Greg Cosell: "Glennon is best QB in rookie class and it is not eve

[ExiledInIllinois]

you guys wanna talk about these mobile quarterback, Marino had less than a hundred yards rushing for his career. let's see how many of those running quarterbacks won the Superbowl - Doug Williams, and maybe I'll give you a half a point for Steve Young.

 

What about John Elway?

[1billsfan]

The reason the Chargers didn't get any compensation for Brees was because he and Rivers were drafted several years apart. By the time the Chargers were ready to fully commit to Rivers, Brees' contract was just about up. Also, Brees had suffered an injury; and it wasn't clear whether he'd fully recover. That lowered his perceived value to teams like Miami. A team drafting first round QBs in back-to-back years would be unlikely to encounter those problems.

 

The Bengals took Carson Palmer first overall. Then they put him on the third string team; with Jon Kitna as the starter. Early in the year, Palmer looked very mistake-prone and unpolished with that third string team. Later in the year, he played very well in practice. Palmer was anointed starter at the beginning of his second year. He looked polished; like a guy who'd learned a lot as a rookie in practice. Aaron Rodgers is another guy who benefitted from time on the bench early in his career.

 

Tom Donahoe represents faux unconventional thinking. The only reason for ever departing from convention is because you've thought about an area more deeply than conventional thinkers have; and have perceived insights they have missed. For someone who isn't a deep thinker, departing from conventional wisdom is usually a mistake. A person like that is unlikely to avoid the errors embodied in conventional thinking; and is likely to make additional errors a conventional thinker would have avoided.

 

The West Coast offense was not considered conventional when Bill Walsh first unleashed it. Ideas like passing on first down, blitzing, or going into a nickel defense on third down were once considered gimmicky things that only AFL teams would do--not the conventional NFL teams.

 

The most likely way to win a Super Bowl is to do something better than other teams do it. This often requires better thinking than that embodied by convention. During the pre- and post-Kelly eras combined, the Bills have achieved one NFL playoff win. The Bills have had exactly one franchise QB in team history. Using back-to-back first round picks on QBs is a logical response to the vital importance of the QB position, the difficulty of finding a franchise QB, and the trade opportunities available to a team with a very good QB on the auction block.

 

First off, the Bills final drafting position will most probably be in the 12-20 range. Jacksonville, Houston, Minnesota and Cleveland will ALL be picking QBs ahead of the Bills.

 

After Bridgewater and Manziel, I don't see any QB I'd take over EJ Manuel. A guy who's proving to be up to the task of becoming a franchise QB both emotionally and physically. That's a huge deal. He just had a great game in the strong november winds of RWS against a hated rival AFC East team. What, that's not enough? You're still wanting you some Tajh Boyd in the first? Think he could do what EJ did to the Jets on that kind of a windy day at RWS?

 

BTW, San Diego traded away a HOFer. So i'm not sure that "trade away the first QB drafted in the first" scenario is such a great argument for you to keep making!

 

The Bills being in any position to draft either Bridgwater or Manziel is simply put, a fairy tale. Even if either were there, I'd still probably trade the pick and keep EJ depending on if he's looked solid down the stretch here.

Edited November 30, 2013 by 1billsfan

[C.Biscuit97]

 

 

First off, the Bills final drafting position will most probably be in the 12-20 range. Jacksonville, Houston, Minnesota and Cleveland will ALL be picking QBs ahead of the Bills.

 

After Bridgewater and Manziel, I don't see any QB I'd take over EJ Manuel. A guy who's proving to be up to the task of becoming a franchise QB both emotionally and physically. That's a huge deal. He just had a great game in the strong november winds of RWS against a hated rival AFC East team. What, that's not enough? You're still wanting you some Tajh Boyd in the first? Think he could do what EJ did to the Jets on that kind of a windy day at RWS?

 

BTW, San Diego traded away a HOFer. So i'm not sure that "trade away the first QB drafted in the first" scenario is such a great argument for you to keep making!

 

The Bills being in any position to draft either Bridgwater or Manziel is simply put, a fairy tale. Even if either were there, I'd still probably trade the pick and keep EJ depending on if he's looked solid down the stretch here.

 

I don't even know if I'd put Bridgewater or Johnny Football over EJ. I have serious questions about Johnny Spoiled Brat's arm strength & who does Bridgewater even play?

