Dr. Who

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.

I'd rather bring Fitz back in that scenario. Don't know how big a contract he would command.

Jackson is not my top choice, but if we choose to stand pat, I am hoping Jackson is there at 21. I think he needs to build muscle and could use a redshirt year. I'm afraid he'll get hurt like RG3.

What, 5 to 7 years down the road with drafts and free agency, we won't be able to build a defense? That trade up for a top qb must have cost more than I foresee . . .

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.