C.Biscuit97 Posted February 6, 2014 Posted February 6, 2014 yea, but theres more than just draft grades - especially for round 1 qbs. its a position, more than any other that is dictated by need so you can easily cross a lot of teams off the list without considering how they may have the qb rated. in our case we still rolled the dice that the NYJs, or oakland wouldnt pull the trigger - which i think someone else mentioned may be an indicator that they had another qb theyd feel comfortable with also. i normally say just take your guy if you see him, grades be damned, but i cant fault them for getting their guy AND some extra. Very good point. If EJ can become a solid starter, it will be one of the greatest trades in Bills' history. And luck always helps.
Nanker Posted February 6, 2014 Posted February 6, 2014 This definitely sounds like you're upset: Also, it's a bit two-sided to tell someone what their own opinion was, and then turn around and be totally unwilling to look into it for yourself....unless, of course, you intend to take me at my word, in which case my only issue would be your telling me what my opinion was a year ago. Yes, the team did a fine job of filling needs. They needed a starting WR, they got one in Robert Woods. If we're playing the if-then game, then I suppose there's no way to know if they'd have gotten Kiko in the 3rd--again, that's not the point. The point of my post was that the team clearly did a good job of evaluating the talent that was available. Look no further than Goodwin if you question that...to say he did not contribute much, when he was the team's only deep threat to speak of, is misguided IMO, especially in light of the tumultuous state of the QB position last year. It's probably worth noting that Goodwin was the only Bills' WR to catch a TD from all 3 QBs. I'm also not sure what you were expecting from Duke Williams...the team went into the season with 3 veteran safeties ahead of him on the depth chart, and then added Jim Leonhard for insurance when Byrd wasn't ready. Exactly which of those guys was a rookie 4th round pick supposed to beat out? Regardless, I already explained my position on this issue: the team clearly did a good job of identifying talented players that would be available after the first round. I'm content that they'll do a good job of drafting those guys, so I'd prefer that they increase their odds of getting an elite player by drafting in the top 10 and not trading down. I think you take yourself too seriously. I am not upset. Take me at my word on that. I'll take you on your word that you advocated taking Richardson. I just think your statement that they did a fine job in rounds 2-4 is hollow in that the best player is one they got by virtue of trading down and two of the other four were not significant contributors. Peace out.
yungmack Posted February 6, 2014 Posted February 6, 2014 What if Manziel, Bridgewater or Bortles were available at #9 (I doubt they will be but...)? Would you take one of them? Here's a method to help you decide: If EJ was coming out this year, would you take him over any of those 3 guys? If your answer is No, then I think it's clear what should be done and I hope Whaley et al are asking themselves that very question.
FireChan Posted February 6, 2014 Posted February 6, 2014 I think you take yourself too seriously. I am not upset. Take me at my word on that. I'll take you on your word that you advocated taking Richardson. I just think your statement that they did a fine job in rounds 2-4 is hollow in that the best player is one they got by virtue of trading down and two of the other four were not significant contributors. Peace out. Well, seeing as EJ wasn't a significant contributor, Woods and Goodwin weren't likely going to be either. Nothing has been seen that insinuates they will not be good contributors with a decent QB. What if Manziel, Bridgewater or Bortles were available at #9 (I doubt they will be but...)? Would you take one of them? Here's a method to help you decide: If EJ was coming out this year, would you take him over any of those 3 guys? If your answer is No, then I think it's clear what should be done and I hope Whaley et al are asking themselves that very question. Knowing how EJ played this year, the answer would be yes. Purely on prospect? Might be a little tougher.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 6, 2014 Posted February 6, 2014 What if Manziel, Bridgewater or Bortles were available at #9 (I doubt they will be but...)? Would you take one of them? Here's a method to help you decide: If EJ was coming out this year, would you take him over any of those 3 guys? If your answer is No, then I think it's clear what should be done and I hope Whaley et al are asking themselves that very question. I'd take Bridgewater. I'd be tantalized by the prospect of JM, but I do have a strong feeling that the kid is going to be a coach killer. Pettine will find out soon enough. Bortles and James is flavor of the month and probably belongs on a team that takes guys named Blake or Blaine.
