Koufax

Sounds pretty crazy to want a new stadium that soon after getting a new stadium, and I am not a defender of Snyder at all, but a couple mitigating factors that make this more reasonable: 1) Dan Snyder was not the owner when the stadium was built, so inherited it with his purchase, and therefor isn't just looking for another handout and shiny new toy, but probably looking to have a stadium that fits his own ego, like that other guy in that other city in Texas. 2) The stadium is not in DC, but is in Maryland, and having it in DC (or Virginia) could be a priority, as well as give room for getting sides negotiating against each other. 3) The stadium isn't pure awesomeness on a number of fronts, and as such sort of falls into the Comiskey Park situation (the last new stadium before Camden changed the perspective). 4) With a 30 year or so wait on season tickets, going significantly larger could make a lot of sense, generate a lot of additional revenue, etc. So despite the fact that it is still so new, and was even newer when he started talking about it, it is more reasonable an idea for a super franchise and super owner than it might seem on the surface.

I still think this is getting blown up. Here are some observations: 1) EJ has clearly separated himself to be our starting QB on the depth chart. 2) Starting QBs barely play if at all in the 4th preseason game. 3) EJ had a minor injury that means they will keep him out of the third game coming up, which makes sense with a very minor procedure not being back to practice during the week and in game shape in less than a week. 4) Could EJ play in two weeks if the 4th preseason game if it mattered? Probably. That is the least important game, and any player a little dinged up would normally sit. 5) Has there been any indication that he will not practice next week? I'm not sure on this, but it wouldn't surprise me for him to be riding a stationary bike and in meetings right away, and running around in non-contact sooner than people think, unrelated to the fact that they will be holding him out from two preseason game. Marrone continued to stress that this was very minor. My conclusion is that he can't play this weekend without it being a risk, so this weekend is what we lose (and not an insignificant thing for a rookie QB), but everything else is unknown and we expect him to jump back in much sooner than the Tuesday before the opener.

I might be missing something that will come out today, but there is no evidence that EJ is going to miss two weeks of practice. My expectation is he had fluid drained and will miss this week's game. Then playing scrub ball the final week doesn't make any sense in his preparation, but he will sit out the final game while practicing and be our week 1 QB. So while they will help pd him out of the final preseason game, that doesn't mean he won't be practicing in a red jersey that week as well as the week of the opener.

Play to win each and every game. Never think the draft crap shoot is worth not trying to be a one win better football team. Even when it is week 17 and an Andrew Luck is there. Recent drafts: 2007: Russell #1, Adrian Peterson #7, Patrick Willis #10 2008: Jake Long #1, Matt Ryan #3, Chris Johnson #24 2009: Stafford #1, Orakpo #13, Cushing #15 2010: Bradford #1, Spiller #8 2011: Newton #1, Watt #11 2012: Who judges a draft after one year? But that Luck guy seems pretty good. Picking #1 can be nice, but it is never worth trying to lose for, and there are always great players available later, especially now that we won't be picking a first round QB (which is where there tends to be a difference even if hit or miss). I hope we are picking #32, but if we hit week 15 with something in the 5-15 range, I will still be rooting for us to win out the final games even as it "hurts" our draft position.

Don't bother blocking blindside Mario...he's just a decoy.

I think we are making a lot of fuss about what Allan Iverson would refer to as one "Not a game" [i might be paraphrasing incorrectly, because I can't remember his exact word choice]. Glenn is our LT, and I sure hope he excels at that. As has been mentioned now, seeing him briefly in another position can give our coaching staff some insight into what our strategy might be in case of injuries and/or Glenn not excelling over the course of the season. 1) If he struggles but is our best LT, we can consider moving him in to LG next year and getting a replacement LT (draft or otherwise). 2) If he struggles, and another LT option emerges and leapfrogs him on the depth chart, they can have an idea if moving him to LG in the season would work out. 3) If there is an injury or two at guard, and another Glenn struggles enough that he is on even footing with another LT (or pretty close even if Glenn is ahead), it is likely that our line would be slightly improved with Glenn sliding in to LG, and the similar and maybe a little inferior tackle playing LT. 4) Glenn does great, and this was just an afternoon of informational cross training and he stays as our LT of the future. All things point to having him play LT, but working him a little at LG letting our O-Line experienced head coach have more information to make decisions in the best interest if our team based on various unknown future outcomes.

