Beerball Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 Kolb is definetely a bridge to the 2014 Draft. The class in general stinks and 2014 is pretty loaded with good prospects even if Manziel doesn't come out. Kolb will get his one year to prove himself and so will a 3rd or 4th round guy. If they struggle we'll take one in the first round next year no doubt Manziel will flop in the NFL (IMO).
simpleman Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 As many have said, what teams pick two QB's with top 10 picks two years in a row? While I see Barkley and Smith as both potential average starters in the NFL, I don't see either as a Franchise QB. If we pick a QB with our 8th this year, we unfortunately will not pick a QB with our first next year. And next year is when the potential to pick up a bona fide Franchise QB is greatest. No one expects great things with Kolb, just that he at least be average, which he has already proven he can be at times. We realistically are not in the hunt this year anyway. Let's try to trade down, and if can't, fill our holes at lb,wr, te, ol, cb and pick up a Scott or a Brey with a 4th or 5th. Build a team and develop continuity and then go all in next year for a shot at a bona fide Franchise QB
BuffBill Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 With Nix's apparent enthusiasm (not) about the 2013 Draft QB class, it's worth speculating as to whether we'll all be throwing any unbolted object at our TVs watching this year's NFL draft. Between our endless needs list and Nix's obvious allergy to drafting QBs, it's not inconceivable that the Bills will pass on the position for an inexplicable fourth year. If Ryan Nassib, who would be an obvious Marrone play, slips through our fingers, the reat of the field pales in comparison to the top 6-8 QBs in 2014. If Nix truly decides to fill holes everywhere else first and give them a year's experience, it could be a long three days for Bills fans. Or will it? Any method to this madness? I don't think it eliminates the Bills taking a QB in this years draft, and it shouldn't. I do get the feeling though that it means they will take a chance and not take one in the first round though.
chris heff Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 I can't think of a single instance when an NFL team picks QB's high in the draft in 2 straight seasons. Maybe it's common I just don't know? So theoretically, they draft a rookie this year high, sit him(or start him).Then Decide he blows (after 1 year)and do it over in 14? I don't get it. I would think it would be a cause for heads to roll if a legit NFL team works that way. The new rookie salary structure changed what teams can do. Under the old system if you drafted a QB in round one the money committed was too large to do it again for years.
missthe kgun Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 I can't think of a single instance when an NFL team picks QB's high in the draft in 2 straight seasons. Maybe it's common I just don't know? So theoretically, they draft a rookie this year high, sit him(or start him).Then Decide he blows (after 1 year)and do it over in 14? I don't get it. I would think it would be a cause for heads to roll if a legit NFL team works that way. It just happened a few years ago...Carolina took Claussen in the 2nd rd, then took Cam the very next year #1 Overall
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 Again, the Cowboys drafted Troy Aikman in the first round of the 1989 draft and then months later drafted Steve Walsh in the first round of the supplemental draft. That's two first round picks on QBs in less than one year. And I'd say those Cowboys teams were pretty competent.
Cash Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 Again, the Cowboys drafted Troy Aikman in the first round of the 1989 draft and then months later drafted Steve Walsh in the first round of the supplemental draft. That's two first round picks on QBs in less than one year. And I'd say those Cowboys teams were pretty competent. Do you have an example from the last 25 years, or an example that involves the regular draft rather than the supplemental draft? Pointing out this unusual situation many times doesn't turn it into a common situation. I also don't think an isolated example from 1989 bears much relevance to the NFL of today. I continue to maintain that whether teams should or not, it will be some time before a team drafts QBs in the top 10 (or even first round) in consecutive drafts. I also think that if/when it does happen, it'll be one of two situations: Either ownership/GM/coaching staff (or at the very least GM & coaching staff) changed between QB #1 & QB #2, or a successful team with a strong reputation in the media drafts QBs in consecutive years in an "outside the box" attempt to replace a retiring QB. We could see the Patriots try such a move in the 2 years after Brady retires, for example. Actually, with the Patriots' penchant for stockpiling picks, I could even see them going into the Brady-less draft with 2 first rounders, and spending them both on QBs. Would still surprise me, but wouldn't shock me. If the Bills draft a QB at #8 this year, I would be shocked if they drafted a QB in the first round in 2014. My only other contribution to this thread is to say that it's depressing that the 2013 draft hasn't happened yet and I'm already looking forward to the 2014 draft. I think this is the least confidence I've ever had in the Bills' ability to field a winning team.