Reasons to Not Pick a QB in Next Draft

[BIllsNation]

1. All QB's in this years draft are huge risks and none are worthy of the third pick in the draft.

2. This team does not improve unless they improve defensive talent to stop the run. First three picks in the draft should go towards DT, DE, LB.

3. Luck, Terelle Pryor, Landry Jones, Barkley, and several other QB's will be available in 2012. Some of these QB's have better pro potential.

4. Fitzpatrick is in his prime, give him another full year with this offense and these upcoming receivers.

5. Improvement from Spiller, young receivers and getting Parrish and Easley back from injury will help Fitzpatrick.

6. Concentrate in FA on finding a RT, TE and a back up QB.

 

 

exactly we need to improve our d throughout the draft and FA

[1B4IDie]

A "#2 QB," veteran or not, isn't what we're looking for. We're looking for the guy who is going to start in two or three years. It is tougher to find a QB in free agency or through a trade than it is to find a player at any other position, so it's not a "waste" to take a QB with a mid-round pick, see how he develops, and pursue the other positional needs via free agency or trades.

 

I'm not sure how much either Mallett or Newton are blue-chip prospects, but those are the two guys I had in mind when I mentioned the third round, if they fall that far. I don't think they will; I think other teams will be dumb enough to blow first-round picks on these guys, whom I don't believe have first-round talent.

 

If Colin Kaepernick is available in the 5th, I'd take him and find that average-to-below ILB that you're going to draft 5th through FA or a trade instead.

So by your logic drafting an average to below average QB to develop into a starter, after the 3rd round, which almost never happens (Tom Brady, Ryan Fitzpatrick then no other starter on the 30 other NFL teams) is better than drafting an average to below average LB that will see playing time because our front7 is so weak is a better use of a pick.

Glad you're not the GM.

It is easy to sign a backup QB there are tons of guys that have a few starts and proved they're not franchise QBs but are good in a pinch.

Thigpen comes to mind off the top of the head.

You're smoking crack or have no ability to judge talent if you think Mallet or Newton aren't going in the top 20.

 

Mallet is a better prospect than Josh Freeman. I would have loved if the Bills "reached" on Josh Freeman over Lynch. Instead of taking a 3rd round average to below average QB.

Edited January 16, 2011 by Why So Serious?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1. Same could be said every year.

2. Drafting a QB poses no detriment to improving the defense. There is great defensive talent in the 2011 draft in rounds 2-4

3. Very weak class. With the exception of Luck all project much worse pro prospects then Cam & Mallet

4. No one want the rookie to start.

5. No one wants the rookie to start.

6. Seems irrelevant to me.

 

Josh Freeman wasn't rated as high as #11 in 2007 but in the long run that would have been a great pick over Lynch.

 

If there is a guy you think can be "the man" you take him when you have a chance.

 

"Why so serious", I have nothing against "if 'The Man' is there you take him" philosophy providing we acknowledge the contrary: if you aren't confident "The Man" is there, you draft another position

 

2. It's a fallacy that drafting a QB poses no detriment to the defense. Think about the '90s Bills without Bruce Smith and Biscuit. We had good linebackers in Conlan and Talley and a good NT in Hansen, without Bruuuuuuce! and Biscuit we would not have been at the same level.

There can be just as big difference between a high-first round D pick and 2nd-3rd rounds, as between high 1st round QB, and 2nd-3rd rounds

 

3. Many draft pundits rank Gabbert higher than either. I've seen Newton as low as #7 and Mallet #5 (behind Locker).

I don't agree with that last. There seems to be consensus it was Luck off on a pinnacle and a varying handful further back.

 

Question: if we take the most positive view that Cam Newton left FL because he didn't want to stay #2 behind Tebow for another year, why do we think he'd be content to stay on the bench and develop for several years behind Fitz?

