Dibs

Unfortunately it is not longer defenses that win championships(if it was ever true). It is the "one" QB who wins championships......and has been for the past 20 years. (Data in this link: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/155525-how-to-win-a-super-bowl/?do=findComment&comment=2722647) I personally believe having a QB like Alex Smith would be detrimental to a team wanting to win championships. The logic goes......the QB is good enough to regularly provide winning seasons and playoffs.....therefore there is never any immediate imperative to find the "one" at QB by (regularly)wasting 1st round picks in the attempt. His salary would be relatively high, thus reducing the number of other good veterans on the team.....and unless all of the stars miraculously align and the entire team is stellar(very, very low odds), he will never provide a SB win. Until he is aged or injured, the team will be stuck with above-averageness at best. (It's why I'm happy for the cowboys to have a QB like Romo.) It's good for the fans.....regular playoffs is what keeps us satisfied......but never the dizzying heights that the "one" QB would likely bring.

Perhaps.....or perhaps not. The Chiefs are in the position to get one of the 2-3(typically) premium talents in the draft.....Geno not being considered one of them. As one does not often get the chance to obtain one of those calibre of player.....and one might typically be able to regularly obtain a QB prospect of Geno's potential(6-15?).....perhaps they feel it a better choice not to pass on the "can't miss super-star" with the #1 pick. There's a lot more chance that your 1st round drafted QB will become the "one" than there is for a 7 year veteran who has shown so far that he isn't the "one", becoming the "one". That being said, there is more chance that the 7 year vet can become(maintain being) a good QB who can regularly win you games and get you into the playoffs.....but never take you to the promised land.

"We still have too many holes." Now that's a thread title that would be more appropriate at least a couple of days after Free Agency has started. Of course we "still" have too many holes.....we have had no opportunity to fill any yet.

In one foul swoop we could be fixing the QB situation.

I'm on tender hooks waiting to see if we draft him.

His base talent, wasted talent, lack of talent, potential talent & future talent are all relatively irrelevant(under the assumption that nobody believes he can be the answer at QB)......it all will come down to the caponomics of the situation. If he re-structures he stays......if he doesn't he gets cut.

If he is not good enough to win a SB(which I think we all agree that he isn't)......and he stays on the roster, it won't be to be the long term starter....it will be at best as a caretaker QB until whomever we get is ready to start. Similarly, if he gets cut....it won't make a great deal of difference unless we manage to put together a much improved team(particularly defense) in one off-season. The winning difference between an "average" Fitz and a "below average" <insert name> is not likely to be greater than a 2 game difference.....i.e. 4 wins instead of 6 wins. As I said originally, what difference does it make if he is horrible, bad or average? If he stays we are stuck with what he is.....and if he is replaced by a horrible/bad/average QB we are quibbling over a 2 game difference in a losing season. Waste of time if you ask me.

It sounds good.....and it would be nice to believe that talent evaluators can have a more precise grasp than the general standard.....and likely to a small percent some do. I have toyed with the concept of doing a team by team analysis of over-all draft success but decided that this would be a futile exercise. Scouts, coaches, GMs and even owners all factor into the process.....and with those changing on a regular basis, there would be no way to pinpoint if there was actually a genius hiding amongst the mediocrity. The reality is that the best prospects are generally recognized. This has been shown through each position I have analysed to date(QB, LB, WR, OL). The QB postition is the greatest example of how the scouting process works effectively. In the 20 years of drafts, there was only one Star QB(Brady) who was not drafted inside the top 34 picks. This shows that the talent evaluators do a fantastic job when it comes to evaluating QBs. Other positions have differing outcomes. The WR position has the expected drop-off in success rate after the 1st round....but the ability to predict a 2nd round talent over a 3rd round talent seems non-existent as both those rounds had the same Star & Starter success rates for WRs. LBs & OLmen had a distinctive drop-off between the 2nd & 3rd rounds....which implies that talent evaluators could still distinguish Star & Starter potential for those positions in that range. This sort of analysis could be extremely useful for a team drafting. Take the Bills in this draft as example. We want a QB, WR & LB. As one desires a Star QB, there is no point taking a QB who is not graded as at least a high 2nd round pick as the odds of him becoming a Star are miniscule. You take your LB in the 2nd round as statistics have now shown that the talent evaluation in regards to LBs can clearly distinguish between the players at that level.....and you select a 3rd round graded WR(in the 3rd) feeling confident that even though your analysis has shown other WRs to have more potential, statistics have shown that the evaluators are not very pricise in grading WRs of the 2nd/3rd round level.

