Tyrod's friend

Really? You feel the absolute need to put this in every single thread? Stop being a child.

Makes extremely good sense that there's a chance and that's why they up and left town to go see Darnold at the last minute ... but I see the Giants as being more likely to trade #2 with the Broncos (Rosen is their presumed choice) , Jets & Mayfield at 3, Cleveland at 4 (Barkley/Chubb/DB). Possible that the Bills and Giants make that second trade to move up to 5. Giants get a running back at 12, a Guard at 22, pick up a second rounder from Denver (OT/DL), a second rounder from us (WR).

Yeah, not concerned about that part. My point is kind of boring and not particularly engaging, and it might not get a response from others. Besides I'm too f'in verbose. Side note: I realize there is a sort of underlying goal here of acquiring broad respect here. Basically what I see from posters is that respect is only gained when others agree with you. If others agree with you, you probably are echoing the same groupthink that occurs in the broader world and not expanding discussion. (Note: I don't think I'm special, but I have always loved the Patton line - if everyone is thinking the same thing, somebody isn't thinking.) *** But since you sort of asked for a response ... May I point out that finding "one-offs" is absurdity. Nothing is absolutely universal and of course you'll find singular exceptions. That hardly makes what I am saying untrue. Basic hypothesis by average fan: QBs have seen their completion percentage improve when they get to the pros. Therefore, they have become more accurate. Here's the bullet points: Sequential growth (comp %) only happens at the collegiate level. Jared Goff would be an example of collegiate growth; Matt Stafford, too. Once a QB reaches the pros, there is veritably no track record of sequential growth in accuracy. When it occurs, it happens years after they've been in the league. It strikes me that the improvement then is the result of the many variables involved, not inherent to QB ability. One time improvement is NOT growth, it is an output of changes in the many other variables that make up for completion percentage. Not the least of these are surrounding talent or limiting the required output of the QB (scheme/responsibility). In point of fact, players that show a one season spurt only to recede underlies the fact that no QB can do this.. Obviously, more track record is better than less. Failure to grow at the final/senior reason should likely be a huge, huge red flag. Much of this is the result of not only re-wiring muscle memory but the complexity of trying to do that while increasing the speed with which the QB needs to process information. Why is this relevant/important to me: There is incredible noise regarding how Josh Allen or other QBs can improve their accuracy in the pros. Thinking his accuracy will improve is a non starter to me. The importance of muscle memory cannot be understated here. I expect that studying the predictive nature of 1200-1600 college passes would be pretty enlightening but that is way beyond my scope. Can a QB improve in other ways? Perhaps. I haven't looked at this, but if they can I would focus on only the things a QB can impact by personal choices - sacks taken, interceptions thrown, and passes completed. YPC, YPA, TD % ... these are almost always scheme/teammate impacted variables. But expecting a QB to improve their accuracy seems clear to me. Singular assumption: Accuracy is to be determined by completion percentage. This is the basis for conversation around Allen. It doesn't say anything that we don't already know on some levels. Wild college QBs would need more infrastructure to be successful. Someone that improves sequentially in college is most likely to be successful in the pros. More college experience > less. Adds zero to the conversation. OTOH and to be fair to myself, there are plenty of people here that say Josh Allen can become more accurate. That's simply bull$hit. He's not going to do something that Russell f'n Wilson couldn't do. It's not about completing more or less than 60% of your passes. It's about improvement, it's about doing it over time, it's about creating the proper muscle memory when you get to the pros because the time won't be there to make changes that will make you more accurate. The whole thing elevated my concern about waiting to take Mike White or Luke Falk in a later round. It suggested to me that Lamar Jackson might be better than what I gave him credit. Cheers. EDIT: From Sean Payton, today: "The pressure to get a quarterback is so great in this league, I get that. But we can’t create ’em."

