JohnC

No I didn't. Their coach, Shanahan, told the owner that if they moved up for Griffin that he was going to be a project qb who was going to take time before he would be ready. I have said on many occasions that not drafting Cousins or Russell in the third round was a mistake, especially for a team lacking a qb. I have no problem with a team being aggressive in signing a qb prospect. But the Skin situation was not that type of situation. It was an owner driven decision that forced the HC to make a deal that he had qualms about before it was even made.

In the same year that the Skins drafted Griffin they also drafted Cousins in the fourth round. He is their starter now. The person who didn't want to invest a lot of picks and future picks on Griffin was their coach, Shanahan. It was the owner who insisted on mortgaging the future on Griffin. Cousins was available for us in the third or fourth round. We did what we usually do and passed. Our saga continues.

There is an irony here. When he finally came to the realization that he needed to use a high draft pick on a qb he lost his authority to select one in this year's draft. I believe that he wanted to draft either Mahomes or Watson in the first round. It was too late because he was no longer making those decisions for the organization. I never understood his passivity on the qb issue. In the end he sabotaged himself by not being aggressive enough in addressing the qb issue.

Taylor has been in the league six years or so. He is far from being a rookie. What you see is what you get. His style of play and level of play are what you now see. Can he get appreciably better? I don't believe so. He has certain strengths such as his mobility and he throws an exceptional long ball. (Beauty to behold.) But his limitations that relate to vision, reading defenses, going through progressions, feel for the pocket and anticipatory throws etc are simply part of his game that you have to be willing to accept. As with Fitz what you see is what you get. Wishing a player to play beyond his abilities is an exercise in frustration. I'm not condemning him as a player. I'm pointing out that he is not the caliber of qb that is going to get your team anywhere meaningful. Those opinions have a tendency to rile up the loyalists.

With respect to the highlighted segment one side was going down and the other side was not moving up. It was repeatedly reported that TT had to accept a lower deal in order to remain with the team. If Whaley had the authority and he didn't, he would have simply cut him. As far as dismissing the reality of the business world where agents (technically illegal but tacitly accepted practice) make inquiries into what the market has to offer I say this respectfully that you are being naive. His agents knew what his value was and was not in the market. And they knew which teams were interested or not for his services before his contract expired. Do you really believe that there was a team or teams interested in him as a starter and willing to abide by his original contract he would have stayed?

I make this conservative time judgment with confidence. Anyone who thinks that this rebuilding or reworking (whatever word one is comfortable with) of the roster is going to lead to a playoff game this year is going to be disappointed. If the Bills decide to draft a qb the next year do you expect immediate results? Let's get serious. The mistake that has been made by this bedraggled franchise is that too often decisions have been made in order to get immediate results. With the hiring of the new front office and coaching staff and with our qb situation and his short term deal the organization is taking a less expedient approach and acting in a more long term and sustaining fashion. That is the right thing to do and that is what we should want. Making decisions on a short term basis simply to get by as a fringe wild-card contender is the approach that has crippled this franchise. Doing things the right way and for the rights reasons is the right thing to do. That isn't something to complain about---it is something that we should be happy about.

Your response makes no sense at all. If what you are saying is accurate then why did TT agree to a modified deal? TT and his reps knew that there wasn't a better deal for him on the market. Because if there were offers (under the table) he would have simply walked away to a better offer and situation. The facts are that the Bills didn't release him because he adjusted[/b[ his contract. If he would have insisted on keeping his original deal then odds are that McDermott would have also allowed him to walk. What is well known now is that once McDermott was hired he was running the show. And it is probable that he was not going to keep him under the original terms because the lower deal was worked out when McDermott was de facto the boss. You and I are riding different horses on the carousel so neither one is going to catch up to the other. Our differences are irreconcilable because our evaluations are the qb are different. My position is that being an adequate qb is not good enough to get you anywhere meaningful. You see more than I do; I have seen enough. We just respectfully disagree.

You have avoided the simple question that Shaw66 has put to you: What recent front office and coaching hire has bothered you so much that you are out of hand rejecting it as a bad transaction? What recent player transaction has bothered you so much that you have already rejected it as being bad? None of the people responding to your post has denied you the right to be skeptical. But when asked by Shaw66 and others what specific decision/s do you find so offensive that you out of hand reject it you vaguely respond about the history contaminating the present. That is a very thin response. There is nothing wrong with you being skeptical because I am to a lesser degree wary of the immediate empowering of the wrestling coach over the football operation. But even on that issue I am a little less troubled because the staff assembled in the front office seem to be high quality. In my view this team is a few years away from being a serious team. So you are going to have plenty of time and opportunities to express your displeasure as to what is unfolding. However, it seems to me that the ground work that is being laid down in the beginning stage of this takeover is being down properly and smartly. Only time will tell.

