"Next year" is always the best year for drafting quarterback

[1B4IDie]

Good Point. I didn't think of it that way.

 

A poster in another string pointed out that Luck, is a pretty serious Engineering student. The rumor being he will not come out until the 2012 draft, until he recieves his Engineering degree, as the Luck camp believes the NFL will be there when he is ready. Plus adding 2 more year's of college football experience MAY only help his draft expeerience and supposidely his sister will be a Freshman in September 2011 on a volleyball scholorship at Standford.

 

If those rumors are true; 2011 draft may have one less top tier QB in it.

 

I still like the concept of gigantic QB throwing against the lake winds; but who knows if Mallet will come out.

 

I guess hope does spring eternal Or the grass is always greenier or something.

 

You said "But the point still stands the 2010 QB draft class going into the draft was considered very sub par." You're right about that. But the reason that is true is that there was huge movement during the season. Which almost always happens. Which means that it is now very very much too early to say anything about next year's draft class of QBs and expect it to be treated as anything but pure desperate hope.

 

We'll know after the season what kind of class this is. Now, we simply have no idea.

 

The OP was right. Before the season, it always seems like it's going to be a fantastic year.

[Mr. WEO]

Yeah, mostly because you'd actually heard of Leinart before he was drafted. My point was that teams have seen what a bust he's been given the chances he'd been given and the offense he had, versus his college production. And this probably led to a re-evaluation of a guy like Tebow, who had a similar pedigree, and who probably would have lasted well into the 2nd round had the Broncos not panicked and reached for him, based on erroneous reports that the Bills were "desperately trying to trade up to get him."

 

But hey, it's not his fault he was the 10th pick. I'm sure he'll do well in the UFL next season.

look, you made the silly claim that the NFL doesn't pick Qbs based on what they did in college.

 

Anyway, you may be more confused than usual-----Leinart is the starting QB for AZ. Your guy (the actual UFL star) moved up, by default, to backup QB in Oakland. Equating the two as busts highlights your poor position.

[The Dean]

look, you made the silly claim that the NFL doesn't pick Qbs based on what they did in college.

 

 

What he should have said is, "The NFL doesn't value QB exclusively on how they did in college" or "College success ALONE is less important for QBs than most other positions in NFL evaluations." For the most part, any RB (for example) that excels in a major college conference is considered NFL material, and those that dominate in those conferences nearly always are considered prime prospects. That isn't necessarily the case with QBs.

 

Recently guys like Colt Brennan, Graham Harrell joined Heisman winners Troy Smith, Jason White, Eric Crouch and Chris Weinke as guys who were OUTSTANDING college QBs but weren't highly regarded by the NFL. Right up til the 2010 draft, there was debate about exactly where Tim Tebow would be taken. Many thought he was well overdrafted in the 1st, while others thought he was the best QB prospect in the draft.

 

It's pretty obvious NFL teams weren't as enthralled with Clausen as are many here. He wouldn't have slid so far had he been considered a can't-miss QB. Now, I understand if some want to criticize the Bills FO for not recognizing Clausen's talent. But I don't see how anyone would criticize the FO taking a player they like over a player they don't like. Taking a QB in the 2nd round simply for the sake of taking a QB in an early round is insane, if you aren't sold on that QB.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

What he should have said is, "The NFL doesn't value QB exclusively on how they did in college" or "College success ALONE is less important for QBs than most other positions in NFL evaluations." For the most part, any RB (for example) that excels in a major college conference is considered NFL material, and those that dominate in those conferences nearly always are considered prime prospects. That isn't necessarily the case with QBs.

 

Recently guys like Colt Brennan, Graham Harrell joined Heisman winners Troy Smith, Jason White, Eric Crouch and Chris Weinke as guys who were OUTSTANDING college QBs but weren't highly regarded by the NFL. Right up til the 2010 draft, there was debate about exactly where Tim Tebow would be taken. Many thought he was well overdrafted in the 1st, while others thought he was the best QB prospect in the draft.

 

It's pretty obvious NFL teams weren't as enthralled with Clausen as are many here. He wouldn't have slid so far had he been considered a can't-miss QB. Now, I understand if some want to criticize the Bills FO for not recognizing Clausen's talent. But I don't see how anyone would criticize the FO taking a player they like over a player they don't like. Taking a QB in the 2nd round simply for the sake of taking a QB in an early round is insane, if you aren't sold on that QB.

 

In other words...

[The Dean]

In other words...

