SouthNYfan

Denver's QB situation was horrible. Turnover city. Their defense is still a top flight unit, as good or better than ours. I'm not impressed with their coach much, but they have a significantly better receiving corps and their running game is solid too. Their OLine is a dumpster fire though. They are instantly one of the top AFC teams with a QB, just like we are. Their front office and ownership has recent success on not only winning, but in turning around a poor team rather quickly. It's presumptuous to claim we are the definite favorites when pretty much nobody outside Buffalo seems to think so. We are in the running, with a decent enough shot, assuming we will pay him$$$, but you are acting like it's a foregone conclusion. I'm being realistic, you're being Buffalo biased.

My thing about the browns was a joke. The rest of your post I agree with, except for the last paragraph. I think it's presumptuous to say they are ahead of us based on one season. Denver has a recent Superbowl victory, and another appearance. Arizona has recent success as well. The Jets are a larger market, so maybe he likes that? I don't think so with them though. I think Denver and Arizona are higher than us, then us, then the Jets.

Sure changed the perception of the Browns after they made the playoffs in 2002. Dudes were kicking down the door to sign there.

Can't wait!

I went through so this before People like to look at contracts in a vacuum The cap goes up every year, so his 27 mil won't be as much % of the cap. You also hit the nail on the head, regarding the other extensions incoming.

That actually made me laugh Rob. (In a good way, I'm thanks ) I would say that while Hitler was a terrible person, and anything else other than that is wrong, that incorrect thought process is completely independent of that same person's hypothetical wish to mortgage the farm for a QB they believed to be the gospel, which cannot be proven correct or not until said player in the league. Bottom line is, if you trade 3 first round picks to move up (one of which was extra capital earned by trading down last year and hitting a home run with White) then in reality you are only giving up one extra pick (next year's first) which looks to be a average at best draft. If the QB tanks, so be it. If the QB is a home run, then you're set for a decade. That's all I'm saying.

Continue to use decades old RBs to justify your misguided belief and to dodge responding to anything I said regarding the current NFL fact that a QB is dramatically more important to a team's success than any other position. Yes, Hitler, as in an example that opinions can be wrong, and to think otherwise is just false. Your opinion that you should always draft BPA and that a RB like Barkley is an impactful as a top QB is wrong. So is your assertion that because there isn't a consensus #1 between the QBs that all should then be avoided. Keep living in the past regarding what can and cannot consistently win in the NFL though.

Good post! I'm torn on Landry I'm not saying it was the best apology, but he looked genuinely upset when he saw Williams on the ground, and personally reached out to him after it happened. Williams forgave him on a public forum during his retirement announcement. The rest of the Landry crap is valid. I'm over the Williams thing since Williams is over it, you know? I don't think it's wrong to hate Landry, but I don't think it's wrong to forgive either. I will say that I don't think his attitude is worth his level of talent though. He's not an all time great.

Opinions can be wrong. Some people think that Hitler was a great man. You really gonna defend that all opinions are equally correct? You are using examples of teams winning with a stud QB that are 2 decades old. You are ignoring everything I'm saying. The impact of a QB is the greatest on the field. It's not even close to the next position. An elite QB with an average RB just went to 8 Superbowls in 16 seasons. How many Superbowls has AP been to? How about Barry Sanders? An elite QB with an average RB is a huge leap ahead of an elite RB with an average QB. Yes, it's a team game. Never said it wasn't. The most important position, bar none, is the QB. Marino had one 1000 yard rusher and like 3 top15 def his whole career. If they had given him even decent RBS and defs every year he would have gotten a ring. You can also get above avg RBS in later rounds. It's very rare to find a good QB later in the draft.

Ironically, he prob could have read it in less time than it took him to write that post

Your logic which you are describing has absolutely nothing to do with what I was referring you. You implied that because nobody can decide which of the three between Mayfield, Rosen, Darnold is a consensus "best" then none will be good at all. That's just completely faulty logic. Drafting BPA is only good sometimes. Barkley looks to be a stud RB, I think he's going to have a good career. He could be the best running back in a decade. He's still not as valuable as an elite franchise QB. He's still not as valuable as a very good QB either. This is a QB driven league, and the impact of anybody else on the team in today's game isn't anywhere close at any other position. I'm not sure what you are referring to work the 2000 Ravens, or what that has to do with this discussion. That was almost 2 decades ago. The game has changed and evolved. It's no longer a "grind it out, manage the game" league. Rule changes have shifted the needle wayyyyyy towards the offensive side of the ball, specifically to the passing game. You still need a balanced team to win in the league, but you aren't going to win with a stout defense, running game, and subpar QB anymore. If you reach for a QB and hit, it will change your franchise for a decade in the right direction. A very good franchise QB automatically puts you into Superbowl contention. An elite defense and running game with QB question marks (see: Jax and Minny) still leaves you as a "well if they get a QB then we can talk about them contending every year)