I wouldn't get this. He is way ahead of Tuel both in his ability to step in and play, and in his ability to be a mentor/clipboard guy. This would surprise me and be a dumb move.

Not sure I follow but here are two things that are not true: A) Glenn is moving to guard so we can draft a LT B) That guard is our #1 priority in the 2014 draft. We have a good player at a key position, and some uncertainty on the single most fungible and replaceable position in the game. Don't sit back and hope we sign the next Dockery...the position can be easily filled in other ways and not be a problem. I would love to have Levitre still, but not at big dollars for a less important position.

Was it Dockery? If so did you offer him a $50M contract?

I'm disappointed the Byrd was not signed to an extension, but I think that not overpaying is important. Now that we are past that point, I don't think he helps himself or us by staying gone long, and I expect him to come pretty soon, play a great season, and sign an extension after the season. But that is the best case scenario, and he could go the Peters route instead, which would be a great disappointment.

Stature: Doug Flutie Pocket Presence: Drew Bledsoe Arm Strength: Chad Pennington Accuracy: Derek Anderson Scramble Ability: Dan Marino Decision Making: JP Losman Leadership: Jeff George I like to root for an underdog.

Potential franchise QBs go in the top 10 when the chances are viewed as high (even if the outcome isn't) and in the later first round to early second when there are some concerns on ceiling or probability of success. There are three parts of any reach calculation: 1) Was the guy you got the best player you could have drafted in that spot? 2) Was there near certainty you could have gotten him with the next pick? 3) If not in second round, with a pick in between by trading back/up? Some accuse of us reaching based on positional need, because they think there were more valuable players (at the same position or otherwise) available at #16. I am doubtful that there was or that a good chance at a franchise QB isn't worth the #16 pick. The second part of near certainty of getting him in round two, I think there should have been CONSIDERABLE doubts about him lasting until #41, with Philly and the Jets both being possibilities. We will never really know, but sitting at #41 and watching the QB you want go off the board would be silly if he is significantly higher on your board than the other QBs. The third part is the one where there are some reasonable arguments. Unless another team jumped up to get him after we traded back, it was unlikely he was going anywhere in picks 17-25. That is still a big if, and unless you think no other team values him at 25 or so your risks in moving back/up to take him later are significant. But I tend to think he would have been there still in the low 20s, and maybe that would have been a poker hand worth playing to maximize draft value. Looks great if the poker hand plays out well after finding a trade partner, but looks terrible if you push your luck and get burnt. What we would have added for a trade down just isn't worth getting the QB you think will be the best. Until he performs or the Eagles say they were interested, there will be those calling him a reach. But if he becomes our starter and performs well this will be really silly. We got our extra 2nd in the process, and used a #16 pick. Way lower than the Whitner, McKelvin, and Maybin picks to finally try to fix a huge long lasting void at the QB position.

Exactly. Taking him at #1 would have been silly. Taking him in the second round is fine if you think he has a chance to be your guy. In between, taking him #8 is closer in nature to that #1 than it is to the second round. I would argue that #16 is a lot like #30 in that all blue chip performers are gone, and you are adding in either some limits or some risk. If we could have traded down again that would have been nice, but letting him get to Philadelphia hoping he slides to #41 would have been silly if you really like him, and also taking the chance that a team moves ahead of you if you somehow got to #25 or so just isn't worth the risk. Trading down for an extra quality pick AND getting your top QB in the second half of the first round is completely fine outcome to me. Maybe there was a more profitable poker game to play and still get your guy, but you sure feel like an idiot if you misread the tea leaves and end up with your second favorite QB instead of your top guy. So there are two arguments against what happened: 1) REACH: Nobody else thought EJ was the top QB and he would have lasted until the 3rd round and you should have waited for him at #41 if you couldn't trade down a little further in round 1 (if anybody would take him in the second they would also consider trading up a little to get him and must really like him afterall). This seems pretty impossible to tell and again is a dumb strategy if there is a real risk you miss out on your guy. 2) WORHTLESS: He is not going to be a good QB, and you shouldn't pick him ahead of the other guys. Only time will tell here, but that means you are calling out the Bills scouting on their evaluations and QB projections. Could be true, but I don't see a strong enough argument in its favor to decide so emphatically and risk looking like an idiot if he pans out. It will take a little patience, but I am optimistic that he can improve on the decision making part of the game that is so crucial to go with good arm strength, mobility, accuracy, and leadership. Only time will tell, and if it were a certainty he wouldn't even have fallen to #8 with his physical tools, but I am happy to have him. I will keep an eye on Geno and Barkley (Nassib falls into the Mallett won't know anytime soon category), but I like our chances.

