BillsVet

Vast majority? That's not a straw-man argument? They haven't found a QB because their decisions on the position have been a case study in not prioritizing it. They tried to fill the position with duct tape and bailing wire, then were forced to take one in a bad draft, and now seemingly need to add another arm. Not taking one, especially in 2011 and 2012 haunts them to this day. (Now I suppose someone will say who they should have taken to further conflate the issue) Almost everything in terms of on-field success circles back eventually to bad front office management. Not taking a QB in 3 drafts is a bad decision. And having to enter drafts needing a certain position is the cumulative result of bad decisions. It's why the Bills never really rebuild, but shuffle pieces around and end up with the same result...mediocrity.

It's been a common refrain here for many years it's just bad luck for why the Bills aren't winning. Certainly the writer applied his angle to the story, but it's strange a GM would be talking about this 5 years after the fact. To me it smacks of someone who isn't comfortable with their current QB situation and is preemptively saying it wasn't their fault. We all know GMs and HCs use the media for getting their message out, and that's what this is IMO. Because without a playoff season it's likely people's jobs are at stake.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25567414/gm-explains-how-andrew-luck-spoiled-bills-plan-to-draft-cam-newton Hey, the Bills just aren't lucky. It's a big part of the reason they've struggled finding their QB of the future. First it was QB purgatory and now it's bad luck.

Just because Buffalo has been risk averse taking QB's for the better part of 20 years doesn't mean it's right. Of course there's risk a player won't work out. EJ was a bust and everyone seems to understand that. OTOH, not taking a QB guarantees you don't have anyone. Tyron may be their guy or he could regress. Doesn't mean you don't take one because the player might not work out. There aren't many teams that have invested less the past 20 years in the game's most important position. It's time to change that.

Your unabashed homerism and inability to criticize a franchise winning about 40% of their games for the period I specified is once again noted. I guess this really is the post-factual age. Facts don't matter anymore, but emotions obviously do.

I chose the first year after Donahoe was fired through 2014, which is the last draft class which should be analyzed. Because as many fans have noted here (in unison actually) we can't evaluate a draft class until they've been in the league for 2 perhaps 3 full seasons. That's a 9 year sample size encompassing 18 2nd or 3rd round draft picks.

Where the better drafting teams are getting it done is in the 2nd-3rd rounds. Of Buffalo's drafts from 2006-2014, the only solid starters they've drafted from those rounds have been Posluszny, Byrd, Levitre, and Glenn. Aaron Williams has been nothing special despite being the 34th overall pick in 2011, Woods has been OK and without good QB play, Kiko played one solid NFL season (and is on his 3rd team), leaving Preston Brown who seems like JAG. Hitting on 4 picks out of 18, albeit with different GM's, is part of the reason why the Bills struggle with depth and the cap.

They're going to have to reduce the playbook...chances are 1 perhaps 2 rookies will be playing on the defensive front 7. That, and newcomers like Zach Brown and Robert Blanton will be getting minutes. Maybe Buddy watched the 1985 Chicago Bears 30 for 30 and realized his dad once had to do it.

Unless your scheme requires excellent CB play with types who are left alone on the outside with WR's, I'm not sure investing in CB's to this degree is absolutely necessary. A team has to align scheme with cost requirements, like what was done years ago in Indianapolis. They weren't going to spend big on defense because more was required for the offensive side of the ball with P. Manning, Harrison, Wayne, Clark, E. James, et al. So their defensive scheme, a Tampa-2 was suitable because corners were zone types, the LBs were smaller quicker types, and their big dollar types were DE's and safeties, and perhaps DT's. The Bills don't seem to have that. Their personnel acquisition isn't aligned with scheme, which means (as Whaley noted) they're top heavy. This only happens though when you've got solid personnel administration and coaching who are in lock step. I'm not sure the Bills have been there in more than 20 years. Good for Gettlleman. Now Norman can go look for the big contract after all the teams have spent most of their cap.

Translation: "Even if the season goes south, I want my bosses to know that I'll praise them no matter what to keep my job."

They'll probably have some C-130s from Niagara Falls fly over. ...and there was much rejoicing.

Obviously.

