Kirby Jackson Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 If there is a top QB that some how fall at 19 I don't think you pass him up. It has been mentioned an infinite amount of times, but QB is by far the most important position on the field. If there is a potential all pro QB at 19 that falls you pull the trigger. I don't watch a lot of college football and from what people are saying this isn't a strong QB class so I guess it probably wont happen. With that said I wouldn't mind if they went WR in the first round. A big, go get the football type WR to help Tyrod would be key next year...we don't have one on the roster. There is no QB in this draft that is can't miss. The top guys may never be as good as TT. You cannot draft a guy because the position is important if he is never going to play. If the Bills had the 1st overall pick this year QB would be the wrong selection. Everyone always wants to get better at QB but there aren't always guys to do that. If the Bills were to take even a 1st round QB this year, they probably have about a 5% chance of improving the position for 2016. I don't see how taking a step back at QB gets this team in "win now" mode any closer to their objective? Tyrod is not perfect but he warrants a longer look. This was kind of the Aaron Rodgers point earlier. These unicorns don't exist. These guys that everyone seems to think that you have to have come along about once every 2-3 years. You have to have the right pick (or assets to get him) and be sure that he is an upgrade. A WR is definitely needed but this is a weak WR crop at the top. I like Treadwell a lot and his slow 40 time will scare some teams. He is the most polished though. There are a few others that would make some sense in the 2nd.
Mark80 Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) that isn't always the case due to coaching and scheme changes that take place in college after a kid has already committed. You have big time recruits lining the bench at certain schools because they weren't recruited by the current coach and there is no loyalty there of the coach needing to fit his scheme to the talent, since he also has his own talent that already fits. I don't think the rule of "if you don't start in college you won't succeed in the NFL", while certainly true in some situations, can be universally applied. Certain kids will transfer when in that situation, but that is not an easy decision or easily done. Each player is its own case. Can you please name a single instance where this occurred and the QB had NFL success? I see your Matt Cassell example. I did say EFFECTIVE NFL QB though. If you want to consider a guy that only threw for over 3,000 yards twice and never over 4,000 an effective NFL QB, well, so be it. I think most people clearly can see that the man is and always has been terrible and if that is the best example anyone can think of, well, then I think I proved my original point. Edited February 4, 2016 by Mark80
TheFunPolice Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 I would MUCH rather see the Bills draft a LB, WR, S, or some other position, rather than QB early in the draft. Let's build the roster around Tyrod and take a shot at this thing.
reddogblitz Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 Someone earlier was talking a bout how we dont make the playoffs till we learn how to consistantly beat the patriots. I think there is some truth to that......but I have a hard time believing ANY of these QBs that are highly touted signals the end of the pats dominance...... I think it's bull. IF we had been able to beat Jacksonville and Philadelphia we would have made the playoffs despite getting swept by the Patsies.
Kirby Jackson Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 I think it's bull. IF we had been able to beat Jacksonville and Philadelphia we would have made the playoffs despite getting swept by the Patsies. Agreed That's always a weird argument to me. You are able to make the playoffs when your record warrants it, not when you beat a specific team. I promise that if the Bills are 14-2 next year with 2 losses to the Patriots they will be in the playoffs.