?boom

Just because folks like to be lazy doesn't make the comparisons any more true either. Go watch video of Jackson. He's not a "one read and run" QB. If you think that's an he is you're completely off the mark. Saying tyrod is better? On what basis? I stated that Taylor wasn't 1/3 the QB Jackson is coming out. That's a flat out fact. Lamar Jackson is significantly better than tyrod Taylor was coming out of college. It's also lazy to call Mayfield another manziel. They are undersized QBs from Texas. That's about it. Mayfield has better pocket presence. Johnny was a loudmouthed, arrogant prick in all walks of life. He was a drunk, a party animal, taunting the press and the public with social media photos of him throwing around $$, all sorts of idiotic immature stuff. Baker is a cocky guy who had one, I repeat, ONE incident with the law, which he seems to have sincerely felt remorse for. He took responsibility for it. Johnny football still has yet to do that for anything. It's all everybody else's fault with manziel. I don't see that with Mayfield. It's lazy to compare the two as being "exactly the same"

Difficulty agreeing on a consensus #1 isn't uncommon. Your logic is comply faulty. You are using an unfounded basis to come to the conclusion that all 3 top QBs are bad because people cannot agree on which one is best. That's like saying that "because we can't decide if Brady, Manning, or Montana is the GOAT, then all three must not be very good at all" The lack of consensus between which of the 3 (Mayfield, Rosen, darnold) is the "best pick" does not inherently mean that none of the 3 are good, it means they are all viewed as equal (in different ways) as great QB draft picks. Listen, all 3 could suck, all 3 could be elite, who knows. My point is, your "logic" that none are good/worth it because nobody can decide who the best one is, is completely faulty.

Supply and demand. QBs are in short supply and are the most important piece on the team, and it's not even a close #2. He just turned 26. Sat behind tom Brady (this is a good thing it he's a smart player who studied and paid attention). He has been nothing short of brilliant when he's played. He went 5-0 beating 3 playoff teams, averaging almost 70% comp and 300 yards per game. 4 of the 5 teams he beat we're top 15 defenses. 2 of those we're top 10, including #2 JAX. The guy isn't Rob Johnson 2.0 with one start. Is he deserving of being the highest paid player? Depends what you consider "deserving" You can't look at the $27mil a year in a vacuum. As I've said before, the salary cap increases year to year, which means a guy making $25mil 5 years ago is a higher % of the cap than a guy making $25mil today. EVERY position has supply and demand, it is just magnified with QBs, as they are the most important, and the drop-off/gap in team chances of winning is staggering when going from one QB tier to the next (elite-->almost elite-->very good-->above average-->average-->below average-->trash-->Cleveland) Each tier is probably worth about 2 wins a year over the previous. Jimmy G I think has shown enough that he's at least going to be an "above average" QB who has looked top of "almost elite" to bottom of "elite" already. He would have hit $30mil open market. They paid on his age, potential, and QB relative value to the other options available.

I'm sure people still will I'm not saying he's our #1 guy, but sometimes teams just won't let you trade up. Mayfield, Rosen, and darnold all go before we pick because we can't move up enough, I wouldn't be upset with Jackson. He's not Tyrod. Comparing them is simply lazy. Black, highly athletic, that's about it. Taylor wasn't 1/3 the QB Jackson is coming out.

We would be blessed to get the next Andrew Luck. He had an injury, he was a stud, and is nothing close to a bust unless the injury ruins his career.

3 first rounders, a 2nd rounder, and Glenn? That is definitely "full ditka"

So many variables/possible outcomes with regards to mahomes move. The ultimate success will not only be judged by our QB/draft results this year, but also on mahomes' career. If he becomes an elite top5 guy, and we wind up with anything less than that, it was a bomb. If he's above average/solid, say #6-#15, then we need to have at least that. If he bombs we are of the hook.

AW publicly forgave him, and said Landry apologized to him and seemed genuinely concerned. If AW can forgive him, Bills fans should get over it. Having said that, I think he's a diva and a dbag (even if you remove the AW incident) and doesn't fit the "character" profile that MCD requires. I think it will be tough to field a competent WR core with strict character rules though. A lot of great, even average, WRs are jagoffs.

Wrekt

Ahh Makes sense I mean there isn't a consensus #1 There is a consensus darnold and Rosen will be solid starters at worst, and most believe Mayfield will be too. I think most of the fan-base would be happy with any of those 3 (with obvious personal preference) and nobody should be very upset if we got any one of them

Except that none of the top 4 will be avail at 21

I'd take him in a heartbeat

May the odds be forever in his favor. (Sorry I just watched hunger games with the wife and kid last night again... Which his start against the chargers looked pretty much like the deathmatch at the start of the games) Agree. Sometimes a guy keeps getting chances because he was either A) drafted high, so there was a lot of promise (and a lot of money/picks invested in him) so it's hard to just cut bait... Or B) they kept getting signed by terrible teams, where they were the best option available from the trash bin, yet their production was below replacement level