Are the Quarterbacks going to start dropping?

[GunnerBill]

And it's all based on "if Manziel pans out". So criticising the Bills front office for not having that perspective when you have no idea at all whether the Bills see the commercial benefits of Johnny Football or not seems odd. The Bills may flat out not like the chances of his game transitioning. It's only a no-brainer if you think Johnny Manziel has the game to be a franchise quarterback.

[BADOLBILZ]

QB play and the ability of Clowney/Watkins to play in the NFL over the long haul are entirely unrelated.

 

And if your second comment is true, why bother taking Manziel since we'll let him go if he develops into anything anyway?

 

Lastly, your final sentence completely contradicts the idea you present at the beginning of your post.

 

I guess I'm just having trouble following you here...what point, exactly, are you making?

 

QB play definitely alters the perspective with which the other 21 are viewed. It's extremely foolish to suggest otherwise.

 

Yes it is true that the Bills haven't been able to retain All Pro talent. The three All Pro's they developed over the last decade all managed to wriggle themselves free of the franchise. That's 100% if you are counting.

 

Does that loss of "other 21 talent" relate to the QB position? Not really, because teams with good QB's tend to win a lot of games and their play is easy to put a value upon. Not winning is a big factor in both team AND player dissatisfaction with each other. it leads players to want to be elsewhere rather than work thru contract issues and it causes teams to wonder if they are worth the money if they aren't impacting the win column or the bottom line. Not to belabor the point, but durability is also factor. Money spent on a proven QB has been pretty well spent historically. QB's can play when their physical tools decline. Dan Marino plays the last 6 years of his career with a noticeable limp. Any other position that player never plays a down for that team again.

 

How does saying that you don't have to nail your first round picks contradict the idea that Johnny Manziel could be a franchise changing player? Because Manziel would be A singular first round pick? Well, if you get your franchise QB in round 2 maybe you actually never do need to nail that first round pick but the point was that you can and need to find good players outside of the first round. Be it 2-7 or UDFA or vet FA. Blowing first round picks doesn't preclude a team from being good. The Broncos made the SB last year without much contribution from their two "premium" draft picks of the past decade LT Ryan Clady and pass rusher Von Miller.......both NFL stars at positions that fall right behind QB on the list of importance. That pretty much gives you the idea of the chasm of value between position #1 and the rest.

 

What's my point? If you want to maximize the strength of your franchise it starts with QB play and everything else is a distant second. IMO the Bills and their fans traditionally talk themselves out of facing this fact and the net result is a kind of reverse synergy.......the team continually being worse than the sum of their parts and lacking any kind of identity. If Johnny Manziel is there, you take the guy and don't look back.

[dave mcbride]

 

 

QB play and the ability of Clowney/Watkins to play in the NFL over the long haul are entirely unrelated.

 

And if your second comment is true, why bother taking Manziel since we'll let him go if he develops into anything anyway?

 

Lastly, your final sentence completely contradicts the idea you present at the beginning of your post.

 

I guess I'm just having trouble following you here...what point, exactly, are you making?

 

Badol would never suggest that we'd let a franchise qb leave. That's easy to stop. The guys we let go went because ... they played positions that were far less important than Qb (not that i think we should have let them walk).

Edited April 16, 2014 by dave mcbride

[KOKBILLS]

What's my point? If you want to maximize the strength of your franchise it starts with QB play and everything else is a distant second. IMO the Bills and their fans traditionally talk themselves out of facing this fact and the net result is a kind of reverse synergy.......

 

I hear you...But...If the Bills talk themselves out of it what real choice do the fans have other than to complain or deal with it? What does it matter if they've (the Bills) made up their mind? We have zero control...So I don't think it's a matter of most Bills fans talking themselves into it...Rather, I believe they move on knowing the Bills have talked themselves into it and hope for the best...Because that's all they can do...

[CSBill]

I do agree, my hunch is, all three of the top three QBs will drop . . . I would even bet that two of them will be available when the Bills pick at 9 . . . not that I want us to pick any of the three . . . but the bad news is, this means some of those top players we thought might be available, will probably not be (I doubt any of the three OTs, or the two WRs will be there at 9).