 

All Qbs have flaws. Again, EJ has better #s than Luck has as a rookie. His td to int ratio is better than Ryan & Flacco as rookie. U don't know if he'll be the guy but this silly assumptions after 7 games is foolish. This needs to be talk about next year.

 

Spend a 1st on TE or Player that will help next year. You will have a much better idea of what EJ is next year. And there will be more Qbs that will get hyped next year as well. There always are.

[K-9]

Back when the Chargers had both Rivers and Brees on the roster, they had to choose one guy or the other. They chose Rivers, despite the fact he'd been given little playing time up to that point. This year, Rivers is having the best season of any QB in the NFL.

 

If you have two QBs of Rivers/Brees caliber on your roster, then in the long term you'll only be able to keep one of them. Whichever guy you make the backup will not sign any kind of contract extension, so he's gone when his first contract is over. That means that one of your QBs must be traded before that happens.

 

Normally you'd trade away whichever QB was getting the lion's share of playing time; because that will be the QB with the most trade value. Much more trade value than a backup who's played very little!

 

A strategy like this only makes sense if you like the second QB drafted at least as much as the first one you took. The second QB will be the guy who replaces the first QB once he's traded away. So you have to have confidence in him.

 

If both QBs work out, then you'll be able to trade away one of them for significantly more than the draft pick initially used to take him. If only one QB works out, at least you still have a QB. If neither work out, at least you gave yourself two chances at bat.

 

Is the Brees/Rivers example the best you can do? Because it does nothing to bolster your point of developing two franchise QBs simultaneously and then trading one for that "ton of trade value" you mentioned. San Diego got absolutely nothing in return for Brees. So much for that "ton of trade value."

 

Still waiting for your insight into developing two young QBs into franchise players simultaneously. Not gonna hold my breath, though.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

The reason the Chargers didn't get any compensation for Brees was because he and Rivers were drafted several years apart. By the time the Chargers were ready to fully commit to Rivers, Brees' contract was just about up. Also, Brees had suffered an injury; and it wasn't clear whether he'd fully recover. That lowered his perceived value to teams like Miami. A team drafting first round QBs in back-to-back years would be unlikely to encounter those problems.

 

The Bengals took Carson Palmer first overall. Then they put him on the third string team; with Jon Kitna as the starter. Early in the year, Palmer looked very mistake-prone and unpolished with that third string team. Later in the year, he played very well in practice. Palmer was anointed starter at the beginning of his second year. He looked polished; like a guy who'd learned a lot as a rookie in practice. Aaron Rodgers is another guy who benefitted from time on the bench early in his career.

 

Tom Donahoe represents faux unconventional thinking. The only reason for ever departing from convention is because you've thought about an area more deeply than conventional thinkers have; and have perceived insights they have missed. For someone who isn't a deep thinker, departing from conventional wisdom is usually a mistake. A person like that is unlikely to avoid the errors embodied in conventional thinking; and is likely to make additional errors a conventional thinker would have avoided.

 

The West Coast offense was not considered conventional when Bill Walsh first unleashed it. Ideas like passing on first down, blitzing, or going into a nickel defense on third down were once considered gimmicky things that only AFL teams would do--not the conventional NFL teams.

 

The most likely way to win a Super Bowl is to do something better than other teams do it. This often requires better thinking than that embodied by convention. During the pre- and post-Kelly eras combined, the Bills have achieved one NFL playoff win. The Bills have had exactly one franchise QB in team history. Using back-to-back first round picks on QBs is a logical response to the vital importance of the QB position, the difficulty of finding a franchise QB, and the trade opportunities available to a team with a very good QB on the auction block.

 

No, it isn't the logical response if the Bills feel that Manuel will develop into a franchise player. Just because you've already pronounced Manuel a bust, doesn't mean the Bill have. The ONLY way the Bills take another 1st round QB is if there is a consensus generational QB to be had when they pick. I doubt one falls to them though.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[chris heff]

So this thread has now become about the wisdom of drafting QBs in the first round in consecutive years.

 

As far as Brees and Rivers are concerned. The Chargers had all but given up on Brees. He had been replaced as the starter by Flutie. After acquiring Rivers, Brees had two really good years. Last of which he had been franchised. Brees was injured in the last game of 2005. San Diego couldn't afford to pay both Rivers and Brees. The rest is history. San Diego received no compensation. If they knew then what they know now, would they have acquired Rivers? I doubt it.