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) Do you have an example from the last 25 years, or an example that involves the regular draft rather than the supplemental draft? Pointing out this unusual situation many times doesn't turn it into a common situation. I also don't think an isolated example from 1989 bears much relevance to the NFL of today. It just happened a few years ago...Carolina took Claussen in the 2nd rd, then took Cam the very next year #1 Overall Cash, I didn't say it was common or relevant. Just giving an example. And the Dallas example was even more extreme in that the two first rounders the Cowboys burnt for Walsh and Aikman happened months apart, not one year apart. Anyways it would be unusual for it to happen in consecutive years. But with QBing more valued than ever before, I think it will become more, not less common. Look at the situation in Cleveland with Brandon Weeden. Marginally successful rookie season followed by a regime change. In Jacksonville, Gabbert has been a big disappointment. His selection also has been followed by an ownership change and two coaching changes. In Minnesota, Christian Ponder has been disappointing as has Jake Locker in Tennessee. These guys are already 2 years removed from being drafted but it should surprise no one if their teams invested a high draft pick in another quarterback. It created shockwaves in Cincinnati this week when it became known that the Bengals worked out EJ Manuel. What does that mean about how the Bengals really feel about Andy Dalton? Or does it say a lot about EJ Manuel? Anyways, while it has been rare in the past, I think you'll see it more common (not common but more common) in the future that a team drafts a quarterback in the first round and upon a year's reflection, dips into the well again 12 months later. Edited April 1, 2013 by San Jose Bills Fan
Leelee Phoenix Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 The financial commitment to a QB 8th overall would be hard to give up on after one year, though. Especially with the Bills. That will be like $15-20M guaranteed. 41st pick, absolutely disposable.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 The financial commitment to a QB 8th overall would be hard to give up on after one year, though. Especially with the Bills. That will be like $15-20M guaranteed. 41st pick, absolutely disposable. Not even close. Last year, Tannehill was selected #8 overall and got four year 12.6m contract and I doubt all of it guaranteed. http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/29/2918172/miami-dolphins-ryan-tannehill.html The Bills offered Fitz that deal for all intents and purposes.
section122 Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 Do you have an example from the last 25 years, or an example that involves the regular draft rather than the supplemental draft? Pointing out this unusual situation many times doesn't turn it into a common situation. I also don't think an isolated example from 1989 bears much relevance to the NFL of today. I continue to maintain that whether teams should or not, it will be some time before a team drafts QBs in the top 10 (or even first round) in consecutive drafts. I also think that if/when it does happen, it'll be one of two situations: Either ownership/GM/coaching staff (or at the very least GM & coaching staff) changed between QB #1 & QB #2, or a successful team with a strong reputation in the media drafts QBs in consecutive years in an "outside the box" attempt to replace a retiring QB. We could see the Patriots try such a move in the 2 years after Brady retires, for example. Actually, with the Patriots' penchant for stockpiling picks, I could even see them going into the Brady-less draft with 2 first rounders, and spending them both on QBs. Would still surprise me, but wouldn't shock me. If the Bills draft a QB at #8 this year, I would be shocked if they drafted a QB in the first round in 2014. My only other contribution to this thread is to say that it's depressing that the 2013 draft hasn't happened yet and I'm already looking forward to the 2014 draft. I think this is the least confidence I've ever had in the Bills' ability to field a winning team. I actually do have an example. The Redskins used there pick last year, this year, AND next year on QBs. It just happened to be the same guy.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 The financial commitment to a QB 8th overall would be hard to give up on after one year, though. Especially with the Bills. That will be like $15-20M guaranteed. 41st pick, absolutely disposable. Not even close. Last year, Tannehill was selected #8 overall and got four year 12.6m contract and I doubt all of it guaranteed. http://www.miamihera...-tannehill.html The Bills offered Fitz that deal for all intents and purposes. Yep. Tannehill's guaranteed money was $7.653 million. http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7417/ryan-tannehill (under View Contract Details) Very small investment of money.
