Dorkington Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I thought the whole argument was that record doesn't matter, developing a QB matters. I'm much more invested in the Bills winning games, personally. I guess I'll just agree to disagree. Cheers
BillsVet Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 On the other hand, if we take a top QB prospect in 2014, we sit on two prospects, neither of which may turn out, and we have weaknesses elsewhere, hurting the entire. Does Bridgewater + EJ - Sammy get us to 9-7 last year? The fastest way to being a playoff-caliber team is to get the QB. I think that point has been lost or diluted over the years as the Bills have struggled to find a capable starter. Instead, the rebuilding concept has been to only get the QB after all the other pieces, offensive and defensive, were in order. The issue remains that, in the UFA era, teams just can't wait around for all of the roster to be in place before you get the QB. You've got a narrow window to get enough pieces in place, and it begins with the QB. Besides, I keep hearing this narrative that you don't take a player unless there's a guarantee. I'm not clear where this came from, because no single draft pick is a guarantee. Who cares if you sit on 2 QB prospects. They didn't have huge pressing needs everywhere, or, at least that's what we've been told. Positional value being what it is, you don't lose much on a team like this taking another QB if one guy is struggling.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 The issue remains that, in the UFA era, teams just can't wait around for all of the roster to be in place before you get the QB. You've got a narrow window to get enough pieces in place, and it begins with the QB. And I'd counter with this: finding a QB is the hardest piece of the puzzle to get. You can't just wait around for the guy to fall into your lap before you build your team, otherwise you'll waste three of four seasons of your QB's window building a winning team (which is about the length of a contract). Your logic is flawed, though your desire for a QB is not. I want one too. But waiting to get one before building the rest of your team is as foolish as thinking you can build a winning team without a quality QB.
yungmack Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 In this era of offensive football, what has a NFL GM done if, after 3 off-seasons of rebuilding, he hasn't identified a franchise QB? I know I'm in the minority who aren't enamored with Whaley. He just doesn't seem like this great GM who's ahead of the curve, and it's not just his selection of Manuel or addressing the subsequent issue at QB with journeymen. I will grant that he didn't hire the previous HC or that he inherited a great situation from Blundering Buddy. As much as 2015 is make or break for Manuel, it's almost to that degree with Whaley. He's been given a better HC, resources to acquire better talent, and had 3 drafts to mine talent. If they don't win this year I, it's time to look for a replacement. Especially considering he's been with the organization for 5+ seasons now. Not to slag on you, as this is something of a constant theme around here, but just for the hell of it, can you identify a true franchise QB, either drafted or available through a trade or FA signing, who the Bills had a shot at in the last three years? If not, then it's hardly fair to judge Whaley as failing in this regard. That's kind of like blaming Gen. Grant for not using air power in the Civil War. Besides, he might actually have drafted a franchise QB; I think there's still an even chance EJ can be that guy.
GG Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 And I'd counter with this: finding a QB is the hardest piece of the puzzle to get. You can't just wait around for the guy to fall into your lap before you build your team, otherwise you'll waste three of four seasons of your QB's window building a winning team (which is about the length of a contract). Your logic is flawed, though your desire for a QB is not. I want one too. But waiting to get one before building the rest of your team is as foolish as thinking you can build a winning team without a quality QB. But the data is fairly conclusive that if you do happen to land the franchise QB, the rest of the rebuilding is much easier, as opposed to having a stocked roster at every position other than the QB. Seahawks are case in point, they kept swinging for the QB every year until they stumbled on Wilson. If another team had the foresight to grab Wilson before them, then they would have continued adding QBs every year until they landed one.
Dorkington Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Not to slag on you, as this is something of a constant theme around here, but just for the hell of it, can you identify a true franchise QB, either drafted or available through a trade or FA signing, who the Bills had a shot at in the last three years? If not, then it's hardly fair to judge Whaley as failing in this regard. That's kind of like blaming Gen. Grant for not using air power in the Civil War. Besides, he might actually have drafted a franchise QB; I think there's still an even chance EJ can be that guy. It's suggested that Carr and Bridgewater are two franchise QBs that Whaley passed on and should be held accountable for. Also, some attribute us passing on Russell Wilson to Whaley as well.
yungmack Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 It's suggested that Carr and Bridgewater are two franchise QBs that Whaley passed on and should be held accountable for. Also, some attribute us passing on Russell Wilson to Whaley as well. I don't see Carr or Bridgewater as much better than QBs on the current roster. Another year or two should clear up the situation. Wilson is another matter: he was well worth taking a chance on.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) But the data is fairly conclusive that if you do happen to land the franchise QB, the rest of the rebuilding is much easier, as opposed to having a stocked roster at every position other than the QB. Seahawks are case in point, they kept swinging for the QB every year until they stumbled on Wilson. If another team had the foresight to grab Wilson before them, then they would have continued adding QBs every year until they landed one. But this isn't accurate. The Seahawks had Hasselbeck as their starter from 2001-2010, in that time they drafted five QBs, none higher than the third round (2005, Green) until they took Wilson in 2012 (between those drafts they only spent a sixth rounder on a QB in 2009). The Seahawks didn't keep swinging for QBs, they built their team (especially once PC got there) and got lucky with Wilson in the third. There's no question finding the QB is the hardest part, but you cannot wait to build your team until you find one unless you just don't care about your fans at all. Edited May 11, 2015 by GreggyT
TC in St. Louis Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I think they made a smart move getting Cassel. He's experienced enough, and good enough to handle this offense. We don't need greatness from him. While he's on the team, we can find out what we have in EJ Manuel. I go back to the Senior Bowl, when EJ was the MVP and showed a ton of talent. Somehow he got himself to the point in life where he was the starting QB on FSU, and hence drafted by the Bills. I'm so sour on Doug Marrone right now, I honestly blame him for what went wrong with EJ Manuel. EJ started as a rookie, took some lumps. You know the rest. What rookie quarterbacks do better? We shall see. I like the picks they made. They have reasons for every one they made. The only problem I have is that they didn't take a shot at La'el Collins. You'd think that having Rex on a private jet to New Orleans to try and compete on the open market....would have had his rights had they just thrown down on a 7th rounder.
