SoTier

If you look at the list of successful top 4 QBs, only Rivers and Ryan were drafted after #2. The other 12 success were #1s and #2s. Go high or stay home. In this scenario, I would be okay with them drafting a QB in the 2nd or 3rd on the off chance that lightning might strike.

Well said.

Why do you assume that if the Bills pass on the 2018 first round QBs that they won't draft one in 2019 or 2020? Is 2018 the last year that QBs are going to be available in the NFL draft?

This. NONE of the top QBs stand out from the others as to be even the consensus best QB in the draft much less the best player in the draft. All of these QBs have significant flaws. Taking a QB at 21 or 22 would be acceptable to me. Trading up a few spots (5 or 6) to take Baker Mayfield would be okay if the cost wasn't too much (giving up maybe 1 first and maybe a 3rd at most), but giving up the proverbial "farm" to move into the top five is setting the Bills up for failure in the future unless they hit the lottery like Philly looks to have done in 2016. Getting a QB on a par with guys like Bortles, Winston or Mariotta wouldn't be good enough IMO.

Good analysis. I will be happy if the Bills do both 1) & 2) under the evaluation paragraph. If they decide to pass on a QB in the first round and take somebody in the 2nd or 3rd, as long as they do it for the right reasons, I'm good with that.

This. It's NOT the system that makes the QB. If you draft the right QB, he'll likely outlast the current coaching staff and maybe even the GM.

Sorry, but it doesn't matter how "deep" you go, teams miss on QBs more frequently than other top ten positions, probably because the position requires much more in the way of intangibles than most other positions, and the guys who may have the physical ability don't necessarily have the intangibles like being able to read Ds, having good reaction time, and/or making good decisions (JP Losman) while the opposite is also common (Ryan Fitzpatrick). Well, "we" don't always get what we want. Getting a serviceable QB with the Bills drafting at 21 is realistically about the best the Bills can expect. The best QBs to come out of the bottom of the first round since 2000 are Chad Pennington (2001), Aaron Rodgers (2005), Joe Flacco (2018), and Teddy Bridgewater (2014). All the others drafted after pick #16 sucked. Trading up into the top ten doesn't guarantee a team drafting the next Jim Kelly either. In the last 10 years, the first ten picks have yielded these busts or just serviceable QBs: Mark Sanchez (2009), Jake Locker (2011), Blaine Gabbert (2011), Robert Griffin III (2012), Ryan Tannehill (2012), Blake Bortles (2014).

It's not a "chicken or egg" scenario. A team should always have an eye out for promising OLers in the draft, but excellent players at all the OL positions can frequently be found outside of the first round ... and even as UDFAs as Jason Peters has shown. Besides, the Bills OL is not nearly as bad as it has been in the past nor as bad as it looked in 2017 (despite PFF's statistical claims to the contrary). Improved play designs and blocking schemes that better suit the current OLers' talents better is likely to make the OL better. Miller had a horrible year last year, but as a young OLer, he might rebound as he was decent in 2016. If Glenn can get healthy and the Bills keep him, then they can move Dawkins over to RT to replace Mills. With Incognito at LG, all they'll need is solid center, which might be Groy. The Bills would then need to add youth and depth on the OL, but they could fill that with Day 2 or 3. The Bills OL isn't a great OL, but it was serviceable in both 2015 and 2016 with most of the same players. Quality QBs, OTOH, aren't often found outside of the top ten of the first round, seldom found in the bottom half of the first round, and rarely found outside of the first round. Currently, there are a handful of non-first rounders as legitimate starters in the NFL: Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Russell Wilson, Andy Dalton, Kirk Cousins, Case Keenum, Derek Carr, Dak Prescott, and Jimmy Garoppolo. Of those, the first three are great QBs. Dalton and Cousins are good ones. The others have shown promise but need to either improve their play or prove that their short-term success is sustainable. So, when a team has or acquires a high first round pick and they don't have Aaron Rodgers or Matt Ryan under center, then they should seriously look at the QBs available in the draft. That doesn't mean that they have to draft one because as 2013 proved, sometimes all the QBs available are duds or the one you want is gone as in 2004. They have to be open to taking one if they think that one of the kids available can be the next Aaron Rodgers or Matt Ryan, however, even if they have an Andy Dalton under center (which is why I would be uncomfortable in signing Cousins -- his contract will preclude the Bills from drafting a younger prospect for most of the length of his contract). One thing the Bills cannot do is draft a first round QB just to appease the fan base which is what I think they did in both 2004 and 2013. Drafting the wrong guy is much more costly than passing on a good one because teams commit to that first rounder for 3-5 years. If you think not, consider that they could have drafted Aaron Rodgers if they hadn't traded up for JP Losman the year before.

