BADOLBILZ Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 The only thing I must add there is that I am strongly of the opinion that the Bills liked another qb (Geno Smith?) as much as they liked EJ. I am unable to see this as not being true. If you were a GM and you thought a QB was head and shoulders above the rest, would you trade back 8 spots and risk losing him? I surely would not. Agreed, they either had less than full conviction on EJ or they were just being stupid. In this case, the answer is likely that they just weren't fully sold on EJ and were willing to take the chance that he may be gone by the time they picked. You don't trade back and then select your sure-fire franchise QB. You can pass on any other position on the field and hope to get them later but when it is QB you are literally saying that you can move on without that QB if he isn't there the next time you pick.
YoloinOhio Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 Agreed, they either had less than full conviction on EJ or they were just being stupid. In this case, the answer is likely that they just weren't fully sold on EJ and were willing to take the chance that he may be gone by the time they picked. You don't trade back and then select your sure-fire franchise QB. You can pass on any other position on the field and hope to get them later but when it is QB you are literally saying that you can move on without that QB if he isn't there the next time you pick Don't agree at all. There weren't many teams who were going to take QBs in the 1st or 2nd rd last year, and they knew that. They took him high enough so as not to lose him, but were able to make a (GREAT) trade and still get him because they knew they would be able to. Not because they valued him less. I can't believe people here want to draft a QB high and think the bills might do so. For a long time we want the bills to get a QB in the first round. We finally do so and due to injuries, injuries at WR, an inconsistent run game, and a terrible o line. And you want to give up??? Um rookie QBs are allowed to struggle. When was the last time a team drafted QBs in the first round back to back years??? Exactly because grumpy ill informed fans who want to use the laughably bad strategy of drafting QBs every year don't run teams 1989.
K-9 Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 The only thing I must add there is that I am strongly of the opinion that the Bills liked another qb (Geno Smith?) as much as they liked EJ. I am unable to see this as not being true. If you were a GM and you thought a QB was head and shoulders above the rest, would you trade back 8 spots and risk losing him? I surely would not. I think this stands to reason but it doesn't change the fact they got the QB they "liked best" by virtue of the fact they had their choice of any QB in the draft. Whether it was EJ at 1 and Geno at 1a, it really doesn't matter. EJ Manuel was the QB they targeted above all others. If Manuel had graded out higher, I doubt they would have risked losing him between picks 9 and 16 just as you said. GO BILLS!!!
GG Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 The logic is there, whether you can find it or not. 2013 - Only 2 teams, drafting at 8 & 9 respectively needed a QB. And the Jets didn't necessarily NEED one. 2014 - Possibly 7 teams, drafting at 1,2,3,4,5,8 & 20 respectively need a QB. Can any of those teams reasonably expect to get their QB at where they are actually valued, or is their hand forced? I can argue that KC and Cardinals also needed a QB in 2013, but decided to trade for an available vet instead of rolling the dice on the 2013. In retrospect, the worries about the 2013 have so far proven correct. The history also shows that if there are QBs with potential in the draft, teams will not hesitate using high draft picks for them. Just the basic fact that EJ was the only QB taken in the first round, and after a trade-down, shows the apprehension of last year's talent. You will not see that this year. So I can't see how you call this year's QB class same quality as last year's.
Chuck Schick Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 Agreed, they either had less than full conviction on EJ or they were just being stupid. In this case, the answer is likely that they just weren't fully sold on EJ and were willing to take the chance that he may be gone by the time they picked. You don't trade back and then select your sure-fire franchise QB. You can pass on any other position on the field and hope to get them later but when it is QB you are literally saying that you can move on without that QB if he isn't there the next time you pick. Crazy how one of the (potentially) best trades in the last 2 decades can be classified as stupid. By your reasoning the Bills should have traded UP to get Manuel if they really really wanted him- pissing away later/future draft picks in the process.