Some outlet ranked him below replacement level starter; I seem to recall somewhere that he was like the 29th ranked center. I have heard that Bengals fans were about as supportive of him as we are of Mills and glad to see him go. Overall, based on the Ravens game it sounds like you'd agree; he would be great depth, but definitely a sub-optimal outcome as a starter. Fair?

There is literally no choices to be made that should yield you a FRANCHISE QB. That grade is assigned to 4.4 and above. There is almost NO difference between the QBs; 15 points hardly makes you scream out "value" Mason Rudolph is massively overvalued by fans or undervalued by this post.

So, with that, I am done going over this idea with you. Hope you do not lose power today! and ... with a sense of humor ...

I've read much the same. Yet if this is the guy, the one you wanted all along ... why is it that a couple of weeks before the draft there is a sudden announcement that you are going to have a private workout in California? I am not sure, but doesn't Sam Darnold have a trip planned to Cleveland and NYC at almost the same time? The Bills couldn't arrange a time for him to come to Orchard Park? At the singularly busiest time of the year for the brain trust they are making a special, West Coast trip spending 6-7 hours in the air for this? The argument could be made that the meeting was set up a long time ago and we didn't know about it - I doubt that. We don't know why they decided to travel all of a sudden. But if Sam Darnold was the top choice from word one, well, that's some way to handle a billion dollar business.

Yup. I've said over and over that Darnold is this year's Aaron Rodgers - but only to the extent that he falls unexpectedly. I honestly don't think that scouts are telling their FO that he's a great player. I think there's a lot of disinformation being floated. Maybe he's a player, we'll see. He's not the overall #1 QB, #1 overall player and I've got him as my top choice for bust of the year if he goes top 3 and has to play (like, NY Jets. For the Bills, that would be the ultimate joy).

There's career value and peak value. I agree, Yards from scrimmage is the best way to assess a running back. You could argue that YPC is important I guess, I dunno. Most running backs have a four year window; Smith, Sanders and Thomas's all roughly overlap and make for a good comp to Thurman. Side note: Sweetness was the only RB that had two, four year windows, and played on a team that never once had a QB. Clearly, easily to me the best running back in the history of the game. Thurman had the worst four year peak of the three. I mean, it's great company to be in (Babe Ruth was the 3rd worst of the top three HR hitters), but Thurman hit an average of 1973, Smith 1980, and Sanders 2030, and Sanders obviously didn't have the cast of the other two. He was obscenely good at his peak. So at his four year peak, he was probably in the top five. Statistically, from a career perspective he was literally in the top 9, and that' mostly because other running backs just outlasted him (Gore). Some (Martin) were more consistent. He had a key role in a winning program; his peak value was roughly approximate to any other running back; his statistics show he was in the top 9 for career numbers. Based on your parameters, I can't for the life of me see an argument - Thurman was easily a top 10 back. It's like ... you'd be foolish to NOT say Thurman was a top 10 back. Not even a small question.

I think you are being optimistic. Josh Allen's floor is Ryan Leaf - but he's probably the only guy in this draft that could be better than Brett Favre.