[thebandit27]

QB play definitely alters the perspective with which the other 21 are viewed. It's extremely foolish to suggest otherwise.

 

Now that I agree with; it's decidedly different from your original statement that "If the QB play isn't there, the chances of them (Clowney/Watkins) going 4 and out is pretty high". In actuality, whether or not Clowney, Watkins, or anyone else receive contract extensions with their original teams is 99.999999999% dependent upon factors aside from QB play, among them: performance on the field, behavior off the field, contract demands, etc.

 

Yes it is true that the Bills haven't been able to retain All Pro talent. The three All Pro's they developed over the last decade all managed to wriggle themselves free of the franchise. That's 100% if you are counting.

 

Does that loss of "other 21 talent" relate to the QB position? Not really, because teams with good QB's tend to win a lot of games and their play is easy to put a value upon. Not winning is a big factor in both team AND player dissatisfaction with each other. it leads players to want to be elsewhere rather than work thru contract issues and it causes teams to wonder if they are worth the money if they aren't impacting the win column or the bottom line. Not to belabor the point, but durability is also factor. Money spent on a proven QB has been pretty well spent historically. QB's can play when their physical tools decline. Dan Marino plays the last 6 years of his career with a noticeable limp. Any other position that player never plays a down for that team again.

 

Again, this is an altogether different point than you made originally. If what you were really saying is that having a franchise QB makes players want to sign & stay with your team, then yes, I agree with that. The quote "And when they (Watkins/Clowney) are long retired they will be doing color commentary on QB's drafted at the same time or in earlier years than them, the same way that LaDanian Tomlinson does with Drew Brees still going strong" strongly implies that you believe that the QB's performance somehow affects whether or not the other positional players will have long careers...that's simply not a true statement, which is why I asked what point you were trying to make.

 

How does saying that you don't have to nail your first round picks contradict the idea that Johnny Manziel could be a franchise changing player? Because Manziel would be A singular first round pick? Well, if you get your franchise QB in round 2 maybe you actually never do need to nail that first round pick but the point was that you can and need to find good players outside of the first round. Be it 2-7 or UDFA or vet FA. Blowing first round picks doesn't preclude a team from being good. The Broncos made the SB last year without much contribution from their two "premium" draft picks of the past decade LT Ryan Clady and pass rusher Von Miller.......both NFL stars at positions that fall right behind QB on the list of importance. That pretty much gives you the idea of the chasm of value between position #1 and the rest.

 

Because in one sentence you say that no other player matters unless you have a QB (which you are strongly advocating taking in the 1st round), and then you go on to say that the 1st round picks don't matter unless you can nail rounds 2-7. Your revised statement above is far more reasonable...yes, to be a perennial contender, a team typically needs to hit on more than just their 1st round pick. Otherwise, they need to have a Manning, Brady, or Andrew Luck to cover the rear end of the GM that doesn't draft particularly well...the most obvious case is Indy, where their draft picks aside from Luck have been largely flops.

 

 

 

What's my point? If you want to maximize the strength of your franchise it starts with QB play and everything else is a distant second. IMO the Bills and their fans traditionally talk themselves out of facing this fact and the net result is a kind of reverse synergy.......the team continually being worse than the sum of their parts and lacking any kind of identity. If Johnny Manziel is there, you take the guy and don't look back.

 

I don't think anyone denies that QB play is, by far, the greatest predictor of long-term success. The only divergence I've seen is with regard to opinions about specific players. Some folks mistakenly thought Fitz was a franchise QB; he wasn't. Some folks believe EJ is franchise material; that's hardly proven at this point.

 

Although I don't agree that Manziel is franchise material, I do agree that it would be prudent to have a contingency plan. I'd vastly prefer a guy like Aaron Murray in the 3rd round or so than any of the top 3 QBs, who I don't like much at all in terms of NFL potential.

[K-9]

Now that I agree with; it's decidedly different from your original statement that "If the QB play isn't there, the chances of them (Clowney/Watkins) going 4 and out is pretty high". In actuality, whether or not Clowney, Watkins, or anyone else receive contract extensions with their original teams is 99.999999999% dependent upon factors aside from QB play, among them: performance on the field, behavior off the field, contract demands, etc.