YoloinOhio Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) Can you please name a single instance where this occurred and the QB had NFL success? I see your Matt Cassell example. I did say EFFECTIVE NFL QB though. If you want to consider a guy that only threw for over 3,000 yards twice and never over 4,000 an effective NFL QB, well, so be it. I think most people clearly can see that the man is and always has been terrible. i already provided the Russell Wilson example. NC state willingly moved on from him. They preferred to play the hot shot freshman recruit instead. If they thought Wilson was better for their team at that point in time, they wouldn't have proceeded in that manner. Instead of being a backup, he was able to transfer without sitting out a year because he had already graduated. That's not the case for everywhere. The point isn't that this happens all the time, it's that I don't think you can slap a label on a college player based on playing time or even production. There are numerous variables that play into a college athlete's career. The scouts research every tiny detail with an eye on NFL traits and projection. If what occurred to lead to that player not being on the field as a starter doesn't point negatively toward their projection, it isn't a deal breaker as to whether they might draft him. You may never see a backup QB go in the first round but you certainly may see one go later as a flyer. I think that was the discussion, but I haven't followed the thread closely. Edited February 4, 2016 by YoloinOhio
Kirby Jackson Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 i already provided the Russell Wilson example. NC state willingly moved on from him. They preferred to play the hot shot freshman recruit instead. If they thought Wilson was better, they wouldn't have proceeded in that manner. The point isn't that this happens all the time, it's that I don't think you can slap a label on a college player based on playing time or even production. There are numerous variables that play into a college athlete's career. The scouts research every tiny detail with an eye on NFL traits and projection. If what occurred to lead to that player not being on the field as a starter doesn't point negatively toward their projection, it isn't a deal breaker as to whether they might draft him. You may never see a backup QB go in the first round but you certainly may see one go later as a flyer. I think that was the discussion, but I haven't followed the thread closely. Flacco sort of fits as well. He left Pitt because he was going to be behind Tyler Palco.
Captain Hindsight Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 TE and JP did both show promise until they were banged around or injured, especially TE. I remember he took that hit from I believe Adrian Wilson of the Cardnials and was concussed. After that, he was a totally different QB; he played so tentative. The same can be said for EJ. Since those players sustained their injuries they played completely different after that point. That's the main difference I see between them and TT. After his knee injury he back and played really well and wasn't shaken up by it. And I agree with you even more on this Tyrod subject just becoming redundant haha. GO BILLS!! This is the most overused excuse as to why Trent started to suck. He was never a guy that wanted to throw it all over the place. He was always tentative He tried hard not to screw up and eventually defenses pressed down on the receivers and Trent rightfully earned his nickname
TheFunPolice Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 The Bills were 4-2 in the AFC East this year. The problem was going 1-3 vs the NFC East.
John from Riverside Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 I would MUCH rather see the Bills draft a LB, WR, S, or some other position, rather than QB early in the draft. Let's build the roster around Tyrod and take a shot at this thing. From my view it makes NO sense for Whaley to draft a QB with that 1st pick - DL and LB are the strength positions in this draft - He needs a immediate starter out of that 1st pick (unless its Jaylon Smith.....who you are drafting because he might be a top 5 talent) - if they dont turn it around this year all they will be doing is drafting a QB for their replacements when they get fired I really think its gonna be Spence if he falls
Chandler#81 Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 Huh? I'm sorry, but if you can't start on your college team, you are not going to be an effective NFL player at any position, much less QB. Tom Brady sharing playing time with Henson is the only thing similar to what you are saying that I can think of and that was only because his coach was a stubborn idiot who couldn't see what everyone else saw, that Tom was a much more effective QB than Henson. Henson was just playing because of his reputation. Cam couldn't get on the field at Florida, cuz the Great Tebow was playing. Transferred, won the Heisman and the rest is history. Aikman bounced around the college ranks as well. Granted, these are rare. But they happen.
