JohnC

You may be right. The Alpha Dog who is lives on the left coast has predicted that is where he would go. However, I think he is going to stay in LA.

I disagree with you. There is a good chance that he re-signs with them on a short deal. He's in a good situation playing on a team with a good qb. That will allow him to garner better stats and better position himself for his next contract. If he does leave I see San Fran as a good landing spot for him.

It's not unusual that teams that are out of the playoff hunt with meaningless games with respect to playoff implication do play better because there is less pressure. It's also not unusual that faltering teams are more likely to face backup goalies so the starter can get a rest. Teams playing lagging teams are more inclined to sit players with nagging injuries. That doesn't happen when teams are facing teams they are vying for either the playoffs or positioning. My point is that at this time of year don't fall into the trap of overrating what is being accomplished in the bottom feeding environment.

I have problems with the way this issue is being discussed and framed i.e. who got the better of the deal. It worked out for us and I believe that it worked out for the Rams. The Bills didn't have to sign him so they created cap space at the time and in the future. If the Bills use the acquired second round pick into a good player or use it in a deal to get a qb then that certainly should factor in to the calculation of what the benefit of the deal was. As you keenly observed with Watkins the stats don't tell the full story. His presence certainly had a positive effect on the other receivers. Because he was the big play threat he also opened up the field for the qb, receivers and even for the running game. Odds are that Watkins is going to remain with the Rams while Gaines is more likely to leave. The Bills already have a replacement in Davis. It seems that this deal worked out well for both franchises and the evaluation process is still on going.

What's evident is that the Sabres are not collectively fast enough to be an up and down skating team. When they create congestion in front of the net they are more likely to score. It appears that Reinhardt now understands that is where he is going to prosper.

I am a devoted Walmart Casio buyer. When it breaks down I throw it away and get in line for another. I'm not cheap. I am parsimonious!

The issue isn't who won the trade as it is was it the right thing to do for you. If he resigns with the Rams and becomes a star then good for him. That still isn't to say that it was the wrong thing for us to do. Our needs are our needs and another team's needs are their needs. As you noted the Bills gained cap space and they got a second round pick in the deal. If that second round pick is used in a deal for a qb this year then I would consider it a phenomenal deal for us. Or if that acquired second round pick becomes a mainstay defensive player I would still declare the transaction as a success.

There is no imaginable way that the Bills would be able to get the Giants' pick without giving up both of our first round picks and additional pick/s this year and probably also next year. I see Glenn having more value than Hughes (my opinion). What makes a deal for us difficult is that the first round picks that we would be offering are lower middle first round picks. So even those picks aren't considered premium picks. My view is simple. If you believe that the qb prospect you are moving up for is going to be a franchise qb then paying the piper is worth it. It's not going to come cheap. A Rolex watch is going to cost more than a Casio watch. One advantage of drafting a high end prospect is that there is an expectation that the prospect is going to play sooner than a more developmental type prospect. Having a starting qb on a rookie deal will provide more cap flexibility in the short run to acquire free agent players to compensate for the lost picks.

Is there any country in the world that takes a significantly different approach to treating cancer that has similar or better results?

Your board seems to be very realistic from the players you have on it and what it would take to select either Rosen, Mayfield or Darnold. I wouldn't be surprised if another 2018 2nd round pick would have to be added to go up and get our qb. I also agree with you that it seems that Rosen is the targeted qb, although any one of the top three is good enough for me. I'm not bothered by the high cost. Settling on a qb allows this franchise more options in building the roster.

JeffisMagic was imprudently ignored. With a selection of either one of the qbs you referred to our approach to this draft would be dramatically different.

The issue isn't how long can Eli play. The real issue is at what level can he play at now and in the near future. I'm hoping that the Giants work out a deal with us and stockpile picks. My approach for the Biills and even the Giants is if you have an opportunity to select a high end qb with your pick then you should do so. When you are discussing the qb position and who to select the emphasis shouldn't be on the first year. For the Giants and even the Bills if you can get a qb who you believe is going to be better than the other options in the long run then I would prefer taking the higher end prospect. There is a case to be made for the Giants and even the Bills that it is a better strategy to use your multiple picks to in general bolster the roster. My preference is to take the higher end prospect and be set for next decade or so. Different approaches-different philosophies-different situations at where each respective franchise is at-different evaluations and calculations.

If Eli believes that he can play for another four years then he is deluding himself. He clearly is fading. At this point in his long and distinguished career how much is left in his near empty tank? The Giants are in a good position to get a replacement player for Eli, even if the veteran is the starter this year. The Giants who usually are a competitive team rarely are in a position that they are currently in to secure their next long term qb. Passing on a highly rated qb, whoever it is, is an opportunity that doesn't come along very often. Don't get me wrong. I would love for the Giants to deal with the Bills and trade out. That would not only be a terrific scenario for us but also an opportunity that doesn't come along too often for a historically middle of the pack team.

