Dr. Who

The early MASH is better, imo. The anarchic energy is sharper and the humor doesn't descend into preachy bathos. You can't give a comic character depth or nuance. When one does that, a certain kind of humor becomes sadistic. For this reason, Frank Burns was more suited as the butt of jokes. Show took a different direction with Stiers. He's an interesting character with intellect to challenge Hawkeye. I liked the character, and the actor, a lot, but it swung the comedy away from the ethos introduced in the movie.

You may have stated this in one of the innumerable threads, but I missed it if so. Do you have any surmise as to which qb(s) we are most interested in? I sure hope Mayfield is included in the fellas we are keen to move up for.

I meant it would be an awful plan for Beane. Sorry for lack of clarity.

And good for him. Loyalty is fine. I wouldn't expect him to bash Brown in a public context. That said, one can hardly imagine a worse combine than that fella had.

Awful plan, imo. Certainly, one is leaning heavily towards a skeptical interpretation of the top-rated prospects and equally propping up the tier-two fellas as if, in fact, there really isn't any signficant difference, so why pay the price to move up. I doubt that is truly cogent, but it fits in with the way OBD has addressed the qb position for most of the history of this franchise.

Unless you are envisioning a tiny jump into the mid to late teens, there's no way both firsts are not involved. Exasperating how last year, those of us pushing for the Bills to finally address qb and take Watson or Mahomes at ten were condescendingly told they weren't any good and this year was the bonanza year to draft qb. Now, as always, there are too many holes on the roster and suddenly the draft class at qb isn't all that good. If this isn't a good draft class, there likely won't be one. Most drafts have one or two potential franchise qbs, or zero, actually. Those fellas are always drafted high. This year, we have two firsts, two seconds -- if not now, when, exactly, will the stars align for the perfect scenario that makes drafting a qb high in round one possible?

I'm not convinced a tradeup is impossible. Giants or Colts may be willing to deal. Saquon could easily go in one of the first two picks. Aside from that, I think Mayfield is worth a high trade up. Outside of top three, I'd place Jackson and even Allen ahead of Rudolph. Supposedly we passed on qb last year and traded out of ten to have the capital to get a qb this year. It's a fail, imo, if we end up settling for a tier two or three qb.

I like Mayfield and Rosen best. Darnold is a bit riskier, but I'd still trade up for him. If we stand pat, I hope Jackson is there at 21. Those are the first round qbs, imo.

We'd be lucky if he were there for one of our seconds -- and I'd run to the podium with the pick if he were.

You could cut out the dead wood and bring in a new wave of older, low budget players. You can play that game if your hand is forced. What you can't do every year is have a legitimate chance to get a franchise qb. Next year is next year; long-term success can accomodate a down year if need be. Free agency and future drafts can build up a team. Very short-sighted to just look at the evident deficiencies on the team and use that as a rationale for not going after the qb. I think the gap between Rudolph and Darnold/Rosen/Mayfield is significant. I even prefer Jackson/Allen to Rudolph. I think Rudolph's ceiling is maybe Andy Dalton. Obviously, if you judge him better, you will have a higher opinion. I think Rudolph is a third round talent. If he weren't tall and looked the part, he's JAG.

If you really like Rosen, Darnold, and Mayfield, that means you think they are potential franchise qbs. It's worth it.

Please let this be true.

Not sure we will be in a position to spend a second rounder on wr, but he would look good in a Bills uni. Aside from talent, I think we should draft him just for the fun of seeing how many combinations of a misspelled first name are possible.

You take every equivocal situation and assume the worst. When offered an alternative scenario, you pretend that your pessimism is rational and everyone who disagrees is a fool. I doubt it will cost three firsts and a second to get up into the top three, but as others have pointed out, there are still more draft picks and free agency, which you appear to ignore in your assessment. It's easy to win an argument when you beg all the questions. But even granting certitude for all your surmises, you still consistently ignore the question you have been asked multiple times -- if you foresee a bad record, regardless, than why not get a franchise qb and build for the future? Logic, Hercule, give it a try. Agatha Christie killed her detective off because she didn't want incompetent imitators ruining a splendid reputation.

