Dr. Who

I prefer Mayfield and agree with OP, but I would also be very happy with Rosen.

It's unpopular because we've had good cbs before. We've spent lots of first round picks on them, often letting them walk after their rookie deal is up and replacing them. That is our usual M.O. You need cbs, of course, but you need qb more. The latter is harder to find, yes, but where has having a good defensive backfield gotten us when the offense is always terminally handicapped by inadequate qb play?

I think we should draft Baker Mayfield in the first and see if we can grab Mark Andrews (TE, I know) on day two.

Yeah, the DL is much more in need of talent infusion.

I am guessing a lot of folks don't believe Glenn is healthy. They think we can heal him up enough to trick the Giants or something. They are "tossing him in" because they don't think of him as a durable player. If it's all about salary cap, that's just plain foolish. He's a very nice LT, one of the harder positions to fill. If he is healthy, Glenn and Dawkins would conceivably give you too nice bookends for the OL. Yep, that's how the draft works, wherever you are picking. Though the bust rate is still high, you have a much better chance of getting a franchise qb picking early, and this appears to be a draft with a few players with real potential. Unless you have a foolproof way to know the future ahead of time, there's no way to eliminate risk.

Well, I largely agree with this. I think you better try to get at least a more capable RT in FA as well, though. (I am hoping Miller might rebound at RG with a new scheme.)

I am somewhat concerned about this. One assumes all the medical issues will be vetted at the Combine and in individual meetings with teams.

If Cordy Glenn is healthy, he has significant value. If he isn't, I don't see how the Giants would want him. That is not exactly a steal, imo, but I would definitely make the trade.

Progressive atheist is opposite to my own beliefs, but I don't see how religion or politics has any effect on the ability to play football.

Another year of Tyrod . . . well, I'll have to increase the alcohol budget. OBD, save the liver, please.

Ahh, I'm not the GM and I'll freak out if I want to. Seems to me the trading away of assets for picks was designed to set up a move up for qb. Though I grant the OP is level-headed and it's possible things play out in a manner that precludes the ability to get the guy you want. What I don't really like is some post I read where a journalist fella opined that McD would be fine using draft capital to improve the D and going with a mediocre vet qb. No thanks to that plan. (I like the three qbs you indicate, btw.)

Sorry, that's a deal breaker.

I understood your initial comment to mean we could get by without addition. This does not preclude some improvement through FA and the draft, which I surmise you are open to. My own hope would be to use FA to bolster both DL and OL if possible. This makes moving up for qb more palatable, though I would move up for qb regardless.

Alright. I am bothering folks by expatiating on these matters. Seems to me the Patriots just got lucky in the sixth round one year. Not sure how that fits with your analogy. I would explain theological/science matters quite differently, but this is not the forum for such a discussion.

Well, I'm not going to try and disabuse you of confusion. Sorry, if you don't like my comment. My constructive criticism is to take care with potentially comic acronyms. Read Free Agent RT too fast and acronym becomes advocacy for superior flatulence.

Well, I believe the chicken should come first, as well, though I don't see how the religion/science divide follows from your analogy. Most fundamentalists, I would guess, suppose the chicken came first. But the whole debate between science (under the guise of neo-Darwinism) and religion (perhaps under the rubric of Intelligent Design) share certain metaphysical assumptions that mean it is actually an internecine dispute. Both are basically locked into an inadequate ontological understanding, imo. Regardless, one needn't really choose between religion and science, just as one can have one's chicken and one's egg, too, especially when FA allows one to make up for "lost" draft capital used to secure the chicken (er, qb).

Everyone will hope the rookie turns into a player of Rodgers quality. Rodgers sat for a few years. That was made easier because the Packers had Favre. But I'm not sure what is the real import of your rhetorical question: are you presupposing the pick is a bust? How would anyone know that? Does one refuse to move up for a qb because they might not turn out well? Is a trade up for qb never justified? Does one have to have divine foreknowledge the player will be the next Aaron Rodgers before such a trade is okay with you? If you're only asking will the fanbase be okay if the Bills draft a bad qb, there's something jejune and cynically despairing about such a view -- and naturally, people will be disappointed. But you can bust on any player at any position; maybe we should try to get a good one when the top of the draft has a number of promising prospects. We passed on Watson and Mahomes, presumably to put ourselves in a position to finally address the most important position in football. Maybe at least once every twenty-five years, you ought to try and get a good one. What happens next year if the Bills pass once again at drafting qb early and Watson and Mahomes play well, as does Rosen and Mayfield and one or two others, eventually. How will the fan base handle this?

I think the two-tier approach the Eagles used to grab Wentz is what is surmised in a preliminary move to eight. You could easily see a run on qb at the top of the draft and be left out if you think eight is high enough.

Of all the FA qbs, he's the one I would target, though my preference is that we trade up for one of Rosen, Darnold, or Mayfield.

If the Bills trade up for Rudolph, I'm going to need a new tv.

Anthony Lynn is the Chargers coach. Tricky, tricky.

Strangely enough, I don't want either playing qb for the Bills.

Yeah, I think that's it. You're supposed to think it's "throw the ball, throw the ball" Tyrod, but that's the twist.

If Josh Rosen will be an elite qb, I certainly hope we go get him.

I could be wrong here, but I think you've created a false set of alternatives. No one is guaranteed a top 5 qb. The fella you are arguing with doesn't think Eli is a top five qb, so if you project a draft pick with a ceiling of Eli, he doesn't want to pay a bunch to move up and get that qb. You can project a qb top 5 and miss, but the point is, one would be okay trying to move up for someone you think has a reasonable chance of becoming elite.