hondo in seattle

That's what worries me. I read a study somewhere that showed unsurprisingly that offensive and defensive rankings are not random from year to year. There tends to be some degree of continuity across seasons even with players coming, going, and getting hurt. For example, if a defense allowed a lot of yards last year, it probably will again this year. This is worrisome because neither our O nor our D performed well statistically in 2017. There are, however, exceptions to the general tendency. When there's a big raise or drop in the offensive or defensive statistical rankings, it's usually drive by a change in one of these places: HC, OC, DC, QB. That gives us reason for both hope and despair. On offense, we have a different OC and QB and that makes our offense hard to predict. So there's hope. Here's the despair: our defense has the same HC and DC. Statisticians will tell us that in this case we'll probably perform on D about the same as last year. We'll see. I'm hoping for a stastical improvement because McD and Frazier are still implementing a new defensive system and finding the players to execute it. More specifically what worries me, though, is that take-aways vary a lot from year to year. It's one of the most unpredictable stats in all of football. It seems as if they are driven more by luck than skill. Last year, key take-aways gave us a few wins. We might not get those take-aways again this year.

Not to be a Debbie Downer but... We were in the bottom half of offensive yards gained and defensive yards allowed last year. We've got a lot of work to do. Even if our defense manages to jump into the upper half of the rankings this season, it won't be enough to carry a weak offensive unit into the playoffs. I do agree that our D will be better this year. But I don't see it as a top ten squad yet. The front 7 as a whole was not stellar last year and while Star is a welcomed addition, he hasn't been dominant lately. And I'm not sure we have enough good DBs when you consider there are 5 or more on the field on most plays. Really hope I'm wrong.

PT101, thanks for not starting another thread about why we did or didn't get the wrong QB in the draft! (Yikes, I'm usually a patient man but I'm getting tired of people thinking their opinion on the Allen pick needs a new thread). I was debating 4 or 5 and decided to let the optimist in me win out and voted 5. We have a lot of JAGs who could maybe start on other teams but few stars.

I thought the Kirk Cousins interviews with Allen were good. Allen seemed to know his stuff. https://officialize.com/originals/the-wake-up-call/kirk-cousins-josh-allen-part-1?utm_campaign=KCwakeup1_042418&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter The thing about Cousins is that he also had flaws coming out of college. One draft profile on NFL.com said this, "Cousins has late-round value to a team looking for someone to compete for a backup role." Some guys overcome their flaws. Fingers crossed that Allen is one of them. http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/kirk-cousins?id=2532820

I hope you're right. I've given up on assessing drafts a long time ago - my evaluations were too often wrong. And it's not just me. Other fans are often wrong. The 'draft analysts' are often wrong... GMs are often wrong, for that matter. I'm purely in wait-and-see mode.

I agree but the opportunity cost was high. We've lost out on some good players who could have filled important holes. Really hoping Allen and Edmunds prove to be worth the price we paid.

I'd say - and I've heard scouts say - every college QB needs to get better. That's why, despite all their expertise and and hours of due diligence, scouting departments still decide upon the wrong QB year after year. It's hard to predict which QB will improve in the ways needed, and which won't. Personally, I am concerned about Allen. Guys who weren't productive in college usually aren't productive in the pros. Then again, I'd have been concerned about any of these guys because of the high fail rate of 1st round QBs. That all have shortcomings they may fail to overcome. Even an amazing talent evaluator like Bill Walsh was wrong almost as often as he was right. I won't pretend to know what to expect from Allen. I just cross my fingers and hope for the best.

There were folks on this board comparing this draft favorably to the draft of 1983. And how this class ultimately stacks up still remains to be seen. But so far, 1983 is still the gold standard with 6 QBs picked in the first round (in the first 27 picks if I recall correctly). I hope, though, this class produces at least one HOFer and SB winner.

I think it was a risk-reward evaluation. None of this year's QBs are close to being sure-things. Historically, most 1st round QB aren't. There are risks no matter which QB you take. Most draft analysts say the risk for Allen is higher than the other guys in that Top Four group. The main concern is that 'you can't fix accuracy.' But many draft analysts also say Allen has a higher ceiling than his peers. Mayock, for example, thinks Allen could be "special." The choice ultimately came down to the two Joshes. The Bills may have seen more risk with Allen but also saw more potential reward. Even if the pick doesn't pan out, it doesn't mean the thought process was wrong. You have to roll the dice. Sometimes you'll win; sometimes you'll lose. If Beane is good at his job, he'll win more than the 31 other GMs. They gave up two #2's to get the guy they wanted. If this works out, it'll be a great deal. If not, life goes on and you swing again.