My basic point regarding TT whether he is with the Bills or with another team is that he was looked at as a bridge qb. No team considered him to be a player with the potential of being their long term starting qb. The contract he got with Buffalo or the potential contract he would have been able to garner from another team is a bridge qb valued contract. I would say with confidence that Chicago, Cleveland and SF (teams you cited) would not be satisfied to have a TT caliber qb as their starting qb, at least not on a long term basis. (Chicago went out and got Glennon as their bridge qb.) I'll also say the same thing about Buffalo. If this franchise has any serious aspirations it will not be with TT as their franchise qb. My comments are not to diminish him as a player. He is the best that we currently have. We should be happy to have him as our bridge qb. But I don't consider him a franchise qb and I don't believe that this new staff does either.

If Tryod was not willing to modify his contract he was going to be released. That was a fact. You don't think that his agents or reps unofficially checked the market to see if there was an interest in him by other teams?

The context was in the Pegula era. It was an inexplicable decision.

When you hire an undisciplined fool coach like Rex who was just fired from his last job where the team he departed from was in shambles it becomes clear that it was not only a bad hire but it was a weird hire. This was an incompetent coach who in his short stint sent this franchise back by years. This was a predictable mistake.

Name a team that was interested in Taylor and made an effort to acquire him? Taylor took a pay cut cut in salary and had the terms of his contract altered so he could remain with the Bills. Again, name a team that showed an interest in him and took any measure to get him when he was available?

Creating a paradigm of optimists vs pessimists is not only foolish, it is childish. Pointing out bad coaching hires is not being pessimistic, it is pointing out the obvious. Pointing out bad picks or bad contracts is not being pessimistic it is pointing out the facts. The Bills have been bad for more than a generation. Your response is to blame the critical observers. That's not only childish but it is simply weird. You criticize Sullivan for not accurately getting the reasons right why this woebegone franchise continues to lose year after year, and then act as if not being precise in one's criticism is a justification for historical failure. That not only makes no sense but it is odd reasoning. Losing is losing. Especially when it rises to historical failure why be bothered by the precision of the complaints when the problems are so pervasive. The blame the fans mentality for such institutional failure is simply dumb. It makes no sense. It's like blaming the owners of a burglarized house because their locks were inadequate. Let's get real here!

With respect to the highlighted segment who is debating otherwise. The owners didn't end the dysfunction in the organization after they took over, they increased it, especially with their peculiar Rex hire. It was chaos wrapped over with more chaos. Now you are proclaiming that house fire is a house on fire and making it out as if it is an original discovery. It' not. It's known to all who aren't indoctrinated zealots. Shaw66's list of post Rex moves are all sensible. The coaching and front office hires all fall in the category of being good hires. they all fall comfortably within the range of being conventional transactions. What is there to criticize? Do you want the owners to wear the Scarlet Letter on their chest for the rest of their lives because of their gross ineptitude when they first took over as owners? Pointing out the missteps that the Pegulas have made is not a challenging task because most of us are already aware of them. It's seems that any current transaction that is made by them is now referenced and re-framed by you by their bumbling history. That not only makes no sense but also adds nothing new to the discussion. I'm not a fawning fan of this organization. Contrary to most desperate optimists I believe that it is going to take at a minimum three years to untangle the mess that has accrued during the not so long takeover by the new owners. I still have qualms over empowering the wrestling coach with so much authority so soom. But what I am not going to do is to judge everything that is now being done and let it be colored by what has gone on in the past. That not only makes no sense and is unfair but it is also unadulterated foolishness.

I would take Alex Smith over Tyrod under any circumstances. The deal for Smith worked out well for KC. They are a playoff team with him taking the snaps. And compared to TT he uses whole field. The criticism of him that he too often throws the underneath stuff because he is overly cautions is warranted. But without question the trade that KC made for him has worked out well for them. Tyrod could have put himself on the market if he wanted to but didn't because there wasn't much interest in him. He ended up taking a pay cut and the term of his contract was shortened so the team could be in a better position to walk away from him if it decided to.

You don't have to draft a qb to have a good qb. You can also trade for one like they did with Montana and Smith. It doesn't matter how you get a franchise qb as long as you do get one. If you can't get an elite qb through the draft or through trades and free agency that doesn't mean that you can't get a good enough qb to allow you to be competitive, as KC is on a long term basis.

No need to apologize. Sometimes when reading a response it is difficult to determine who it is directed at and how it is meant. Sorry for the sharp tone.