 

To determine if a QB is indeed a franchise QB doesn't that require a considerable amount of playing time? How exactly does a team do that? Two QB systems do not work in the NFL. So you would have to trade the one with the greatest body of work. What if your wrong? Of course there may be a team willing to trade high picks or pick for a QB with a very limited number of games, but that organization would have to be dumb, desperate or both. Should Jacksonville have traded Brunell rather than Johnson?

Edited November 30, 2013 by chris heff

[1billsfan]

I don't even know if I'd put Bridgewater or Johnny Football over EJ. I have serious questions about Johnny Spoiled Brat's arm strength & who does Bridgewater even play?

 

All Qbs have flaws. Again, EJ has better #s than Luck has as a rookie. His td to int ratio is better than Ryan & Flacco as rookie. U don't know if he'll be the guy but this silly assumptions after 7 games is foolish. This needs to be talk about next year.

 

Spend a 1st on TE or Player that will help next year. You will have a much better idea of what EJ is next year. And there will be more Qbs that will get hyped next year as well. There always are.

 

I agree. It's just so annoying that that the subject is even discussed since the Bills will be picking 10 spots beyond where the "two big named QBs" will be picked. As I said, it's a fairytale scenario so why bother.

 

That being said, I do think that Manziel will be a special player in the NFL and the only thing that's in question is if he can handle the leadership/maturity aspect. I'm very happy to have Manuel as our franchise QB to be groom into hopefully a great career. Bridgewater seems like a very good prospect worthy of a very high 1st round draft pick. Although he's no lockdown surefire safe pick. That's the thing about the jump from college to the NFL you don't know for sure unless you're picking a Luck or Manning.

Edited November 30, 2013 by 1billsfan

[John from Riverside]

This is exactly why I want the bills do do well and get out of those top picks........to end all this draft a QB talk....

 

 

We HAVE our QB......his name i EJ manuel.....an we might even have our backup nailed down with Thadeous Lewis.....

 

This team need a TE, a LG, a LB

 

We have other needs....lets bring along th QB we used a 1st round pick on

[Wayne Cubed]

This is exactly why I want the bills do do well and get out of those top picks........to end all this draft a QB talk....

 

 

We HAVE our QB......his name i EJ manuel.....an we might even have our backup nailed down with Thadeous Lewis.....

 

This team need a TE, a LG, a LB

 

We have other needs....lets bring along th QB we used a 1st round pick on

 

"Yes but if you have a franchise QB, that's all you need to win. Do whatever it takes to get one."

 

-Mike Shanahan

[C.Biscuit97]

 

 

I agree. It's just so annoying that that the subject is even discussed since the Bills will be picking 10 spots beyond where the "two big named QBs" will be picked. As I said, it's a fairytale scenario so why bother.

 

That being said, I do think that Manziel will be a special player in the NFL and the only thing that's in question is if he can handle the leadership/maturity aspect. I'm very happy to have Manuel as our franchise QB to be groom into hopefully a great career. Bridgewater seems like a very good prospect worthy of a very high 1st round draft pick. Although he's no lockdown surefire safe pick. That's the thing about the jump from college to the NFL you don't know for sure unless you're picking a Luck or Manning.

 

Agree 100%. And even though I think he's a big douche, I love watching Johnny Football play. If I'm the Jags, he's no doubt my pick because that team desperately needs excitement. I just worry about his arm strength & the fact he plays in a great QB friendly offense (Case Keenum set records in that offense & just lost to the Jags). We'll see I guess but every Qb has flaws. And EJ hasn't looked close to as bad as someone like Gabbert, who probably shouldn't be a first rounder in the first place.

[Dibs]

The reason the Chargers didn't get any compensation for Brees was because he and Rivers were drafted several years apart. By the time the Chargers were ready to fully commit to Rivers, Brees' contract was just about up.....

 

I think the assumption you have made here that the Chargers were ready to fully commit to Rivers is pivotal in your conclusions with the Rivers/Brees situation. There is no evidence at all to think that had Brees not got injured that the Chargers would not have stayed with him. He had effectively shown himself to be a legitimately good QB verging on elite and his performance easily kept Rivers on the bench for 2 full seasons.

 

To me it seems far more likely that had Brees not been injured, that the Chargers would have re-signed him and then recouped some of their initial draft investment by trading an unproven Rivers.

 

 

The only real logic to draft a QB in the 1st round in the year after already drafting one in the first round is(as others have stated).....injury, the situation where one has the chance to land an elite prospect(pick #1 or #2), or where your 1st round QB has shown enough in his first year to have your talent evaluators drastically reduce their grading of his potential.

