CosmicBills

It's not an either / or proposition. Both areas need SERIOUS upgrades. However, it's easier to find quality OL than it is to find a legit franchise QB. I don't know if Bradford or Clausen will be franchise QBs (let alone any of the others in this draft), but if the scouting department does, then they have to get the QB first. No matter what it takes.

The Bills need both. Lynch isn't going anywhere.

WR is a need for the Bills. HB is not. So, I wouldn't LOVE the pick, but at least it would make sense. Personally, QB is the number one need for the Bills. If they don't think there is a legit franchise QB in this draft (which may well be the case) then I think you have to look at OL/DL before WR/LB. Still ... WR is a big hole on the roster.

I'm not saying running the ball isn't important. It is. But it's NOT what it was. You pass to set up the run. Meaning, the better the passing game the better your running game. You need talented RBs. But you don't need SUPERSTAR RBs. In fact, I'd argue that super star RBs on your team is a waste of cap space because you can get the same production from a two man backfield of lesser paid players. Put it another way ... if the saints had Fred Jackson and Marshawn Lynch rather than Bush and their other two HBs, they STILL would have been 4th in the league in rushing (or higher because Jackson is better than any back they have) AND they would have won the super bowl still. So, again, what's the logic in drafting a HB when we already have two capable ones on the rosters and no QB to utilize them? Answer? ZERO.

I'm going to jump on you here, but it's not personal Todd ... it's just this one point I hear ALL the time on this board and it's so short sighted. The NFL has become a QB driven league. You cannot win a championship without a franchise QB. It can't be done and hasn't been done in a decade. But you are 100% right that a QB needs a capable line to be of any use. They don't need to be 5 probowlers, but they need to be able to give the QB time. I'll give you, and everyone else clamoring for O-Line before QB that. However, it is far easier to find a capable LT than it is to find a franchise QB. So, if the Bills honestly feel that one of the QBs in this draft is a franchise type QB they HAVE to get him BEFORE they get a LT. Even if it means trading up. Why? Because this team is REBUILDING. It doesn't matter how you get the pieces, just that you get them. And if a franchise QB is in this draft and you're within striking distance of getting him, you have to do it. Regardless of what your line is like. You can always fix the lines later in the draft or the first round next year. Either way, the Bills aren't going to be contending for a title until they get a QB. Say for example the Bills traded up to get Bradford (they won't, but this is hypothetical) and gave up their 2nd round pick and maybe a 2nd next year to do so. People here would freak out because they have so many holes to fill. Well sure, but you can't argue that QB is the most important position on the field AND the team's biggest hole. The other complainers would argue that getting a franchise QB before the line is fixed will ruin his development -- this is also false. For two big reasons: 1. Just because you draft a QB this year doesn't mean he has to play this year and get killed. He can sit and learn (as we've said, the Bills aren't winning this year anyway) and 2. A good QB makes his line look better than it is (see: Indy, NE, NO). Now, if the Bills don't feel there is a franchise QB in this draft, then I'm with you 100%. By all means, fix the lines, and use high picks to do so. But to think you have to have a line before you have a QB is just illogical.

To echo what's already been said: Picking a RB at #9 is akin to shooting yourself in the head. It's dinosaur thinking. The NFL is a PASS FIRST league, it has been for the past decade and it will only continue to be more so. If you don't think so, you haven't been paying enough attention to how football games are won these days. Need proof? Look at the percentages of PASSES on 3rd and 2 compared to runs. It's over 71%. 71% of the time on 3rd and 2 an NFL team PASSES the ball. Want more proof? No team has won the super bowl without an elite QB under center since Dilfer did it ... and that was a decade ago. 3 yards and a cloud of dust is the old school NFL. Those days are over. And, until the league adjusts the rules to give DBs more of a fighting chance, they ain't coming back. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. The rest of the NFL knows this. It's why we've seen more teams going to a RB by committee approach. It helps with injuries, but it's more because it doesn't make financial sense to spend a huge chunk of your cap dollars on a RB when their ability to impact a game is becoming less and less. Yes, Chris Johnson is a stud. How many super bowls has Tennessee won? What about Minnesota? Who was the RB for the three Patriot Super Bowls? What about the Saints? Or Colts? Wasting the number 9 pick on Spiller would be equivalent to flushing the pick down the toilet even IF Spiller is an all pro. Why? Because RBs don't win games. QBs do. If the Bills feel that one of the QBs are a franchise type guy, they HAVE to get him. Even if it means moving up. If they don't think there is a legit franchise QB in the draft, then the deficiencies in the trenches has to be addressed before even thinking about a HB. If you don't see the logic in this, then you're living in the past. I'm sorry. The game has changed. Adapt or die.