 

 

 

Again, this is an altogether different point than you made originally. If what you were really saying is that having a franchise QB makes players want to sign & stay with your team, then yes, I agree with that. The quote "And when they (Watkins/Clowney) are long retired they will be doing color commentary on QB's drafted at the same time or in earlier years than them, the same way that LaDanian Tomlinson does with Drew Brees still going strong" strongly implies that you believe that the QB's performance somehow affects whether or not the other positional players will have long careers...that's simply not a true statement, which is why I asked what point you were trying to make.

 

 

 

Because in one sentence you say that no other player matters unless you have a QB (which you are strongly advocating taking in the 1st round), and then you go on to say that the 1st round picks don't matter unless you can nail rounds 2-7. Your revised statement above is far more reasonable...yes, to be a perennial contender, a team typically needs to hit on more than just their 1st round pick. Otherwise, they need to have a Manning, Brady, or Andrew Luck to cover the rear end of the GM that doesn't draft particularly well...the most obvious case is Indy, where their draft picks aside from Luck have been largely flops.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think anyone denies that QB play is, by far, the greatest predictor of long-term success. The only divergence I've seen is with regard to opinions about specific players. Some folks mistakenly thought Fitz was a franchise QB; he wasn't. Some folks believe EJ is franchise material; that's hardly proven at this point.

 

Although I don't agree that Manziel is franchise material, I do agree that it would be prudent to have a contingency plan. I'd vastly prefer a guy like Aaron Murray in the 3rd round or so than any of the top 3 QBs, who I don't like much at all in terms of NFL potential.

 

Can't improve upon anything in this post. Well stated, bandit.

 

While Manziel has been one of the most exciting players I have ever seen in college football, if he's there at 9 it means at least 4 QB-starved teams deemed him not good enough to grab to fill the most important position in professional sports; that a certain consensus was reached concerning his ability to adapt his game to the next level. While we both know how subjective the evaluation process is, his availability at 9 would speak volumes to me. Not just with regards to his ability, but with regards to just how many better football players there are in the draft this year.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Edited April 16, 2014 by K-9

[mattsox]

I don't think Cleveland takes a QB at 4. I believe they are very bullish on Hoyer. He looked pretty good last year until he got Kiko smashed. Imagine they take Watkins and pair him next to Josh Gordon? Look out!

 

Dream scenario. We'll see if Hoyer can make a comeback. I still think you take QB, unless they can get Mack or Clowney, but don't see them falling so low.

[Cleveland Rocks?]

And it's all based on "if Manziel pans out". So criticising the Bills front office for not having that perspective when you have no idea at all whether the Bills see the commercial benefits of Johnny Football or not seems odd. The Bills may flat out not like the chances of his game transitioning. It's only a no-brainer if you think Johnny Manziel has the game to be a franchise quarterback.

I know I am an outsider, but I can't wrap my head around why the Bills would bother with any of these QBs with their #1 pick, let alone Manziel who I think is risky NFL prospect to begin with. Draft someone who can help you. Now.

Dream scenario. We'll see if Hoyer can make a comeback. I still think you take QB, unless they can get Mack or Clowney, but don't see them falling so low.

He'll make a comeback from the knee injury but I don't think he should be the starter. He is a nice story, hometown boy... but he wasn't good in college and is on his 4th or 5th team. He won a couple games which I know is a big deal for the Browns as they only win about 4 per year on average, but he hasn't shown me enough to not draft a QB at 4. I just hope they take the right one (i.e. Weeden 2012) and that they don't gamble and wait until the 2nd round thinking the guy they want will be there (i.e. Manuel 2013). I don't have much faith they will make the right decision. Edited April 16, 2014 by Cleveland Rocks?

[LB3]

I just saw Kipers latest mock on the scroll on ESPN and he now has Bridgewater going 33rd to Houston.

[thebandit27]

I still believe that Houston would take Garropolo over anyone else at 33...