metzelaars_lives Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) This is the most overused excuse as to why Trent started to suck. He was never a guy that wanted to throw it all over the place. He was always tentative He tried hard not to screw up and eventually defenses pressed down on the receivers and Trent rightfully earned his nickname Yes. To insinuate that JP Losman, Trent Edwards or EJ Manuel ever sniffed the level of play that Tyrod Taylor attained this season is ridiculous. A game or two here or there for Losman and Edwards, perhaps. But you cannot fluke your way to the numbers Taylor put up this year. Taylor had at least 4 or 5 games which would have been as good as either of those two guys ever played and certainly better than Manuel ever played. Nick Foles once threw for 27 TD's and 2 INT's. Nick Foles sucks. Taylor could regress next year too. But the year when Foles threw 27 TD's and 2 INT's he was really good. It's not like he sucked that year and magically ended up with 27 TD's and 2 INT's. At the end of the day, Taylor had a pretty damn good year, particularly for a first year starter. I've said it before but more people need to hear it: if Taylor was considered a rookie this year, he would have waltzed away with the offensive rookie of the year award. Think about that for a second. I'm so sick of people acting like he should be judged like a guy who just completed his fifth year as a starter. He should be judged more like a rookie than a fifth year starter. Edited February 4, 2016 by metzelaars_lives
Mark80 Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) i already provided the Russell Wilson example. NC state willingly moved on from him. They preferred to play the hot shot freshman recruit instead. If they thought Wilson was better for their team at that point in time, they wouldn't have proceeded in that manner. Instead of being a backup, he was able to transfer without sitting out a year because he had already graduated. That's not the case for everywhere. The point isn't that this happens all the time, it's that I don't think you can slap a label on a college player based on playing time or even production. There are numerous variables that play into a college athlete's career. The scouts research every tiny detail with an eye on NFL traits and projection. If what occurred to lead to that player not being on the field as a starter doesn't point negatively toward their projection, it isn't a deal breaker as to whether they might draft him. You may never see a backup QB go in the first round but you certainly may see one go later as a flyer. I think that was the discussion, but I haven't followed the thread closely. Flacco sort of fits as well. He left Pitt because he was going to be behind Tyler Palco. Cam couldn't get on the field at Florida, cuz the Great Tebow was playing. Transferred, won the Heisman and the rest is history. Aikman bounced around the college ranks as well. Granted, these are rare. But they happen. You guys are all mentioning players that were starters in their final year(s) of college. Not one of those guys was a backup. Wilson started at NC State as a senior, graduated, started at Wisconsin, Cam started at Auburn, Aikman started at UCLA, Flaco started at Delaware. The poster said to find some college backup sitting behind a star, that is not what any of these guys the season before they were drafted. You are talking year(s) before they were drafted. I am asking for an example of a guy who was a backup the season before the draft that had NFL success and Matt Cassell is not an answer to that IMO. He wrote: "Someone worth looking for would be a college second stringer with skills who was forced to sit behind a true star. Grab him and develop him. No more one game wonders like EJ." Edited February 4, 2016 by Mark80
YoloinOhio Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) You guys are all mentioning players that were starters in their final year(s) of college. Not one of those guys was a backup. Wilson started at NC State as a senior, graduated, started at Wisconsin, Cam started at Auburn, Aikman started at UCLA, Flaco started at Delaware. The poster said to find some college backup sitting behind a star, that is not what any of these guys the season before they were drafted. You are talking year(s) before they were drafted. I am asking for an example of a guy who was a backup the season before the draft that had NFL success and Matt Cassell is not an answer to that IMO. He wrote: "Someone worth looking for would be a college second stringer with skills who was forced to sit behind a true star. Grab him and develop him. No more one game wonders like EJ." i wasn't referring to what the other poster wrote - just saying teams should be open to using a late round pick on a QB with NFL traits to develop, regardless of whether he was a starter or not. Because there are lots of reasons as to why he may not be starting and they may or may not factor in to whether he would be successful at the next level. Both Wilson and Flacco would have been backups if they didn't transfer. Not every guy can transfer or wants to transfer. Certainly they won't be guys you expect to start right away or use a high pick on. But if you see a QB with NFL traits who you scout and think he can develop into an NFL QB, it may not matter if he played a lot or a little if you have time to develop him for a few years. Not every backup QB is going to get a shot, but some might depending on what they bring to the table. Good scouts will find those players. Edited February 4, 2016 by YoloinOhio