 

 

</h2>

<h2>Error 403: ACCESS IS PROHIBITED

I am sorry but remotely linking to ,pdf, .tar, .zip, .gz, image and sound files on this server is prohibited.

Please browse for the file yourself by visiting the site that is being linked to.

I found it on this page:

 

http://www.rosswalker.co.uk/tv_sounds/star_trek_p10.htm

[San Jose Bills Fan]

</h2>

I found it on this page:

 

http://www.rosswalker.co.uk/tv_sounds/star_trek_p10.htm

Ahhh, so much for any comedic or dramatic effect, Dean.

 

The message to you is the title of that Talking Heads concert movie:

 

"Stop Making Sense."

[stuckincincy]

What he should have said is, "The NFL doesn't value QB exclusively on how they did in college" or "College success ALONE is less important for QBs than most other positions in NFL evaluations." For the most part, any RB (for example) that excels in a major college conference is considered NFL material, and those that dominate in those conferences nearly always are considered prime prospects. That isn't necessarily the case with QBs.

 

Recently guys like Colt Brennan, Graham Harrell joined Heisman winners Troy Smith, Jason White, Eric Crouch and Chris Weinke as guys who were OUTSTANDING college QBs but weren't highly regarded by the NFL. Right up til the 2010 draft, there was debate about exactly where Tim Tebow would be taken. Many thought he was well overdrafted in the 1st, while others thought he was the best QB prospect in the draft.

 

It's pretty obvious NFL teams weren't as enthralled with Clausen as are many here. He wouldn't have slid so far had he been considered a can't-miss QB. Now, I understand if some want to criticize the Bills FO for not recognizing Clausen's talent. But I don't see how anyone would criticize the FO taking a player they like over a player they don't like. Taking a QB in the 2nd round simply for the sake of taking a QB in an early round is insane, if you aren't sold on that QB.

 

All you say is true, Dean. But a franchise, with qb woes for many years sooner or later has to simply...roll the dice. Maybe the following year, too.

 

They may have not been sold - but their public announcements for a switch to a 3-4 and a desire for a "scatback" IMO put them in a corner come draft day - not unnoticed by other clubs, who read the smoke signals and knew BUF's early position pick predilections. They saw a competitor who tipped his hand.

[PDaDdy]

Just a casual observation from reading the draft banter every year. I can't remember the last time someone didn't think that "next year" wasn't the bumper crop of top flight QB's. And every year rolls around and the prospects fade and we hear about the next great class coming up the year after...

 

That's it.

 

Are you saying that next year will be a bad year to draft a QB? Are QBs hyped every year? Yes. The draft is all educated guessing or a "crap shoot", as some say, which is an over simplification for those who aren't very savvy. 1983 was a good year for QBs. The year Losman came out was a good year for QBs. Unfortunately, Losman wasn't one of them. Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers and Big Ben however have all turned out great.

 

I'm not saying I'm the greatest at it but if you don't get swept up in the hype and pay attention to some key points you can make very good educated guesses about which QBs will become something. From what I hear, which is of course very early, is that 2011 could indeed be a great year for QBs. Guys that run pro offenses and play in less than ideal weather conditions. Guys with BIG arms. Not just guys that can "make all the throws" or have a "college", not nfl, strong arm. Guys with size. Guys with athleticism.

 

I am not sold on Trent. He has a dead arm and when he attempts to throw deep balls they are ugly ducks half the time that float and wobble. From initial comments and news it does seem, as many guessed, that to some degree or another the coaching staff was as a BIG part of the problem. I don't want Trent to crash and burn or the Bills to tank the season but I think we may indeed be in a position to grab one of the top QBs in 2011. I am hearing good things about Gailey but I don't know if he can polish that turd into a diamond.

 

If Trent or Brohm can be effective we may have a slight luxury of not playing rookie QB for a while. That being said QBs drafted in the top 10 picks of the draft WILL become the starter in their first year at some point. The only exception was Phillip Rivers who couldn't beat out Drew Brees. Go figure.

[PDaDdy]

All you say is true, Dean. But a franchise, with qb woes for many years sooner or later has to simply...roll the dice. Maybe the following year, too.

 

They may have not been sold - but their public announcements for a switch to a 3-4 and a desire for a "scatback" IMO put them in a corner come draft day - not unnoticed by other clubs, who read the smoke signals and knew BUF's early position pick predilections. They saw a competitor who tipped his hand.