Oh I don't think Trent is a coward. I agree with you that's a faulty argument. To me, Trent is just incapable of staying healthy for 16 games until he proves otherwise. But that has nothing to do with his courage or even his abilities as a QB in general.

But how can you honestly say, with a straight face, that he's NOT injury prone when he's never finished a season without getting hurt? Not even in college?

I do. I really do. Because, my point is that he's injury prone. It's exacerbated by our poor O-Line play, but he's made of glass. He was constantly injured at Standford, in fact he only had ONE season in which he started 11 games. Until he starts (and finishes) 16 games in an NFL season, he will always be a huge question mark. And you can't make someone who's constantly hurt your franchise QB -- no matter HOW good he is.

I watched it many times because it's astounding to me how it resulted in a concussion. A leg injury, sure. A concussion? His head hit the turf but his momentum was slowed by the twisting you mentioned that it wasn't a very hard hit in relation to other "big" hits in the game. Certainly having 2 concussions in 12 months factored in. Once you have one concussion you're more likely to have a second. When you have 2, you're more likely to have a 3rd. All the more reason to call Trent injury prone. You're making my point for me. Again, I'm not bashing Trent. He cannot control his body's ability to prevent injury. I'm sure he stretches, lifts, runs and does all he can to strengthen his body and make it as resilient as possible -- but for some people, that's never going to be enough.

I think this is an excellent point.

It's a medical fact that some people are more resistant to injury than others. It's just how things go. Trent's FIRST concussion was a brutal hit that I don't fault him for at all. His second concussion was the sort of hit that happens every other game in the NFL and 90% of the QBs would have gotten back up. Look through his history and he's always been hurt. Over time those injuries keep adding up. Sure, it doesn't help that the line is a revolving door, and it's unfair to blame Trent for something he can't control like his body's durability ... but it also doesn't change the fact that you can't be a starting QB from the IR list.

I'm leery of Clausen too -- but only because of the reports about his attitude. Which, is entirely unfair to the guy since it's all speculation. From what I've seen of Clausen (and it has been a fair amount) he has all the tools. He can make all the throws and is tough as nails. I like a QB with swagger like Kelly but fear Clausen's may be more in line with Cutler who's attitude is self destructive. But there's just no way to predict that (in my opinion) unless you get honest feedback from his teammates and coaches at Notre Dame. As fans, we won't get that unless we know people (and I don't). So if Clausen does fall to 9, I'd be excited about his physical abilities but be dreading some sort of implosion in his first year.

Hahaha, I hear ya. It's funny though, I played DE/OLB in college and honestly I can't evaluate LBs or DEs for the life of me. I don't know why. I find I have a better track record with positions other than the ones I played. Makes no sense to me. That said, I am by no means an expert and don't mean to pass myself off as one. I could be 100% wrong about Tebow. And if I am, I'll happily admit it. I just don't think I'll be eating any crow in the near future.

It's an impossible question to answer until the draft is over. If the Bills invest a high pick on a QB then Trent is done in Buffalo. Period. It's what's best for Trent and best for the team. However, if they take a project in rounds 3-5, then it's entirely possible that Trent beats out Brohm and Fitz in camp and wins the job. Personally, I don't get why everyone hates Trent so much, but the dude is a serious china doll. He's made of glass. So even if he wins the job, he has to stay healthy for 16 games for me to believe that he's the long term solution at QB. My guess, especially with Seattle trading for a QB today, is that the Bills find a way to get one of the top 2 QBs in the first round and Fitz is our opening day starter with the heir apparent waiting till week 8 or so to step in.