Mark80 Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) i wasn't referring to what the other poster wrote - just saying teams should be open to using a late round pick on a QB with NFL traits to develop, regardless of whether he was a a starter or not. Because there are lots of reasons as to why he may not be starting and they may or may not factor in to whether he would be successful at the next level. Both Wilson and Flacco would have been backups if they didn't transfer. Not every guy can transfer or wants to transfer. Certainly they won't be guys you expect to start right away or use a high pick on. But if you see a QB with NFL traits who you scout and think he can develop into an NFL QB, it may not matter if he played a lot or a little if you have time to develop him for a few years. You are just dealing in hypotheticals. If Flaco didn't transfer, if Wilson didn't transfer, if someone unknown QB doesn't transfer...the fact is that guys with the goods DO transfer to get playing time instead of being a back up because they know if they want to have a shot to hit the NFL, they need to be on the field in college. Cassell is the only guy I can think of that did not start in college and got some playing time in the NFL, but he was far from successful. If we want to try a strategy that has never, to my knowledge at least, worked in the history of the NFL, well, I guess it's bound to happen sometime, right? But I would simply prefer the more conventional routes of drafting guys who are at least good enough to play in college. I mean, if we wanted to we could take your argument to the next level...why not just hold open tryouts for any Joe Schmo that can throw a football? Hey, he's got an arm, who's to say he can't develop? Edited February 4, 2016 by Mark80
Marty McFly Posted February 4, 2016 Author Posted February 4, 2016 funny, but that's actually a decent example. He never saw the field as a QB in college. Clearly he was able to play the position effectively in the NFL, regardless of what people think of him. He's not great but he's been a starter. Worth a late pick for NE when they were able to get a huge ROI on him with the trade to KC after he lead them to a winning season with no experience playing QB in college? I'd say so. Russell Wilson was told to take a hike by nc state so they could get Giraffe Boy on the field ASAP. They can say it was because he wanted to play baseball too, but if they really wanted Wilson to still be their QB, they would have dealt with the baseball. Who did giraffe face turn into? What a Flutie like blunder by that FO
YoloinOhio Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 You are just dealing in hypotheticals. If Flaco didn't transfer, if Wilson didn't transfer, if someone unknown QB doesn't transfer...the fact is, that guys with the goods DO transfer to get playing time instead of being a back up because they know if they want to have a shot to hit the NFL, they need to be on the field in college. Cassell is the only guy I can think of that did not start in college and got some playing time in the NFL, but he was far from successful. If we want to try a strategy that has never, to my knowledge at least, worked in the history of the NFL, well, I guess it's bound to happen sometime, right? But I would simply prefer the more conventional routes of drafting guys who are at least good enough to play in college. that's fair and I'm always more comfortable with proven methods as well. Just think it's less about a scouting department not considering a QB who appears to have NFL traits simply because he didn't start - and more about asking why he didn't start and vetting it from there depending on the answer.
Mark80 Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) Maybe we'll take your OSU boy later in the draft. He could be an example right there, but since he started the first 1/2 of the season I'm not sure it really counts though! I'm still hoping for Kessler though around 5 or 6th round. Edited February 4, 2016 by Mark80
YoloinOhio Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 Maybe we'll take your OSU boy later in the draft. He could be an example right there, but since he started the first 1/2 of the season I'm not sure it really counts though!he is a weird case. Not sure he fits any example. He may get a check mark in his favor from the scouts that the read option/run the QB every other snap offense wasn't a fit for him.
Marty McFly Posted February 4, 2016 Author Posted February 4, 2016 Yes. To insinuate that JP Losman, Trent Edwards or EJ Manuel ever sniffed the level of play that Tyrod Taylor attained this season is ridiculous. A game or two here or there for Losman and Edwards, perhaps. But you cannot fluke your way to the numbers Taylor put up this year. Taylor had at least 4 or 5 games which would have been as good as either of those two guys ever played and certainly better than Manuel ever played. Nick Foles once threw for 27 TD's and 2 INT's. Nick Foles sucks. Taylor could regress next year too. But the year when Foles threw 27 TD's and 2 INT's he was really good. It's not like he sucked that year and magically ended up with 27 TD's and 2 INT's. At the end of the day, Taylor had a pretty damn good year, particularly for a first year starter. I've said it before but more people need to hear it: if Taylor was considered a rookie this year, he would have waltzed away with the offensive rookie of the year award. Think about that for a second. I'm so sick of people acting like he should be judged like a guy who just completed his fifth year as a starter. He should be judged more like a rookie than a fifth year starter. This.
Recommended Posts