 

Did we get what we wanted? I think the answer to that is yes. Tipping our hand as you say had no negative repercussions. Sometimes in poker the best bluff is telling the truth Who would expect a GM and a coach to actually be telling you what they need? To everyone it seemed like a smoke screen. "The Bills don't need a RB." "They're posturing to try to trade down with someone who wanted Spiller." "They are disguising their obvious need for a LT or a QB" Instead Nix and Gailey got exactly what they wanted.

 

Sounds pretty slick to me.

[San-O]

1. I would say NFL scouts and front office types probably concurred that it was a weak draft class for QBs, as only

2 were taken in 1st round, only 1 taken in top 20. Tebow was a huge reach in my opinion.

 

2. The Bills don't/haven't draft well in years, while San Diego has drafted 2 Pro Bowl QB in recent years. They don't seem to

have the personnel in front office to evaluate pro level QBs.

 

IMHO.

[Mr. WEO]

What he should have said is, "The NFL doesn't value QB exclusively on how they did in college" or "College success ALONE is less important for QBs than most other positions in NFL evaluations." For the most part, any RB (for example) that excels in a major college conference is considered NFL material, and those that dominate in those conferences nearly always are considered prime prospects. That isn't necessarily the case with QBs.

 

Recently guys like Colt Brennan, Graham Harrell joined Heisman winners Troy Smith, Jason White, Eric Crouch and Chris Weinke as guys who were OUTSTANDING college QBs but weren't highly regarded by the NFL. Right up til the 2010 draft, there was debate about exactly where Tim Tebow would be taken. Many thought he was well overdrafted in the 1st, while others thought he was the best QB prospect in the draft.

 

It's pretty obvious NFL teams weren't as enthralled with Clausen as are many here. He wouldn't have slid so far had he been considered a can't-miss QB. Now, I understand if some want to criticize the Bills FO for not recognizing Clausen's talent. But I don't see how anyone would criticize the FO taking a player they like over a player they don't like. Taking a QB in the 2nd round simply for the sake of taking a QB in an early round is insane, if you aren't sold on that QB.

I don't disagree with this. And certain programs, like Fla State, Ohio State, Fla and Texas Tech will always struggle to have their QBs taken seriously becuase they struggle to become pros. But to say they don't pay attention to college career or performance is silly.

 

As for Clausen, the mediocre reviews circulated by "NFL insiders" were self-serving in that they relieved all teams of "blowing" a first round pick on him. They were essentially acting as hedge fund managers short selling Clausen--then hoping to pick him up much cheaper after they had forced down his value.

[stuckincincy]

Did we get what we wanted? I think the answer to that is yes. Tipping our hand as you say had no negative repercussions. Sometimes in poker the best bluff is telling the truth Who would expect a GM and a coach to actually be telling you what they need? To everyone it seemed like a smoke screen. "The Bills don't need a RB." "They're posturing to try to trade down with someone who wanted Spiller." "They are disguising their obvious need for a LT or a QB" Instead Nix and Gailey got exactly what they wanted.

 

Sounds pretty slick to me.

 

Yes - they got exactly what they wanted. 10th year or so of them out-foxing the competition come draft day. Slick.

[The Dean]

I don't disagree with this. And certain programs, like Fla State, Ohio State, Fla and Texas Tech will always struggle to have their QBs taken seriously becuase they struggle to become pros. But to say they don't pay attention to college career or performance is silly.

 

As for Clausen, the mediocre reviews circulated by "NFL insiders" were self-serving in that they relieved all teams of "blowing" a first round pick on him. They were essentially acting as hedge fund managers short selling Clausen--then hoping to pick him up much cheaper after they had forced down his value.

 

 

While this may have been true for one, or two teams, it is far more likely that most teams that passed on him (some twice or more) decided he didn't look as good up close (after looking at tons of tape, talking to his teammates and coaches, interviewing him, etc) as he did from a distance. I simply can't believe every NFL team was bluffing by talking him down and passing on him. That's preposterous. Besides, do you think NFL teams pay much attention to what "NFL insiders" have to say, when they have their own insiders? I think these inside reports have the biggest impact on fans, not on teams.

 

Now, I'm not saying he won't be a good QB. I actually think there is a decent chance he will be OK. But that is more likely to happen if he is with a team that believes he is good, convinced he can work in their system, likes him, etc. It's much harder to succeed with an organization that really didn't want you to begin with.