GG Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 But this isn't accurate. The Seahawks had Hasselbeck as their starter from 2001-2010, in that time they drafted five QBs, none higher than the third round (2005, Green) until they took Wilson in 2012 (between those drafts they only spent a sixth rounder on a QB in 2009). The Seahawks didn't keep swinging for QBs, they built their team (especially once PC got there) and got lucky with Wilson in the third. There's no question finding the QB is the hardest part, but you cannot wait to build your team until you find one unless you just don't care about your fans at all. Are you forgetting the trade for Whitehurst, signing Jackson, followed by Flynn and then lucking into Wilson? And in your example, they drafted 5 QBs in a decade, when they had an established starter, which would compare to how many for the Bills in that time span when they did not have a bona fide starter?
FireChan Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Are you forgetting the trade for Whitehurst, signing Jackson, followed by Flynn and then lucking into Wilson? And in your example, they drafted 5 QBs in a decade, when they had an established starter, which would compare to how many for the Bills in that time span when they did not have a bona fide starter? We traded for Cassel, signed Kolb, signed Orton, drafted EJ, signed an UDFA Tuel, signed Thad. What's the comparison again?
GG Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 We traded for Cassel, signed Kolb, signed Orton, drafted EJ, signed an UDFA Tuel, signed Thad. What's the comparison again? Don't know if you're being facetious, but 2015 offseason is an anomaly in Bills' history of having a QB competition.
FireChan Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Don't know if you're being facetious, but 2015 offseason is an anomaly in Bills' history of having a QB competition. Except we had a competition in 2013. And we only didn't have one in 2014 because we couldn't find a guy good enough to compete. Check the 2013-2015 Bills and compare it with 2010-2012 Seahawks. Both teams searching high and low for QB's. There's quite a bit of similarity. Pre-Whaley though? Yeah, that was a trainwreck.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Are you forgetting the trade for Whitehurst, signing Jackson, followed by Flynn and then lucking into Wilson? And in your example, they drafted 5 QBs in a decade, when they had an established starter, which would compare to how many for the Bills in that time span when they did not have a bona fide starter? You're damn straight I did. But for clarification's sake, I was speaking to the philosophy of "draft a QB every year" specifically. I was not trying to justify the Bills' approach to finding QBs in the past decade and a half in any way shape or form. I have been a pretty vocal critic about their lack of investment in the position, at least quality investment. Though I do think at some point we have to approach this front office / ownership with a clean slate in terms of personnel blunders of the past, don't we? There's obvious carry over in some respects, but this is clearly a new organization from top to bottom in terms of approach to building a roster.
GG Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Except we had a competition in 2013. And we only didn't have one in 2014 because we couldn't find a guy good enough to compete. Check the 2013-2015 Bills and compare it with 2010-2012 Seahawks. Both teams searching high and low for QB's. There's quite a bit of similarity. Pre-Whaley though? Yeah, that was a trainwreck. To be clear, they intended to have a competition in 2013, but that never materialized. What do you think of Bills strategy last offseason to go into camp with EJ, Lewis, Dixon & Tuel? That's your reason there was no competition. Thankfully someone took Whaley aside and reminded him of the importance of the position and he did a decent job of getting real bodies in camp.
FireChan Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 To be clear, they intended to have a competition in 2013, but that never materialized. What do you think of Bills strategy last offseason to go into camp with EJ, Lewis, Dixon & Tuel? That's your reason there was no competition. Thankfully someone took Whaley aside and reminded him of the importance of the position and he did a decent job of getting real bodies in camp. There weren't too many good bodies to get in 2014. Also, think back to before camp. Thad was almost a lock to be at least the backup. Can you really blame Whaley when his top two QB's got worse? Was he supposed to predict that? If two QB's on another team turned into bad players, how many other teams would still have good QB's?
GG Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 There weren't too many good bodies to get in 2014. Also, think back to before camp. Thad was almost a lock to be at least the backup. Can you really blame Whaley when his top two QB's got worse? Was he supposed to predict that? If two QB's on another team turned into bad players, how many other teams would still have good QB's? Yes, I can blame Whaley because despite conventional wisdom, he thought that he had bona fide NFL QBs on the roster in 2014. This is the one part I will agree with Marrone. He knew that he was saddled with the dregs.
maddenboy Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 All you have to do is look at who we drafted and see how good/bad they are now. Rather, look at who we drafted vs who they told us to draft. The old argument that if we had just gone by Kiper's board, we'd have a superbowl by now. Or something.
FireChan Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Yes, I can blame Whaley because despite conventional wisdom, he thought that he had bona fide NFL QBs on the roster in 2014. This is the one part I will agree with Marrone. He knew that he was saddled with the dregs. Outside of draftees, who was a bonafide NFL QB FA? Like I said, I'm not trying to exonerate Whaley, and I generally agree with you, but we weren't so different from the Hawks.
Recommended Posts