[1B4IDie]

"Why so serious", I have nothing against "if 'The Man' is there you take him" philosophy providing we acknowledge the contrary: if you aren't confident "The Man" is there, you draft another position

 

2. It's a fallacy that drafting a QB poses no detriment to the defense. Think about the '90s Bills without Bruce Smith and Biscuit. We had good linebackers in Conlan and Talley and a good NT in Hansen, without Bruuuuuuce! and Biscuit we would not have been at the same level.

There can be just as big difference between a high-first round D pick and 2nd-3rd rounds, as between high 1st round QB, and 2nd-3rd rounds

 

3. Many draft pundits rank Gabbert higher than either. I've seen Newton as low as #7 and Mallet #5 (behind Locker).

I don't agree with that last. There seems to be consensus it was Luck off on a pinnacle and a varying handful further back.

 

Question: if we take the most positive view that Cam Newton left FL because he didn't want to stay #2 behind Tebow for another year, why do we think he'd be content to stay on the bench and develop for several years behind Fitz?

Nick Fairely is going #1 overall and certainly will not be there at #3 so who is the Bruce Smith?

Bowers and Quinn give me the creeps that high.

I like Marcell Dareaus and wouldnt hate that pick.

 

The weak is reference to the OP. 2012 is a super weak QB draft class after Luck.

 

I feel that Mallet or Newton could both be "the man". We'll see what Nix and Co. think in April.

[Original Byrd Man]

So by your logic drafting an average to below average QB to develop into a starter, after the 3rd round, which almost never happens (Tom Brady, Ryan Fitzpatrick then no other starter on the 30 other NFL teams) is better than drafting an average to below average LB that will see playing time because our front7 is so weak is a better use of a pick.

Glad you're not the GM.

It is easy to sign a backup QB there are tons of guys that have a few starts and proved they're not franchise QBs but are good in a pinch.

Thigpen comes to mind off the top of the head.

You're smoking crack or have no ability to judge talent if you think Mallet or Newton aren't going in the top 20.

 

Mallet is a better prospect than Josh Freeman. I would have loved if the Bills "reached" on Josh Freeman over Lynch. Instead of taking a 3rd round average to below average QB.

Say what you want about Lynch, but he is still a very good back who played behind a horrible line with Capt'n Check down for a QB. Can you say 8 or 9 men in the box? There is no way to judge how Mallet will do at the NFL level. He may be the next Tom Brady or the next Ryan Leaf. If he is the latter we wasted another #1 pick. Better safe than sorry.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Nick Fairely is going #1 overall and certainly will not be there at #3 so who is the Bruce Smith?

Bowers and Quinn give me the creeps that high.

I like Marcell Dareaus and wouldnt hate that pick.

 

The weak is reference to the OP. 2012 is a super weak QB draft class after Luck.

 

I feel that Mallet or Newton could both be "the man". We'll see what Nix and Co. think in April.

 

Fair enough. You think Mallet or Newton are "the man", I'm not sold. we can disagree there.

Pundits think Gabbert is "the man", I'm not sold there either so I disagree with them.

 

I'm not yet convinced Fairley is going #1 or that he should be #1 to us (flame on folks). We don't know how Carolina and Denver see the board.

Some have Bowers and Dareus above him.

 

I like Dareus about the best what I've seen. I think there are other DL whose star will rise: Clayborn, JJWatt, maybe Heyward.

 

You're right, we'll see what Nix and Co think in April

[Captain Hindsight]

I dont see a QB worth taking that high. Late in the draft im fine with drafting a project and working with him but not in the first or second

[Hapless Bills Fan]

So by your logic drafting an average to below average QB to develop into a starter, after the 3rd round, which almost never happens (Tom Brady, Ryan Fitzpatrick then no other starter on the 30 other NFL teams) is better than drafting an average to below average LB that will see playing time because our front7 is so weak is a better use of a pick.

 

I don't want to 'rain on your tirade' so to speak but while the percentage of late-round quality QB starting in the NFL is lower than 1st rounders, you're missing a few of the current crop from your list:

Matt Hasselbeck SEA (6 playoffs, SB, 3 probowls - 6th round)

Matt Cassel KC (had 11-5 year in NE, playoffs this year - UDFA)

Matt Moore Car (UDFA, beat out Delhomme)

Jake Delhomme Browns (UDFA) or maybe Seneca Wallace (4th round)?

