karl malones other son Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/02/legedu-naanee-bernard-pollard-troy-smith-among-players-not-tendered-contracts/ didnt see this posted
The Senator Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Just goes to show how risky a proposition drafting a QB can be - and how wrong most of the pundits usually are, as some of them had Brohm pegged as the #1-overall pick had he entered the 2007 draft.
ReturnoftheBuffaloBeast23 Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 (edited) Welp! I guess all the Broom supporters are going to jump off the peace bridge now... I hope they can swim ... Now that he's gone more room for CAM NEWTON!... (Im the first to mention Cam do I get a prize? Even tho I felt a slight Cam dis coming from our ^TBD government^ LOL...) Edited March 3, 2011 by ReturnoftheBuffaloBeast23
Meathead Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 and no this does not clear the way to draft newton well technically i suppose it does but dat aint happenin
Rob's House Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Welp! I guess all the Broom supporters are going to jump off the peace bridge now... I hope they can swim ... Now that he's gone more room for CAM NEWTON!... (Im the first to mention Cam do I get a prize? Even tho I felt a slight Cam dis coming from our ^TBD government^ LOL...) So just to clarify, do you want the Bills to Draft Cam Newton?
BiggieScooby Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 So just to clarify, do you want the Bills to Draft Cam Newton? no. go big or go home with front 7
truth on hold Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 (edited) Cutting Brohm loose in all likelihood means Bills will draft a QB. They won't go with just Fitz (who they're not completely sold on) and the unheralded, once cut Brown. I don't see them bringing in a vet to backup a vet either ... doesn't make sense with a guy like Chan who wants his own "franchise QB." So methinks they must be targeting one in the draft. Likely a 1st or 2nd rounder since they don't want another late rounder like Brown on the roster. I don't like the implications either: - use #3 pick, when I don't see any QB worthy of it; - or use #35 pick for best QB available, which likely means drafting DFensive front 7 at 3 (where I think there's better quality than the QB class, but still not worthy of #3. I want a true elite player like Peterson or Green.) So we either use our most valuable pick on a QB that we will have to pay and play for years even though odds are he may not be worth it, or make the mistake of drafting for need at #3 with a reach on DFensive front 7, and follow that up with another reach in Rd 2 by just going with best QB, no matter where he really rates. If that's the case, as poor as Brohm looks, I wish we'd just keep him for another year. Edited March 3, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack
reddogblitz Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Actually it opens up room for the Bills to pick also non RFA Troy Smith. You know, he looks like Coach Gailey's style of QB.
Chilly Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 (edited) Just goes to show how risky a proposition drafting a QB can be - and how wrong most of the pundits usually are, as some of them had Brohm pegged as the #1-overall pick had he entered the 2007 draft. Hows Graham Harrell working out for you? Edited March 3, 2011 by BlueFire
Bangarang Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 "I got an idea. Why don't I make a thread using nothing but opinion and speculation and just pass it off as fact." But seriously, we were going to draft a QB before Brohm got released. Brohm just sucks so why keep him?
boyst Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Brohm was not cut, for one. He was just not resigned. Getting a rookie QB as a backup is a huge risk. Levi Brown has been in the system for 1 year and by that should be bumped to 2nd string. Now, we have to assume that we get a QB at #3 or in round 2 that will be better then Brown at the scheme - debatable with Gailey's system so tailored to Fitz and Brown being accustomed to it. So then we have to ask is it worth it to have two QB's who are developing in our system? When one of those QB's is a high draft pick he will be harder pressed to perform, perhaps even asked to start should Fitz underperform or get injured. If it was up to me I would be just as comfortable having Brown on active roster with a rookie late round QB and Fitz as a starter. If he gets injured I am sure we can find a released vet to come in and take over putting Fitz on IR or letting that late round player go to PS.