 

Actually, I think SoCal Surf has the "proper" criticism (if you will):

 

The Bills don't/haven't draft well in years, while San Diego has drafted 2 Pro Bowl QB in recent years. They don't seem to

have the personnel in front office to evaluate pro level QBs.

 

That may be true. Just like Don Nelson (NBA) never had the ability to identify and develop a good big man. On the other hand, while some of the scouts are the same, this is a new FO, so I'm not sure we can paint them with that same brush, as that reputation comes from previous regimes.

[Doc]

look, you made the silly claim that the NFL doesn't pick Qbs based on what they did in college.

By "silly" you obviously meant "hard for me to understand." The Dean (see below) seemed to have no problem with it.

 

Anyway, you may be more confused than usual-----Leinart is the starting QB for AZ. Your guy (the actual UFL star) moved up, by default, to backup QB in Oakland. Equating the two as busts highlights your poor position.

Leinart isn't the starter "by default?"

What he should have said is, "The NFL doesn't value QB exclusively on how they did in college" or "College success ALONE is less important for QBs than most other positions in NFL evaluations." For the most part, any RB (for example) that excels in a major college conference is considered NFL material, and those that dominate in those conferences nearly always are considered prime prospects. That isn't necessarily the case with QBs.

 

Recently guys like Colt Brennan, Graham Harrell joined Heisman winners Troy Smith, Jason White, Eric Crouch and Chris Weinke as guys who were OUTSTANDING college QBs but weren't highly regarded by the NFL. Right up til the 2010 draft, there was debate about exactly where Tim Tebow would be taken. Many thought he was well overdrafted in the 1st, while others thought he was the best QB prospect in the draft.

 

It's pretty obvious NFL teams weren't as enthralled with Clausen as are many here. He wouldn't have slid so far had he been considered a can't-miss QB. Now, I understand if some want to criticize the Bills FO for not recognizing Clausen's talent. But I don't see how anyone would criticize the FO taking a player they like over a player they don't like. Taking a QB in the 2nd round simply for the sake of taking a QB in an early round is insane, if you aren't sold on that QB.

Thank you.

[Mr. WEO]

While this may have been true for one, or two teams, it is far more likely that most teams that passed on him (some twice or more) decided he didn't look as good up close (after looking at tons of tape, talking to his teammates and coaches, interviewing him, etc) as he did from a distance. I simply can't believe every NFL team was bluffing by talking him down and passing on him. That's preposterous. Besides, do you think NFL teams pay much attention to what "NFL insiders" have to say, when they have their own insiders? I think these inside reports have the biggest impact on fans, not on teams.

 

Now, I'm not saying he won't be a good QB. I actually think there is a decent chance he will be OK. But that is more likely to happen if he is with a team that believes he is good, convinced he can work in their system, likes him, etc. It's much harder to succeed with an organization that really didn't want you to begin with.

 

Actually, I think SoCal Surf has the "proper" criticism (if you will):

 

 

 

That may be true. Just like Don Nelson (NBA) never had the ability to identify and develop a good big man. On the other hand, while some of the scouts are the same, this is a new FO, so I'm not sure we can paint them with that same brush, as that reputation comes from previous regimes.

The NFL insiders I was referring to were the teams' own talent evaluators--not doc's talking head friends. All teams don't have to participate in talking him down---but as such talk drops his value (and these NFL guys absolutely read the paper, read the websites and watch TV), they all benefit. Also, you seem to ignore that every team did not need a QB in the first round, so it is disingenuous to say "all 32 teams passed on him".

 

 

By "silly" you obviously meant "hard for me to understand." The Dean (see below) seemed to have no problem with it.

 

 

Leinart isn't the starter "by default?"

 

Thank you.

No doc, your claim was pretty simple to understand. I wasn't disagreeing with Dean's attempt to salvage your poor choice of words. For that he deserves your thanks.

 

No, Leinart was drafted in the first round and after a rocky start, he has been learning at the knee of one of the best passers in the league of the last ten years, who just retired.

 

JPL was drafted in the first round and let go----dumped-----by a chronically struggling team with a horrible offense and who then went on to play semi-pro ball and now just moved up the roster on the worst team in the league after another, more recent 1st round bust was, too, let go.

 

There is a difference that most would pick up on right away.

[Doc]

No doc, your claim was pretty simple to understand. I wasn't disagreeing with Dean's attempt to salvage your poor choice of words. For that he deserves your thanks.

