transplantbillsfan

You can interpret this that way if you want, I guess. Though McDermott and Beane don't strike me as viewing 1 player as the Franchise Savior, even if that player is a QB. Sorry, not curbing my enthusiasm. I can handle my level of enthusiasm just fine, thanks And I keep going back to the fact that the OC who reportedly pushed for that benching was the guy let go of instead of Taylor.

As our season ended and my attention had recently shifted to college ball, for me I wanted 3 QBs: Mayfield Darnold Rudolph ... Now he's probably 5th with Jackson and Rosen leapfrogging him.

I really think McDermott's comments that "we aren't as far along as people think" was a statement to fans that we should anticipate keeping all our picks in order to continue to build the team while still taking a QB, just maybe the 4th or 5th best guy rather than one of the top 3. And, in turn, brace yourselves for one more potential year of Tyrod Taylor. We'll see though.

Holy crap... someone's a moron for sure, but it ain't Jackson.

Jackson has been the recently I've been thinking is our most likely pick. Ever since Wood's retirement I changed my assumption that we're inevitably moving up to we're most likely staying put to keep our draft picks. I'd be happy with Jackson at 21.

I'll be really surprised if we don't draft any of those 5 on your list or Mason Rudolph or go out and try to acquire Kirk Cousins or (please please please!!!) Andrew Luck. So while if you asked me if I'd put $20 down on Tyrod being on the roster come the Fall, I might take that bet. But if you asked me if I'd put $200 down on any of the 8 in Darnold or Rosen or Jackson or Mayfield or Rudolph or Allen or Cousins or Luck being on our roster in the Fall, I'd definitely take that bet. I actually don't want to bet on either, I'm just trying to make a point What are you asking me? I remember you saying that people were exaggerating the success of Taylor's 2015 season, but even then I don't remember you dismissing him as a Franchise QB. I definitely do not remember you saying in the preseason of 2015 that you knew he would never be a Franchise QB. Is this revisionist history?

Just want to argue now? I disagree. After 2015 there was good reason to think Tyrod Taylor could have been our long term solution at QB.

I like that... the ----------tyrod divide---------- Clever... and largely accurate. But I really don't think there's anyone in #1, and although I'm only guessing here, I think with your #1 you mean that these people think Tyrod could still be our long term answer to the QB position, am I right? I don't think anyone believes that anymore. I guess what you've illustrated there is why this discussion can be so infuriating because I legitimately think there are people in #4 and #5, but I just don't think the #1s are really out there any more. So the more "extremes" on this message board are those people in #4 and #5, and yet, those in #3, #4, and #5 have created this ridiculous "CoT" narrative when the truth is, those on the fringes in #4 and #5 are often a helluva lot more "cult-like" than anyone in #2.

This is how I've felt since last year ever since we traded down in the first and acquired all of our picks as the summer progressed. It's literally what I've been hoping for here for a very long time... and I've been vocal about it, too. But just because it's what I hope for doesn't mean it's what I think will happen. And I'm also not a believer in the "if the thing I want to happen most doesn't happen, the sky is falling!!!" attitude so prevalent here.

I don't, at least not into the top 5 for one of the 2 or 3 best guys who could and maybe should start week 1. But I'll be excited if you're right and I'm wrong

Shefter: Bills not engaged in any talks to move up in draft

Well gee, considering I've never ever ever said Tyrod is going to be great. And other than talking maybe about his 2015 season, I guarantee I've never categorized his overall play as anything close to great for the duration of a season. I'm done here because you're just getting all upset and illogical and making up ridiculous crap now. Have fun doing that. As much as you and your crew love to complain about this stupid CoT thing, you guys are the worst. It's like the moment you see the name "Tyrod Taylor," everything goes red for you at some point during the conversation and you can no longer think straight. Some of you are just always like that like xRushx. Some of you at least operate on a little bit of a higher plain intelligence wise so it takes longer for everything to just go completely red. But when you're just making up complete and utter crap, like you are here, that's when it's clear you've devolved the conversation and it becomes pointless. Enjoy your evening. Off for a sunset surf session.

So... All of the teams we play next year are going to be as good or much better than they were in 2017 and none are going to regress? That's a rhetorical question because you're pretending to see the future. It's dumb. Every year people try to predict how easy or difficult the schedule is the following year for all NFL teams and are very often very wrong.