 

IMO, selecting consecutive 1st round QBs is a totally fine concept. The problem however being that the same concept could be used in the third year....and fourth, which is not a tenable situation. Furthermore, there is no logic to suggest that the guy you have given up on and replaced as a starter......or the guy who wasn't good enough to get onto the field....would net you a reasonable trade return for your investment.

Edited November 30, 2013 by Dibs

[1billsfan]

Agree 100%. And even though I think he's a big douche, I love watching Johnny Football play. If I'm the Jags, he's no doubt my pick because that team desperately needs excitement. I just worry about his arm strength & the fact he plays in a great QB friendly offense (Case Keenum set records in that offense & just lost to the Jags). We'll see I guess but every Qb has flaws. And EJ hasn't looked close to as bad as someone like Gabbert, who probably shouldn't be a first rounder in the first place.

 

I'll never understand the overly critical knocks on Manuel. I remember watching Florida State one night and just loving the way Manuel was playing. I thought, qeez how great would it be if the Bills got EJ Manuel. A guy with his kind of size and talents would be there when the Bills pick. This was before I found out about his solid background, personality and leadership skills. I think there was a backlash against Manuel due to Luck, RGIII and Wilson's seasons. They were angry because they didn't see that kind of "instant NFL QB talent" in Manuel or anyone else in last year's draft.

 

After all of the nitpicking of Manuel through the pre-draft process, I was starting to question what I originally saw in Manuel. I was starting to want the Bills to select Matt Scott in the second round if they didn't land Manuel or Smith!...LOL Yikes! In the end, I wanted EJ Manuel first and foremost (I literally fell to my knees in gratitude that it was Manuel and not Nassib) and I'm very happy with how he looks so far. It seems like a slow burn with him. The fact that he plays for the Bills is good since he can work out his kinks in relative obscurity. Imagine if the Jets drafted him in the first? It would be wall to wall EJ Manuel with daily reports and "takes" on whether he has "it" or not. I'm glad that I can still have the outside hope that this team can go on an unbeaten run and beat the Pats on the road to get into the playoffs and still do some damage once in. I think EJ has it in him to guide this team on a "legendary" playoff run. First step is beating Atlanta of course.

Edited November 30, 2013 by 1billsfan

[JohnC]

 

 

Tom Donahoe represents faux unconventional thinking. The only reason for ever departing from convention is because you've thought about an area more deeply than conventional thinkers have; and have perceived insights they have missed. For someone who isn't a deep thinker, departing from conventional wisdom is usually a mistake. A person like that is unlikely to avoid the errors embodied in conventional thinking; and is likely to make additional errors a conventional thinker would have avoided.

 

The West Coast offense was not considered conventional when Bill Walsh first unleashed it. Ideas like passing on first down, blitzing, or going into a nickel defense on third down were once considered gimmicky things that only AFL teams would do--not the conventional NFL teams.

 

The most likely way to win a Super Bowl is to do something better than other teams do it. This often requires better thinking than that embodied by convention. During the pre- and post-Kelly eras combined, the Bills have achieved one NFL playoff win. The Bills have had exactly one franchise QB in team history. Using back-to-back first round picks on QBs is a logical response to the vital importance of the QB position, the difficulty of finding a franchise QB, and the trade opportunities available to a team with a very good QB on the auction block.

 

Calm down! You are jumping ahead of yourself. We are dealing with a Ralph Wilson owned franchise. Let's look at the context. The Bills have not made the playoffs in 14 yrs, and still counting. The Bills have had a losing record in 11 out of the last 12 seasons. This is a franchise that for a generation has not mastered the bare basics of running a franchise. Now you are dreaming of taking the grand leap of being pioneers in new ways of running a franchise. Before this franchise can get to this advanced stage of evolution it has to master the basics of life in real time i.e. now.

 

What this franchise needs more than anything else is stability and maturity. Going off on some experimental course instead of concentrating on mastering the basics of managing a franchise and coaching a team is a recipe for disaster, and starting over again, and again. Before you can master calculus you need to be able to master arithmetic. Before you become a neuro-surgeon you have to be able to handle a basic biology class.

 

Go ahead and reach for the moon. I don't want to deter you from seeking your dreams. But I'm not going to apologize for being more grounded and seek basic competency before I follow (your) out of this world dreams.

