JohnC

If Glennon can't execute a pro offense and make the throws then find someone else. I'm open to all options other than retaining Taylor. This fine fellow deserves a fresh start somewhere else.

I consider McCoy a sterling player. But the reality is that he is a thirty year old speed back whose value is going to diminish. Without a doubt his workload is going to lessen, so he is not going to be as much of a focal player as he has been. You can't beat mother nature! Brady is in a different category because of the position he plays. His position relies more on brains than athleticism. Let's look at what you would get from an acquisition of Foles in an exchange for a back. You get a qb who can run a pro offense and make pro throws. That in itself is a major upgrade from what we have been accustomed to over the past three years. Foles is a qb who even in the short term (one to two years) will keep the Bills competitive while it continues with its reconstruction. Where I forcefully disagree with you is that a McCoy/Taylor combination does not closely match replacement backs/Foles combination. In addition, in my scenario the Bills keep their picks. And if smartly handled they can either work a deal to get their ace qb prospect or if they stay pat get an infusion of young talent added to the roster. I'm open to all qb options other than retaining Taylor. That shipped has sailed a long time ago for me. If I could get a qb such as Bradford from the market I would be ecstatic. My unyielding criteria is that the qb has to be able to run a pro offense and throw the ball down field.

I'm agreeable to any option that doesn't include Taylor. In the three years he has started for us he has had no progression to his game. If a qb can't run a pro offense or throw it downfield then that player should not be a starter, even if it is as a bridge qb. What have we come to when it is considered an outrageous expectation to expect your starting qb to be able to run a pro offense? It's a sad commentary when expectations have been so dumbed down. A pop warner offense may be good enough for you but it is not for me. On this issue I'm not yielding or going with the flow.

You are wrong. If Taylor could play the position at a high level he would be well worth the contract. In fact he would be a bargain. The reality is that his level of play doesn't come close to matching his salary. The value isn't there as a starter. As a backup he would be overpaid. That is correct.

As I said Peterman is more likely to be on the roster than Taylor. I don't know what you are disagreeing with.

Can't you read. That Peterman is more likely to be on the roster than Taylor would be. I never said Peterman was the answer. However, he is more likely to be on the roster as a backup than Taylor is on the roster at all.

As usual you are missing the point. With Foles I believe the Bills could still remain a competitive team. In addition, you would still have credible play at the qb position that would buy your young qb time to be better prepared when the time comes to take over. It might be in his rookie year or second year. At least you remain competitive with a qb who can run a pro offense and can capably throw the ball. McCoy is a terrific player. But he is not in his prime from the standpoint of usage. His touches are going to be limited. If you lose his talent you balance it out with getting better qb play, even if it is for the short term. You want to portray my position as if I was mortgaging the future. That is utter nonsense. I wouldn't want to give up draft picks for Foles. But I would be willing to give up a high cost running back for him. With a qb such as Foles the team can continue to be competitive.

I stated that Peterman was more likely to be on the roster next season than Taylor would. Do you disagree with that?

The odds are substantially higher that Peterman will be on next year's roster and Taylor won't be.

You criticize my ability to be rational on the Taylor issue when yet it coincides with the organization's line of thinking. And let me remind you that Whaley was going to dispatch Taylor before he had a viable replacement but couldn't execute his plan because he lost his authority. And the irrationality that you claim I have on this issue is more likely to coincide with the position that this current regime has on Taylor. What are the odds that Taylor is on our roster next season? Foles is not a franchise qb or it is questionable that he is a long term starting qb. Would I give up a McCoy for him for a one or two year deal? Absolutely. I would still want the Bills to go all out to get a top shelf qb prospect in this draft but still be in a position to be competitive and allow time to prepare the prospect. McCoy is undoubtedly one of our best players on offense. However, he is 30 yrs old, and he definitely won't be a workhorse back next season. Understandably, he is a diminishing player with a high price tag for a position where there are a number of reasonable options. Would there be a loss of productivity at his position? Probably so. But on the other hand the play at the more important position would inarguably be improved, even if it is for the short term. I'll take that deal. Make no mistake what my position is. I'm still a strong advocate for the franchise to come out of this draft with a high end qb prospect. But if a qb such as Foles can be attained for the price of a back and it would allow us to be more competitive and give time to develop a qb I would take the deal with no hesitation. I said it before and I will say it again: The era of a pop warner offense has to end. If you don't know what I mean then I suggest that you watch a tape of the Jacksonville game. From a quarterback standpoint it was an embarrassment. No more!

