EJ knee surgery, Tim Graham questions, draft QB?

[thebandit27]

 

 

Spiller worth a #1? You are really going to leave that in print?

 

Dareus might be worth a first rounder on talent but his contract is nearing it's end and he isn't playing on a dirt cheap rookie deal......so there is no way in hell anyone trades a first round pick for him, let alone anything that approaches where he was picked.

 

I can flippantly say that Eli Manning will play until he is 40 because that is the way it's going to be. QB's are going to play much longer. It's already happening. The beatings that QB's used to take that caused them to break down in their mid-30's just aren't permitted any longer. With rare exception, the QB's that used to play late into their 30's were beasts. Elway, Kelly, even Marino......these guys were big tough guys who could take a beating. Guys like Peyton and Brady don't fit that mold at all, but they are at the age when the class of 83' was limping out of the league and yet they rarely get touched on gameday and nobody is talking retirement for either of them.

 

I love when people state opinions as absolute facts. Unfortunately it makes real actual discussion impossible.

[Doc]

In essence, they did use top picks in two consecutive seasons on a QB. The Cowboys forfeited their next #1 to select Walsh. That's the way the supplemental draft works.

 

The Cowboys were a very bad team and that pick they used on Walsh would have been the #1 overall.

 

By comparison, EJ Manuel was just a mid-first round pick.

Essence doesn't match the reality that they picked 2 QB's in the first round in the same year. And if you asked JJ, he'd have said it was a mistake to take Walsh because they lost the 1st overall pick the following year and likely retarded Aikman's growth. But that's the great thing about hindsight.

[3rdand12]

I don't know that that is the case, Badol, that guys are crushed by having to compete for their jobs. I do, sincerely, believe that guys don't always get the best opportunities to reach their potential. That very well could have happened for Aaron Rodgers as he sat on the bench and waited for his time in GB. Had he not gotten really intense instruction from Mike McCarthy, he may not have made the adjustments that made him great. There is only so much time to absorb from the coaching staff, and sometimes one great teacher makes all the difference in a guy's career.

 

No one reasonable thinks that drafting a 1st round QB will crush EJ's spirit and hence his will to succeed in the NFL. It would undoubtedly curb the number of opportunities he would have to do so, though, and that's why many of us think the team should be cautious about adding another heir apparent into the mix. If he's the most talented guy out there -- sure, draft a QB. If he's another project, why have two of them on the roster with the expectation of giving them equal time? There is zero harm in finding out what they've got in Manuel this year. If he isn't better than the other QBs on our roster, his career will lead into career backup territory, you re-load or see if the other guys are better, and that's that. If he is, then the team has done its due diligence, and done what's best for a growing team -- not a young one as you've often noted, but a team that is growing an identity.

At times Sir , you border on eloquent .

Thats what i meant !!^

Edited February 2, 2014 by 3rdand12

[4merper4mer]

Graham asked a question that Bills fans have about EJ. I've pointed this out before, I tailgate with dozens of people every home game who have had season tickets in their familes going as far back as the 1960's. They are passionate Bills fans. They sit close enough to often hear the conversations on the sidelines. They know many of the players families. Their ages range from teenagers to mid-50's and none of them waste any of their time on TSW. They don't feel the need to. They fly the Bills colors, but they know the organization doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt any longer. They live Bills football and they read articles in the Buffalo News. They want to know how EJ will react to adversity. That was essentially Graham's question. So while you are perturbed to hear Graham ask a question that gets asked here on TSW every week, that by no means makes it a bad or redundant question because Graham isn't asking it for you. He is doing his job. Deal with it.

 

 

 

If you can come up with even one single plausible/acceptable/good answer EJ could have given to that question, I will agree with you. I don't feel there is one. If Graham asked the same basic question to Whaley it would be a better avenue to answering the fans question.

 

The premise of the question was not about whether EJ deserved to be facing competition. It was a way to stick it to EJ. It was the question of an amateur. If he wants to get the question answered he should have asked Whaley. If he wants to stick it to EJ, he should have been more clever.

 

What he did is like asking the waiter whether he thinks the restaurant should change their recipe. It's stupid. Ask the chef.

[Kelly the Dog]

Essence doesn't match the reality that they picked 2 QB's in the first round in the same year. And if you asked JJ, he'd have said it was a mistake to take Walsh because they lost the 1st overall pick the following year and likely retarded Aikman's growth. But that's the great thing about hindsight.