truth on hold Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 (edited) So many assumptions. So we're not allowed to discuss the future any more? "I got an idea. Why don't I make a thread using nothing but opinion and speculation and just pass it off as fact." But seriously, we were going to draft a QB before Brohm got released. Brohm just sucks so why keep him? Never said anything was fact. Just what I can see happening. Im half kidding when I say keep Brohm. The other half is to prevent us from wasting more high round picks. Brohm was not cut, for one. He was just not resigned. Getting a rookie QB as a backup is a huge risk. Levi Brown has been in the system for 1 year and by that should be bumped to 2nd string. Now, we have to assume that we get a QB at #3 or in round 2 that will be better then Brown at the scheme - debatable with Gailey's system so tailored to Fitz and Brown being accustomed to it. So then we have to ask is it worth it to have two QB's who are developing in our system? When one of those QB's is a high draft pick he will be harder pressed to perform, perhaps even asked to start should Fitz underperform or get injured. If it was up to me I would be just as comfortable having Brown on active roster with a rookie late round QB and Fitz as a starter. If he gets injured I am sure we can find a released vet to come in and take over putting Fitz on IR or letting that late round player go to PS. Problem is Brown looks like you'd expect a late round QB to look. I don't see Gailey adding more late round long shots, or journeyman vets who have no chance of taking you to the promised land. More probable scenario is Newton at 3 or a Locker at 35. Edited March 3, 2011 by Joe_the_6_pack
BiggieScooby Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Ralph wants a QB I agree with you, he said so in October & he obviously doesn't think Fitz is the long term solution beyond 2011. If Newton is gone I think OBD thinks hard on Gabbert and then leans to WR. Similar to the Spiller pick it makes sense to out think ourselves and get a position we have a handle on. Personally I want guy's like Dareus, Quinn, Bowers or Fairley. The only other thing I can think of is we are trying to trade down with Washington or Minnesota to create a bidding war for Cam Newton.
Estro Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Tyler Thigpen was just tendered by the Miami Dolphins, but like Poz and Whitner, his tender will likely be nullified if and when a new CBA is agreed upon. I'd expect the Bills to give Thigpen serious consideration when he is a "true" FA. Chan has experience with him and has seen that he can run his offense competently. He certainly would be an upgrade over Brohm, who looked absolutely terrible with every chance he was given. Thigpen has at least been able to come in and adequately move the ball, when given the chance. He'd be a quality backup, and the Phins obviously feel the same way otherwise he wouldn'y have been tendered. Thigpen also gives you flexibility in the draft. If things don't shake out the way you want you're not handcuffed into taking a QB just for the sake of filling out the roster. Even if you do draft a raw prospect, you can keep Thigpen as the backup, and make sure the new rook doesn't have to see the field in year 1. the problem with this plan is it requires FA taking place before the draft, which likely won't be the case this season. This probably means the Bills will have to draft a QB at some point, but that shouldn't prevent them from signing Thigpen when FA ultimately takes place.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Cutting Brohm loose in all likelihood means Bills will draft a QB. They won't go with just Fitz (who they're not completely sold on) and the unheralded, once cut Brown. I don't see them bringing in a vet to backup a vet either ... doesn't make sense with a guy like Chan who wants his own "franchise QB." So methinks they must be targeting one in the draft. Likely a 1st or 2nd rounder since they don't want another late rounder like Brown on the roster. I don't like the implications either: - use #3 pick, when I don't see any QB worthy of it; - or use #35 pick for best QB available, which likely means drafting DFensive front 7 at 3 (where I think there's better quality than the QB class, but still not worthy of #3. I want a true elite player like Peterson or Green.) So we either use our most valuable pick on a QB that we will have to pay and play for years even though odds are he may not be worth it, or make the mistake of drafting for need at #3 with a reach on DFensive front 7, and follow that up with another reach in Rd 2 by just going with best QB, no matter where he really rates. If that's the case, as poor as Brohm looks, I wish we'd just keep him for another year. So Dareus and Quinn aren't elite ? We have been drafting skill players all decade its time to address the line.
hondo in seattle Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 So Dareus and Quinn aren't elite ? We have been drafting skill players all decade its time to address the line. I'm not sad to see Brohm go. But I do think it's curious we once cut Brown and kept Brohm. Now we cut Brohm and keep Brown. What changed?
Tsaikotic Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 I'm not sad to see Brohm go. But I do think it's curious we once cut Brown and kept Brohm. Now we cut Brohm and keep Brown. What changed? coin flips??
Mark Long Beach Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 I'm not sad to see Brohm go. But I do think it's curious we once cut Brown and kept Brohm. Now we cut Brohm and keep Brown. What changed? Probably Brohm's play in the last game. He stunk it up and basically said that he couldn't handle the speed of the NFL. Chan agreed with him. It was just a matter of time before he was gone.
downunderbill Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 So we're not allowed to discuss the future any more? Of course. Just don't see how not resigning brohm, a completly ineffective qb, makes it likely that a qb will be drafted.
Recommended Posts