Thank you and as always, welcoming a civil discourse. Apologies, this is going to be a long response and other than Thurman#1, feel free to pass on my bull$hit. It really is a work in progress, so I've refined what my thoughts are here. Again, fans are saying completion percentage can improve/cannot improve/accuracy is the most important thing. I am making no assertions about INT%, YPC, YPA, QBR. First, a leap into the first year is certainly not only possible but even likely. Let's call it survivor bias; the rookie QB that continues to complete 54%-56% of his passes in his first training camp is unlikely to be remembered. Obviously Baker Mayfield can decline his completion percentage quite a bit from 70% and still keep a starting job. I do like the parameters limited. Tyrod ... doesn't he fit my parameters like dead on? He doesn't assert himself sufficiently for four or five years. Then he puts up a 64, 62, 63 per cent completion percentages; his total Buffalo experience is 63%. We could talk endlessly about his third year, the loss of WRs and the OC change but let's not get stuck in the weeds. Again, almost a poster boy for what I am trying to say - his senior year in the ACC he improved considerably. Second, there is a reason for saying things happen later in a career ... that's not justification. It strikes me as a natural flow from muscle memory. The one thing you hear about in every camp, every year is the revelation of the speed of the game at the pro level. Let's call this a fundamental analysis as opposed to a statistical analysis.To think that a QB will process that, in addition to everything else they face and then on top of that alter their muscle memory strikes me as absurd. To revert to a statistical analysis, when you use a resource like Pro Football Reference, there is almost literally no standard deviation in years 1-4. That has to mean something. They might talk about the game "slowing down" (and that might be reflected in things like QBR), but completion percentage buttressed my point: there are synapses that are a decade in production. You don't change them quickly. Within this paradigm then there is the occasional second year leap. But (I think, I do not know) it almost inevitably turns out to be unsustainable. Doesn't that also say something to the casual football fan? It very much strikes me as the exception that proves the rule. Caveat: I don't have full access to some of the statistical webpages that show a pro QBs ball placement. So I am admitting I am not accounting for some statistical variances. To the opposite side, I think that college QBs that improve - especially in their senior/last year - are showing the converse of this idea (again, TT was significantly better in his senior year). They have natural ability and they are asserting it over others. Russell Wilson is my favorite example of this. He changes conferences and utterly dominates the Big Ten. Goes to the Pros, wins a Super Bowl championship almost immediately. But outside of his fourth year in the pros, his completion percentage has been 63% with literally no deviation at all. On the whole this gives me pause over my own favorite player in the draft. How will Baker Mayfield react when he can't impose his will on the game, when he doesn't improve? In my mind Tom Brady highlights a limited list of players capable of continually evolving. Will failing to improve destroy Mayfield's renowned self-confidence? On some level Leaf's questions are warranted. It isn't a silver bullet obviously and I would have had considerable concern over Matt Ryan - even though he sort of hits my parameters. He's clearly an example that was a complete player when he came out of college and it strikes me that he was already asserting himself over the game to the extent he could have at his program at Boston College. I would have been wrong; but on the other hand, can you honestly say that Matt Ryan improved his completion percentage over his first four years? No way. Part of this gets down to this: is completion percentage even a relevant stat? That's a different question. I'm not often humble, and I'll admit that it isn't earth shattering. Some of this stuff is derivative; some of it is applying stuff we know in a different way (improving seniors/extensive history). I do think it is relevant. I think it leads me to be more interested in Lamar Jackson and Mason Rudolph than I would be. It makes me question delaying taking a QB because my solution is Mike White or Luke Falk. The difference in my take is this: if we take one of those last two, or Josh Allen, I think Bills fans will be utterly right to have a quick trigger on them if they aren't completing at least 59% of their passes by November. We will have made a mistake. That completion percentage is not getting better in the next four years and you have yourself a lemon. Cheers, Alex

Good post and a good example. Not 100% sure that I think a 1983 situation is applicable (a special year), and I think there are choices to show that thrusting a QB behind a bad offensive line falls apart to never recover. I don't know the Jeff George experience specifically and can't speak about his line, but since you brought him up I know he was sacked 56 times his second year on the way to a 1-15 record. And as you say, he was a #1 pick; why is his example less important than the success of John Elway? I don't know that a franchise QB is a 15 year investment anymore as well. Kirk Cousins new contract reads out to me like a new paradigm; let's just see of Matt Ryan or Aaron Rodgers resigns with their teams and if they do, how long they sign a contract. But your post certainly made me think I might be wrong. Cheers.

