advantage, they wouldn't in all likelihood, be banned. Like a lot of things in life, rather than the genuinely controlled use of things, it's the abuse of them, that causes the most harm. Steroids, HGH etc. have plenty of genuine medical uses, but they aren't supposed to be used to make you go quuicker, stronger, longer or harder.

I see where you are coming from with this, but I think they value about 3 or 4 non-qbs pretty highly, and as such really don't want to slide too far back. Also, nobody knows who the Browns are picking atm, so the Giants won't move until they know, imho, which pretty much nixes your scenario. I'd also say that it's far easier to let the Bills do the legwork with trades, and you can concentrate on which players you'd want.

I don't think the Giants are prepared to move too far back tbh. 5, 6 or 7 might be their limit, and the ball is in Beane's court to get the Bills there. Then the dance is on. It may not be quite as expensive to move up from, say 7, the big question, is how much do you give up to get there in the first place. I think that realistically the highest the Bills can get to before trading with the Gints, would be the #6 from Indy, but even that might be debateable. #7 might be their best shot, and then they must know what the Giants will want from there. Unless the Browns announce their pick early, we aren't going to know if we will move to the #2, until that first pick is in. I'm going to say that if we haven't moved further up before the draft, we aren't going to go to the #2 regardless. I don't see trading multiple picks twice, is something you want to be doing in the limited time available, between the first and second picks.