After Whaley was dismissed he was asked in an interview if he had it to do over what would he have done differently? Without hesitation he said he wished he would have been more aggressive in addressing the qb position. As far as bringing in a rookie qb to start that isn't a big issue with me. My priority is to get the high end prospect on the roster and then take it from there. If the qb takes time to get ready, then so be it. If a qb shows that he can play right away or sometime during his rookie season, then so be it. His readiness will be the determining factor. I'm not hung up on the bridge qb issue as others are. My criteria are limited. The qb has to be able to run a pro offense and be able to throw the ball down field. Any qb who can run a pro option offense and throw the ball down the field is an upgrade over what Taylor can do. Not only do I firmly believe that but I also believe the McBeane duo also believe that. There are good reasons why he will not be on our roster when the season starts.

Whaley was ready to move on before he lost his authority. I'm confident that McBeane will move on. What options they will pursue I can't say for sure. But I'm very confident that they will find a viable option. Taylor was recently asked if he had heard anything from the organization about his status. He stated no. Many people are resistant to that obvious reality. I'm not.

I'm not banging the table for any particular qb. However, I'm banging the table for another option at qb. Odds are that the organization is going to move on from Taylor. If you don't believe that then you are going to be disappointed when it happens this offseason. I'm open to any option other than the status quo. It's as simple as that.

Tyrod Taylor being the starting qb next year is unacceptable. Whatever option is available needs to be taken. If a bad option is better than what our current situation is I'm for it. If its not Glennon then let it be someone else. I'm no longer receptive to watching a pop warner offense.

Do you want to know what is worse than this retread nonsense? Having Tyrod Taylor as your starting qb next year. Are you going to keep boosting him when he is let go? Did you not watch the playoff game in which we scored three points? You and others are distorting the issue. If I could get Foles for a one year or two year deal I would not be adverse to it. If after one year he departs then so what? You still have the ability to take your high end prospect this year and you have given him an opportunity to be acclimated. That's what basically happened in the Goff situation. In his first year he mostly sat until he played at the end of the season. It's obvious that he wasn't ready his rookie year so grooming a young qb is a better approach then throwing him into the fire when he isn't ready. What you can't accept is that the Tyrod era is over with. It has run its course. If you can't accept that obvious reality then it is your problem. Giving up a 30 yr back who can still play but is diminishing for a starting qb would be an advantageous deal for us. Even if the qb plays for a short term it still would be beneficial because you would then have an opportunity to run a pro offense instead of a pop warner offense.

You don't have an understanding of what I have been posting. Please stop with the ludicrous claim that you will have to pay him in the range of $100 M. I realize that for lent you gave up some things but I didn't know it was going to be your common sense. In my mind he would be a bridge qb for a year or so. If he walks after two year or even one year then so be it. At least you got some utility out of him. He would simply be a short-term bridge qb who is capable of running a pro offense and passing at a respectable level. That in itself would be a dramatic upgrade of what we have now at qb. You act as if I am foreclosing the option to take a high end qb prospect. That is not the case. By having a qb such as Foles at the expense of a dealt McCoy you will give your young qb time to develop and still in the bargain have better qb play than you had before. Let's assume that the Giants draft Rosen with their pick. Is he going to start right away with Eli still on the roster? Probably not. So why wouldn't the same situation be appropriate here if Foles was brought in. There is a good reason why this proposed deal would not materialize. It would not be a good deal for the Eagles. That is an indication that it would benefit the Bills more than the Eagles. You might complain about getting a better deal from a trade but not I. A

If he can run a pro offense and throw the ball down the field I would have no problem with him as a bridge qb. He would be a dramatic upgrade from what we currently have. Let me remind you that the Bills scored three points in its playoff loss in which the qb play was dreadful.