St.Francisisbetterthanyou Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 long time reader of these blogs first time i ever posted..... Everybody keeps on saying 2014 is the better draft class....how do you know this? If Barkley and Wilson came out last year they could have both been 1st round talent from their previous season of work....stuff happens they had a bad next season....same can be said for any of the three kids coming out next year there are supposedly all better than these guys. Personally I would rather take a guy like Barkley or Wilson now that they have had success and defeat....Both of those guys know what this league is all about....Not For Long......they will have the better attitude than anybody riding a high from a good couple of seasons. Because when push comes to shove and the speed of the Pro game is just too much for you, your mind wont adapt to the agony of defeat. Barkley and Wilson have that mental toughness now without a team paying them a single dollar. I am also sick of hearing about what happened in the past. Do you really think an NFL GM cares what happened 20 years ago in the draft, i dont even think he cares about what happened last year. It is a dog eat dog world and if you truly think someone is going to suck for luck situation how would you like it if your boss decides to fire everyone around you and bring in all new people....do you think he would have his job long or the company would still even be around. You have to put food on the table somehow. Remember this is not a game like everyone thinks it is.....this is a business and peoples lives are at stake. Once you start thinking like that and not a fan most of you will actually understand.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 long time reader of these blogs first time i ever posted..... Everybody keeps on saying 2014 is the better draft class....how do you know this? If Barkley and Wilson came out last year they could have both been 1st round talent from their previous season of work....stuff happens they had a bad next season....same can be said for any of the three kids coming out next year there are supposedly all better than these guys. Personally I would rather take a guy like Barkley or Wilson now that they have had success and defeat....Both of those guys know what this league is all about....Not For Long......they will have the better attitude than anybody riding a high from a good couple of seasons. Because when push comes to shove and the speed of the Pro game is just too much for you, your mind wont adapt to the agony of defeat. Barkley and Wilson have that mental toughness now without a team paying them a single dollar. I am also sick of hearing about what happened in the past. Do you really think an NFL GM cares what happened 20 years ago in the draft, i dont even think he cares about what happened last year. It is a dog eat dog world and if you truly think someone is going to suck for luck situation how would you like it if your boss decides to fire everyone around you and bring in all new people....do you think he would have his job long or the company would still even be around. You have to put food on the table somehow. Remember this is not a game like everyone thinks it is.....this is a business and peoples lives are at stake. Once you start thinking like that and not a fan most of you will actually understand. You lost me at your handle. Welcome to the board, (I guess).
St.Francisisbetterthanyou Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 You lost me at your handle. Welcome to the board, (I guess). St Francis has two NFL GM's and a scout who got his former GM daddy hired with the Redskins. Didnt think my normal handle of choice "Just the Tip" was going to get me anywhere!
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 I bet if Barley or Smith are there at 8 we take one, if not BPA. 2nd or third round we will get a QB if not in the 1st.
Cash Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 Cash, I didn't say it was common or relevant. Just giving an example. And the Dallas example was even more extreme in that the two first rounders the Cowboys burnt for Walsh and Aikman happened months apart, not one year apart. Anyways it would be unusual for it to happen in consecutive years. But with QBing more valued than ever before, I think it will become more, not less common. No problem, just seemed like you were harping on it by quoting yourself. I see that as a really unique situation in a different era that is essentially unrepeatable. (Jerry Jones, Herschel Walker trade, draft picks valued differently, etc.) And I agree with your "more common" statement, if only because it *can't* get less common, having never happened before with 2 consecutive regular drafts. I don't know the particulars of the Steve Walsh situation, but the supplemental draft has always been a different animal than the regular draft. If Andrew Luck had gone into the supplemental draft last year, I think nearly every team in the league would have bid a first-round pick on him, even if it was only for the purpose of trading him. Since you get the player immediately, but don't give up the draft pick until the following year, and since the two draft orders don't correlate, teams behave differently in the supplemental draft than in the regular one. Look at the situation in Cleveland with Brandon Weeden. Marginally successful rookie