First, I'm anything but thoughtless. If I post something it's likely I re-wrote it several times and more often that not you'd find that I edited my comments. It's because I am anything but thoughtless. I have a reason for the things I post and I'm not prone to backing down because I have thought them out. (this particular day I was hasty, but I had thought out the parameters long ago.) You know, a funny thing about my "overreaction" - ESPN later asked the same question I did. Second, by all means continue with ad hominem attacks on myself and others - it puts you in great company. It shows off your own deep thoughts and the overall level of creative and thought provoking posts we all count on from you. I'm sure you have great observations. Third, I don't generally bring my personal life to this forum. I don't know what you do for a living but I'm sure your life is very challenged. Suffice to say I am compensated extremely well for successfully competing at a very high level, requiring nearly daily, split-second decisions. And you know what? I rarely find myself checking out what to wear in advance. But if you'd like to compare 1099's I'm open; table stakes to play in the game are pretty high though. Finally, even when I don't agree with posters I try to give their posts the respect their time deserves. Not always successful and sometimes my emotion gets the better of me. Cheers, Alex

This is what I was referring to; that the Eagles basically make it to the playoffs the minute that Jim Schwartz, Doug Pederson and Frank Reich are put together as a coaching unit. And it's one thing to go up and get Wentz when you have Lane Johnson and Jason Peters covering the outside rush for a rookie QB already in place, not to mention Steve Wisniewski at G. That Wentz, for all intents and purposes, wasn't nearly as important as you'd like to believe. The implied question behind your point would have been then, could another QB - Nick Foles - taken that team to the playoffs. I don't see anything from their numbers that suggests there is a ton of difference between these two guys. Nick had a better INT % a better TD % around the same YPG and a much better QB rating. In their best season, Foles had a QBR of nearly 84. He replicated that ability in the playoffs, after he had a chance during the regular season to get some rust off. I'm not saying they are equal. Just that the combination of a great OC and a great DC put the Iggles in the playoffs, every bit as much as the combination of Wade Phillips and Sean McVay put the Rams in the playoffs, and not Jared Goff.

This guy ... Mr. 4th Rounder Passing Statistics for Career Games 2013 to 2014 Games Passing Passing Year Tm G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD Average 10 9 194 314 2527 20 6 18 124 Per 16 Games 16 14 296 478 3851 30 9 28 188 2013-2014 PHI 21 18 14-4-0 389 628 61.9 5054 40 6.4 12 1.9 68 8.0 8.5 13.0 240.7 100.5 37 247 7.23 7.62 5.6 he couldn't have possibly replaced this guy? Four Draft picks Passing Statistics for Career Games 2016 to 2017 Games Passing Passing Year Tm G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD Average 14 14 322 524 3539 24 10 30 188 Per 16 Games 16 16 355 578 3905 27 12 34 207 2016-2017 PHI 29 29 18-11-0 644 1047 61.5 7078 49 4.7 21 2.0 73 6.8 6.8 11.0 244.1 88.8 61 375 6.05 6.08 5.5 Those two guys ... you are going to tell me that you can clearly tell the difference and that one of them couldn't have at least approximated the ability of the other? Honestly? I'm not intending to be a jerk here, but ... isn't it at least a little bit about the team and the OC and the HC in this instance? And, to be fair, here is Fole's first two years so we are comparing two guys just starting out in football: Nick Foles Passing Statistics for Career Games 2012 to 2013 Games Passing Passing Year Tm G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD Average 10 8 182 291 2295 16 4 24 152 Per 16 Games 16 13 291 466 3672 26 6 38 243 2012-2013 PHI 20 16 9-7-0 364 582 62.5 4590 33 5.7 7 1.2 63 7.9 8.5 12.6 229.5 101.0 48 304 6.80 7.35 7.6 I'm not in the Foles fanboy club anymore. Used to be a card carrying member.

Really, really legitimate response - one of the few in this thread. Starters are one thing; that is as much a condemnation of your current roster as anything else. How many impact players, like PB quality or nearly so? I'd say two per year and over a two year period I think it's pretty rare to find three in total. I think of the Hawks a couple of years ago stringing together three great drafts.