There is a scenario that has been associated with Cleveland that could affect what the Giants do. Cleveland could take Barkley with the first pick and then draft Mayfield at the 4 spot. If Barkley is the player the Giants covet then there might be a chance to deal with them. I still believe that the Giants will be making a big mistake if they don't take Rosen with their first round pick.

I'm an Italian from the tough streets of the Westside. I would rather kick him in the nuts.

From the Bills perspective the myth isn't about where a prospect plays. The issue is does the prospect's talents project to the pro game. When you watch Darnold compared to Mayfield and even Rosen there is an uneven nature to his game. You see him make careless throws and turnovers. And you also see him follow up those bonehead plays with impressive plays. Ideally, he should have stayed in school another year and worked on his game. But the economics of the real world intruded on the college care free life and partying with voluptuous cheerleaders. It's certainly not a secret that the franchise has put a great deal of emphasis on scouting qbs. If you are expecting a guarantee that the evaluations are going to be scientifically accurate then you are in the wrong business. You do you due diligence and then make the best decision you can. Can you make a big mistake that sets the franchise back? Of course you can. You can also make crushing mistakes for the receiver, OT, running back positions. The reality of the NFL is that having a good franchise qb is one of the most determining factors for success. It isn't the only factor but without question the most influential factor. It's simply time to take the calculated risk to do what you have to do to succeed.

Haven't you heard that self-promotion is gauche? One of the standards to be allowed to post here is to be unattractive. So the person who made the prediction about Bryan must have been an outsider.

I'm not naming the draftniks on this board for fear of missing one of the amateur analysts with the keen eyes. But I want to say that this exalted group here is terrific. I really pay attention to what is being said. This is just an observation but am I the only one to notice that Bandito at times can be very pugnacious? If someone throws a punch he responds with a combo to the gut. He is a respected street fighter. He lives by the old boxing creed: When you take a punch-----you then give a punch.

I'm sure Kyle Williams and Eric Wood are not unhappy with making the playoffs. Anyone who has an once of objectivity realize that the Bills were from a talent standpoint not a playoff caliber team. That's what makes their playoff participation even more of an impressive achievement. As we both have said before it is a tribute to the HC and the players that bought in that the sum was greater than its parts.

For Buffalo you may be right. I see the fans embracing him as a player and personality. However, I'm not rigid on this issue. The franchise needs to rank the qbs and then if the preferred qb isn't available then go to the next option. And if the second option isn't available then go to the third option. The advantage of this year is you can successfully come away from this draft by getting one of the top three to four ranked qbs. In addition, there is a good fall back option. If your top tier prospects aren't attainable then you can draft a second tier qb with your current drafting position without using your draft options to move up. The bottom line is there is no excuse to come out of this draft without a premium to very good qb prospect.

The point needs to be stressed that if the Bills trade both of their picks to move up they are also getting a higher first round pick in return. So in reality you are losing a first round pick for the move up. You are not trading two picks and get nothing for it. You are getting a higher pick in return. So when all is said and done you are getting one player instead of two. There is a repeated notion that the organization is losing two players with a trade up. You are actually losing one and hopefully addressing the qb position. That extra first round pick is a tradable asset. Why not make use of it? For the sake of argument if by trading that particular first round pick you lose a good DT prospect from the draft you still can make it up with a solid and reasonably priced DT from the free agent market. The Bills certainly are not going to get a high end qb from the market. I just don't understand the reluctance to make such a deal for this qb starved franchise.

Would mar a lago be a more suitable location?

The good old days of the "bickering bills". A lot of strong characters creating a caldron full of volatility. The coaches weren't the demurring type of people either. https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2011/6/20/2228738/bickering-bills

If Cleveland and the Giants want to draft their favored qb prospect there is no package that will entice them to make a deal. You are mixing up what you want to do with what the trading partner wants to do. What's in our best interest isn't necessarily in their best interests. If the hotshot in a luxury car wants to go out with the voluptuous babe and she says no, then you are not going out with her. You then have to go to your next option or stay home and watch reruns of The Big Bang Theory.

How do you know that the Giants wouldn't want to draft Rosen? Or a team like Denver or Jets move up with a smaller deal to get him? The Giants then could still end up drafting at a high position to get a premier prospect. If Denver or the Jets gets Cousins then the dynamic of the draft changes. I'm stating the obvious that there are no guarantees. Sometimes what you want to do doesn't mesh with what you can do. If option A is available then take option B. If option B isn't available then take option C etc.