RochesterRob

I don't get why people think the Browns would be opposed to trading up from slot 4 if they really did not want to risk losing a targeted prospect. It would make too much sense for them if they identified one of the QB's as can't miss. They could go from 4 to 2 at a minimum in cost. Too much wishful thinking here in that other teams will be slothful and dumb to help the Bills. Look at other teams as reasonably capable and smart so on draft day the action makes some sense versus crying about how the Bills did not move into the top 4. Even if the Bills offer a wheelbarrow full of picks does not mean any of those teams want to trade out or see too much value in retaining that pick.

The OT game down in Miami was very important but if I remember right we were down for most of the game. The 27-0 blowout at home put the football world on notice the Bills were rising in the AFC.

All the more reason to keep our 1st's and only make minor moves up or down from 21/22.

Imagine that. A non-Bills fan base that is ready to storm the castle if they don't get their way.

It's gonna be expensive because at this point all the high ceiling QB's are expected to go in the top 7-8. As discussed recently probably a quantity of seven picks or so with at least three 1st's and three 2nd's for somebody like us who has picks down in the 20's to start. Of course things could change now with the combine gone by and a prospect making a misstep. If the feeling changes that one or more of the big 4 drop past 10 then our cost drops dramatically. We should be able to get to 11 or 12 with just our 1st's with maybe a tad bit of sweetening. The Brown's are taking Barkley with 1 and it would take a whopper of a trade to convince them not to.

He might be 29 but he probably has several years left barring disaster. Why is it that on one hand the trade up proponents have Eli and Brady penciled in for the same amount of time going forward and those two are 40ish in age yet it's real iffy that a guy nearly ten years younger can do the same?

Just some guy with an opinion. I would pay far closer attention if he quoted someone inside the Giants' FO.

Gonna have to invest in some offensive support if we get him. One of our firsts and the remaining second round pick in support players.

Yes on the '87 home Dolphins game. The game where Marino was benched. I had things to do that day but caught the last 10 minutes of it. Priceless to see Marino sulking, Shula trying to look as though he was not PO'd, the shock of the announcers (who I forget now), and the best was for last which was Costas and Co sitting shellshocked in the studio. It took them ten seconds to break the silence to discuss that game. The '89 game against the Oiler's in Houston. Bad thing was we did lose Burroughs permanently.

Cletus only eats the finest WNY possum road kill as roasted over an old 55 gallon oil barrel by his wife Brandine.

They already deviated considerably from Hooker's vision when the series started so they could have made Frank more three dimensional if they wanted to. But the show wanted to be an anti-cpaitalist anti-authority show so anybody with those values had to be done as a stereotype. I still think although better than Frank Winchester was made too toothless on many occasions. If I was Winchester I would have been pushing on Potter for a transfer even if it was to another MASH. You would think that Charles had no right to his money whatsoever the way Pierce, Hunnicutt, and Potter thought.

I do one thing, I do it well, and then I move on (if I remember the line correctly). Stiers did many things well as it turns out.

OK. You have 7 picks and a 50 percent hit rate giving you 3.5 players as I understand it. I guess I would have the mindset that I could beat that rate realistic or not. Then I would have to weigh that against who might be there at 21 and 22 such as Payne or Price (pre-injury). Then I would have to consider the benefit of what each player would bring. Payne might translate to shorter time of possession for the opponent along with the opponent punting deeper in their own territory giving our offense a shorter field. I guess in short that I am more comfortable with more dimensions to work with so I would rather have Payne and whoever else in the first and possibly second rounds. I get that you see it differently but in my mind I can't get to where you are. We are just going to see it differently and in the end it won't matter as Beane is not going to ask either of us about what to do.

Just in terms of picks I think you are running a little heavy but for the most part in the ballpark. I would never commit that much capital to just one player. If the year was different with a dozen NFL ready prospects waiting and QB not weighted to the top of the draft then I think I could offer both 2018 1st's, a 2018 second, and a 2018 5th to get up to number 4 or 3 and live with it. That is with my scouts giving glowing reports on a given guy and intel that says two other organizations feel the same way to verify what my guys say by pushing me to that package by making their own offers on picks 3 or 4.

You never said anything about "if the package is right in your previous post." Once again I would ask you to stop writing things in the sand. Say what you mean and say it at a time that is appropriate. If you say that the "Browns are going to move pick number 1" I am not going to read your mind to know that you meant that "only if the price is right."

Your previous post provides a pretty good hint unless you are the type to throw things around for the sake of throwing something out. Alright then, I ask you to put your cards on the table as to the absolute max you will go. Time to be held to something and not just writing stuff in the sand as they say.

The Browns merely said they are open to a trade as opposed to having a fire sale where the first pick "has got to go."

Your package is way too light to move up to 2 or 3 this year. Maybe in a year where there is a dozen clear cut NFL prospects with QB not weighted on the top of the draft as many predict.

Giving up a boatload of picks is nonsensical in terms of risk/reward.

It's not like they did not even try during that time period. Also, we were so far in the hole in overall player deficiency that we had to go BPA as best as we could identify. This also was one of the darkest hours for the team as Ralph really needed to hand the reins over but in reality had too much of a finger in things. God bless Ralph but the bottom line today is different as we no longer have a mentally declining owner mucking things up.

There have always been rule changes. Should we put asterisks after all the winning SB QB's that played before your modern era and say "Well they could not hack it in today's league?" They played in the system that was laid out for them and won. Maybe under a different set of rules they successfully adapted and the results would still be the same.

Trent Dilfer says hello and plans on spending a quiet late winter Sunday polishing his SB ring from the Ravens.

Indy can use Barkley just as much as the other top of the draft teams. Cleveland can't rest under the assumption that Barkley falls to 4. Barkley would be a good safety blanket for whoever the Browns QB will be.

You swing for the fences type guys need to realize there is more than one way to build a contender. Stop worrying about what other teams have done and build within the framework that exists in Buffalo.

It will be supply and demand at its most basic form.