Dibs

I tend to think that if we draft a QB in the 1st there will be a higher likelihood of that standard statement being true this year than for the past 20.

Agreed. I didn't mean to imply that they were going to have to have a fire sale or something similar.....just that they can't stand with their current roster/contracts with their rookies.

As only the top 51 contracts are counted towards the cap........it will work out that the 4th, 5th & 6th rounders will not count. That estimate would then only be 3.77m. But the top ones will. Looking at these two pages.... http://www.overthecap.com/rookiepool.php?Team=49ers http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/san-francisco-49ers/cap-hit/ .....the 49ers first 4 picks will count.....for an estimated total of $3.4m. They are going to need to re-structure or cut somebody to make it under the cap.

Huh?? He said.... "Barkley is going to be the next franchise QB of the Buffalo Bills, and the first QB to take this team to the playoffs in tooooooo long!" What sort of Bills fan hopes that the Bills finally winning is wrong?

Though I personally think that they are all a load of rubbish......here is an article showing basically the opposite of what you said. http://blog.pundittracker.com/nfl-mock-drafts-espn%E2%80%99s-todd-mcshay-is-1/

Why does this logic apply to the Bills and not the Jets? Surely if we can guarantee a solid rookie selection at pick 13 for 4-5 years.....so can the Jets. If we have to pay Byrd a big pay day(and that is bad).....don't the Jets also have to pay Byrd a big pay day if they trade for him? As you've explained it, the Jets would be crazy to do the trade. If it is so obviously good for us to do the trade.....surely the Jets will simply draft their own guaranteed solid rookie selection at pick 13. On top of that......the Jets do not have the cap room to sign Byrd.

Did you stop to think of the reason why the Jets traded Revis to TB? It was because they had no room under the cap. If the Jets traded for Byrd, they would again be pushed over the cap. What is the logic you used to think that this is good for the Bills?

Oh I agree.....but who's projections do we use? I had a look at eight draft prospect ranking sites(ESPN, NFL(Mayock), DraftTek, SI.com, WalterFootball, SBNation, FFToolbox & DraftCountdown). There were no consensus top 5 picks and only 2 consensus top 10 picks(Eric Fisher & Dion Jordan). There were 6 consensus top 15 picks(Star Lotulelei, Ezekiel Ansah, Luke Joeckel & Chance Warmack).

Q- What's worn under a kilt? A- Nothing. It's all in perfect working order.

Obviously you look at the player rankings for many sites. I think you missed a few though.... (from the Nassib thread)

Ironically the only QB who Parcells' drafted that fit his own rules was Pennington. He also drafted Hostetler and Bledsoe but neither fit into his rules.

This is about 5 days premature isn't it? Any "bust" predicted by us amateurs might not even be selected high in the draft.

You seem to have totally ignored the possibility that we actually are better on the OL(including depth) than most people think(as Nix stated).....and that Morrone has assessed this to be the case as well. I dislike Nix for various reasons. None of which however are due to the OL. If anything, I would say that Nix has had a knack for finding solid/good OLmen in his tenure at the Bills......and in that regard, I am willing to give him(& Marrone) the benefit of the doubt at this point.

That isn't really a solid argument for drafting a CB inside the top 10 two years in a row though. CBs are typically selected that high in the draft due to their potential ability to man-cover WRs. Selecting two CBs that high in a very short span either means a team is planning for the likelihood that one of the CBs does not pan out(no team really has the luxury to do this at any postion)......or is indeed trying to stock their roster with 2 star man-cover CBs. As nearly all teams do not have two star WRs.....this would mean that having two star man-cover CBs is a luxury position to be in. Filling luxury positions on a team before positions of need seems to me to be a good way to go nowhere. A bit like spending money/time on tweaking a racing car's engine when it has bad tires. It might improve in certain statistics(straight line speed etc)......but is never going to win a race.

Though I think both examples you list(49ers & Ravens) support the concept that having a good OL is still important in today's game.....I think only one of those examples supports the concept of selecting OL with the #8 pick. Listing the 49ers backs your point. They spent three 1st round picks on the OL(who are all starting).....and they are a legitimate contender. To list the Ravens however is perhaps counterproductive to the point as only one of their starting OLmen was drafted in the 1st round by them. Their OL would better support the argument that you can find quality OLmen after the 1st round & via FA rather than the argument to support selecting one with the #8 pick.

I'd say it also could tell us how knowledgeable an individual is on the definitions of basic English words......combined with how knowledgeable they are with basic mathematics. I think what the Wonderlic really tells us is whether an individual paid attention in junior high or not.

I agree. You'd need at least a number out of 64. Is that serious? Is that really what a Wonderlic test is like? Apart from the concept that I'd expect the average pre-teen to be able to score reasonably well on that simple test(the rough average simply guessing the answers would be 13).... ....how does having an extremely basic understanding of math, and having a general understanding of the meaning of words, relate to ones ability to be able to play football(or even relate to any form of intelligence)?

On top of the adjustments above(red)....Jags 33, Eagles 35, Cardinals 38, Jets 39, Titans 40.....could all easily trade up from the 2nd into the 20-22 range. It would likely cost an extra low 2nd or a 3rd round pick for them to do this. If there were only one or two QBs who you rate as solid prospects left when the #8 pick comes......you couldn't risk the trade down.

"For the last time, that is not how you do the human centipede!"

The Bills overpaid Mario a bit(1m-2m/year) due to FA pressure etc......but the Matthews deal is by no means a bargain. The new money for the new years on the Matthews deal equates to 13.2m/year.....which makes him the #1 paid LB in the league.

Are uniforms supposed to be water proof?

Looking back.....I agree that I was a bit touchy....to which I apologize that I overstated things. Having recently given up smoking, I find that I've been a bit touchy far more than I normally am. Apologies to anybody else whom I might have over reacted to lately.

I live in Australia. 8am-5pm ET is certainly not my 8am-5pm.

That is a massive assumption. There are many draft analysts who grade one(or two) QBs well ahead of the pack. But what if the Bills have Nassib(and maybe one other) graded as the only legit prospects in the draft......just like certain media analysts? If this is the case......and one of their two legit QB options is gone before the #8 spot.....would you risk trading down to #13 allowing the Jets to grab the only QB(according to your own board) left?

I don't see why this concept is so difficult for many people to grasp. All it takes is for one other team to rate the player the same for us to miss out......assuming the rating is that of legitimate 1st round potential.