Does anyone know how many times Whaley said the word, "excited" during the press conference?

You're not a slight bit skeptical of a franchise that's below .500 the past 3 seasons? With a HC who hasn't made the playoffs the last 6 seasons? BTW...prospective? I guess we're done here.

Wynn is a 7th year player who missed all of 2015 with an injury and will be learning a new position in Rex's defense. How do we know he can, "play?"

I'll bet Robert Blanton has fewer personal foul penalties this year when he's the starting SS.

The author doesn't mention that positional value being what it is, drafting RB's high is no longer typically the best use of a team's resources. The rules of the game have shaded toward throwing the ball and as a result, running it isn't very important. Teams trying to run their way to success typically don't. There are so many variables conveniently left out of this article. The one constant in the modern NFL is that teams with top RB's aren't making the playoffs. Of the top 16 backs by rushing yards in 2015, only 5 of them played on playoff teams. Only 7 RBs in 2015 ran for more than 1k yards. Only 1 RB who rushed for 1k or more yards played on a playoff team (Adrian Peterson) The other intangible not mentioned is that RB's have a high propensity for being injured. And it makes sense because when they touch the ball they're usually getting hit. It's why teams are limiting carries, with only Peterson getting more than 300 carries (327) last year. That means more platooning (the fantasy owners know this) which therefore reduces the need to have a feature back. Which means you'll look for, as the author says, committee backs. I know there's going to be an effort by some to justify Buffalo's absurd use of draft resources and UFA dollars on RB's the past 10-15 years. Offensively the Bills haven't done much in that time, because their priority on running the ball is not in keeping with NFL trends. And because they've failed to find a QB, which falls on multiple GM's. RB's aren't "easily" replaceable...but it's still the easiest position to replace. And the Bills still use far too many resources on the position, Lesean McCoy being the latest example.

Agreed. It's hard for any GM to remain in the position without results, i.e. playoffs. I'm pretty sure TPegs expects a winner in 2016 and if not, perhaps they'll make significant changes. But we're a long way from there right now.

Wins are overrated when a team drafts so well. Everyone knows Buffalo has drafted better than most teams, even though doing so would eventually result in more wins. Whaley just can't get the HC's to use all the talent he's evaluated appropriately. And this is why the Bills don't make the playoffs.

If TT doesn't progress in 2016 and they draft a QB early this month...well, some people are going to use that to say they need more time building this team. Senior executives are usually in survival mode. Particularly when they have nothing to show for their effort.

Where's the manipulation of stats? They are 39-57 over the past 6 seasons (2010-2015) with Doug Whaley employed by the team as essentially lead personnel guy. They are 23-25 with Whaley as GM (2013-2015), who has had way more money to spend than his predecessors. I doubt the direction the team is headed. Offensively they've built a team to run the ball in a passing league. The defense is complex and not flexible, requiring new talent to fit the scheme as opposed to the SB winning team that ran a more slimmed down defensive playbook. Oh, and (EDIT: their) lack of cap space prevented signing more than some depth players, which were admittedly necessary.

It's astounding how little you understand here. Nix was 16-32 in 3 seasons (2010-12) and was retired. In his successor's 3 seasons (2013-15) Buffalo's gone 23-25, ergo a 39-57. That fact is what so irritates and antagonizes those of you who still believe this franchise is on the verge of greatness. It's why you go to such extremes trying to manufacture metrics to support your errant opinions. Like claiming Buffalo's drafted better than most teams, an entirely subjective exercise. The agenda? A team that wins. Yet, I see the team doing precious little this off-season and frankly, debating a failed GM and another who's not put a winner on the field is an exercise in futility. Who cares? Those of you who manufacture good emotions from this team can continue to do so. And based on their UFA signings, cap management, presumed reliance on rookies and uncertainty at QB they're not primed to win in the AFC. And facts still don't care about your emotions.

How many times can Whaley use the word "excited" in one interview? Marrone didn't say "obviously" as much as Whaley does his signature word.

17-15 in 2014-2015. After being one of the highest spending teams in the NFL and getting a win the final week of 2014 against NE when they played their JV team. I'm sure TPegs is good with being barely .500 the past 2 years given the big dollars he's spent on the franchise.