Dr. Who Posted April 12, 2017 Posted April 12, 2017 The fact that McD said it could be a smokescreen, and both John Murphy and Sal said they think it's a smokescreen, I'm thinking it isn't. Leroi also says smokescreen, so I am inclined to agree with you. Imo
jeffismagic Posted April 12, 2017 Posted April 12, 2017 Leroi also says smokescreen, so I am inclined to agree with you. Imo Yes, the Bills are not very good at tricking people. Hey Bills, don't say you are doing a smoke screen! Not believable.
YoloinOhio Posted April 12, 2017 Posted April 12, 2017 To clarify I only think it's a smokescreen that they could take one at 10. I do think they will take one in the 2nd. I don't buy the hype of all these QBs going early.
Riverboat Richie Posted April 12, 2017 Posted April 12, 2017 No one is even sure that there is ONE starter in the group and there is going to be a top ten run? I don't think so. San Fransico needs a starter now and the Jets would be no better off than they are now at QB. Cleveland can wait til their second pick. AZ and Buffalo don't need a starter for this coming season so they can sit a guy for the year. It would surprise me if one was picked before the Bills pick.
BillsFan17 Posted April 13, 2017 Posted April 13, 2017 I kind of feel like, they may like one or two of them. If they are they may consider them, but won't make a rash move to go up and get one. I think Trubisky is the apple of THE QB class around the league. Howeve, Buffalo has Tyrod, Yates and Cardale under contract, so if they do draft a kid high... do we keep four QBs? Do we run the risk of putting Jones on the practice squad? Do we cut Yates and let the draft pick and Jones battle it out? I don't think anything should prevent you from drafting a QB if you think he is the guy... I just don't get the sense that we will go that way under McDermott. The guy has talked about building a long term solution here. To me, I think mcdermott will build a roster and if the QB they want is there go for it, but they want a culture here and are content with Tyrod at the helm as they transition.
26CornerBlitz Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 @billsupdates NFL Draft 2017: Buffalo Bills 'very serious' about drafting QB at 10 (report): http://trib.al/qjzoDEQ
jeffismagic Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 I kind of feel like, they may like one or two of them. If they are they may consider them, but won't make a rash move to go up and get one. I think Trubisky is the apple of THE QB class around the league. Howeve, Buffalo has Tyrod, Yates and Cardale under contract, so if they do draft a kid high... do we keep four QBs? Do we run the risk of putting Jones on the practice squad? Do we cut Yates and let the draft pick and Jones battle it out? I don't think anything should prevent you from drafting a QB if you think he is the guy... I just don't get the sense that we will go that way under McDermott. The guy has talked about building a long term solution here. To me, I think mcdermott will build a roster and if the QB they want is there go for it, but they want a culture here and are content with Tyrod at the helm as they transition. If McDermott ties his coaching career to Tyrod Taylor he will have a short stay here. We shall see what his vision is quite soon. Very scary to have this guy making the call.
BillsFan17 Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 If McDermott ties his coaching career to Tyrod Taylor he will have a short stay here. We shall see what his vision is quite soon. Very scary to have this guy making the call. I don't think they are tying their future to him, but I do think they brought him back to give them a little but of a cushion. They don't have to force a QB selection, instead they can let the draft come to them at the position. If the guy they like falls to them they can make the pick if they so choose. However, without Tyrod they may have possibly even been tempted to trade up to ensure they get a QB.
Dr. Who Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 (edited) I don't think they are tying their future to him, but I do think they brought him back to give them a little but of a cushion. They don't have to force a QB selection, instead they can let the draft come to them at the position. If the guy they like falls to them they can make the pick if they so choose. However, without Tyrod they may have possibly even been tempted to trade up to ensure they get a QB. Imo, Tyrod on a cheap contract is a good scenario for drafting a young qb that needs a year or two to develop. I am not dismissing Cardale Jones, but I surmise he is a longshot to be a relevant NFL qb. So it seems rational to me to draft a qb with potential to become a franchise qb. I don't think it's Tyrod and I doubt it is Jones. What's the point of having a bridge qb without a developing qb to provide a "destination" for the bridge? All this, of course, presupposes there are qbs available in the draft who have that potential. Btw, Greg Gabriel's April 14 Mock draft has Watson going to the Bears, Mahomes the Jets, and Trubisky to the Bills. Edited April 17, 2017 by Dr. Who
GunnerBill Posted April 17, 2017 Posted April 17, 2017 (edited) Didn't know where to stick this but Gil Brandt's big board has Trubisky as his 8th best player overall, Watson as his 9th, Mahomes as his 18th and DeShone Kizer as his 33rd. Now none of the other talking heads on the networks with the exception of Bill Polian have the experience of evaluating draft prospects that Brandt has. This class does not suck. It never sucked. I don't know where that narrative started but it is wrong. There are plenty of respected draft guys out there with first round (and in some cases high first round) grades on these Quarterbacks. Edited April 17, 2017 by GunnerBill
Rocky Landing Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 I don't think they are tying their future to him, but I do think they brought him back to give them a little but of a cushion. They don't have to force a QB selection, instead they can let the draft come to them at the position. If the guy they like falls to them they can make the pick if they so choose. However, without Tyrod they may have possibly even been tempted to trade up to ensure they get a QB. i'm very glad they kept Tyrod. Dumping him would have put us in the same position that got us EJ. If TT is a "bridge QB," (which I don't believe is a given) then so be it. Better than having no bridge at all. Personally, I'm preferring Kizer at this point as a draft prospect. And hopefully not before round 3. I'm also looking forward to whatever competition Cardale offers in TC. And I think that Chad Kelly as a UDFA would be fun. That is all.