I really didn't want Allen but it's hard to fault Beane for moving on from TT's mediocrity, signing Mccarron as a safety net, and then 'swinging for the fences' with Allen.

I agree that the chances of Edmunds being a star are greater than Allen's. But as a fan, I'm hoping we defy the odds and both turn into stars.

Some important caveats but, wow, this guy's excited about Edmunds! Thanks for posting.

Nice post. There were risks with either pick - in fact with any QB. It seems the Bills decided to bet on upside.

Beane drafted a boom-or-bust kind of kid and brought in Mccarron as a safety net. While I was hoping for a different name to be announced yesterday, it's hard to fault Beane's approach. This is better than going forward with the guaranteed mediocrity of TT.

That's more or less fair. So what's the historical win rate on 1st round QBs? Maybe 50%? So there's a gap of maybe 20%? At this point the dice are in the air... There's nothing to do except see how they land. But until they do, in my mind, there's no need for pessimism. And I say that as a guy who would have also placed a different bet. I see what you're saying 26CB but I have to defend 'die hard' on this. (1) Beane is new. He's built up a qualified scouting department. And now they're doing their first draft. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt. (2) Charlie Weis, among other NFL folks, think Allen has a lot of upside. Let's wait and see. (3) We're Bills fans. We're not fans of the other 31 teams so let's criticize the hell out of them while supporting our guys.

The BIlls - and a lot of other folks - like Allen. You clearly don't. Can you honestly say Allen has 0% chance of becoming a franchise QB? Would you be so arrogant to say in absolute certainty that all the professional personnel guys who like Allen are simply idiots and have no clue how to evaluate QBs? But you do? Allen's flaws and shortcomings are obvious to the world. The Bills believe Allen can overcome them. Brees, Brady and many others had to overcome flaws when they turned pro and succeeded. Lots of other QBs don't overcome their college flaws. Who really knows which camp Allen will fall into? I think all the go-big-or-go-home guys should be happy because the Bills just swung hard on a guy who might end being a bust but could also turn out to be a star.

Mayock - who I consider one of the better draft gurus - wrote this in his mock: Dude is 6-foot-5, 237 pounds. He's the same size as Carson Wentz with bigger arm talent and he's a better athlete. Out of maybe any player in this draft, his upside might be the highest. I don't think he's ready Day 1, but if he can get over some hurdles, he's going to be special. The rub is the "if." But every college QB has hurdles to overcome.

I gotta say this, even though Allen wouldn't have been my pick... I think it's funny that some posters think their couple hours of watching highlights combined with reading some media reports make them better judges of QB talent than the collective intelligence of Beane and his entire scouting department combined with their hundreds of hours of due diligence. Part of the fun of being a fan is second-guessing coaches and GMs. But let's not pretend we actually know more.

Whether the pick works out or not, there will be crowds of Bills fans clamoring that they're smarter than Beane, shouting, "See, I told you!" I've heard scouts say the most difficult part about assessing college QBs is that none of them are NFL ready. They all have flaws to fix, things to learn. And so the scouts evaluate film to see how serious the flaws are while at the same time talking to the kid and his coaches to see how coachable he may be. And then the personnel guys make an educated guess. There are no certain hits and none of these top QBs are certain misses. It's really all a matter of odds. I personally think Allen's odds are longer than Rosen's. But Beane rolled the dice on Allen so at this point I'm just hoping for the best.

There's little doubt Beane is a smart guy. Nonetheless, I wasn't happy to read that this attribute was a consideration (again)... "Being able to play in our elements was important us. Josh has big hands, and we saw him play well in a big-time snow game against Colorado State."

You go into a furniture store and see some furniture you really like, but the prices are too expensive. So you come back a week later to see if anything's on sale.

As long as he's been around, it's possible Murph has an insider source who dropped him some hints. Then again, it's also possible Beane hasn't finalized anything yet and is waiting to see how the first few picks go down.

#1 is more-or-less my fantasy scenario. I don't want to trade away a bunch of picks to move up when we have so many needs. I don't want to miss the opportunity to draft a good QB when that need is so great.

I get what you're saying but there's no hard and fast rule. I've known good leaders who were very quiet and self-effacing in most settings but still strong, confident and effective when leading their teams. And I've seen cocky leaders who weren't afraid to blow their own horns who nonetheless did good things to win the loyalty of their teams and maximize their performance. Personality and style have little to do with leadership effectiveness.

I'm screwed. I'm not okay with going full Ditka to trade up. I'm also not okay with staying pat and drafting our future backup QB (Rudolf, for example) with a later first round pick.