K-9 Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 I can argue that KC and Cardinals also needed a QB in 2013, but decided to trade for an available vet instead of rolling the dice on the 2013. In retrospect, the worries about the 2013 have so far proven correct. The history also shows that if there are QBs with potential in the draft, teams will not hesitate using high draft picks for them. Just the basic fact that EJ was the only QB taken in the first round, and after a trade-down, shows the apprehension of last year's talent. You will not see that this year. So I can't see how you call this year's QB class same quality as last year's. I'll re-clarify my point. There is more quality in this year's QB class. There is no, blue-chip, can't miss prospect as there are questions about every one of them. That is how it compares to last year's class. As I've stated, this class resembles 2011 more than last year's. 4 were taken with the first 12 picks. Only Cam Newton is panning out so far. GO BILLS!!!
C.Biscuit97 Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 I can argue that KC and Cardinals also needed a QB in 2013, but decided to trade for an available vet instead of rolling the dice on the 2013. In retrospect, the worries about the 2013 have so far proven correct. The history also shows that if there are QBs with potential in the draft, teams will not hesitate using high draft picks for them. Just the basic fact that EJ was the only QB taken in the first round, and after a trade-down, shows the apprehension of last year's talent. You will not see that this year. So I can't see how you call this year's QB class same quality as last year's. 1) how can any player prove themselves after one year? 2) Why did Aaron Rodgers go #24? 3) In 2011, it was considered to be a weak QB class and 4 QBs went in the top 12 picks. Are Blaine Gabbert, Jake Locker, and Christian Ponder really that much superior prospects than EJ? Or was it because teams were QB needy?
Beerball Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 I'll take that bet. Seriously, Blake Bortles is being talked about as a top 10 pick. It's all about need and less teams needed a QB last year. Their records would suggest otherwise.
K-9 Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 Their records would suggest otherwise. Not clear what you're getting at here. What does that have to do with my post regarding other, non-QB prospects in this draft? GO BILLS!!!
Beerball Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 Not clear what you're getting at here. What does that have to do with my post regarding other, non-QB prospects in this draft? GO BILLS!!! nothing, user error that's already been corrected
C.Biscuit97 Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 Their records would suggest otherwise. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2013/draft.htm KC - Traded for Smith (who had 1 td and 11 ints as a rookie) Jax - took Gabbert top 10 previous year Mia - Took Tannehill 1st round previous year (and had worse #s than EJ as a rookie) Phi - Vick and Foles Det - #1 overall Stafford Cle - Spend a 1st rounder on Weeden previous year Ari - Traded for Palmer STL - #1 overall Bradford NYJ - #5 overall Sanchez who sucks but did go to 2 AFC championship games Ten - Top 10 pick Locker previous year SD - Rivers Oak - Traded for the immortal Matt Flynn NYJ - Same as above Car - #1 overall Newton (who EJ helped beat) NO - Brees
Beerball Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 http://www.pro-footb.../2013/draft.htm KC - Traded for Smith (who had 1 td and 11 ints as a rookie) Jax - took Gabbert top 10 previous year Mia - Took Tannehill 1st round previous year (and had worse #s than EJ as a rookie) Phi - Vick and Foles Det - #1 overall Stafford Cle - Spend a 1st rounder on Weeden previous year Ari - Traded for Palmer STL - #1 overall Bradford NYJ - #5 overall Sanchez who sucks but did go to 2 AFC championship games Ten - Top 10 pick Locker previous year SD - Rivers Oak - Traded for the immortal Matt Flynn NYJ - Same as above Car - #1 overall Newton (who EJ helped beat) NO - Brees Nice list. KC traded for Smith for what reason? (hint...there was no QB worthy of being picked high last season. Gabbert sucks and will continue to suck. You want the Bills to follow their lead? Cleveland--see Gabbert. NYJ if there was a QB worthy of their pick in round 1 they would have pulled the trigger. There's 4 teams in obvious need of a QB who bypassed one in last year's first round. But, I'm to believe that these two drafts offer the same QB talent? Sorry, doesn't hold water.
NoSaint Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 Nice list. KC traded for Smith for what reason? (hint...there was no QB worthy of being picked high last season. Gabbert sucks and will continue to suck. You want the Bills to follow their lead? Cleveland--see Gabbert. NYJ if there was a QB worthy of their pick in round 1 they would have pulled the trigger. There's 4 teams in obvious need of a QB who bypassed one in last year's first round. But, I'm to believe that these two drafts offer the same QB talent? Sorry, doesn't hold water. but to come full circle, you also admittedly dont watch much of the college qbs
Beerball Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 but to come full circle, you also admittedly dont watch much of the college qbs And that's relevant how? How many QB's went in the top 10 last draft? How many will go in the top 10 this draft? That's all the information needed to ascertain that this year's crop is more highly regarded by the experts (the real ones who work for NFL teams, not pundits) than last season's was.