We should really be discussing this in the other thread but.... Aaron Rodgers was a unique situation in regards to the criteria used as he was on the cusp of player drafting year(2005) but he spent 3 full years on the bench. Effectively he only had 5 years to qualify whereas nearly all other players had a full 8+ years to "qualify". Y/A may well be a better system for analyzing "star" value in QBs....but since I am doing analysis on all positions, I needed a standard system which would apply across the board. Furthermore, I was not endeavouring to obtain the number of star QBs in the league today.....I was obtaining the number of Star(&Starter calibre) QBs(and all players) for the teams who drafted them between the years of 1986 - 2005. The 4+ pro-bowl system is not perfect, but if a star player cannot make the pro-bowl 4 times....then they are not likely the star calibre player that I was interested in tracking.

I wouldn't mind it if we ended up with a similar result as Casserly's last draft. 3 multi-probowlers & a solid starter.

Likely only an 8% chance .....but if you don't try you have a 0% chance. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/155235-drafting-success-qb/page__st__20 (post #29 in this thread)

It baffles me how anybody(NFL teams included) can think that a castoff QB from a team with no talented starter could possibly become anything more than serviceable.

Actually....you don't quite recall correctly. Though the Patriots did win 11 games in 2008, it was the only season apart from 2002 where they have not made the playoffs since Brady became their starter(2001). For interest: 2001: SB win 2002: No playoffs 2003: SB win 2004: SB win 2005: Playoffs 2nd round 2006: Conference final loss 2007: SB loss 2008: No playoffs (Cassel) 2009: WC loss 2010: Division loss 2011: SB loss 2012: Conference final loss Playoffs every year in the last decade....except for the one year that they don't have Brady.

But this news is so important to Bills fans that it requires two threads.

In terms of your definition of "tiers", I personally would describe it as 3rd Tier....not 2nd. 1st Tier are the "can't miss" quality.....those that get selected in the top 4 in R1. 2nd Tier are the rest of the 1st R quality QBs.....and into the very top of R2. 3rd Tier are the ones directly after that. I only raise this as to avoid communication problems. If I were to have stopped reading after your 2nd sentence, I would have thought that you meant that there are several QBs who would be fine to take at the #8 spot.

They kinda did.... Bills 2012 rushing yards = 2217 Bills 2012 rushing yards allowed = 2333 Bills 2012 rushing Y/A = 5.0 Bills 2012 rushing Y/A allowed = 5.0 I don't understand all of the Fitz posturing. There seems to be no debate that Fitz is not minimally a good QB. Who really cares if he is horrible, bad or just plain average? None of those can win us a SB.....so time to move on.

Perhaps you should start to consider the concept that your ability to circumnavigate the myriad of complexities involved in these situations is lacking.

http://www.nfl.com/n...les-unavailable "Eagles coach Chip Kelly said that he wanted to coach Foles, and Chiefs coach Andy Reid believed the Eagles liked Foles too much to deal him." "It appears Reid is right. The Eagles reiterated to the Chiefs that Foles was not available at this time. That possibly could change in the coming weeks with the league year starting March 12. Either the Eagles are trying to gain leverage and not show their hand or they actually mean what they say."

It could be perhaps equally argued that Fitz appeared much greater than his abilities in the first 7 games of 2011......and once teams adjusted to the scheme, his skills were shown in a more realistic light.

I have no idea how relevant his "hot hand" was to Nelson.....but just for interest sake.... Fitz had a hot hand for the first 7 games in 2011. Nelson's averages are: 1st 7 games 2011 4.4 catches/game 52 yards/game Games 8-16 2011 3.3 catches/game 32 yards/game

Actually....it is possible that the premium placed upon OGs his increased(if ever so slightly) in the last 5 years. 2011 #15 2010 #17 2008 #15 That is the biggest run on high picked OGs in about 25 years.....which is exactly your point. There actually seems there was a higher premium on OGs prior to the mid 1980's though.....and they were apparently hot commodities in the 1960's & 1970's..... Here are all the #17 or higher OGs list....back to 1960: 2011 #15 2010 #17 2008 #15 2001 #17 1997 #10 1995 #14 1989 #17 1986 #9 1983 #9 1982 #8 1980 #11 1977 #14 1976 #14 & #15 1975 #3 & #13 1974 #3 1973 #4 1972 #8 1970 #14 1969 #17 1967 #9, #12 & #17 1966 #2 & #5 1964 #2 1963 #10 1960 #7

Who are we going to take in the 1st round?

He will only get the parts of his guaranteed money that hasn't been paid to him yet(hard to figure exactly how much that is). He will however be getting that money regardless to if he stays or is cut. Cutting him will mean that he will earn nothing on top of any left-over guaranteed money. Put yourself in Fitz's shoes. The Bills say to you, "Re-structure or be cut.".... If you re-structure you likely get at least the same(new money/cash) as you would as a FA.....and you get to stay in a team where you just might get some more playing time. If you don't re-structure.....you are a FA trying to land a backup role somewhere. There is little incentive for him not to re-structure unless he feels he could get more as a FA.