hjnick

Friementh or something like that, the TE from PennSt. Right now, you take Beaz off the field and leave Gabe and Diggs on the field. If both TE's are receiving threats, I think that formation can really work. especially in crunch time when we need to run the ball and get 10 yards to ice the game.

What about a TE that can really block. I heard the TE from Penn State is huge and can really block and catch. He helps the pass and run game. We could also actually put 2 TE's out there at the same time and pass or run in that formation. Maybe that would help out the running game a little?

100% totally agree. David did a very good job containing Kelce. We need fast LBs to cover TEs.

can oliver bend like a good Edge rusher needs to do?

I think Darnold would be a good fit for a team like Pittsburgh. Big Ben probably has maybe 1 year left and Rudolph doesn't seem to be the answer there. Give a 2nd and a next year's 4th? for Darnold. Well if Watson is worth 6 firsts and Stafford 2 1sts and Goff... Darnold worth at least, what 1.5 firsts?

I agree with you. I would do whatever it takes to mend the fences with Watson and keep him in Houston.

Exactly what i was thinking. Low base salary and a sack bonus.

I don't disagree with you about Lawrence, I wouldn't trade down either. What I was trying to say is if you REALLY are going to potentially spend SIX (6) #1 picks for Watson, why not look into trying to get Lawrence instead. If you can get Lawrence, then you also get the cheap contract for 5 years with that. OR if you love one of the 'other QB's' in this draft, trade with the Jets for the #2 pick. Maybe Houston should try and trade w/ Jacksonville...?

Based on talent alone, there might not be any '1st round talent' at 30... BUT the great thing about the last picks of the draft is - it's the last picks for that night and if you want to go and get a player that you think fell, it's a good place to trade back up to. - you get the 5th year option on that player. I think that 5th year option is a big plus to go up and get a player at the end of the first. Maybe someone trades back up and gets Trask here for that 5th year option or Mac Jones if he slips down the draft board. Having a 5th year option on a QB is huge if he pans out.

I think our optimal way to go (and it takes 2 to tango), but if we could trade our 1st round pick, drop back into the early second round and obtain an extra pick or 2. Then with that 2nd round pick, get a LB to replace Milano. Later in the draft I want to get Chubba Hubbard, probably a 3rd or 4th round pick. Dude is FAST!

I'm sure you could find a couple of GMs that would be chomping at the bit to trade for Dak and pay him what he wants. I don't have a very high opinion of Dak. If Jerry Jones looks at this QB market right now, I seriously shop Dak and try to get as much for him and find another QB in the draft. If you can get 4 #1's for Dak, how do you NOT trade him?

I'm not sure which draft LBs are faster than Milano, but I would use or 1st or 2nd rounder to replace Milano unless we already have a LB in waiting that we think can replace Milano. We need a LB that can make Kelce work. We have to bring in players to stop the KC offense.

Yeah, I think that was round 5. Yeah, I've seen HIll play some. Dude is a beast. I really want to get RB Chubba Hubbard. Chubba if FAST!

This offseason is going to have alot of turnover and turmoil because of the lower salary cap, which NO one was expecting before COVID. Lots of hard decisions will be made. The teams frontoffices that can handle and cope best with this situation will make gains. In Beane I Trust.

Should the Cowboys trade Dak? They could get like 4-5 first rounders for him in this market.

Thanks for the link. Very cool. Plunkett was actually traded for 3 1st round picks. There are lots of players (QBs mostly) that are 'untradeable'. I bet nobody has called the Bills and seriously asked if Josh Allen is available. Houston has gotten themselves in this mess because of their total mismanagement of the franchise from ownership down and I don't blame Watson for wanting to leave that dysfunctional situation. The floodgates of 'other' QBs being available IMO is because the franchises looking to deal QBs are tired of them, don't think they are good enough, or saw the ludicrous price the Rams paid for Stafford and said to themselves "Hell, they got that for Stafford!!!", please take my QB too for that price." BTW, if the Jets, Miami, or Atlanta called Jacksonville about the #1 pick, I bet they would listen for 3 #1 picks and only have to drop 1-3 spots AND they still get a QB. (They might throw in some 2's and 3's as well).

No trades.

Lots of trade backs.

Which LB is normally trying to cover the TE??? Milano or Edmunds? I think it's Milano. We were very bad at covering the TE. Draft a newer, faster LB and let Milano go.