David Garrard Jacksonville (4th round)

 

So at least 7 out of 32 current starting QB drafted later than 3rd round.

 

Of course, one may say "some of those are not really quality starters". One may also say that about a bunch of 1st round starters

 

Looking at the "heirs apparent" of some top teams:

Matt Flynn has done very well for GB when he's played - 7th round.

Brian Hoyer did very well when he came into the game for NE - UDFA

[BADOLBILZ]

1. Same could be said every year.

2. Drafting a QB poses no detriment to improving the defense. There is great defensive talent in the 2011 draft in rounds 2-4

3. Very weak class. With the exception of Luck all project much worse pro prospects then Cam & Mallet

4. No one want the rookie to start.

5. No one wants the rookie to start.

6. Seems irrelevant to me.

 

Josh Freeman wasn't rated as high as #11 in 2007 but in the long run that would have been a great pick over Lynch.

 

If there is a guy you think can be "the man" you take him when you have a chance.

 

The Bills, and many of their fans, seem to get brain rot during the draft process every year. They very early on rationalize why they shouldn't address the most position on the field in round 1. Then, they degenerate to the point where they are picking a position they could easily address on day 2. RB? SS? C'mon, you haven't made the playoffs in a decade and you are trying to rebuild your franchise around spare parts?

 

I've said it before, if this team had drafted a QB with their first pick in each of the past 7 years and they all were busts the team wouldn't be any worse off. It wouldn't have cost them a penny more than drafting the low-to-no impact talent they have. That's how bad they've drafted.

 

If it's a QB then at least it's a gamble on by far the most important position and a player who can legitimately turn around the fortune of the franchise. Donte Whitner? Marshawn Lycnh? Spiller? Those picks were senseless.

[1B4IDie]

The Bills, and many of their fans, seem to get brain rot during the draft process every year. They very early on rationalize why they shouldn't address the most position on the field in round 1. Then, they degenerate to the point where they are picking a position they could easily address on day 2. RB? SS? C'mon, you haven't made the playoffs in a decade and you are trying to rebuild your franchise around spare parts?

 

I've said it before, if this team had drafted a QB with their first pick in each of the past 7 years and they all were busts the team wouldn't be any worse off. It wouldn't have cost them a penny more than drafting the low-to-no impact talent they have. That's how bad they've drafted.

 

If it's a QB then at least it's a gamble on by far the most important position and a player who can legitimately turn around the fortune of the franchise. Donte Whitner? Marshawn Lycnh? Spiller? Those picks were senseless.

Outstanding point!

And add that to the fact that the Bills have only taken two QBs in the first round in the Super Bowl era and the only time they were relevant was when 1 of those first round picks led them to 4 straight Super Bowls.

[Maddog69]

The Bills, and many of their fans, seem to get brain rot during the draft process every year. They very early on rationalize why they shouldn't address the most position on the field in round 1. Then, they degenerate to the point where they are picking a position they could easily address on day 2. RB? SS? C'mon, you haven't made the playoffs in a decade and you are trying to rebuild your franchise around spare parts?

 

I've said it before, if this team had drafted a QB with their first pick in each of the past 7 years and they all were busts the team wouldn't be any worse off. It wouldn't have cost them a penny more than drafting the low-to-no impact talent they have. That's how bad they've drafted.

 

If it's a QB then at least it's a gamble on by far the most important position and a player who can legitimately turn around the fortune of the franchise. Donte Whitner? Marshawn Lycnh? Spiller? Those picks were senseless.

 

This might be the single greatest, most intelligent post ever made on this site.

[Offside Number 76]

So by your logic drafting an average to below average QB to develop into a starter, after the 3rd round, which almost never happens (Tom Brady, Ryan Fitzpatrick then no other starter on the 30 other NFL teams) is better than drafting an average to below average LB that will see playing time because our front7 is so weak is a better use of a pick.

Glad you're not the GM.