With that kind of optimism, why not just go ahead and get the qb? You seem to already have presumed a poor record in any event.

Slightly above average centers are easier to replace, though I realize he's an excellent locker room fella as well. Today's defensive schemes require skill at both tackle spots. It would be big, assuming we don't end up trading Glenn in order to move up and grab a qb. Personally, I'd rather find a way to keep him and move up. A solid oline would certainly improve the potential for a young qb to have success.

I dunno, how have you liked 6-10 to 9-7 at best the last twenty plus years? Get the qb.

Honestly, I am going to be unhappy if we don't find a way to get one of the big three (Mayfield and Rosen are my favorites). If we stand pat, I would consider Jackson or Allen, though both have significant risks and I doubt Allen will drop that far in any event. I think Rudolph is a third round qb and will be disappointed if we take him. I'd rather wait and take Mike White later on if you are going that route.

I could be wrong, but I think it starts Friday and runs through Monday or Tuesday. Yesterday NFL Network was showing old film from last year's combine. Talk about yawn.

Well, I've been guilty of plugging Mittelstadt in, but that's mainly trying to find some consolation for how disappointing we have been; not just disappointing, but a team that is not fun to watch at all. I'm certainly willing to be patient in order to get it right.

How does O'Regan being a small dude imply blowing it up? I don't think they are tanking at all. They are simply not good. Botterill has a long-term plan that emphasizes careful development. Of course, you have to have the talent to develop. GMTM set the rebuild back years by bad drafting, poor decisions, and the lack of a cohesive overall plan. He apparently wanted to imitate the KIngs when the league was moving towards speed and skill. Kane was our best chip. Not sure JB misplayed it. Seems his value just wasn't that high. We could use some lottery luck. Blueline could really use Dahlin. Otherwise, Svechnikov or Tkachuk.

It was the return for Nash that makes the Kane deal look particularly bad. Few years ago, I had much more hope for the Sabres than the Bills. I am not especially confident about the Bills, but they appear closer. Loved Tim Murray's deadpan schtick, but it was only amusing when you thought he had a clue. What a messed up rebuild.

Well, disappointing return on E. Kane trade and now this lovely little thought. Fun times. Fortunately, I don't think Vic has a clue.

There's a whole cottage industry on these boards of folks who will reliably tell you every year why it isn't the year to do what it takes to draft a top qb prospect. (Naturally, lot of years, there's not much to choose from, but this is a year with multiple qbs worthy of consideration.) This, with 25 years of evidence of what happens to a team with mediocre to poor qb play. Just by the law of averages and dumb luck, we finally squeaked in . . . well past mere law of averages actually to luck into a wildcard, and we managed all of three points when we got there. But we are told by some that, after all, TT is a playoff qb, the team has lots of holes, the experts can't agree if any of the qbs are franchise worthy, etc, so stand pat and wait till next year. If you disagree with this, you are an immediate gratification dope who thinks qb alone will lead to SB when you have to build a defense, etc. Well, walk and chew gum, fellas, but start with a potential franchise qb. And I agree with the folks who say we should have taken a shot with Watson or Mahomes -- I pushed for both of them before the draft. But now that we traded out and acquired draft capital, presumably to now go get the qb . . . it's Lucy and the football, redux.

Not sure anyone suggested it was easy to build a SB team. One builds a team over the course of years. Getting a potential franchise qb now is not aimed at immediate gratification. You have time to fill other holes. No one is expecting to go win the SB next year. Even a great qb needs time to mature. I don't grant you will need to trade three firsts. 21 and 22, plus, but even if it was three firsts, you'd still have enough draft capital and FA to improve the team over the course of years. It isn't an either/or situation unless one exaggerates cost to the point of hyperbole.