The reason why the Eagles would not trade Foles for McCoy is that it would be a losing proposition for them. Or in other words it would be more beneficial for us. I intensely disagree with you that Foles would be a lesser player than either McCown or Fitz. The mistake you and others are making is that you are assuming that he would be ensconced as our long term franchise qb. I am not suggesting that. However, in my view he would not only be an acceptable bridge qb but also a dramatic upgrade at that position until the next high end qb prospect is ready to play.

You are twisting this argument into a something that is outlandish. Who is suggesting that he should be given a $100 M contract? I hope you don't take this in a negative way but you are being zany with your assumption that he is going to be given a gilded contract. Just stop with this foolishness. He currently has a two year contract that if traded will probably be upgraded. If it is at what Taylor is currently making then it would be a very reasonable contract. I am absolutely comfortable trading a 30 yr old back who without question is on the downside of his career. The carries he is going to have next year are for sure going to be less than what he had this year. You ask the question if Foles is good. My response is that he is a qb who has demonstrated that he can run a pro offense and can not only make all the throws but do it well. He is not elite. No one stated that. Is he a franchise qb? I won't either make that claim. What I can say is that he is capable and can be a dramatic upgrade at qb. Getting Foles doesn't necessarily mean that the Bills still can't draft a high end qb prospect. What having Foles would do is allow time for the prospect to be prepared to take over when he is ready. Would Foles be agreeable to such a situation? Why wouldn't he? He would be getting a raise and an opportunity to start. That is a better situation for him than being the backup in Philly. Aren't you tired of the hideous qb play that you have been subjected to over the past few years? If you are not, I am. If you want to make a change then you have to make a change. The status quo is not only acceptable but it is disgusting to watch. Tipster's proposal was not only reasonable but it would be a smart thing to do.

You didn't carefully read what I posted. I stated that if you get Foles in a trade for McCoy you can still have your multiple high picks to use on upgrading the roster. I simply made the point that for those who would prefer one of the higher end qb prospects you still have the ability to do it if you want to. No doubt McCoy is our best player. However, he is a 30 yr old back who is not going to get the number of carries he has gotten in the past. You can bring in a quality back from the market who will be cheaper to replace him. Of course he will not be better but it will balanced out by getting a qb who can run a pro offense and is a much more proficient passer than what we currently have at qb. If the trade off is between a very good back whose carries are going to be less and a competent qb I will take that trade any time of the day. The era of having a pop warner offense needs to end. With the acquisition of a capable qb it will. Who said giving up a second round pick would be in the deal?

You are distorting what has been said in this discussion. He is not an elite player. Few people are making that claim. However, he is a qb who is capable of running a pro offense. He is a decent passer who can make all the throws. Being a capable qb is a dramatic upgrade from what we currently have. You may not find that satisfying but I do. Getting better at the qb position is better than the wretched status quo.

It's not a terrible idea to get a qb who can run a pro offense. The upside to such a trade is that you would keep your high picks to add talent to the roster. No one is suggesting that he is an elite qb because it is evident that he is not. But having a qb who can run a pro offense and is an average or better passer would be a dramatic upgrade from what we currently have. For those who argue that we need to use a high pick for an upscale prospect my response is getting Foles in a McCoy trade doesn't preclude you from doing that, if that is what you want to do. The era of a pop warner offense needs to end. Getting a credible qb who can make plays is not something to lament, it is something to celebrate.

To be transparent I had to go to the dictionary. I am speechless. I am plagued with verbosity. Trust me it has often gotten me in trouble.

I take it back. Anyone who admits to be a Kiss fan is not astute, perspicacious and adroit! You are a diminished man in my eyes.

You are either 56 or not. Stop shading the truth. Admit your age and with pride take your senior discount. And don't bother trying the home hair coloring to hide the gray. Be authentic and be proud.