It is easy to sign a backup QB there are tons of guys that have a few starts and proved they're not franchise QBs but are good in a pinch.

Thigpen comes to mind off the top of the head.

You're smoking crack or have no ability to judge talent if you think Mallet or Newton aren't going in the top 20.

 

Mallet is a better prospect than Josh Freeman. I would have loved if the Bills "reached" on Josh Freeman over Lynch. Instead of taking a 3rd round average to below average QB.

 

Nope. My point is, you'll have equal luck finding that "hidden" QB stud in the 5th as you will that "hidden" LB or DL or whatever stud. Equal there, right?

 

But in free agency or trade, you will have an easier time finding that "hidden" stud at ANY other position than QB. No one wants to trade away a QB, even a Levi.

 

So use some mid-to-late pick, again, depending on what's out there. If you find your QB, fine; if not, you weren't going to find him in FA or in a trade anyway. And as far as what you would have done otherwise with that pick, THAT, you CAN do through FA or trade.

 

Teams guard QBs jealously (in comparison to other positions; I fully realize that some get released or sent to PS), no matter what round they were picked in. Teams do not do the same of mid-round linebacker picks.

[1B4IDie]

Nope. My point is, you'll have equal luck finding that "hidden" QB stud in the 5th as you will that "hidden" LB or DL or whatever stud. Equal there, right?

 

But in free agency or trade, you will have an easier time finding that "hidden" stud at ANY other position than QB. No one wants to trade away a QB, even a Levi.

 

So use some mid-to-late pick, again, depending on what's out there. If you find your QB, fine; if not, you weren't going to find him in FA or in a trade anyway. And as far as what you would have done otherwise with that pick, THAT, you CAN do through FA or trade.

 

Teams guard QBs jealously (in comparison to other positions; I fully realize that some get released or sent to PS), no matter what round they were picked in. Teams do not do the same of mid-round linebacker picks.

WRONG.

The concept that you groom a 4th round QB to become a franchise QB is foolish.

 

It is very likely you find a very good serviceable ILB in the 4th, its still the top 150 prospects. Its not like the 4th round is full of scrubs.

 

As you stated earlier there is a premium placed on QBs therefore the QBs that have a chance to be a starter are drafted early.

 

The QBs that are drafted after the 3rd are not drafted with the idea that they will be the starter or leading the franchise one day. They are drafted in the hopes that they become a serviceable backup.

Edited January 17, 2011 by Why So Serious?

[sllib olaffub]

I've not watched a lot of Jake Locker until I just now looked at some of his highlights... and, yesterday I would have said the Bills will go for either Peterson, Dareus, Bowers, Fairley - of course, if he were there - but, now I think there is no chance Locker gets by us.

 

I just don't see Chan Gailey passing up this guy. Wow! I didn't realize how fast he is. Not only does this kid look like a Pro Quarterback in size, and has been playing in a pro system, but he is a passer first, and a good one - I mean, I watched him make all the throws - numerous 50 yard tosses, and he's got a quick release, he can throw very good on the run, and he runs fast - Tight End fast - plus, he's tough.

Let's see... easily a good enough arm to throw in the Ralph, good runner, can play in the pro styles, has exceptional talent.

 

Now, what does Gailey like? A quarterback who can scramble, with a good arm, and intelligence. Man, we can draft Locker and let him learn the system, Fitz is similar, only, I'd say, inferior in measurables. As much as we need to fix our Defense, I see us getting Locker and then spending the rest of the draft on Defense. I think our staff is loving the fact that everyone else seems to think Locker is now questionable. I think they're drooling to get him. And, I think they selected Spiller last year with the intention of creating a "threesome" of young, electric, WR,QB, and RB - like the Bills and Dallas used to have.

 

I like the idea of Spiller and Fred, Locker, Easley/Evans/Johnson/Jones/Nelson/and Parrish - between Easley, Johnson, Jones, and Nelson - one of them might step up as a legitimate number 1, although, I think Gailey wants a bunch of viable options - much like Green Bay's roster. We still need a real threat for a T.E. - but, I see us being able to address that and RT in F.A. this year.