 

No, Leinart was drafted in the first round and after a rocky start, he has been learning at the knee of one of the best passers in the league of the last ten years, who just retired.

 

JPL was drafted in the first round and let go----dumped-----by a chronically struggling team with a horrible offense and who then went on to play semi-pro ball and now just moved up the roster on the worst team in the league after another, more recent 1st round bust was, too, let go.

 

There is a difference that most would pick up on right away.

I know your thinking is more concrete than most and you need things spelled out for you. For that I apologize for making you have to think outside your tiny box. I'll try to make sure I include every needed word in the future, because I can't expect The Dean to explain everything to you/for me.

 

And it looks like Leinart took Warner's knee to his groin, judging by his stats from last season (most notably that awesome game against the Titans). I'm sure losing Boldin and having a weaker team overall will do wonders for him. Because make no mistake, he's the starter because they have NO other options on that team or looming on the horizon. Although there is a good chance Derek Anderson takes the job he was given, from him.

[Albany,n.y.]

The NFL insiders I was referring to were the teams' own talent evaluators--not doc's talking head friends. All teams don't have to participate in talking him down---but as such talk drops his value (and these NFL guys absolutely read the paper, read the websites and watch TV), they all benefit. Also, you seem to ignore that every team did not need a QB in the first round, so it is disingenuous to say "all 32 teams passed on him".

 

 

 

No doc, your claim was pretty simple to understand. I wasn't disagreeing with Dean's attempt to salvage your poor choice of words. For that he deserves your thanks.

 

No, Leinart was drafted in the first round and after a rocky start, he has been learning at the knee of one of the best passers in the league of the last ten years, who just retired.

 

JPL was drafted in the first round and let go----dumped-----by a chronically struggling team with a horrible offense and who then went on to play semi-pro ball and now just moved up the roster on the worst team in the league after another, more recent 1st round bust was, too, let go.

There is a difference that most would pick up on right away.

JP is in Seattle not Oakland & he's 3rd or 4th on the depth chart.

[Orton's Arm]

What he should have said is, "The NFL doesn't value QB exclusively on how they did in college" or "College success ALONE is less important for QBs than most other positions in NFL evaluations." For the most part, any RB (for example) that excels in a major college conference is considered NFL material, and those that dominate in those conferences nearly always are considered prime prospects. That isn't necessarily the case with QBs.

 

Recently guys like Colt Brennan, Graham Harrell joined Heisman winners Troy Smith, Jason White, Eric Crouch and Chris Weinke as guys who were OUTSTANDING college QBs but weren't highly regarded by the NFL. Right up til the 2010 draft, there was debate about exactly where Tim Tebow would be taken. Many thought he was well overdrafted in the 1st, while others thought he was the best QB prospect in the draft.

 

It's pretty obvious NFL teams weren't as enthralled with Clausen as are many here. He wouldn't have slid so far had he been considered a can't-miss QB. Now, I understand if some want to criticize the Bills FO for not recognizing Clausen's talent. But I don't see how anyone would criticize the FO taking a player they like over a player they don't like. Taking a QB in the 2nd round simply for the sake of taking a QB in an early round is insane, if you aren't sold on that QB.

I agree with this post. There are a lot of ways that college QBs can attain success that won't necessarily translate very effectively to the NFL level. The question NFL GMs are (or should be) asking isn't just "was this guy successful in college?" but rather, "of the things I'd like my starting quarterback to be able to do, how many has this guy proven he can do in college?"

[Mr. WEO]

I agree with this post. There are a lot of ways that college QBs can attain success that won't necessarily translate very effectively to the NFL level. The question NFL GMs are (or should be) asking isn't just "was this guy successful in college?" but rather, "of the things I'd like my starting quarterback to be able to do, how many has this guy proven he can do in college?"

I'll buy that.

 

 

Maybe that's what you meant too, huh doc?

[DrFishfinder]

I agree, and one day when players like Marcus Easley and CJ Spiller are household names for most Bills fans folks will look back and say," you know what, Nix/Gailey drafted some real good players that really helped turn this team around".

 

Ask Thurman Thomas what this Bills team has been lacking over the last few years and he will tell you its big play makers. Players that take it to the house and score TD's, game breakers. CJ Spiller averaged over a TD a game through college.

 

 

 

7 extra points a game could very well be enough to propel us into the playoffs.

What a point-on post dog..... +2.

 

Especially the last sentence: The Bills lost 5 games last year by 7 points or less. Win all of those games: 11-5.