Rocky Landing

The term "bridge QB" gets thrown around on this site a lot as though it were a given. I don't believe it is. Certainly, Tyrod doesn't believe he is a bridge, and McD may not either. But, even if he is, there are plenty of reasons to pay for him, over Foles (who is guaranteed $7mil in Philly, btw) beyond McD's feelings (I'm not sure what that even means?). Honestly, I think we're paying him what he's worth, and I do think he gives us a better chance of winning than any of the other realistic options that were out there. I'm not even sure if I'm in a minority, or majority in this, but, I would rather spend the 2017 season watching the Bills once again go 8-8, than, say, 4-12. Or, 7-9, for that matter. To be clear, I'm not saying that Foles would lose us that many games. I'm just saying that I want to spend as many Sundays watching the Bills win as possible. TT gives us the best chance, at this time, IMHO.

It would seem, from what has been widely reported, that the chances of any of the QBs in this draft developing into a top ten talent are remote, and there is even little consensus on who the top prospect is. It would be pretty surprising if Whaley/McD took one in the first round without trading down. If they did, there would be an avalanche of criticism in the likely event that such a prospect does not pan out. (Not that it matters.) Personally, I would be happy if they traded down for a QB, and not mad if they go for one at #10. But, there are plenty of other needs to be met, with far less risk.

Far better? I'll respectfully disagree with this. Foles was much worse than TT in '15 in St. Louis, and he lost his job to Case Keenum. He barely played last year in KC.

His former coaching staff, and especially his former Ravens' teammates, are some of his most vocal supporters.

I think there is something to this. But, I would say that the lack of a viable alternative played a much bigger role. I was very happy when they kept TT- not because I think he's great (he's not), but because no one could suggest a better alternative (Brian Hoyer???), and I never have, and never will, be on board with tanking a season to get a better draft pick for the following season. So, we're stuck with him this season. Things could be worse. I certainly don't have the faith in him that you do, but I think it's foolish not to recognize his potential. I don't think any of his flaws are insurmountable. And, as the highlight reel that started this thread will attest, his athleticism is undeniable-- and hella-fun to watch when he's on point.

I would submit that one season of decline is an insufficient sample size on which to draw a conclusion.

I'm pretty neutral on TT. I'm hopeful that he will improve. I think it's possible that he becomes, if not a franchise QB, a good enough QB, and leader to get us to the playoffs. I also think it's possible that he flames out. I think the most likely scenario is that he plays 2017 somewhere between his '15 and '16 level. All that being said, I feel like I am objective enough to observe that the "TT Sucks" crowd seems to have much more of an agenda than the "TT is Our Guy" crowd. And, I certainly don't see the sort of blind faith that some of the EJ boosters used to flaunt.

Fair enough. Would you agree that he was better in '15, though?

This stikes me as a rather silly analysis, and more than a little hypocritical. Opinions that differ from yours are not automatically "horrid" (a ridiculous word to use in this context), any more than your opinions are gospel. Tyrod Taylor is what he is, and there were quite a few starting QBs in 2016 that he was better than. The truth is that TT is currently middle-of-the-road. But, there are as many reasons to believe he could improve in 2017 as there are reasons to believe he won't. No doubt, in your mind, that "horrid" opinion makes me "obsessed."

Has anyone said he sucked? The worst thing I have read about him from these pages was that he wasn't worth the price, and he didn't play as hard last season. Both of those things are debatable, but neither equate to "he sucked." What is more amazing to me is the tendency of so many posters to overstate the opinions of those with whom they disagree. If you are arguing against the notion that "Gilmore sucked," then you are engaging in a straw man argument.

I'm wondering if the folks on here who believe this team is three losses worse than last year were Rex Ryan fans? Or, maybe they have very little faith, hope, or trust in McD? Or, maybe they don't remember who the coach was last year? Because, honestly, I can't really wrap my head around the loss of these three players having that great an impact, and I just don't see how, outside of the coaching staff, this team is that different. In my opinion, Rex damaged this team-- especially the defense. So, I'll just go ahead and mix up my own Kool Aid, and be hopeful that McD can turn things around.

Gilmore was an inevitable loss, but not irreplaceable. IMO, Darby is every bit the CB, and Seymour may very well step up, too. He certainly showed promise last season. But, Woods, and Brown? Absolutely replaceable. I'm definitely a "glass half full" guy. But, it's usually half full of sh*t.

1. Mike Williams : Browns 2. Corey Davis : Titans 3. Malik Hooker : Bears 4. OJ Howard : Bills 5 Mitch Trubisky : Jets Bills Pick (bonus) : OJ Howard

I already lined up a ticket to the Bills at Chargers game- lower level, 10 yard line. They're playing for at least the next season at a 29,000 seat soccer stadium called Stub Hub Center. If it's anything like the Bills at Rams last season, it will feel more like a Bills home game.

Anybody not on board with drafting a QB at 10 is an idiot. Grammar counts.

Most of Phoenix smells like bum piss.

Fewer people.

I'd much, much, MUCH rather live in Vegas than Phoenix.

The Raiders already have a huge fan base in Southern California, and for much of that population, a drive to Vegas will be little more than their morning commute. The worst that should be likely, vis a vis fan participation, is that the ratio of home vs. visitor fans at games will be the lowest in the league, thereby giving the Raiders the worst home field advantage in the league. As far as the town, itself, being a huge distraction, are you referring to gambling? I would imagine that the Raiders coaching staff would impose strict prohibitions on such activity, and with the exception of the real gambling junkies, it really isn't such a huge draw for those living there-- it gets old fast. As for the nightlife, it is true that there are numerous clubs and such, and lots to do after hours. But, the same can be said for Miami, New York, and Chicago.

Oh, cut it out, WEO. We all know what he was saying, and so do you. Vegas was literally founded as a playground for adults. There are more bars, clubs, shows, restaurants, and whores per capita than any other city in the country, if not the world. Personally, I disagree with you on one account: I think Vegas is fun for two days, and on the third day you want to GTFO.

As a resident of Los Angeles, I'll say HELL, YEAH.

Lousy footwork? Seriously?

I would be pretty surprised if Brown or Butler saw a whole lot of playing time, if they make the 53 at all. This was clearly his best season. He should get props for that.

8-8 Why should we expect anything different?

Winning sells tickets.