Mike Lombardi on the Draft

[JohnC]

 

Tyrod Taylor extremely accurate over the middle of the field in 2016 and one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL under pressure.

 

 

Quote from Greg Roman before the season started last year in regards to not throwing over the middle very often in 2015 - I definitely think that is something we did not focus on as a staff last year."

 

Also before last season Rex Ryan was quoted saying "Because of the way we can run the football, we’re going to get a lot more coverages that dictate throws outside the numbers more so than a lot of teams."

 

Tyrod's inability to "throw over the middle" is complete nonsense. Greg Roman admitted before last season that "middle of the field" passes were something they did not focus on as a staff.

 

And yet Tyrod threw over the middle 1/3 of the time anyway and completed a very high percentage in 2016 (75.1%)

If TT is such a gem with multi-faceted potential why did he settle for a pay cut and shorter term from the standpoint that the organization can walk away from him sooner? If there was such a demand for what you consider his sparkling talent why didn't he just wait for the option to be declined and then offer his services on the open market? Maybe the reason was that the market that a lot of people talked about was non-existent. Clearly there was a unanimous league wide opinion that he was a reasonable bridge qb and nothing more. There were at least half a dozen teams that were desperate for a qb. What was the response? Silence.

 

The reality was that our GM had enough of him. And our very discrete GM was not discrete in expressing his disdain for his starting qb. He knew exactly what his strengths and weaknesses were. The GM not only ordered that the player you so much covet not play in the last game due to an injury payout clause but he suggested that he sit out sooner.

 

I have been a critic of Whaley but what he isn't is a fool. This is an organization that hasn't had a legitimate franchise qb for over two decades. Do you really believe that he would be willing to cavalierly get rid of a qb who he believed was the long term answer at qb? Let's get serious here.

 

I'm not suggesting that all the ills of the offense can be attributed to the qb. That would be unfair. What I am saying is if you want a team contending for something meaningful then you have to upgrade the position to have a chance to get there. Being adequate is not good enough.

[Coach Tuesday]

I will be shocked if the Bills take a qb. I really believed that Whaley was ready to take the plunge on selecting a qb when he made it clear that he wanted to cut the chord with TT. What changed the situation is that I believe that McDermott is more empowered and his inclination is toward the defensive side of the ball.

 

When I read Lombardi's thoughts on Watson I was more resolute on the importance of taking a qb in the first round. But the reality is our backwater franchise's instincts lean toward the patchwork mind-set.

 

If the Bills select Watson in the first round I will be exuberant. If the Bills make their standard uninspiring and unimaginative pick I will be morose.

 

You KNOW they'll pass on the top QBs to pick a cornerback or WR. You and I both know it.

[JohnC]

 

You KNOW they'll pass on the top QBs to pick a cornerback or WR. You and I both know it.

The qb discussion will be on full force next year.

[billz4life820]

The qb discussion will be on full force next year.

 

and it will be something along the lines... "next years qb class is better we should wait"

[BarleyNY]

That certainly may well be true. I have no idea. I didn't cite his article to boost him but rather because I thought it was interesting, both in thinking about the draft as a process and for what was said about some of this year's prospecrs.

Personal emotions about the writer aside, the article is just a list of the safer prospects universally expected to be first round picks under the heading of players he expects to be good. No kidding, so does everyone else. There's no new information or actual work there. He doesn't even go out on a limb and project what a player will be, only a possible ceiling. I could've written that article in under an hour. It's just a rah-rah fluff piece.

Edited April 25, 2017 by BarleyNY

[jeffismagic]

If TT is such a gem with multi-faceted potential why did he settle for a pay cut and shorter term from the standpoint that the organization can walk away from him sooner? If there was such a demand for what you consider his sparkling talent why didn't he just wait for the option to be declined and then offer his services on the open market? Maybe the reason was that the market that a lot of people talked about was non-existent. Clearly there was a unanimous league wide opinion that he was a reasonable bridge qb and nothing more. There were at least half a dozen teams that were desperate for a qb. What was the response? Silence.

 

The reality was that our GM had enough of him. And our very discrete GM was not discrete in expressing his disdain for his starting qb. He knew exactly what his strengths and weaknesses were. The GM not only ordered that the player you so much covet not play in the last game due to an injury payout clause but he suggested that he sit out sooner.

 

I have been a critic of Whaley but what he isn't is a fool. This is an organization that hasn't had a legitimate franchise qb for over two decades. Do you really believe that he would be willing to cavalierly get rid of a qb who he believed was the long term answer at qb? Let's get serious here.

 

I'm not suggesting that all the ills of the offense can be attributed to the qb. That would be unfair. What I am saying is if you want a team contending for something meaningful then you have to upgrade the position to have a chance to get there. Being adequate is not good enough.

 

Absolutely.

[PolishDave]

If TT is such a gem with multi-faceted potential why did he settle for a pay cut and shorter term from the standpoint that the organization can walk away from him sooner? If there was such a demand for what you consider his sparkling talent why didn't he just wait for the option to be declined and then offer his services on the open market? Maybe the reason was that the market that a lot of people talked about was non-existent. Clearly there was a unanimous league wide opinion that he was a reasonable bridge qb and nothing more. There were at least half a dozen teams that were desperate for a qb. What was the response? Silence.