BillsFan17 Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 See that's the thing, when, if ever outside of Rodgers, who is a rare case, has a team taken a QB in the first round to groom and actually followed that path? Palmer sat for an entire season, as did Rivers. However, worked out both guys in front of them, Kitna and Brees respectively had very good seasons. Point is, today's NFL is way too impatient. The first sign of struggle from the starter the backup will always be the most popular guy among fans. Especially a kid in the first. Especially in a league where injuries as so abundant. And especially when coaches jobs are on the line. So yes, we could grab a kid who has to groom to be the aire apparant, but who is to say we don't wait and snag a kid next year who is more NFL ready, could still ideally sit for a year, and if anything you feel more comfortable if said QB gets thrown in a little sooner...
PromoTheRobot Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 I don't think they are tying their future to him, but I do think they brought him back to give them a little but of a cushion. They don't have to force a QB selection, instead they can let the draft come to them at the position. If the guy they like falls to them they can make the pick if they so choose. However, without Tyrod they may have possibly even been tempted to trade up to ensure they get a QB. ...in a bad QB draft. Billsy.
YoloinOhio Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 So they've met with every QB except Watson? Hmmm
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 So they've met with every QB except Watson? Hmmm But Whaley is in love with Watson
BigBuff423 Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 We've seen what Drafting for "need" does to an NFL team, I was not in favor of keeping Tyrod merely because I DON'T think he is a very good QB as NFL QBs go, but I do appreciate the plan, the didactic means of allowing their Draft plan to come to them. That said, I think we sometimes underestimate the power of coaching in the NFL because we assume a great prospect will nearly automatically translate to a great NFL player, and certainly with QBs that is very far from true. So, I think I would prefer the team to unearth the talent and cultivate it to its top potential....so if its Webb from Cal or Peterman from Pitt or some other lesser "hyped" commodity, than so be it....because we can have a list of names that QBs were not projected to be "the" QB, and instead based on situation and coaching and potential emerged as fantastic players, including QBs.
Webster Guy Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 I think we want to trade down, maybe more than once even. Cleveland is the whale this year, and they don't offer us anything if they think we're drafting a LB or Dback for need. There are also a few teams that may want QB ahead of Cleveland at 12 so that helps us too. Evaluating qb's like we have for this draft isn't just a smokescreen, it's legitimate due diligence on the most important position in the game. Some of these dudes will be there in the second round as well. What excites me is there are a big handful of future pro bowlers on the defensive side in this draft and we have the opportunity to get a few of them next week. And of course the fact that nobody ever gets mock drafts even close to what actually happens. Tons of predictions but less than 20% historical accuracy in the first round and far less than that in later rounds. Remember we got slashed by Ajayi twice last year and Bell once, in record setting numbers. That wasn't just scheme, it was against an 8 man front when we knew it was coming. To me that means we need another defensive heavy draft.
jeffismagic Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 We've seen what Drafting for "need" does to an NFL team, I was not in favor of keeping Tyrod merely because I DON'T think he is a very good QB as NFL QBs go, but I do appreciate the plan, the didactic means of allowing their Draft plan to come to them. That said, I think we sometimes underestimate the power of coaching in the NFL because we assume a great prospect will nearly automatically translate to a great NFL player, and certainly with QBs that is very far from true. So, I think I would prefer the team to unearth the talent and cultivate it to its top potential....so if its Webb from Cal or Peterman from Pitt or some other lesser "hyped" commodity, than so be it....because we can have a list of names that QBs were not projected to be "the" QB, and instead based on situation and coaching and potential emerged as fantastic players, including QBs. Great point. Trubisky with Shanahan vs Trubisky in Cleveland.
Bill_with_it Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 (edited) So they've met with every QB except Watson? HmmmThey met with Watson at the combine.https://www.instagram.com/p/BTAaybXhk9v/ Edited April 18, 2017 by Bill_with_it
Bangarang Posted April 18, 2017 Posted April 18, 2017 They met with Watson at the combine. https://www.instagram.com/p/BTAaybXhk9v/ No pre-draft visit or workout though
Recommended Posts