I think that something similar happened to Aaron Rodgers as well. He was supposed to be the #1 pick, but I believe that there were vague rumors floating about him, too, and that sank his draft stock.

The "logical expectation" for a fifth round QB is a possible backup. Plain and simple. Peterman fell to the fifth round because he doesn't have a good enough arm to be a quality NFL starter. He doesn't appear to have the "football intelligence", especially good judgement, that was supposed to make him an adequate NFL backup, either. Now, maybe part of his poor showing in 2017 can be laid at the feet of the Bills coaching staff who didn't prepare him well, but Peterman failed when given the opportunity, however brief. If the Bills draft a QB in 2018, my guess is that Peterman is history. Dalton is better than 3 of the 4 QBs taken ahead of him (Griffin, Gabbert, and Ponder). With the right support around him, he can do pretty well ... and for a second round pick, Cinci didn't pay too much for him. If the Bills took Rudolph at 21 or 22 and got as good a QB as Dalton, that wouldn't be terrible ... unless they passed on the next Drew Brees or Russell Wilson.

Now??? My complaint about all of you "we have to draft a QB in the first round" advocates is exactly because NONE of you talk in specifics! You just want a QB in the first round, and who that is doesn't matter to you. IMO, none of the QBs mentioned as top prospects are good enough to warrant even thinking of trading up more than a few spots ... say, from 21 to 16, and even then, if I was going to consider doing it, it would only be for Mayfield. IMO, both Winston and Mariota seem likely to become "coach killers" -- just good enough to keep coaches hopeful but not quite good enough to consistently win with ... much like Cutler and Tannehill. Drafting QBs has become even more random because so many college teams don't run pro style offenses and therefore scouts don't see collegiate signal callers practicing the skills that pro QBs need to have. I think this is the reason that we've seen a few more QBs succeed from lower rounds ... scouts were skeptical of their skill sets because they didn't see them demonstrate those skills all that much.

Was Beane scouting Rudolph or somebody else? There are probably other players on the two teams that have NFL potential.

The general assumption of the "DRAFT A QB IN THE FIRST ROUND" crowd is that doing so will result in a franchise QB on a par with Kelly despite the reality that in both 2004 and 2013 that didn't happen. I agree. What's most troubling is that all of the tops QBs have serious flaws to the point that there's no consensus #1. In both 1983 and 2004, Elway and E Manning were considered the consensus #1 picks in long before February. It's the consensus #1 picks who are the most likely to be successful by a huge margin: hitting about 80% success since 2000 whereas pick through 2-16 are about 50% and 17-32 only around 20%. That's usually what happens in most drafts: 1 good/great QB (usually the guy who goes #1) and any other first rounders being busts. Occasionally a couple of QBs come out of the first round. When that happens, it's usually like 2005 (Smith & Rodgers), 2008 (Ryan & Flacco) or 2012 (Luck & Tannehill) -- one great one and one okay one. What's interesting about 2011 and 2012 is that good/great QBs came out of rounds after the first, which rarely happens: Dalton in 2011 and Wilson and Cousins in 2012. 2014 might be another year with both Carr and Garoppolo from the 2nd, but Carr struggled in 2017 and Garoppolo has made all of 7 starts, it's early yet to judge their careers.

Dennison seemed determined to force square pegs into round holes with the entire offense. He forced the OL into a blocking scheme that didn't seem to fit their talents from the get-go; the OL could never consistently do a decent job of either run or pass blocking all year. Compare the offense he pushed on Taylor to what the Houston OC did when DeShon Watson got the call (created and implemented plays that fit Watson's skill set). Even in TC, it was obvious that the OL and the QB were struggling with Dennison's system. Letting Goodwin and Woods go and trading Watkins while replacing them with the WRs they did probably doomed Jones' rookie campaign, too. I will give Dennison a pass on not using Jones correctly (ie, slot receiver) because I don't think he had that much input into the total dismantling of the WR corps. IMO, on any team with a NFL caliber WR corps, Jones wouldn't have been a starter except for injury or late in the season. It was too much pressure to put on a rookie from a smaller program, especially when he was forced to play a position that he really didn't "fit". Hopefully, the Bills put Jones in a better position to succeed this season, and that he takes advantage of his second chance.