3rdand12 Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 I don't necessarily agree with this notion. The Ravens, knowing they wanted to target Joe Flacco, traded down with Cleveland and took Flacco later in the first round. Doesn't indicate a lack of confidence in Flacco as much as it does their command for how Round 1 would unfold. In fact, the whole world knew when they made the decision to trade down that the Ravens were targeting a QB later on. My view: the Bills were sold on EJ from the start and fell so much in love with him that they drafted him a full round too early. Bills drafted for need. Dire need indeed. And they probably did the best thing they could'a done . because you are right, Bills got very focused on this kid and certainly wanted him . maybe they they jumped the gun a bit , sure. But all in all is was a good shot to take . I hope they learned from the experience. Because they may have to take another shot 2015
Superb Owl Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 I'd take Bridgewater. I'd be tantalized by the prospect of JM, but I do have a strong feeling that the kid is going to be a coach killer. Pettine will find out soon enough. Agree about Bridgewater. I think he will be a near consensus guy, because of his consistency, precision, and dedication. I even think the Browns may be blowing smoke about Johnny and have the above target. Jameis Winston I think will be 100% consensus.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 Jameis Winston I think will be 100% consensus. Or even unanimous-like.
Superb Owl Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 Or even unanimous-like. The way I saw Earl Thomas firing up his teammates, reminded me of Jameis, uber magnetic enthusiastic. The nate hackett of players
BADOLBILZ Posted February 8, 2014 Posted February 8, 2014 IMO, there was a very noticeable difference in intensity between the two teams. Yes, it turns out the Seahawks were the much better team, but you could tell from the start that the Broncos were not ready for the fight they were going to get from the Seahawks. This Superbowl will serve as a very good recent example for what can happen to a team that comes from a soft conference and doesn't come to play at it's highest and most intense level. The AFC is very soft again like it was in the 80's. The Bills suffered this same problem in Super Bowls. The AFC was soft and the Bills had a virtual cake walk to the SB.......and still got careless at times like the AFC championship versus Denver. I remember after that game a reporter asking Dan Reeves how much better of a team the Redskins were than the Bills and he held his arms as wide apart as he could. That Bills team had more talented players in their primes than Washington.....yet Reeves was exactly right about which team was better. The Bills were super talented, but they weren't prepared to pick on somebody their own size because they didn't have to run the gauntlet that their NFC East SB opponents ran in the stacked a much more physical NFC playoffs.
Dean Cain Posted February 8, 2014 Posted February 8, 2014 (edited) The Bills suffered this same problem in Super Bowls. The AFC was soft and the Bills had a virtual cake walk to the SB.......and still got careless at times like the AFC championship versus Denver. I remember after that game a reporter asking Dan Reeves how much better of a team the Redskins were than the Bills and he held his arms as wide apart as he could. That Bills team had more talented players in their primes than Washington.....yet Reeves was exactly right about which team was better. The Bills were super talented, but they weren't prepared to pick on somebody their own size because they didn't have to run the gauntlet that their NFC East SB opponents ran in the stacked a much more physical NFC playoffs. Jeff Wright's inability to dominate at the three technique was the greatest weakness on our SB era teams. Edited February 8, 2014 by BigCountryBills
Beerball Posted February 8, 2014 Posted February 8, 2014 I'd take Bridgewater. His toothpick thin lower body skeers me.
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 8, 2014 Posted February 8, 2014 (edited) I think part of Tim Graham's object in this is to plant the question in our minds - "does EJ have a fragile ego?" Don't fall for it. Yes that spin is clear.... But certainly in my mind, ego is the big difference between the booms and the busts. All these guys are talented at the nfl level. And all the uncoachble tangibles are there with EJ. Size speed, arm, etc. Confidence and desire are the great differentiators amongst the population of NFL QB, IMO. Kelly, Brady, manning, Rodgers, Marino, Brees, Montana.... all the great ones ranged from cool to emotional and always range from very confident to flat out arrogant. It is also very hard to predict untill you see performance under live fire. I'm still not able to draw a conclusion on EJ, I really don't know how anyone could claim they have.. I wouldn't mind if he turns out to be arrogant. I hope he does think he can be and wants to be the best. And if he works hard enough and believes he can be and will be one of the best, I think it will happen. Hopefully this will be the year we know. Edited February 8, 2014 by over 20 years of fanhood
1billsfan Posted February 8, 2014 Posted February 8, 2014 Yes that spin is clear.... But certainly in my mind, ego is the big difference between the booms and the busts. All these guys are talented at the nfl level. And all the uncoachble tangibles are there with EJ. Size speed, arm, etc. Confidence and desire are the great differentiators amongst the population of NFL QB, IMO. Kelly, Brady, manning, Rodgers, Marino, Brees, Montana.... all the great ones ranged from cool to emotional and always range from very confident to flat out arrogant. It is also very hard to predict untill you see performance under live fire. I'm still not able to draw a conclusion on EJ, I really don't know how anyone could claim they have.. I wouldn't mind if he turns out to be arrogant. I hope he does think he can be and wants to be the best. And if he works hard enough and believes he can be and will be one of the best, I think it will happen. Hopefully this will be the year we know. There are differences between ego, confidence and desire. As for the ego part, I wouldn't like it if EJ was not pissed at Graham who was clearly trying to insult him to his face with that specifically worded "first round QB" question. All NFL franchise QBs worth anything have an ego. Also, all NFL franchises their give rookie first round QB picks more than one year to become their franchise QB. The Buffalo News looks really bad having hired a "look at me" hack like Tim Graham IMO.