Where have I heard, Baker Mayfield #1 and it's not even close? <sigh>

I'm ready. Point out to me anyplace where I have even remotely suggested that we not go after a QB or that I've said that an OG is anywhere near the value of a team to a QB. You are the only one having that conversation, Chicken. There are roughly six, possibly as many as seven QBs that are not terribly different in Grades. You just blew a hole in your offensive line, with a bandaid called Bodine that was meant to cover the last hole. All I am saying, all I've ever said, is that at this point, there are priorities. You can get a roughly equivilant talent for QB in the second round that you can get at 12 or even 22. Don't take my word for it; read Gunnar's analysis. Look at the ranking at NFL.com. I'm not making this sh!t up. There simply isn't that much difference between a lot of these guys and you'll be passing on nearly all of the Tier One positional talent available this year. And just to make sure everyone knows, this isn't JUST THE YEAR OF THE QB. There's a ton of other good players here. I've never said NOT to move up, but the world has changed this morning. If you can simply give Richie $1.25 MM or $2.5 MM and make this problem go away, I'd support that decision by 1BD. In a heart beat. End of the day, sit at 12 or nearly so. If by some miracle Sam Darnold/Josh Rosen/Baker Mayfield you bust the move. But #2 should be out of the conversation at this point.

Name them. Cause there were four good (and I think not anywhere near the RI class) interior lineman signed this offseason and they could have gone anywhere. Average price for a quality guard/center is starts at $10,000,000. If you want crappy interior line play, well there wasn't any competition to get Bodine. And to that ends, I dunno, but I'm thinking our HoF running back might disagree with you. Just a little bit. For what it's worth, here's the deal on Weston. The Giants called him a bust. Five years, $47,500,000. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/san-francisco-49ers/weston-richburg-14452/

Five years, $66.5M Five years, $45.0M Four years, $42.0M Five years, $48M That last guy? His team thought he was a bust, apparently. And none of these guys, none of them, had the pedigree of Richie Incognito. Sure. It's easy to replace a Pro Bowl Guard. You can ask the Giants. It isn't easy, and it certainly isn't cheap. If you want to replace your Pro Bowl or nearly Pro Bowl level interior lineman (Wood) with players that have been ranked as severely below replacement level (Bodine) and who's fans celebrate their leaving? Not a problem at all. Unfortunately, I value offensive lineman and think that jacksh!t doesn't happen til they block.

I don't have the market cornered on being right. But as my wife LOVES to point out to me, everyone has the right to my opinion. With all intended self-deprecation. We disagree on some of the finer points and I can live with that. QB is clearly the most important position not only in football but in all sports; I'm not that stupid but only bordering on it. Bring on the draft. Before another Bills player retires, for chrissakes.

Yeah, that's not really changing the basis of the question though is it? I've taken a step back to think about your earlier post because it was worthy response. I just can't see that an organization would have planned to replace the best offensive lineman in the same off season when they had already lost Eric Wood and replaced that center with a guy that has been to this point at best a bad center. That's just a willful destruction of a team. Groy is not a Pro Bowl guard and they might have seen him as an eventual replacement that isn't something you are thinking is what you want on March 31st. Cheers.

The best guy on this website thinks that Sam Darnold is a mid-1st round pick; that there are numerous, good QBs in this draft. Tell you what, you get back to me when people think your assessment of QBs is better than Gunnar's. Did I say don't draft a QB? Nope. I said it changes your choices. The circumstances changed and you change your valuation of options after the fact. The thought that you wouldn't is absurd to me. Absolutely absurd and as much as I'd like to put it differently, I can't.

Really? No snark here, but ... They benched John Miller last year. Not some other organization, this one. You think they were essentially planning to take a guy that they benched and use him to replace a Pro Bowl guard (let's leave aside the potential disaster at center)? There is no part of me that believes an organization would have that in their plans. You seem like a pretty sane poster and if you think for a minute, I believe you'd see this isn't possible.