BillsFan17

I wouldn't be surprised if Buffalo was interested. However, I think teams like Arizona and maybe even Miami may have been the teams that inquired about him

To be fair, you get to three and you could then pull a Bears and swap the third and other picks for the second overall and secure your guy. Or heck, they swap 3rd and other assets for the first overall. I understand the idea of giving up so much and still potentially missing, but I'd rather be at three trying to move up one more spot, than at 12 where most say they don't want to trade out of the top ten.

Gronk, while arguably the best talent to play TE. Yes, over Gonzo/Sharp. That being said, I wont ever look at him the same. That play forever changed his legacy in the game for me.

He's a very polarizing playet. There is obviously a lot to like, but plenty to be afraid of. More or less a true Boom or Bust prospect if there ever was one in this class. Fore me, I think a team could potentially take more flack by over drafting Jackson and him busting than say the first QB off the board busting. Just because his skill set is so hard to project as a passer in the NFL.

I think it's more of just something to write about than anything else. There is four weeks until the draft, I envision more articles along these lines with different prospects. Really, what else is there to talk about at this point for beat writers?

A ball that is dropped doesn't quantify as uncatchable, so I don't understand your point.

Well said, the biggest point is they stayed in the top ten with the ability to move out and acquire more combined with the (two) trades than had they just made the one with us at 12. The Colts played their position very well, which is something being over looked and some how laid at Beans doorstep.

I think the slight tip of the hand was saying he's be open to moving a pick from the 2019 draft. I feel like if he was totally content at 12, there would be no need to use that 2019 first... Although, I do think it could get interesting if they trade from 22 down into the teens for a QB like Lamar or Rudolph. Take a LB at 12 and then come back into the teens to grab one of those guys. I'd still prefer one of the blue chip specs but...

Beane won't be gun shy, no two ways about that. Just need the other parties to be willing to deal.

Finished with the second highest percentage of uncatchable passes. Unless he is the throw the ball to him self, his struggles will continue.

Yeah, but they get three seconds from the Jets and stay at six giving them even more capital if they wanted to move down again. The two trades would have to be comparmentalized because the foundation for their move with the Jets could have vastly different circumstances. Getting to 6th and acquiring what they did was massive.

If I can get Rosen at six I would do back flips. However, I really don't see him sliding down like that.

I'm sure they will, but for arguments sake, if they think Rosen will slide, I'll gladly benefit from it. I think some teams like Buffalo, Miami, maybe Arizona will try to put it out there that Rosen has red flags.

People also said Watson had a weak arm cause he couldn't ramp up the RPMs at the combine. We all saw how well that translated to the NFL. I'll take anticipation and accuracy all day over a rocket arm.

Works for me, I'll gladly take Rosen a little later in the top ten

Abstractly? Nothing abstract about top five backs not necessarily bringing a team to the next level. Fournette or Kamara? Fournette or Hunt? What about the Cowboys, would they be better off with Ramsey and Jordan Howard in the 5th? I just don't think it's a good move taking a RB in the top five in today's NFL, this isn't altering the landscape to fit my narrative, it's been my stance that you really can't justify in today's NFL taking a back in the top five. This class makes that even more firm a stance when you look at the talent at the position. This class is loaded.

Whatever we want to hear? Who would he be pandering to when saying he didn't want to trade out of the top ten and that's why he took the Jets offer?!?!? Moreover, it's one thing to trade to six and then look to further more down and acquire more, than to trade down to 12. Yeah, buffalo could have offered a nice package, but getting what he did from the Jets and still having the ability to move down again... But what do I know...

Why not? You traded a third rounder in order to give your rookie time to develop while you sure up the line and other elements of the roster. Pick 65 is not a kings ransom to give your self a little breathing room for whomever you draft to sit.

As good as Barkley is, there is no reason to believe Guice or Michel or Chubb or any other of these backs couldn't be as good if not better.

My thoughts exactly, might as well get as much as you can for the pick.

Yet, his initial trade was in the top ten. What he may be willing to do now is different than what the original trade was. If you can't separate the two that's on you not me.

You say that like the Eagles and Rams didn't have WILLING TRADE PARTNERS. Buffalo does not currently have that. Ballard of the Colts said him self they didn't want to slide out of the top ten. Hence why Buffalo most likely wasn't a good trade partner for Indy.

The giants aren't trading out of the top ten.

That package to move down three spots was silly. Their GM could have looked at the idea if moving down to only six and getting that package in return as way to good to pass up. Especially since they could then again move from six down acquiring even more capital. I'm sure teams could have given competitive offers, but what they got from the Jets to only move down three slots... staying in this classes top ten is a major asset in that deal that you can't under value.

Nailed it!