Astrobot Posted February 8, 2014 Posted February 8, 2014 (edited) 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 Only twice. Art Schlichter Colts 1982 pick in RD1, then John Elway 1983. Also Terry Baker first pick in 1963 by LA Rams, then Bill Munson in 1964. http://www.nfl.com/d...t?type=position Edited February 8, 2014 by Astrobot
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 8, 2014 Posted February 8, 2014 There are differences between ego, confidence and desire. As for the ego part, I wouldn't like it if EJ was not pissed at Graham who was clearly trying to insult him to his face with that specifically worded "first round QB" question. All NFL franchise QBs worth anything have an ego. Also, all NFL franchises their give rookie first round QB picks more than one year to become their franchise QB. The Buffalo News looks really bad having hired a "look at me" hack like Tim Graham IMO. Um.... No ego and self confidence are intrinsically connected and synonymous. Feel free to reference a dictionary or thesaurus to confirm this. I specified desire as a separate intangible which is critical, however the supporting ego is requisite to make desire materialize into anything more than just "aimless wishing"... Your point on buf news is interesting, however I suspect they are more interested in how many readers click links to his articles than the content of his stories.
BADOLBILZ Posted February 9, 2014 Posted February 9, 2014 Jeff Wright's inability to dominate at the three technique was the greatest weakness on our SB era teams. He and Kelso were huge liabilities when it came to playing physical, NFC style defense. It was obvious that those were the only real weaknesses on the starting 22 after SB XXV but for all the good Polian did, he was stubborn to a fault and that only seemed to strengthen his resolve not to replace them. Wright in particular. It was way to much to ask a 260-270 pound guy to play NT in a 3-4.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 22, 2014 Posted February 22, 2014 More TG editorializing. I kind of wish bylines were included in the TBD links. It's too bad because there are good quotes from Whaley, and then Graham inserting his own ideas in there. Witness: http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-plan-for-first-round-any-position-but-qb-20140222?two-bills-drive I'm not permitted to quote much here, but Graham explains how Whaley says that he is open to any position except QB for the first round. Then: But the Bills apparently aren’t too interested in adding competition for Manuel, last year’s first-round pick. If you read the rest of what Whaley has to say, including this: "So we have some competition there, but like any position, if we see someone out there that we think can help us and get us better, we won’t hesitate to investigate." ...does anyone here see anything that indicates that the Bills aren't interested in adding competition at the position, period? Or do you see what I see, which is Whaley saying that he likes what he has -- a good move to instill confidence in your current players -- while noting that he is always looking to improve the team? Furthermore, we know from past experience and in general that to telegraph your draft strategy is stupid. Whaley is also subtly letting teams who want a QB know that the #9 spot can be had in trade. And he certainly won't be in a bad position -- that anyone will remember or blame him for -- if Manziel or Bridgewater fall to #9. I am not super enamored of either guy but I would understand the appeal. So why that initial dig? I wonder if TG's feewings are hurt because his great idea for a first round QB was shot down, thus he has to make a point of it every chance he gets.
Sisyphean Bills Posted February 22, 2014 Posted February 22, 2014 Did John Butler say anything about the backup's ~.500 being better than the starter's record? (.4 > .364)
Doc Posted February 22, 2014 Posted February 22, 2014 Did John Butler say anything about the backup's ~.500 being better than the starter's record? (.4 > .364) You mean .444 vs. .4.
Recommended Posts