I think you're arguing a technicality, like the letter of the law versus the spirit of the law. The fact is, they had two first round picks in two consecutive years, and knowingly took two QBs with them. I don't know how you can argue they didn't use two first round picks in consecutive years. It would be different if they were not sure that the supplementary pick would automatically make them lose their upcoming #1 but they did know that.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I think you're arguing a technicality, like the letter of the law versus the spirit of the law. The fact is, they had two first round picks in two consecutive years, and knowingly took two QBs with them. I don't know how you can argue they didn't use two first round picks in consecutive years. It would be different if they were not sure that the supplementary pick would automatically make them lose their upcoming #1 but they did know that.

Still, this happened once in the past 25 years, with a team that at that time was more terrible than the current Bills, and a team that executed one of the great draft-pick pillagings of all time in the Herschel Walker trade. Given all this, could we fairly call the situation a bit of an outlier?

 

Context, context, context. You're a smarter man than I am, so I know that you know this.

[Doc]

I think you're arguing a technicality, like the letter of the law versus the spirit of the law. The fact is, they had two first round picks in two consecutive years, and knowingly took two QBs with them. I don't know how you can argue they didn't use two first round picks in consecutive years. It would be different if they were not sure that the supplementary pick would automatically make them lose their upcoming #1 but they did know that.

The technicality is that the Cowboys used 2-1st rounders in consecutive years, because of how the supplemental draft is set up. But both QB's were acquired prior to the 1989 season and without either having played in even a pre-season game. And in hindsight, it was a mistake to take the 2nd 1st round QB and not give the 1st 1st round QB time to prove himself, even though the Cowboys were able to fleece the Saints into giving up a 1st, 3rd, and 2nd for Walsh.

[Kelly the Dog]

The technicality is that the Cowboys used 2-1st rounders in consecutive years, because of how the supplemental draft is set up. But both QB's were acquired prior to the 1989 season and without either having played in even a pre-season game. And in hindsight, it was a mistake to take the 2nd 1st round QB and not give the 1st 1st round QB time to prove himself, even though the Cowboys were able to fleece the Saints into giving up a 1st, 3rd, and 2nd for Walsh.

Oh, you mean prove himself with a 1-15 record, 9 Tds, 18 INTs and a 55.7 passer rating? Got it.

[RuntheDamnBall]

Oh, you mean prove himself with a 1-15 record, 9 Tds, 18 INTs and a 55.7 passer rating? Got it.

I hope you're trying to make EJ Manuel fans' point for them!

[Kelly the Dog]

 

Context, context, context. You're a smarter man than I am, so I know that you know this.

I would surely say an outlier, yes. But not only did it happen, I would bet there are 100 ex-GMs out there that would say in retrospect, "Damn! I wish I would have spent another #1 the following year on a QB, the bastard ____ that I chose sucked and cost me my job!"

[Doc]

Oh, you mean prove himself with a 1-15 record, 9 Tds, 18 INTs and a 55.7 passer rating? Got it.

No, by the 3 SB wins.

I hope you're trying to make EJ Manuel fans' point for them!

He is.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I would surely say an outlier, yes. But not only did it happen, I would bet there are 100 ex-GMs out there that would say in retrospect, "Damn! I wish I would have spent another #1 the following year on a QB, the bastard ____ that I chose sucked and cost me my job!"

So what is it, you think, then, that makes teams stick with guys longer than it seems they should? It seems like two years is the going rate for most first rounders, unless they just look completely lost out there.

[4merper4mer]

I would surely say an outlier, yes. But not only did it happen, I would bet there are 100 ex-GMs out there that would say in retrospect, "Damn! I wish I would have spent another #1 the following year on a QB, the bastard ____ that I chose sucked and cost me my job!"

 

I know you're discussing a different part of the topic, but your post demonstrates why Graham's question should have been asked of Whaley, not EJ.

 

If someone was doing a documentary about the old Cowboys and their drafting of Walsh, would they ask JJ whether he thought is was a good idea, or would they ask Aikman?

[Kelly the Dog]

I hope you're trying to make EJ Manuel fans' point for them!

I don't think we should draft a QB#1 at all, unless for some reason Johnny Football falls to #9 and then I would have to think about it (only because I think he has a chance, maybe 33% to be a star and even if he isn't he's probably going to be a great change of pace back-up).

 

I think EJ did fair as a rookie, under abysmal circumstances (getting hurt, half a training camp, both RBs hurt including Spiller most of the year, crappy TE play, erratic line play, crappy WR play overall with the best one hurt half the season, first year coach, first year coordinator, etc.)

 

I expect him to do significantly better, but if he gets hurt again or doesn't improve dramatically, we need a new #1 QB and usually the only way to get one is to draft one #1.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Drafting LB's with top ten picks is the equivalent of buying a new car and having it depreciate $10K as you are driving it off the lot.