Edited November 30, 2013 by JohnC

[chris heff]

 

 

I think the assumption you have made here that the Chargers were ready to fully commit to Rivers is pivotal in your conclusions with the Rivers/Brees situation. There is no evidence at all to think that had Brees not got injured that the Chargers would not have stayed with him. He had effectively shown himself to be a legitimately good QB verging on elite and his performance easily kept Rivers on the bench for 2 full seasons.

 

To me it seems far more likely that had Brees not been injured, that the Chargers would have re-signed him and then recouped some of their initial draft investment by trading an unproven Rivers.

 

 

The only real logic to draft a QB in the 1st round in the year after already drafting one in the first round is(as others have stated).....injury, the situation where one has the chance to land an elite prospect(pick #1 or #2), or where your 1st round QB has shown enough in his first year to have your talent evaluators drastically reduce their grading of his potential.

 

IMO, selecting consecutive 1st round QBs is a totally fine concept. The problem however being that the same concept could be used in the third year....and fourth, which is not a tenable situation. Furthermore, there is no logic to suggest that the guy you have given up on and replaced as a starter......or the guy who wasn't good enough to get onto the field....would net you a reasonable trade return for your investment.

 

The example of Brees//Rivers or Brunell/ Johnson are both invalid. The concept of drafting QBs first round in consecutive years only works under the current CBA. If it weren't for the rookie salary structure it would be impossible. That being said, barring injury I still think it is a bad idea.

Edited November 30, 2013 by chris heff

[GunnerBill]

I also think it's a flawed idea for precisely the reasons already discussed. If we had gone 1-15, or 2-14 and there was a sure fire Andrew Luck type prospect sitting at #1 overall then sure I'd consider it and if EJ really stinks right the way down the stretch now then I might think about it (and we'd possibly have a shot at one of the top guys at 4-12). I'm not sold on ANY of the Quarterbacks likely to come out this year. I think Mariota is the one who has impressed me most...and I'm not sure if he is going to declare or not. I don't think Johnny Football will translate to the NFL, I haven't seen a lot of Bridgewater admittedly but I don't consider him a sure thing.

 

If we drafted another Quarterback early this year the chances are that EJ's grasp of the system and the play book and his NFL experience means he wins the job out of camp next season. The only way the other kid then gets in is if EJ stinks (in which case you ain't gonna get a lot if anything in trade value for him) or if he gets injured. I don't think using a 1st or 2nd round pick on a guy who is only going to play if in case of injuries is a good idea myself. Then what if the new draft pick doesn't work out? You draft another one? And another? And another? in the meantime whilst you are wasting 1st rounder after 1st rounder on Quarterbacks the rest of your team isn't getting high quality guys it needs.

 

As for the Shanahan quote... do tell me - how is giving up all those draft picks for a franchise Quarterback (whilst the big holes right throughout the defense and on the offensive line remain unfilled) working out for him? Yes - Quarterback is the most important position in the NFL, but you need a team to win in the NFL - the idea that if you have a franchise quarterback you can be bang average everywhere else is simply a fallacy. Want evidence? Look no further than tomorrow's opponents. Matt Ryan is still a fine Quarterback, but his team has holes all over the place this year due to injuries hence they've only won two games all season (let's hope I can still say that in about 25 hours time!)

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Drafting QBs in the first round in consecutive seasons, as has already been agreed, is an outside the box, unconventional idea to say the least.

 

It becomes less "out there" when you consider that:

 

1) QB has increased in value almost exponentially in the last decade and

 

2) With the new collective bargaining agreement which includes a rookie pay scale, what used to be impossible is now plausible.

 

I was as big a supporter of EJ Manuel BEFORE the draft and CONTINUE to support and believe in him.

 

The reason I don't think any team should ever rule out drafting a QB highly in consecutive years is multi-fold. QBs are valuable assets.

 

If this QB draft is as outstanding as scouts are saying, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the Bills will have a premier QB prospect (AJ McCarron for instance) available when they pick even at picks 10-12.

 

As I mentioned upthread, the Cowboys spent a first rounder on Troy Aikman less than one year after taking Steve Walsh using a first round pick in the supplemental draft.

 

When they determined that Aikman was the better prospect four games into the 1990 season, "Dallas traded Walsh to the New Orleans Saints for a first, third and second round draft choices. With the third pick the Cowboys would eventually select Erik Williams."

 

http://en.wikipedia....erican_football)

 

Williams was a dominating force who went to 4 Pro Bowls, was a 3-time All Pro and one of the most feared O-linemen of his era.