I suppose Taylor caused global warming, too.

It was likely the Arcade & Attica Railroad, a steam locomotive ride out to Curriers, which at one time was probably a little town, but now isn't much but a few houses at an intersection. I think it's still in business, probably running from May through October. The train depot is in downtown Attica just before the split in Routes 39 and 98 split.

Yeah, that's what we thought in 2004, too.

Actually that NOT what the Bills have done for 20+ years. They NEVER "reloaded" but rather shuffled deck chairs on the Titanic by continuously drafting RBs, DBs, and WRs to replace the good ones they let walk away. They were more interested in eeking out the last $ of profit on the bottom line than in winning football games. That's why they had a 17 year playoff drought, not because they didn't draft QBs in the first round, because, of course, they traded a first round pick for a franchise QB in 2002 and then drafted 2 first rounders. They did EXACTLY what you want (trade up) in 2004 to take JP Losman. They also selected EJ Manuel in the first round in 2013. Both busted. Trading up for Losman cost them a shot at Aaron Rodgers the next year. Taking Manuel precluded them taking Bridgewater in 2014 because when a team drafts a first round QB, they're generally committed to him for 4 years unless he's an outright bust like Manziel. No player in the draft comes with a guarantee, and that's especially true of QBs. It's not odd at all. My guess is that they didn't think they were going to make NFL QBs. Taking a QB in the first round just to placate fans gets you JP Losman and EJ Manuel. Losman might have been around in the 2nd, and if he wasn't no great loss. The Bills would have been much better off using the 2nd rounder they traded to Dallas on Matt Schaub, who was a decent starter for several years in Houston. Since none of the QBs in 2013 were worth crap, passing on Manuel would have been a positive thing. Too many Bills fans forget that the draft is a gamble. They've convinced themselves that all the Bills problems stem from not drafting first round QBs when in reality not drafting the right first round QB was simply a symptom of the numerous problems that beset this franchise over the last two decades of Ralph Wilson's ownership and into the first years of the Pegulas' ownership. I'm much more hopeful that the new regime is committed to winning than I was even at this time last year. I don't think that McDermott will take a QB that he doesn't like just to take one. He wants to win too much, and I think he's the one who has control of the personnel. If the Bills sign Cousins, there will be no rookie first round QB in 2018 because he's the guy who will be their franchise guy going forward for 4 or 5 years or whatever.

Don't confuse a QB class having a bunch of first round prospects with it being a "good class". A good QB class produces good NFL QBs, which in the case of 2004, is likely to be 2 or 3 HOFers from the four first round QBs. People were claiming that 2011 and 2012 were great QB classes, too, but only 3 of the 8 QBs taken in the first rounds of those drafts succeeded. If both Goff and Wentz are successful, then 2016 will be a very successful QB class even though only 3 QBs were taken in the first round. And they traded up for him ... so in 2005, they had no first rounder when Aaron Rodgers was sitting there at #18 when Dallas drafted in the Bills' place.

I think this is true because players with modest talent have to learn the game -- from positional techniques to strategy -- in much more depth than do very talented players just to have any kind of shot. Really talented players rely on their talent without thinking about how or why they're doing something; it's often instinctual for them. I don't think it's particularly surprising that few if any really great NFL QBs have become good NFL coaches whereas some really good coaches have been career backups.

Exactly this. This seems to me to be a case of both being in the wrong but only one doing something actually illegal (and very dangerous). I will add that this is exactly why you don't bring a gun to a confrontation. This was not a gang of menacing -looking toughs on the woman's front lawn that she tried to scare away with a shot over their heads (my late stepmother did exactly that once). This was an angry woman losing her temper and firing at people who she could have killed. Guns and arguments do not mix well.

Well, some angry neighbors only get the "right to retaliate" part ... like the lady in the original story.

Take your complaints to the NRA and the jackass politicians who will undoubtedly do EXACTLY what I predicted as soon as somebody sticks a microphone in their faces. Just watch them.

The truth hurts. Deal with it, sunshine.

I'm just stating what we all know will happen in the next 48 hours.