Your question brings up another interesting question. If Peterman had a stronger arm it's not unreasonable to believe that he would have been a top shelf qb prospect in this draft. He seems to have good pocket presence and have good vision and an ability to make quick reads. The arm strength concerns offset some of the other qb skills that many prospects don't have. Is it likely that Peterman can develop a stronger arm like Brady did? Probably not but it is not impossible. I have already said it a thousand times! Why would you want me to repeat it? The best option (in my opinion) was keeping TT on the roster as a bridge qb and drafting a prospect such as Mahomes or Watson from this last draft. How much simpler can my response get?

The article you posted perfectly captures the issues that this new staff faced regarding their qb situation heading into the draft. In my mind they took the cautious Jauron/Levy approach and decided to work with what they had and around with what they had. The new HC/GM, McDermott, decided to take the route that the article seems to promote. You very well know my annoyingly and too often stated position regarding the qb position and this draft. I felt that with TT ensconced on the roster it was a good time to select one of the prospects available in Mahomes or Watson. That lack of willingness to take the plunge and wait for a better situation is the same attitude that has crippled this franchise for a generation. Only time will tell whether the bypassing of the two qb prospects in this draft was a mistake. I believe it was. However, sometimes you can be wrong yet over time the later decisions can more than compensate for the prior decisions. I'm hoping that is the case here.

Few people have argued to shove him out the door. I have not. But there is a realization that there are limitations to his game that relate to "vision" that won't significantly improve. If that assessment is correct then the next question is with that hole in his game can he get you to where you want to go? I have major reservations on that question. The article you cited pointed out that there are plenty of qbs that fall within his category, even acknowledging that he might be near the top of that middle category. Again, I ask whether that is good enough in the long run? I resolutely say no.

If the Sabres now made a deal of trading Nylander for Fowler I would be very upset. In another year or so Nylander is going to be a very good top two line player. I think sometime next season if he starts in Rocherster and with an in season call-up he is going to be a contributing player. There is no doubt that Fowler is a very good player. But by adding a few good defensemen, starting with Guhle, Antipin, and maybe Nelson from Rochester the defense can improve enough to being respectable instead of a major liability. Although Bogosian has been a disappointment by adjusting his game from being a banger to more of a finesse player he could contribute as a third pairing defenseman.

You are making a generalization off of one draft. Isn't that judgment not only a bit premature but also presumptuous? Other than my preference for selecting a qb in the first round I can fairly say that the first three picks were more than reasonable picks. If the same three picks fill holes, then so what? What is the complaint? In this draft there was a trade down to acquire more picks. That in itself was a change. I'm also aware that there was also a trade up but if if was for a player they liked a lot I can't condemn them for acting on a strong conviction.. Is anyone going to disagree with our football operation has been completely overhauled? Is anyone going to disagree that there is a greater coherency between the front office and coaching staff? I'm not jumping to the conclusion that this organization is now in a state of nirvana. But from what I do see is an organization that is more coherent and in sync. Only time will tell whether those changes will be reflected by better play on the field. In general, I'm more encouraged than not.

I do share some of the concerns that Badman has. No question that they are valid. What has me queasy is not the hiring of McDermott who has been mentioned for other job openings. What bothers me more was the immediate transferring of full authority to him. As soon as he was hired he was essentially acting as the GM. No one can doubt that he was managing the draft. There is little doubt that he was very influential in the hiring of the front office staff. (I need to add that individually and more importantly collectively I like the hires.) Does the wrestling coach have too much of the Greg Williams tough guy approach and an egotistical belief where the force of his muscular personality is going to overcome a lack of talent? I have a little concern of that irritating affliction. But what mitigates those fears is that I see the HC being very thoughtful about how he wants to build a roster and an organization. There is a lot of thought put into the concept of his team compared to acting on a shallower level of making individual and unrelated transactions. One of the main reasons for Whaley's failure or middling performance has to do with his "fill the hole" mentality as opposed to having a coherent philosophy in managing a football operation.

I don't understand your reasoning. KC traded with Buffalo and acquired Mahomes with the intention of developing him and playing him down the road. All teams have a pressure to win but KC has made it clear that Alex Smith is their starting qb. Houston, as does KC, clearly has a playoff roster. They announced that Savage will have the first crack at starting. If Watson eventually beats him out then he will earn the playing time. It's interesting to observe that the Bills hired top scouting staff from Houston and KC, both teams that were aggressive in their pursuit of qbs. In addition, there were multiple teams that had a strong desire to trade up with Buffalo to acquire one of the qbs that we bypassed. That tells you that a number of teams ranked the qbs that we bypassed very highly. It also should be noted that the Bills have not had a legitimate franchise qb for almost a quarter century. The lesson to be learned here is that dithering is not a solution to an entrenched problem.