What can I say, I'm a glutton for punishment and always root for the Bills even when I know deep down it's hopeless. I'm by no means a scout or a talent evaluator. But I played enough football in my life to feel confident in my gut when it's clear cut. That said, I was 100% wrong on Rivers. I don't remember my exact post, but around draft time my fear was that someone would try to monkey with his mechanics and set his development back. But, I felt that Rivers was a good to very good QB even with his funky motion. However, with Tebow I don't see that potential. He's a winner. Sure. It helps when you play on a loaded team for a genius coach that had your offense 10 steps ahead for 90% of your career. It also helps when you have track stars with hands as receivers who make up for over thrown and under thrown balls. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The perfect comparison for Tebow is Tyler Hansbrough. Hansbrough was a stud College player. He hustled, played with more heart than anyone on the floor and that allowed him to compensate for his lack of athleticism or pure basketball skill -- AND he had superstar talent around him at all times which covered all manner of sin. And, like Tebow, he was either worshiped or hated -- depending on your team's colors. Yet, in the NBA his hustle, heart and determination can't make up for the lack of skill and pure athleticism that NBA has. Thus, he is a scrub on the Pacers' bench. And the Pacers are awful. Tebow is the same. He has heart. He has hustle. But he has medicore skills that won't translate to the NFL where every player is an all american in the defensive backfield. He's all hype and flash. Without Meyers and an edge in talent, he's going to be a bust. And ... I'll even go as far as to play the race card here. If Tebow, Hansbrough or Brian Leonard (another over hyped guy coming out of college who people here were dying to get) were black, there would be ZERO hype around him. Even with all the wins. Think if Pryor manages to win 2 national titles at Ohio State over his last two years he will have the same hype as Tebow? Nope. And he has better raw skills than Tebow could ever dream. But he's NOT ready for the NFL yet. No one thinks he is. Maybe he'll never be. Who knows. Okay ... rant over.

Trading away picks (and accumulating future picks) is not the same thing at all as investing a second round pick on a franchise QB and sticking him on the bench for 3 to 5 years. If anything, their propensity for wheeling and dealing current picks for FUTURE ones is proof of that. They don't want to pay for players on their roster who aren't going to contribute right away. It's smart business. And, someone tell me, isn't Brady in a contract year in 2010? I don't think he's signed an extension (unless I missed it which is possible). If that's the case AND the Pats take a QB in the second round, it will be to leverage a better deal from Brady OR to trade one of them in 2011 (or 2012 if there's a lockout). Either way, if the Pats take Tebow, it won't be to let him sit on the bench for 3 years. It will mean the (coming) end of Brady and will be a wonderful day for the Bills. Even IF Tebow turns out to be better than I think. That said, of course everything I'm saying is speculation. As I said in my op -- he was making assumptions that I don't think are true.

It is interesting (and alarming to me at least) that the Bills would spin it this way. All the reports I'm seeing are saying the opposite. Still, as much as I believe Tebow will be an epic bust in the NFL, if he does become a Bill I'll root my ass off for him.

The only way the Pats take a QB in the first 2 rounds is if they believe that Brady has less than 3 years left in the league. I think he's got a lot more left in the tank than that. And regardless of who they take, any of the QBs in this draft class have a small chance of filling Brady's shoes. There will be unbelievable (and unrealistic) pressure to deliver from Pats fans. The closest I can think of would be Denver after Elway retired (or here after Kelly). The only way I see someone succeeding post Brady in New England is if they go to an established veteran first ... put some distance between Brady's legend and the rookie's. New England's front office is one of the brightest in the league. They are too smart to pick a QB in this draft before round 3. But if they do, it's very good for Buffalo.

You're making a lot of assumptions with this logic that I don't think are true including that Kraft and BB will let a second round draft pick sit for 3 to 5 years. It won't happen. If they take Tebow that early, he's going to be on the field within 2 years at the latest -- which means Brady is done. And the day Brady leaves NE is going to be a VERY good day for Buffalo.

I hear what you're saying but I disagree ... forget for the moment that I don't think Tebow will succeed as an NFL QB (sorry). But if NE drafts Tebow in the 2nd round, that is going to cause more problems for NE than you might think. Boston fans are fickle to begin with. Biggest bandwagon jumpers in the NFL. They already have a stud QB who they're ready to throw under the bus after any loss. If you add a second round QB heir apparent to Brady now, the first loss, the first 2 INT game that Tom has the fans will be screaming for his head. Bellichick is egotistical enough to think he can win with anyone under center and if the pitchforks get too close he might even make a move. Even IF Tebow proves to be a good NFL Starter, he's not going to be a HOF player like Brady. I see only bad things for NE if they take Tebow in Round 2 or higher. If they take him in round 4 or lower ... then there won't be as much pressure.

How is that bad news? I'd love it if NE blew a high pick on Tebow. It'd be great for Buffalo.

"Tim Tebow's passing workout is still going on. There is a crowd of approximately 1,000 people on hand cheering his every move. Tebow started slow in the early going then picked up the pace. The consensus is, while he's showing a good amount of accuracy and is completing his passes, he has thus far shown poor arm strength and his passes do not come in the form of tight spirals." http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/foot...ker/index.html# All I need to hear. Pass. He's the football version of Tyler Hansbrough.

There are so many things wrong with that paragraph I don't even know where to begin.

Wait ... I'm confused? You want us to list who we think will be drafted and where?