 

In any given draft, there are numerous teams looking for their franchise QB. Being able to draft one is a great form of being able to leverage value.

 

I'm a bit surprised by the adherence to conventional thinking at a time when there's strong rationale for reassessing this issue.

[Fixxxer]

Does anyone believe that we're directing resources and time to scout next years QB class? Personally, I doubt it, at least not in the way they did last year.

 

I believe the team believes they have the franchise QB for the next 10 years, it doesn't matter if it is cheaper to draft 1st round QBs, they made a thorough evaluation last year, they interviewed each and every one of the prospects and they were sure EJ Manuel was the right man for the job.

If in next year draft there is one of the QB available when we draft we will probably transform that selection in more picks or just pass on the guy.

I know that they need to do their homework on every draftable (is that a word?) prospect, but I bet they're not watching the QB position as closely as we might speculate.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I bet they're not watching the QB position as closely as we might speculate.

 

No one is speculating that the Bills are closely watching QB prospects.

 

There seems to be a consensus that they won't seriously consider drafting a QB.

 

The discussion is whether they should consider drafting a QB.

 

It's almost a foregone conclusion that they won't.

[chris heff]

Drafting QBs in the first round in consecutive seasons, as has already been agreed, is an outside the box, unconventional idea to say the least.

 

It becomes less "out there" when you consider that:

 

1) QB has increased in value almost exponentially in the last decade and

 

2) With the new collective bargaining agreement which includes a rookie pay scale, what used to be impossible is now plausible.

 

I was as big a supporter of EJ Manuel BEFORE the draft and CONTINUE to support and believe in him.

 

The reason I don't think any team should ever rule out drafting a QB highly in consecutive years is multi-fold. QBs are valuable assets.

 

If this QB draft is as outstanding as scouts are saying, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the Bills will have a premier QB prospect (AJ McCarron for instance) available when they pick even at picks 10-12.

 

As I mentioned upthread, the Cowboys spent a first rounder on Troy Aikman less than one year after taking Steve Walsh using a first round pick in the supplemental draft.

 

When they determined that Aikman was the better prospect four games into the 1990 season, "Dallas traded Walsh to the New Orleans Saints for a first, third and second round draft choices. With the third pick the Cowboys would eventually select Erik Williams."

 

http://en.wikipedia....erican_football)

 

Williams was a dominating force who went to 4 Pro Bowls, was a 3-time All Pro and one of the most feared O-linemen of his era.

 

In any given draft, there are numerous teams looking for their franchise QB. Being able to draft one is a great form of being able to leverage value.

 

I'm a bit surprised by the adherence to conventional thinking at a time when there's strong rationale for reassessing this issue.

I think there were some extenuating circumstances to the Dallas example. Not to nit pick but Aikman and Walsh were taken in the same year. Jimmy Johnson took Walsh in the supplemental, Walsh had played for him at the U. He was taken after Aikman.

 

1989 was also the year of the Herschel Walker trade, aside from the five players they got six draft picks. You can fill a lot of holes with all those extra picks. So to use two picks on QBs wasn't that big of a deal.

 

So do you think the Bills are solid enough at all other positions that they can afford to use another first round pick on a QB?

[K-9]

No one is speculating that the Bills are closely watching QB prospects.

 

There seems to be a consensus that they won't seriously consider drafting a QB.

 

The discussion is whether they should consider drafting a QB.

 

It's almost a foregone conclusion that they won't.

 

We should draft a QB in the first round if he's a generational talent like Luck, etc. Nobody like that will be available when we draft, if a QB like that exists in the draft as it is.

 

AJ McCarron doesn't fit the description.

 

The Aikman/Walsh scenario is the only one that's relevant to the discussion. N.O. got taken to the cleaners as Walsh never established himself as a franchise player when he was in Dallas and they rolled the dice and lost. Desperate teams do desperate things when it comes to QBs, especially. RJ is a prime example.

 

The crux of the issue is that teams can't develop two franchise QBs simultaneously. And the problem of development isn't confined to what those QBs do on the field, either. There's a huge locker room component involved.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[San Jose Bills Fan]

So do you think the Bills are solid enough at all other positions that they can afford to use another first round pick on a QB?

 

It's the same discussion as the theoretical of whether you take a tight end or a guard in the first round.

 

You don't know until you're on the clock and you see what your options are.

 

My point is that you don't disqualify the possibility.

 

I don't believe dogmatism is a good approach to anything (I was just dogmatic, wasn't I?).