I think we need to stop letting the Rams set the market for worth. They obviously do not care about draft picks at all. While I agree that I wouldn't trade Josh Allen and the Chiefs wouldn't trade Mahomes with whatever you threw at them, when the QB is actually on the market and he doesn't want to be where he is... I think the cost drops dramatically no matter how talented we think he is. I guess I'm the only one that thinks teams are giving up WAY too much for Watson and drastically mortgaging their future. Hell, take 3 #1 picks and trade up to get Lawrence... I think it would be interesting to see how a team would do with no 1st and 2nd round picks for SIX years. I bet they wouldn't win as much as they think they would, even with Mahomes. Look at the talent that is surrounding Mahomes. If you replaced Kelce and Hill with an average TE and WR, do they win as many games? How many less games do they win?

You got to actually give credit to the Lions... they put that old vase out there, got another vase back that's about the same, 2 first rounders and a third AND their new vase is much younger... 😆 If I'm Houston, take the 6 first rounds, laugh all the way to the bank.... tank next year, get the first pick in the draft and get your QB of the future...

Yikes! That is alot for 1 player. I guess it would really depend on the 'first first round pick' you get. Like in this year's class, if that first could get you any of the top 3 QBs in this draft, I think that would be good. OR if you have projected another Lawrence type QB in next years draft class and since Houston doesn't have Watson anymore, they could tank and get the 1st pick in the draft to get their QB. With value for QBs like this, teams should start drafting extra QBs all the time and just trade them away for the extra capital.

I agree with alot of what you said. Whenever these types of discussions come up I always wonder how much the Bills and other teams spend on scouting / player evaluation. Is it just a handful of guys/gals in a smoky room looking at tapes all day long? Do they have hundreds of ppl doing constant evaluation of college and current players, so they would be ready at a moments notice to give information/advice. Is it just the GM's gut instinct on the picks??? The amount of money spent on evaluation and coming up with a good process to evaluate players would go a long way to consistently picking good solid players in the draft. Which teams are good evaluators of talent??? I'm sure there are a handful of teams that are good at picking players... that's why they are good ALL the time. A constant influx of good talent. How a drafted player pans out and/or trading for a 'proven' veteran has ALOT of variables for if it is going to be successful or not. Look at the Diggs trade. Do you honestly believe that if Diggs was traded to the Jets last year that they would have drastically improved? I highly doubt that... then the trade would have been a bust. Diggs and Allen worked hard and made some great chemistry together, which hopefully goes for many years. If the draft really is just a crap shoot and 1st rounders are just a 50/50 proposition, they you should be trading down in almost every draft and stockpiling picks so you have more bullets to fire and 'hopefully' you can hit on some. More shots = more chances for success. Does that remind you of another franchise that we all hate that resides in our division??? I think to get a 'good' organization, you need the owner, GM, and coach in 'lock step' with many of the philosophies and how about building and maintaining a football team. If your GM wants a high octane offense and outscore opponents to win and the coach wants to be a defense first / ball control offense, that probably is not a good fit and will fail. You need a great plan to win at football because not every position will be filled with all pros. Some positions will be more valuable than others to the GM and coach. Kinda obvious, but the first and most critical factor is how good your QB is. If you have a Mahomes or Rodgers, they can mask alot of personnel problems with their superior play. While 'good' QB's need a good team to succeed and very rarely can a team win with a bad/not good QB unless it is stacked with talent everywhere else. As for the Rams and that trade, I'd give them a D for that trade and an A++ for the Lions. To give up 2 first's and give up Goff is truly mindboggling for Matt Stafford. I think I heard somewhere between the contracts of Donald, Stafford, Ramsey, Whitworth, and the dead money of Goff and Gurley, that will be over 50% of their cap next year. This is a huge gamble. The Rams defense will not be as good next year because they will not be able to sign their defensive free agents, so they will have to try and lean on the offense next year behind a pretty pedestrian OLIne (agree they had one of the best lines when they went to the Super Bowl and that is why their offense was successful). I'll end here because this is getting really long. If you made it this far, thanks for reading.

Each university is different, but this really isn't true. MOST athletic departments are separate from the educational part of the university. Or in other words the athletic departments are stand alone entities. Some universities subsidize the athletic department because most athletic departments break even or LOSE money. Only the 'cream of the crop' programs truly make any money (or income). Running a successful athletic department takes alot of money and stretching that money as well as you can.

Unless athletic departments are going to go into debt, the ripples of NO college football will be felt in all college sports. College Football and Men's Basketball are the only sports* that actually make money for the athletic department. Every other sport LOSES money. No income from Football will sink almost all women's sports. They will be cancelled for the fall and spring. The 'lesser' mens programs will also be cancelled. No college football will basically halt all sports for most athletic departments. * - There might be a couple of exceptions, but 99.99% of all income is from football and mens basketball.