I think he has to be better than halfway decent to start week 1. You would want him to be enough better that it doesn't stunt his development, create controversy, put pressure, etc. If Kolb goes 1-3, it is a great situation for EJ after a month of learning and getting used to NFL speed and the offense. If EJ goes 1-3 he gets labeled as a bust, starts pressing, risks losing his job, etc. I'm happy for them to say it is a competition, and I would love EJ to come out with enough of an edge to win the job outright, but I think if it is close it is in the best interest of the team to have Kolb do his best John Kitna impression until he struggles, gets hurt, or EJ starts to separate himself. While not being a world beater, Kolb has struggled more with injuries than incompetence, and should be fine to have us ready to win on week 1 setting up a perfect situation for EJ who most everyone agrees is rough and unfinished.

They are certainly very similar, but I think that if they both prove to be in our top 3-4 receivers they can easily have one go deep taking a corner and bringing safety help, and have another in the slot using elusiveness on a short crossing route. And the attention that will have to get doesn't leave a lot of coverage for Stevie and Woods in four receiver sets, and Spiller out of the backfield. I like our offense with Stevie and Woods running precise intermediate possession routes with great hands and ball skills, while the fast guys spread the coverage and open things up for Spiller and EJ. But just as seventh round Stevie outplayed higher picks, I think there is a reasonable chance the topic of this thread could keep one of those early round picks off the field. Also don't forget that the uptempo offense can easily make use of rotating deep threats as the opposing defense gets worn down.

Fungible position. I want to have a very good LG, but I think that it shouldn't be Dockery, and between other team salary cap cuts and our current roster, someone completely reasonable will emerge by the start of the season, and I would rather have a competition than an overpriced starter (but most of all I would rather have Leveitre at a bargain rate, but that wasn't possible).

I think this nails it on the head. If we hadn't taken EJ, Nassib might have been a great value gamble in the third (I think if you aren't willing to take a QB in the third, then he probably isn't going to be a guy you are counting on for anything...even with Brady, the Patriots weren't ready to spend a FIFTH rounder on him). I think with EJ, it becomes a pick that probably adds very little value (if he really is ahead of Kolb/TJax as short term starter or longer term backup?), and creates a controversy on the player you are grooming, because of the coach connection and the headstart on the scheme. Simply put he had to be better than Kolb right now to make a 3rd (or 4th) worth it, and I think it is pretty clear that he is not better than Kolb right now. And I think a QB controversy would be more of a detriment to our team right now, than any "pushing and making both better" benefit. We handle the next two seasons with the full faith that EJ is going to be our franchise QB, and do everything possible to develop him, and to win with experience when he isn't ready to start. If something really major shows up in his rookie year before next year's draft that makes you realize he was a huge mistake, you can consider looking at the 2014 QB class, but absent something hugely disappointing, we have bet the 2013 and 2014 seasons on this guy and expect him to take over for Kolb within that window, and can evaluate how it all played out prior to the 2015 draft if necessary.

Kevin Kolb. Manuel isn't going to be ready, and he isn't going to be better than Kolb in week 1. His growth and progress is best if he has some more time to really learn the system and the NFL speed in practice, and wait for Kolb to stumble or get hurt later in the year. I would like if he can get some snaps on the field earlier, but I'm fine if he doesn't start any of our first 8 games.