[LOVEMESOMEBILLS]

I just saw Kipers latest mock on the scroll on ESPN and he now has Bridgewater going 33rd to Houston.

I just saw this myself, WOW what a drop for this young man, in such a relatively short period of time.

[thebandit27]

For what it's worth, I'm told there are teams that like Bridgewater enough to trade up for him in the 20-32 range.

 

I'm still going to go out on a limb and say that at least 3, perhaps 4 QBs go before him.

 

[Bill from NYC]

Although I don't agree that Manziel is franchise material, I do agree that it would be prudent to have a contingency plan. I'd vastly prefer a guy like Aaron Murray in the 3rd round or so than any of the top 3 QBs, who I don't like much at all in terms of NFL potential.

 

I don't fully understand what you mean here. I suppose what I am missing is just how much you like Murray. In other words, if I was GM and absolutely sold on a QB, I would draft him first, and concern myself little with what "experts" think.

 

I have said this before.....if the Bills were all in on EJ last season, they would not have traded back. I really believe this, and think that they had another QB that they rated equal or close to him.

 

My point is that if the Bills professional football people think they have a better prospect than EJ available when they draft, they should select him. QBs have huge value. They win football games in this modern NFL. And they are worth their weight in gold.

 

[Beerball]

I don't fully understand what you mean here. I suppose what I am missing is just how much you like Murray. In other words, if I was GM and absolutely sold on a QB, I would draft him first, and concern myself little with what "experts" think.

 

I have said this before.....if the Bills were all in on EJ last season, they would not have traded back. I really believe this, and think that they had another QB that they rated equal or close to him.

 

My point is that if the Bills professional football people think they have a better prospect than EJ available when they draft, they should select him. QBs have huge value. They win football games in this modern NFL. And they are worth their weight in gold.

You made me pull out my calculator!

 

At today's gold prices EJ would be worth approximately $4.9M. EJ's signing bonus was $4.84M. Coincidence? I think not.

[Bill from NYC]

You made me pull out my calculator!

 

At today's gold prices EJ would be worth approximately $4.9M. EJ's signing bonus was $4.84M. Coincidence? I think not.

 

That's funny. And it means that when they are free agents they are worth 4x their weight in gold. And not all of them (Cutler, Stafford, etc.) are what I would consider to be great.

[thebandit27]

 

 

I don't fully understand what you mean here. I suppose what I am missing is just how much you like Murray. In other words, if I was GM and absolutely sold on a QB, I would draft him first, and concern myself little with what "experts" think.

 

I have said this before.....if the Bills were all in on EJ last season, they would not have traded back. I really believe this, and think that they had another QB that they rated equal or close to him.

 

My point is that if the Bills professional football people think they have a better prospect than EJ available when they draft, they should select him. QBs have huge value. They win football games in this modern NFL. And they are worth their weight in gold.

 

I'm saying that I'm not remotely sold on any of this year's QB prospects enough to spend a high pick, and thus would prefer to wait and grab a guy (Murray for example) with (I believe) just as much potential as the 1st round prospects in a later round to be the fallback option.

 

I just feel that there's too much talent at the top of this draft to pick a QB high when they just aren't great prospects IMO.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Hopefully and MANziel falls to us 0:)

[LOVEMESOMEBILLS]

 

 

I have said this before.....if the Bills were all in on EJ last season, they would not have traded back. I really believe this, and think that they had another QB that they rated equal or close to him.

 

Listening to an interview with Buddy the consensus of the draft room was they, with confidence, could trade down to the middle of the 1st and still get EJ. He said he they were talking the possibility of a trade with St Louis a couple of days before the draft. Hard for you to make the statement you made without all the inside knowledge. So, if you can get another second rounder and get the QB you want, that means your not all in ? Low risk/High reward. He also said they had a couple more trade offers for the 16th pick, but no longer had the confidence they would still land EJ. To me it sounds smart/ to you it sounds like they were not all in on EJ.

[26CornerBlitz]

@JohnMurphyShow

Complete audio: Ourlads Mock: One QB Taken in First Round http://ow.ly/2FNoPq