 

That's my prediction - Locker to us at 3. And, I'm thrilled with the prospect. Remember, Fitzpatrick was considered as only a marginal second stringer until Gailey propped him up. Imagine what he can do with what can be considered perfect prospect in Locker. It is perfect for us as things stand now - how everyone sees him as going to Washington, but, on most years we'd lose out on the great QB prospect (as we would have this year with Luck) only, the guy I believe we would want anyway is going to be there for us.

[fansince88]

I have been a Aaron Rodgers fan for a few years now. After watching last night's game, I am reminded of what we need in a QB. On maybe 10 occassions last night, Rodgers was chased from the pocket, and the play (in our case) would've been dead or worse, a sack, and Rodgers, running towards the sideline, hits a reciever downfield for 7-20 yard gains. My point here is, when he moves and throws, he hits his guys in stride.More than just in movement, though, but when he throws the 20 yarders and when he throws the five yarders - he hits his recievers. THAT KIND OF ACCURACY IS WHAT WE NEED IN A QB - and it is what we haven't had in a long while.

 

Fitz does that too! or do you just not want to admit fitz is good?

[1B4IDie]

I've not watched a lot of Jake Locker until I just now looked at some of his highlights... and, yesterday I would have said the Bills will go for either Peterson, Dareus, Bowers, Fairley - of course, if he were there - but, now I think there is no chance Locker gets by us.

 

I just don't see Chan Gailey passing up this guy. Wow! I didn't realize how fast he is. Not only does this kid look like a Pro Quarterback in size, and has been playing in a pro system, but he is a passer first, and a good one - I mean, I watched him make all the throws - numerous 50 yard tosses, and he's got a quick release, he can throw very good on the run, and he runs fast - Tight End fast - plus, he's tough.

Let's see... easily a good enough arm to throw in the Ralph, good runner, can play in the pro styles, has exceptional talent.

 

Now, what does Gailey like? A quarterback who can scramble, with a good arm, and intelligence. Man, we can draft Locker and let him learn the system, Fitz is similar, only, I'd say, inferior in measurables. As much as we need to fix our Defense, I see us getting Locker and then spending the rest of the draft on Defense. I think our staff is loving the fact that everyone else seems to think Locker is now questionable. I think they're drooling to get him. And, I think they selected Spiller last year with the intention of creating a "threesome" of young, electric, WR,QB, and RB - like the Bills and Dallas used to have.

 

I like the idea of Spiller and Fred, Locker, Easley/Evans/Johnson/Jones/Nelson/and Parrish - between Easley, Johnson, Jones, and Nelson - one of them might step up as a legitimate number 1, although, I think Gailey wants a bunch of viable options - much like Green Bay's roster. We still need a real threat for a T.E. - but, I see us being able to address that and RT in F.A. this year.

 

That's my prediction - Locker to us at 3. And, I'm thrilled with the prospect. Remember, Fitzpatrick was considered as only a marginal second stringer until Gailey propped him up. Imagine what he can do with what can be considered perfect prospect in Locker. It is perfect for us as things stand now - how everyone sees him as going to Washington, but, on most years we'd lose out on the great QB prospect (as we would have this year with Luck) only, the guy I believe we would want anyway is going to be there for us.

Locker is a white Cam Newton with worse throwing ability and no ability to win games that crumbles under pressure.

 

Cam Newton > Jake Locker x 100

Edited January 17, 2011 by Why So Serious?

[Cash]

1. Same could be said every year.

2. Drafting a QB poses no detriment to improving the defense. There is great defensive talent in the 2011 draft in rounds 2-4

3. Very weak class. With the exception of Luck all project much worse pro prospects then Cam & Mallet

4. No one want the rookie to start.

5. No one wants the rookie to start.

6. Seems irrelevant to me.

 

Josh Freeman wasn't rated as high as #11 in 2009 but in the long run that would have been a great pick over Maybin.

 

If there is a guy you think can be "the man" you take him when you have a chance.