I stand corrected on you saying it was 5% before. So maybe it only increased 1-4% for you, rather than 5%... still... you're coming around I'll be stoked if we do. I just don't think it's nearly as likely as you do, especially after Wood's early retirement. So legit question: Does this rule apply to all teams in the NFL or only the Bills? If it applies to all teams, we can apply your rule to the Jags and Vikings who also exceeded expectations by 2+ wins and our schedule gets easier, right?

Going into 2017, the Bills were regarded as having the 5th most difficult schedule in the NFL. Going into 2018, the Bills are regarded as having the 18th most difficult schedule in the NFL. Right now you're just trying to justify an argument with evidence that's seriously underwhelming. Next year the teams the Bills play on the whole might very well be better than they were in 2017, but you're really bending over backwards to try to make that true just because you seem to want it to be true, for some reason. Nope, I actually understand that the world is not black in white and that, in fact, most of the truth falls into the gray... but stick with your ridiculous narrative, though

Okay... so now it's very clear that you are completely reliant in your plan on trading up in the draft because that's the only way we acquire Rosen/Mayfield/Darnold. And that's fine. I'd love that, actually. And at that point, I 100% agree that the odds of Taylor being gone increase exponentially and would be perfectly happy, at that point, acquiring a QB in the McCown/Fitz tier. Where I think we differ is in the fact that you seem to believe that trade up is inevitable or easy or the only thing McBeane are really considering doing. I'd love it if we traded up for one of those 3 guys. We might do it. But lately I'm thinking it's less and less likely with the age of this team and how many holes we're going to need to fill over the next couple years. This seems to be where you and I differ from GunnerBill after just reading one of his posts. He seems to think there's a clear and obvious plan to trade up for Darnold/Rosen/Mayfield. I won't speak for you, but I know I'll be excited if that happens, I just don't think it will. McDermott and Beane really strike me as pragmatists and I think Beane's statements on valuing draft picks highly isn't just a smokescreen. I don't think he makes that trade unless he thinks the value is at least fair if not better for us than the other team. And I just think that'll be difficult to do. Less than 2 weeks to the new league year when all the really insanity commences!!!

Really? Is there even 5% who still think Tyrod is the long term answer? I think you're seriously overestimating there. What comments indicate to you that they view him as a last resort only? This is the kind of ridiculous hyperbole that causes friction here. I think we can ALL acknowledge that Tyrod is not choice #1 as who to put under center in a vacuum in 2018. The problem is, this decision won't be made in a vacuum. So, while McBeane very likely would love to have Rosen/Darnold/Cousins/Mayfield/Luck/Brees under center in 2018 over Tyrod Taylor, there are things they need to consider and weigh in terms of their options... things that it sounds like you won't understand simply because you don't agree with these things, but just a couple of them include: - We have an aging team with plenty of holes and 5 draft picks in the first 3 rounds we could use to build a foundation for this team and make them younger... acquiring Rosen/Darnold/Mayfield would require us to sacrifice the youth movement for at least another year - Cost of signing/acquiring a vet QB like Cousins/Luck/Brees

I don't even think this coming year is harder on paper, but that's why they play the games, anyway, right? Why does McDermott need to be "all in" with Tyrod OR have a toxic relationship with him? Why is it one or the other?

Ummm... what about our schedule tells you we're going to regress? I expect this team to be better next year, no matter who is at QB.

You seem upset... do you want a hug?

Soooo... you don't understand it because you don't agree with it? Really? Bradford's a walking injury.

Wasn't it 95% just a few days ago? Note that the "not a CHANCE Tyrod is a Bill in 2018!!!" narrative has been slowly shifting for the last month. Do we need to go through the stages of grief and provide counseling for this message board if Taylor is retained?

Yeah, right. Clearly that's what it says. It's the time of season where people will hilariously dismiss things that are directly stated that they don't like while also reading the tea-leaves psychoanalyzing exactly what is said in order to twist it into something they do like.

This is awesome. Seriously

Scenario #2... what if the Browns draft Darnold but they had him graded out almost exactly equal to another guy (Rosen, Mayfield or Allen) and then saw whichever guy they viewed as equal fall to their spot at #4. At that point, do they take calls from other teams offering Darnold to another team to draft the guy they wanted at 4 while acquiring multiple 1st round picks from another team like Buffalo? Does it cost less at that point if you're a team like Buffalo trading for Darnold who the Browns drafted at #1? I really don't think we'll trade up, but I think when teams have so many draft picks, they're more likely to offer up picks for maybe more of a fair deal.