 

I guess the GM's of the following teams aren't privy to your level of football player depreciation acumen: Misc Games Rk Year Rnd Pick Player Pos Tm From To AP1 PB St CarAV G GS Int Sk College/Univ 1 2011 1 2 Von Miller LB DEN 2011 2013 1 2 3 33 40 40 1 35.0 Texas A&M 2 2010 1 8 Rolando McClain LB OAK 2010 2012 0 0 3 16 41 38 1 6.5 Alabama 3 2009 1 4 Aaron Curry LB SEA 2009 2012 0 0 3 24 48 39 5.5 Wake Forest 4 2008 1 9 Keith Rivers LB CIN 2008 2013 0 0 3 22 62 48 2 3.0 USC 5 2008 1 10 Jerod Mayo LB NWE 2008 2013 1 2 6 44 81 79 3 9.0 Tennessee 6 2006 1 5 A.J. Hawk LB GNB 2006 2013 0 0 8 53 126 123 9 18.5 Ohio St. 7 2006 1 9 Ernie Sims LB DET 2006 2013 0 0 4 30 109 87 1 5.5 Florida St. 8 2003 1 10 Terrell Suggs LB BAL 2003 2013 1 6 9 89 165 149 7 94.5 Arizona St. 9 2000 1 2 LaVar Arrington LB WAS 2000 2006 0 3 5 46 84 72 3 23.5 Penn St. 10 2000 1 9 Brian Urlacher LB CHI 2000 2012 4 8

 

Some fairly impactful players on that list.

 

The fact is many draft picks at any position don't pan out to have the impact the organization that drafted them hopes for

One might even make a cogent argument for the word "most"

That also impacts the QB position. Just curious, according to your depreciation schedule how many draft picks in what round are former first-10 draft picks Ryan Tannehill, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert, Sam Bradford, or Mark Sanchez are worth today?

[3rdand12]

So it is a rare occasion then ? can we agree on that ?

And the second 1st round pick was not the 1st first round picks superior judged by the Cowboys. Hence trading him away to the Saints.

Are we agreed upon that ?

Can anyone here in this room see that there is no prior evidence that this is or ever was a successful stragedy in the NFL based upon the evidence brought forth by the prosecution ?

so drafting a # one QB next year at nine when the most needy teams will have already scooped the most desirable ones ( and thats debatable if i may inject sirs)

 

is reasonable ? thats my loud voice

 

I think not , kind jurors all.

Edited February 2, 2014 by 3rdand12

[RuntheDamnBall]

Without wanting to insult Graham's defenders, does anyone really think that any possible benefit could have been derived from an EJ Manuel answer to his hypothetical question?

 

I understand asking this question in the aftermath of it actually having happened -- should the Bills draft a QB in round 1 or even 2. It would be natural to want to understand his reaction, his feeling of place, communication he's had with the team. In advance of the draft, it still reeks of sh-- stirring and generating column material. You may say that TG's job. It just makes me think less of his job if that's what he's being asked to do.

[Kelly the Dog]

So what is it, you think, then, that makes teams stick with guys longer than it seems they should? It seems like two years is the going rate for most first rounders, unless they just look completely lost out there.

2-3 years IS the going rate, most GMs are scared of drafting two QBs #1 in a row because of their own and their QBs fragile egos. In retrospect, however, it may not be a bad idea. Most GMs can't draft. It's an incredibly difficult job and there are only 3-4 in the entire league that consistently do it pretty well.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I don't think we should draft a QB#1 at all, unless for some reason Johnny Football falls to #9 and then I would have to think about it (only because I think he has a chance, maybe 33% to be a star and even if he isn't he's probably going to be a great change of pace back-up).

 

I think EJ did fair as a rookie, under abysmal circumstances (getting hurt, half a training camp, both RBs hurt including Spiller most of the year, crappy TE play, erratic line play, crappy WR play overall with the best one hurt half the season, first year coach, first year coordinator, etc.)

 

I expect him to do significantly better, but if he gets hurt again or doesn't improve dramatically, we need a new #1 QB and usually the only way to get one is to draft one #1.

I am on the same page with you here.

[3rdand12]

I don't think we should draft a QB#1 at all, unless for some reason Johnny Football falls to #9 and then I would have to think about it (only because I think he has a chance, maybe 33% to be a star and even if he isn't he's probably going to be a great change of pace back-up).

 

I think EJ did fair as a rookie, under abysmal circumstances (getting hurt, half a training camp, both RBs hurt including Spiller most of the year, crappy TE play, erratic line play, crappy WR play overall with the best one hurt half the season, first year coach, first year coordinator, etc.)

 

I expect him to do significantly better, but if he gets hurt again or doesn't improve dramatically, we need a new #1 QB and usually the only way to get one is to draft one #1.

and we dont know that yet ! Edited February 2, 2014 by 3rdand12