season followed by a regime change. In Jacksonville, Gabbert has been a big disappointment. His selection also has been followed by an ownership change and two coaching changes. Cleveland's an interesting test case. New owner, new everything, and on top of that, last year's first-round QB is 30 years old. I wouldn't be shocked to see them draft Barkley in the first. I wouldn't even be surprised to see them acquire a QB with a 2nd or 3rd round pick, whether that's via draft or trade. As for Jax, they strongly proved my point last year by making no attempt to draft a QB (in a historically good class) despite the amazingly bad rookie year from Blaine Gabbert AND a new head coach. I have no idea what direction they'll go in this year -- now with a new GM and new new head coach, and a better-but-still-bad 2nd year from Gabbert, they could try to justify giving Gabbert another shot, or could draft Geno Smith at #3. Or trade for Tebow, even though the GM says he doesn't want Tebow. In Minnesota, Christian Ponder has been disappointing as has Jake Locker in Tennessee. These guys are already 2 years removed from being drafted but it should surprise no one if their teams invested a high draft pick in another quarterback. Ponder & Locker are good examples of why it's not wise to draft a QB in the first round just because 2nd-rounders usually don't succeed. If teams start drafting 2nd-round prospects in the first, the already-low success rate of first-rounders will drop even lower. It created shockwaves in Cincinnati this week when it became known that the Bengals worked out EJ Manuel. What does that mean about how the Bengals really feel about Andy Dalton? Or does it say a lot about EJ Manuel? I hadn't heard that about Cincy, but it would certainly turn heads if they drafted a QB in the first 3 rounds. It reminded me immediately of the Bills drafting Trent Edwards in the 3rd round in 2007. That was 3 years after JP Losman was drafted in the first round, but only 1.5 years of Losman starting. Not to mention that Edwards was drafted (by a new coaching staff) immediately after Losman's first full year as a starter (and only good year in the NFL). Heads were certainly turned by that pick, and there were a number of (correct) whispers that Jauron and his Havoc Staff didn't feel that Losman was the answer. That was a good deal of media scrutiny for just a 3rd-round pick. Likewise, there would be a lot of raised eyebrows if Cincy took Manuel (or any QB) in the 2nd or 3rd round this year, but neither situation would compare to something like Miami drafting a QB #1 this year. For a team to be willing to take the media hit of "giving up" on last year's first-round QB just 1 year later, they'd need to have a very strong reason. NFL organizations are typically very risk-averse. Most teams would be too worried about the media hit to make such a bold move. Again, I'm not saying it'll never happen, just that I think it'll be extremely rare. I'll actually retract my earlier statement that it'll be a while, because I didn't realize how prime the Cleveland situation is for them to draft another QB this year. Yep. Tannehill's guaranteed money was $7.653 million. http://www.rotoworld.../ryan-tannehill (under View Contract Details) Very small investment of money. According to this article (and others, this was just the first one a quick google search turned up), the contracts for the first 16 picks (including Tannehill) are fully guaranteed. This doesn't have to be the case -- I remember there being a sticking point last year for draftees in the late teens who were trying to get their deals fully guaranteed, so it's negotiable. This is a cap wrinkle I actually wanted to bring up, because it does impact the discussion of drafting QBs #1 in consecutive years. Most pundits/fans agree pretty much universally that the new rookie salary structure decreases the risk of drafting a QB high, since you're not stuck with a Sam Bradford-level contract for said QB. But when you consider that in the top half of the first round, your QB is getting a 4-year *guaranteed* deal, it alters the thinking a little bit. That salary structure is set up for a bad team to pick their "franchise" QB and commit to him for 3-4 years whether he's good or not. Drafting 2 QBs back-to-back is still somewhat feasible, but going 3 in a row is basically impossible unless a team can trade at least one of them. Teams aren't going to want to carry fully guaranteed contracts on the bench if they can avoid it. It's doable if a QB is riding the pine because he's being groomed to be the starter, and probably also if the team considers him a quality backup, but that's about it. I still say that the default position for rebuilding teams will be what it's been -- draft a QB high, make him the face of the franchise, commit to him for several years until he's proven that he can't do it, then repeat. (Sprinkle in a few games or whole seasons of starting the Holcombs/Fitzes/Kolbs of the world in there as well.) I bet if Barley or Smith are there at 8 we take one, if not BPA. 2nd or third round we will get a QB if not in the 1st. Barley is a strong grain, but too inconsistent for the first round. I'd be happy with it in the 2nd, but I only have first-round grades on Wheat and Rice.
Mango Posted April 1, 2013 Posted April 1, 2013 my larger concern is that this makes it ok to roll the dice on a terrible nassib
Recommended Posts