Dibs

I understand what you are saying....and you are right that my studies are relatively exclusive in their criteria. This is due to the focused question I used for the reason of the studies. In regards to the QB position though, I tend to think that it is pretty spot on in relation to producing solid starting QBs......particularly how it relates to the position the Bills find themselves in at the moment. It is extremely rare for a QB to be retained by their drafting team and become minimally a solid starter for the team that drafts them if the QB has not shown themselves to be of that level within their first 4-5 years. Conversely, it is extremely rare for a QB that has become a solid starter for the drafting team to be let go by that team after the first 4-5 years. Though there is a small number of QBs who then bounce around the league.....eventually maturing to have a few good seasons of QB play, that is of no use to the drafting team(in our case the Bills). For a quick double check.....here are a list of 2nd(non-top 32 picks), 3rd & 4th round QBs over a 10 year span(2001-2010). I will bold any QB who even remotely resembles a multi year starter. 2nd Round: (0 of 11) Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne, Pat White, Jimmy Clausen 3rd Round: (1 of 12) Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Kevin O'Connell, Colt McCoy 4th Round: (2 of 12) Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Kyle Orton, Stefan Lefors, Isaiah Stanback, Stephen McGee, Mike Kafka Overall from 10 years of 2nd-4th round QB drafting.....3 of 35 (8.6%)(1 in 11.7) Kyle Orton......played just well enough to have 2 teams try(& succeed) to replace him in his first 5 years.......a team(Bills) desperate for a QB wouldn't want him(may as well keep Fitz). David Garrard.....didn't become a factor for the Jags till 4 years after drafting.....started 76 games for them.....IMO, no good for the Bills needs....but include him if you like. Matt Schaub.....unusual circumstances.....only 2 start for drafting team Falcons.....include him as well. Overall numbers for 10 years of 2nd-4th round QB drafting.....2 of 35 (5.7%)(1 in 17.5) If the Bills think that they have a reasonble chance to "find a QB" in the 2nd round then their new analytics department is not doing a very good job.

From what Sherman said in the interview, it seems he took umbrage to Bayless saying that he wasn't even in the same league as the best CBs in the NFL. Kudos to Sherman IMO. It's not easy to hold your ground while in an atmosphere that is outside of your element.....particularly when young of age. As C.Biscuit97 said....paraphrasing....NFL players are fully accountable for their actions on the playing field. It's about time that some of these media people are held accountable for the actions on their playing field.

Most people think that way.....but if none of those QBs are considered by the scouts to be worthy of a 1st round pick then the odds are actually extremely tiny. I'll pimp my study again.....have a look at the success rates of non 1st round QBs in the link.....you'll see what I mean. Page 2 of the thread has a better top pick 5-34 breakdown than the original post. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/155235-drafting-success-qb/?do=findComment&comment=2712778

That was very funny. :thumbsup:

Honestly Hopeful, if you can't have a polarized view one way or the other you have no place on an internet forum.

I like what you did there....the Period really emphasized your well constructed point.

From 3:35 in: http://gizmodo.com/5886011/john-cleese-truly-stupid-people-will-never-know-they-are-stupid

This article was written on March 6. Odd that it would have this line in it.... "The Bills were also hindered by the absence of wide receiver David Nelson, who was placed on injured reserve in Week 1 after tearing up his right knee. His return, coupled with a new offensive scheme, could make things easier on Fitzpatrick -- assuming the offense plays to his strengths, which is more of an intermediate passing game."

Why didn't you post that 3 hours ago? Some people could have gone to bed.

.....don't forget Keller.

When is this news coming!!!!

I apologize for taking so long to respond to this point......hmmm......now I've forgotten what I was going to say. Carry on.

Speaking of brussel sprouts, I'm having some with dinner tonight. Yummy.

I totally agree with this......under the proviso that there are multiple 1st round graded QBs that can be selected in that range. I'd hate to trade down.....have the team trading pick QB #2 and then the Jets pick QB #3....leaving us with egg on our faces.

I fail to see how the overall average of the draft class effects the individual prospect. If Geno is a legitimate Top 10 prospect.....what difference does it make that the rest of the QBs are scrubs? History has shown that the scouting ability for QBs is very good. If there is a QB in this draft who has the potential to become Elite, there is a miniscule chance that the scouts miss this......and therefore a miniscule chance that he will last past the 36th selection. If we want a QB who can do more than be a backup......we will need to trade up from our #41 pick.

Only in hindsight can one say that they were not worth it. At the time of drafting, players such as Rodgers, Big Ben & Flacco were all considered to be of rough equivalent potential(non Top 4 1st rounders) as Tannehill, Freeman, Leinart etc, etc, etc. If you believe that you can tell which ones will become elite and which ones will bust prior to drafting, you should be applying for a scouting job as you can clearly do something that no NFL scout can do.

Anybody who doesn't know that is weird.

You are using hindsight logic with this. The argument that mjt328 put forward was that Geno is a legitimate prospect for the #8 selection. The fact that outside of the top 4 picks, only about 1 in 6 1st rounders become solid starters(1 in 12 becoming Elite) is irrelevant to the concept that Geno is a legitimately good prospect.

I think he means.....why didn't you move your camp?

:lol:

You have neglected the future implications of Fitz's contract. It all comes down to the cap figures. If we keep Fitz, we are up for a 10.45m cap hit this year......and he will be on the roster for 2014. Cutting him next year(2014), he will have a dead money cap hit of 7m. Does the team then make the same decision next year? If so, he will have a 10.55m cap hit in 2014......and then on the roster for 2105. Cutting him in 2015, he will have a dead money cap hit of 4m. Factoring in a backup contract, it is possible that TJ shows enough to be the main backup. That is only 1.75m. For the sake of argument however, I will allow 4m/year for a replacement backup for Fitz(which is actually a relatively high number for a backup QB). The cap figuring will work like this: Over the next 2 years. If we cut him now......we have a 10m dead money cap hit.....plus 4m for a replacement backup QB.....plus another 4m for a replacement in 2014. = 18m If we cut him next year.....we have a 10.45m cap hit....plus 7m dead money cap hit....plus 4m for a replacement backup QB in 2014. = 21.45m If he doesn't take a pay cut.....I see no reason why a team looking to replace him as starter would be willing to keep hindering themselves via the cap by not simply cutting him.

No.....her going home with you however does count as a random act of kindness.

What sized piece of Swiss cheese? If it was a very small piece it wouldn't have many holes at all......but a big piece has a lot of holes in it. Also....the holes in Swiss cheese are random in size. Does that directly relate to our team? Do the big holes represent linemen & the little ones DBs......or do they relate to the calibre of player? Big hole means we lack a big time player....little hole represents a backup? Honestly, this analogy is far too complex for my puny brain to cope with.

I'll back DC Tom up on this one. I saw studies on this in the late 1980's. The logic is quite sound when you think about it. I've seen other similar studies relating to the polystyrene McDonalds hamburger containers actually being better for the environment than the cardboard ones.....as well as one covering the concept that recycling does more damage to the environment than not doing recycling. The biggest lesson in life that I have learned is that most things have far more complexities than the average person wants to know about.

I'm a little confused....I wasn't responding to your post. Doesn't matter. See my response to Sisyphean Bills to sum me up on this one. I have no disagreement with what you just posted. All good.