Dr. Who

I have confidence McDermott knows D and that White and Edmunds are likely key pieces in building a top-tier defense. Mahomes has to score a lot, because the KC defense is likely to give up 35 points. If Allen turns into a more athletic Big Ben and the D is good, that's a recipe for post-season appearances and success.

I would go after Ja' Wuan James and Darryl Williams at RT. Paradis and Morse at Center. If we can fill those two positions in free agency, it gives us much more flexibility entering the draft.

The rhetoric of your question is just as liable to indicate significant bias -- and I like Mahomes and argued right up to the 2017 draft that we should take him. I'm also thrilled with Josh Allen. They may both end up being superlative qbs. Mahomes may regress, get better, maintain stellar play for years. Allen does not have the surrounding talent or likely coaching staff, given Reid's exceptional abilities. Projecting based on potential is all one can do after a rookie season which involved a subpar oline, injury, and very limited receiver, rb, and te talent. Is recognizing that "propping up" Josh?

He's also more of a natural leader. He doesn't rub people the wrong way. In fact, he seems to inspire loyalty and effort and this as a raw rookie.

I think Beane probably needs to use draft capital to somehow come away with two first rounders if he wants a shot at Jacobs. I really like him. One of the Alabama fellas here said he reminded him of a lesser Thurman Thomas. I just think we also need to come away with DL, OL, or WR as well in the first. If we somehow got Metcalf and Jacobs with some solid oline adds in free agency, this team looks a lot better. (Oh, and T. J. Hockenson, the other Iowa TE, would be nice later in the draft.)

Mahomes got to sit a year, is surrounded by much better talent, and is coached by a fella who is generally considered an elite offensive mind. I'd like to see where Allen is with significant talent upgrades. I'm not bashing Mahomes. I pushed hard in 2017 for the Bills to draft him. I still think the "transcendent talent" label is premature. Let's see how he does in playoffs and with a few more years of history. He may justify such a claim, but I personally think Allen can be a top five qb if all goes well.

I understand. It's fun so long as folks remember the contextual variables that make it a more complicated assessment of counter-factuals than a comparison of "objective facts." And of course, a snapshot now may look quite different with a few more years of historical data, and even then, the "what if" game can never undo the basic reality that distinct particulars interact in incalculable ways. There's no doubt many likely scenarios where Tom Brady is drafted by a different team and washes out of the league.

But to get Mahomes production, you probably need the KC coaching staff and offensive personnel. Bring him into the situation Allen played under as a raw rookie and you're not going to hear talk of MVP.

Yes, I agree it is ambiguous. Personally, I think Josh Allen will be very, very good if we surround him with talent and good coaching, so I'm fine with how things worked out.

I think your thinking doesn't go beyond tactical trolling. Hapless and others above provide context that is much more than emotive homerism. But if this is how you get your kicks, have fun.

If the Bills win with Allen, Edmunds, and White, the talk will go away.

I like some of the half-hour westerns like the aforementioned Have Gun, Will Travel and the old Steve McQueen Wanted Dead or Alive. The half hour drama is no longer a form that seems to be made, but it required tighter storylines. (I was aware of John Dehner taking on the role for radio after the series and its anomolous nature, but I've never listened to it.)

Oh, I have no idea, either, but I just think Haskins is the more attractive prospect right now. And if I am a team that wants Rosen, I'm not paying a top ten pick for him, because if a team is selling after one year, no matter what the circumstances, I'm not paying a premium to get the guy.

If you're the G-men, do you prefer Rosen to taking a shot with Haskins? I really think #6 is a high return for Rosen. Cards invest a #10, then, albeit under difficult circumstances, fella has a poor year, and his value increases . . . I am skeptical.

I like westerns. I'd like to see Gunsmoke and Have Gun, Will Travel updated.

Best option is to use free agency to fix the line, but because of supply-demand ratios and competition with lots of cap space as well, it's a tricky situation. (I think you could get a guard, center, and RT this route. I don't see a LT that would allow you to kick Dawkins to LG where he may thrive best.) I agree the line has to be the priority, but it's not impossible to significantly improve the trenches and skill players in one offseason.

I think we should look at Mitch Morse or Matt Paradis at center. Ju'Wuan James would be a good signing at RT.

I think he would be bad for the locker room and team chemistry. Google Brown, Poyer and Rachel Bush; it's tawdry. If we're going to spend picks for an aging, albeit, excellent wr, I'd rather go after Julio Jones. Better to sign Golden Tate and draft a good one early though, imo.

I am both optimistic and concerned. I don't feel schizophrenic, but does a crazy person know they're crazy? And I'll listen to knuckleheads all day when they are rational and literate.

Yes, that's true. I am looking at Bortles where he is now. It does go to show it's a marathon, not a sprint.

Yeah, this is how I feel. Maybe some folks can be more objective about it.

Hey, I gave you cred up thread. Don't worry.

Yep. It's been a long wait. I didn't even realize I was young back then and thought for sure we'd have a fair number of playoff appearances and hopefully a shot or two at the Super Bowl in the future. Now I'm looking at the hour glass and praying Allen is the answer.

There's definitely enough ambiguity to make it a call that could be argued either way. Let's just put it this way, if Allen turns out to be Blake Bortles (as some of his critics today assert,) I will be very disappointed.

Is "bust" criteria objective level of play or is it also dictated by when a fella was drafted? I surmise most folks would judge Bortles a decent backup level of player. If you drafted him in the mid-rounds, that would make him a moderate success. If you drafted him third overall, that feels like a bust. That doesn't mean Bortles would have to have become a top five qb in order to avoid being a bust. I think Andy Dalton level average does that, though even that indicates a miss in terms of where he was drafted.