I think you must have not counted the fact that we gained pick #16 or that New England didn't gain #52 as an extra pick, but as the swap for their pick. To simplify, I am going to drop off the seventh rounders and our third round swap: Rams moved 8 spots from 16 to 8 and paid #46 Vikings Moved 23 spots from 52 to 29 and paid #82 and #102 Falcons moved 8 spots from 30 to 22 and paid #92 49ers moved 13 spots from 31 to 18 and paid #74 Fish moved 9 spots from 12 to 3 and paid #42 The Raiders got hosed on value, but got the player they were going to pick at #3 anyway. The Bills got pretty good value and the player they wanted while picking up a top 50 pick. I am fine with this. I also think we could have picked Tavon at #8 if we liked him, and paid something like a third to move up from the second to the late first and still get Manuel, but again that is risking losing the guy you want. Even in comparing those, you have to decide between Tavon vs #41 AND #46 AND our 3rd. I think we very likely get two good starters at #41 and #46 and am happy with our moves. We didn't squeeze every drop of value possible, but a second trade down or staying at #8 and waiting or trading back up are both gambles, and not getting the QB you want is too big a price to pay for that.

I don't consider it a reach at #16, even if you think the player could be available #17-#32. They got an extra second rounder by trading down, and while they probably could have traded back further, it also could have turned on them and had them lose the quarterback they want. I'm completely fine with the draft pick strategy as a result of using their #8 pick to get their top QB and a seventh round pick. What this all comes down to is whether they picked the right top QB. Manuel is the one I have seen play the least, but as I read more I am encouraged. We don't need an Andrew Luck day 1 QB thrown to the wolves with Kolb and TJax, so he can play when ready and take time to learn. My biggest worry with him, and I hope the scouts and coaching staff knows much better than I do, is the things that people talk about over and over with him are the Jamarcus Russel/Ryan Leaf/Jeff George qualities of arm and athletic ability. My top two qualities I wanted in this draft were #1 Intermediate Accuracy (without which you aren't a viable QB no matter what other qualities you have), and #2 Decision Making (which makes your #1 useful). These are the Joe Montana/Tom Brady/Drew Brees qualities, and you have to hit on both of these to be successful. If you add in rocket arm or scrambling ability, all the better, but only as additions, not as primary abilities. I am confident and hopeful that he will be excellent at both of these, and able to add to it his great physical tools, hopefully some leadership, etc. But on draft day I think that someone like Barkley had the edge in each of the top two items that matter, so it is up to Manuel and the coaches to prove he can excel in these things and combine his other strengths into a dynamic quarterback. One positive that I think people have mentioned with taking the upside risk is that while the short term goal is getting back to the playoffs, the real goal is winning a Super Bowl (we went to four, but it was never quite right without the ring), and taking a little risk on upside over certainty and polish is probably a wise move in maximizing our chances of winning the big one. But this will all come down to field vision and decision making at NFL speed (I think his intermediate accuracy will be fine), and the day after the draft I have no idea what to realistically expect.

If we wanted Geno wouldn't we have taken him at #8? I think that they like several QBs the same, or have someone at the top of their board who they don't think other teams have at the top.

I wasn't sold on Austin, and although I am intrigued with Geno, I am not sure he is better than Barkley. I like this a lot with all the QBs on the board. One of them will definitely be there at 16, and probably our first choice (because if we wanted Geno we would have taken him 8th most likely).

I'm skeptical of the small size, but the production is there, as well as the elite speed, and maybe he would end up being what we hoped for out of Roscoe. I'm a little wary of him at #8, but getting him and Barkley wouldn't ruin my day.

I don't like the idea of the pick, but there might be a CJ Spiller best playmaker element to it, where he is the most valuable commodity at #8, and there is confidence to get a QB later in the round with a trade up, or sliding all the way to #41. I ***HATE*** a guard at #8. The difference between good and great at that position is probably less than anywhere else on the field. I am sure those guys will be great players, but I think what they would add to the Bills ahead of who we have or who we could pick in the 3rd is so so so much less than what a QB adds or a LB/CB/WR/TE/DE for that matter. Those guys will do less to make this team better than many other players available, and it isn't their fault, but the nature of the position. I wouldn't select a hall of fame punter at #8, and I wouldn't select World's Greatest Equipment Manager there either.