Superb Owl Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 And that's relevant how? How many QB's went in the top 10 last draft? How many will go in the top 10 this draft? That's all the information needed to ascertain that this year's crop is more highly regarded by the experts (the real ones who work for NFL teams, not pundits) than last season's was. Dead on. Who do you see as the nearest this year to can't-miss ?
NoSaint Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 And that's relevant how? How many QB's went in the top 10 last draft? How many will go in the top 10 this draft? That's all the information needed to ascertain that this year's crop is more highly regarded by the experts (the real ones who work for NFL teams, not pundits) than last season's was. to the first question, none, but 2 were mocked in the top 10 by many at this juncture to the second question, none have yet, so we will see how many though youll probably see some. and a return question: more than any other position wouldnt you say QB at the top of the draft is effected by need?
LB3 Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 I can argue that KC and Cardinals also needed a QB in 2013, but decided to trade for an available vet instead of rolling the dice on the 2013. In retrospect, the worries about the 2013 have so far proven correct. The history also shows that if there are QBs with potential in the draft, teams will not hesitate using high draft picks for them. Just the basic fact that EJ was the only QB taken in the first round, and after a trade-down, shows the apprehension of last year's talent. You will not see that this year. So I can't see how you call this year's QB class same quality as last year's. I agree an argument could be made for Arizona, but I disagree on KC. Alex Smith was a hot commodity going into last offseason. I call this year's class slightly better than last year's because I believe it. I think Manziel and Bridgewater are fools gold. But there are certainly a few teams who feel differently (namely Cleveland per reports) and are willing to trade up to get one. There are seven teams that need a QB this year. I personally don't think there is a top ten QB this year. If any of those seven teams disagree with me, can they afford to not pull the trigger? We thought we could get our guy at 16 last year and thought it was worth the gamble, because only 1 other team was in the market, and they had a QB (Sanchez) already. They wanted competition for him. It was a calculated risk. If 7 teams needed a QB last year, it is my belief that 2, possibly 3 would have gone in the top ten because need would have driven their value up considerably. Besides the Jets, who was a legitimate threat to select a QB before we selected at 16 last year?
MDH Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 And that's relevant how? How many QB's went in the top 10 last draft? How many will go in the top 10 this draft? That's all the information needed to ascertain that this year's crop is more highly regarded by the experts (the real ones who work for NFL teams, not pundits) than last season's was. Nobody has gone yet in this year's top 10. At this point last year all the mocks had Geno going in the top 10 so maybe we should wait till those experts actually show us what they think?
Beerball Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 and a return question: more than any other position wouldnt you say QB at the top of the draft is effected by need? Most definitely. Last season's crop of QB's shows that the first QB's elevated draft position was #16. This year it will most likely be within the top 2 yet there were teams who needed a QB last draft but they either filled their needs via trade (KC & AZ) or bypassed the position altogether. That tells me that the talent this year is greater than it was last draft.
NoSaint Posted February 4, 2014 Posted February 4, 2014 Most definitely. Last season's crop of QB's shows that the first QB's elevated draft position was #16. This year it will most likely be within the top 2 yet there were teams who needed a QB last draft but they either filled their needs via trade (KC & AZ) or bypassed the position altogether. That tells me that the talent this year is greater than it was last draft. availability of guys like carson palmer and alex smith are certainly things that changed the board. so might cleveland going after cousins, instead of manziel, potentially. or schaub ending up at jax or minnesota. while i do agree pretty confidently that someone will be gone by 16, ill again point out that this time last year geno was going number 1 and we were going to be possibly playing head games with cleveland and arizona in order to figure out who was getting barkley vs nassib vs Glennon or possibly even EJ all getting mentions for us in the top 10. there was talk of guys like tyler bray and wilson going as early as the second round possibly. right now its a whole lot of speculation from pundits. id say this qb class is a little better, but not night and day different, even if 3 guys go top ten.
Recommended Posts