K-9

Any time you have 70 rated potential starters at the top, it's a deep draft, at least on paper, which is all any of these prospects are. That said, there will be players in that 70 who bust, players on nobody's radar will become All Pros, and some will be exactly what's projected.

Fitz only got a 48. The player with a perfect score remains Pat McInally in '75.

People need to better understand that even if we pay the price quoted in this thread, we STILL have picks in every round which makes it look like a traditional draft, anyway. And in a purportedly deep draft, this is the BEST opportunity to spend the capital on a QB while STILL being able to add pieces in the draft. No brainer from where I sit. Imo, the ONLY thing hindering a move up to 2 would be if McBean have ONE prospect CLEARLY ranked above all others and the rest are so closely rated and he knows a good prospect would fall. It's a question of their commitment to the prospect they have targeted. I can't see this deal being a hindrance to trying to go up and get him.

Once again, an interesting list to read but none if it relevant to these QBs and these teams in this draft.

Speaking of McVay's system, I want Daboll to be talking to the QB at the LOS right up until the 15 second cutoff, too. I'm surprised not every team is doing that already.

I agree. For all the sack he ran into, he also made inhuman athletic plays to escape sacks as well. Lets hope our new QB can compensate for what he lacks in escapeability with getting the ball out on time.

I am looking at ONLY through the prism of draft capital invested which, as I've pointed out, represent several of their top selections in various drafts. I understand the point about evaluation of college prospects at the position, but I would posit that it was that precise evaluation that led them to go the veteran route vs. the prospect route at the time, especially in '98 when they had no chance at the top of the draft. 2003 was extremely bare as well. That said, I think '04 is an example of what you allude to here; Donahoe wanted Roethlisberger badly and should have pulled the trigger on the trade with the Texans to get him. If McBean are that convinced of somebody in this draft, they need to pull the trigger. Anything less than that and they are being hypocritical about their process.

Too many holes, too many holes, too many holes!!! DOOMED!!!

It is NO difference in the expenditure of their draft capital. No matter how you slice it, the Bills used their first pick in the '98 draft on Rob Johnson, the #9 pick overall, etc. Too me, what's quibbling over split hairs is the '83 draft where folks like to point out how we took Hunter instead of Kelly at 12 vs. 14, respectively. I get it, but there just isn't that much difference.

Better than a bridge too short:

I am in agreement with the spirit of this post. And I agree, now is the time. However, I continue to maintain that we can't exclude trades of their first round draft slots for QBs: Rob Johnson for the their #9 pick in the '98 draft Drew Bledsoe for their #14 pick in '03 draft JP Losman for their #20 pick in the '05 draft And no, that's not splitting hairs. Those are examples of their actual first round investments in QBs over the years. No need to respond or start a tangent debate on the subject. Like I said, I agree with the spirit of your post.

Nobody's gonna complain about the rookie not playing until our starter screws up.

Well, in a draft projected to produce 70 starters in the league I agree, it's a great opportunity to infuse a roster with good, young talent. I just think the Giants are missing an opportunity to lock up the most important position for the next 10 years after Manning hangs 'em up.

Davis’ haircut manages to make Gruden’s coif look good. That ain’t easy.

Anything BUT house money. Those were OUR assets we gave up in order to acquire that additional draft capital; our investment in time and money on the players traded. No house money involved.

He buys time, goes through progressions, and makes plays. Sure, sometimes he scrambles for yards but usually not before he's exhausted the possibilities.

"Everybody's robbin' the same train." Buddy Nix Circa: forever

I think you missed the part about being a playmaker in that profile above.

Games have always been won between the ears. I could argue moreso in past eras when QBs called their own plays.

Short and intermediate routes, no experience under center, average arm.

The House of Irish answers the call.

And watch them several times over at that. Then break down every 3, 5, and 7 step drop while noting the route combinations and defensive alignment. Oh, and be sure to note the game situation for each event as well. That's a good start, anyway.

It's all subjective evaluation. It's just that some is more informed than others. Zierlein et al just aren't in a position to put in the man hours required to fully evaluate these prospects. Heck, NFL teams still aren't finished with their due diligence and rankings at this point. That said, I think the Bills, Jest, and others have a prospect that's a clear front runner with everybody else tightly packed in the rankings.

I think there's a lot of validity here. In a draft both deep in QBs and, according to some, with the top 70 prospects projecting as starters, this is a good year to have 6 picks in the first three rounds. While I'm in favor of trading up if their guy is there, I am also totally on board with McBeane letting the draft fall to them because of the unique opportunity to reshape the roster with young talent. But if they identify that guy at QB and he's there for the taking, they should spend the capital.