 

Fixed. And a great point in principle, even if you were off by 2 years. I'm not personally a fan of any QB in this draft, and I tend to doubt any will pan out at #3 overall. But in principle, this idea that you're going to draft a 5th-round guy, then hope he's good in 3 years? It's terrible. There's a reason that QBs bust so frequently: The position is SO important that teams are willing to take huge risks in the first round. Not the case with less-important positions like LB, C, G, or S. (Let's face it, Michael Huff and Whitner back-to-back are about the biggest historical busts at S, and both are actually pretty decent players. Safeties don't get a first-round grade unless they're nearly sure things.) In general, you've got a much better chance at getting a good LB late in the draft than a good QB.

[HeHateMe]

I've not watched a lot of Jake Locker until I just now looked at some of his highlights... and, yesterday I would have said the Bills will go for either Peterson, Dareus, Bowers, Fairley - of course, if he were there - but, now I think there is no chance Locker gets by us.

 

I just don't see Chan Gailey passing up this guy. Wow! I didn't realize how fast he is. Not only does this kid look like a Pro Quarterback in size, and has been playing in a pro system, but he is a passer first, and a good one - I mean, I watched him make all the throws - numerous 50 yard tosses, and he's got a quick release, he can throw very good on the run, and he runs fast - Tight End fast - plus, he's tough.

Let's see... easily a good enough arm to throw in the Ralph, good runner, can play in the pro styles, has exceptional talent.

 

Now, what does Gailey like? A quarterback who can scramble, with a good arm, and intelligence. Man, we can draft Locker and let him learn the system, Fitz is similar, only, I'd say, inferior in measurables. As much as we need to fix our Defense, I see us getting Locker and then spending the rest of the draft on Defense. I think our staff is loving the fact that everyone else seems to think Locker is now questionable. I think they're drooling to get him. And, I think they selected Spiller last year with the intention of creating a "threesome" of young, electric, WR,QB, and RB - like the Bills and Dallas used to have.

 

I like the idea of Spiller and Fred, Locker, Easley/Evans/Johnson/Jones/Nelson/and Parrish - between Easley, Johnson, Jones, and Nelson - one of them might step up as a legitimate number 1, although, I think Gailey wants a bunch of viable options - much like Green Bay's roster. We still need a real threat for a T.E. - but, I see us being able to address that and RT in F.A. this year.

 

That's my prediction - Locker to us at 3. And, I'm thrilled with the prospect. Remember, Fitzpatrick was considered as only a marginal second stringer until Gailey propped him up. Imagine what he can do with what can be considered perfect prospect in Locker. It is perfect for us as things stand now - how everyone sees him as going to Washington, but, on most years we'd lose out on the great QB prospect (as we would have this year with Luck) only, the guy I believe we would want anyway is going to be there for us.

 

 

Locker is awful. You just said you haven't seen him play much yet you think he is Joe Montana. I cringe at the thought of him 3rd overall. He is hot garbage.

[yungmack]

It seems to me that the baseline for drafting a QB is Fitz. In other words, is there someone available who is a marked improvement over Fitz? If your answer is yes, then grab that guy. If not, expend your picks elsewhere. I have watched Locker, Mallet, et al many, many times; in my opinion, with the exception of Newton, none of the guys being talked about here are currently better than Fitz, nor do I think they ever will be. As to Newton, he's intriguing. But I'm not yet sold on him as the guy you spend the #3 pick on.

[Albany,n.y.]

1. Same could be said every year.

2. Drafting a QB poses no detriment to improving the defense. There is great defensive talent in the 2011 draft in rounds 2-4

3. Very weak class. With the exception of Luck all project much worse pro prospects then Cam & Mallet

4. No one want the rookie to start.

5. No one wants the rookie to start.

6. Seems irrelevant to me.

 

Josh Freeman wasn't rated as high as #11 in 2007 but in the long run that would have been a great pick over Lynch. If there is a guy you think can be "the man" you take him when you have a chance.

Josh Freeman was picked in 2009. We picked Maybin instead of Freeman