 

The reality was that our GM had enough of him. And our very discrete GM was not discrete in expressing his disdain for his starting qb. He knew exactly what his strengths and weaknesses were. The GM not only ordered that the player you so much covet not play in the last game due to an injury payout clause but he suggested that he sit out sooner.

 

I have been a critic of Whaley but what he isn't is a fool. This is an organization that hasn't had a legitimate franchise qb for over two decades. Do you really believe that he would be willing to cavalierly get rid of a qb who he believed was the long term answer at qb? Let's get serious here.

 

I'm not suggesting that all the ills of the offense can be attributed to the qb. That would be unfair. What I am saying is if you want a team contending for something meaningful then you have to upgrade the position to have a chance to get there. Being adequate is not good enough.

 

Nobody has a problem upgrading at QB John. No need to suggest that they do. Try to find one guy who doesn't want to upgrade. Anything short of Tom Brady could be upgraded when possible.

 

Tyrod stayed in Buffalo for one primary reason (in my opinion) - because he thought it was his best opportunity. He wants to start and he wants to win. I think that HE thinks his best shot to do that is here in this style of offense with these players.

 

As far as Whaley goes - Tyrod was never Whaley's guy in my opinion. He was Rex's guy.

 

Now Tyrod is McDermott's guy at least for the time being. If McDermott didn't like Tyrod (at least enough to realize Tyrod is his best option for now) - then Tyrod would have been shown the door.

 

I know you Tyrod haters can't stand that. But you can't change it either.

Edited April 25, 2017 by PolishDave

[JohnC]

 

Nobody has a problem upgrading at QB John. No need to suggest that they do. Try to find one guy who doesn't want to upgrade. Anything short of Tom Brady could be upgraded when possible.

 

Tyrod stayed in Buffalo for one primary reason (in my opinion) - because he thought it was his best opportunity. He wants to start and he wants to win. I think that HE thinks his best shot to do that is here in this style of offense with these players.

 

As far as Whaley goes - Tyrod was never Whaley's guy in my opinion. He was Rex's guy.

 

Now Tyrod is McDermott's guy at least for the time being. If McDermott didn't like Tyrod (at least enough to realize Tyrod is his best option for now) - then Tyrod would have been shown the door.

 

I know you Tyrod haters can't stand that. But you can't change it either.

With respect to the first highlighted area your upgrading comment is exactly my point. I believe that there are qbs in this draft who have the potential to be significant upgrades over TT. Not necessarily right away but in the not too distant future. With conviction I believe that until the caliber of qb is demonstrably improved this team is going to remain stuck in the middle.

 

I agree with your comment that TT wasn't Whaley's preferred qb and that he was more embraced by Rex. But it is stunningly irrational to portray Whaley's assessment as if he has a bias against TT because of his association with Rex. That view makes absolutely no sense. That is simply and odd thing to say. You don't think that Whaley would love to have a qb, any qb, playing at a high level for him?

 

I also agree that TT preferred to stay with Buffalo because he had a better chance to play. There is a good reason for that. No other team would have considered him as a starter or at best maybe a temporary bridge qb.

 

With respect to the highlighted comment about me hating him that is again another foolish thing to say. I'm thankful that we do have him. He is a reasonable bridge qb for a franchise that didn't have any better options.

 

Absolutely.

Repeating a myth doesn't ever make it true. The solution for some people is to resort to creating an illusion that satisfies what you want to believe. I have a better recommendation: Trust your eyes!

[PolishDave]

With respect to the first highlighted area your upgrading comment is exactly my point. I believe that there are qbs in this draft who have the potential to be significant upgrades over TT. Not necessarily right away but in the not too distant future. With conviction I believe that until the caliber of qb is demonstrably improved this team is going to remain stuck in the middle.

 

I agree with your comment that TT wasn't Whaley's preferred qb and that he was more embraced by Rex. But it is stunningly irrational to portray Whaley's assessment as if he has a bias against TT because of his association with Rex. That view makes absolutely no sense. That is simply and odd thing to say. You don't think that Whaley would love to have a qb, any qb, playing at a high level for him?

 

I also agree that TT preferred to stay with Buffalo because he had a better chance to play. There is a good reason for that. No other team would have considered him as a starter or at best maybe a temporary bridge qb.

 

With respect to the highlighted comment about me hating him that is again another foolish thing to say. I'm thankful that we do have him. He is a reasonable bridge qb for a franchise that didn't have any better options.

 

"Who have the potential to be significant upgrades over TT."

 

Wishy washy weak and meaningless statement. You could say that about any QB in college about any quarterback in the NFL not named Tom Brady.

 

That is not how the coaches will decide if and when to replace TT with a guy. They are more likely going on the basis of "Is there a guy we are confident is going to be better"

 

See that is the difference. If you replace your phrase "has potential to be a significant upgrade" with "we are confident he is going to be an upgrade" - all of a sudden you are left scratching your head about the guys in the draft right now.

 

And the reason those coaches likely aren't all that confident is because Tyrod is as good as he is - whether people want to admit it or not. If the coaches were comparing those college QB's to someone like EJ - it would be a no brainer. They would probably take a handful or more of these prospects over EJ.

 

Having a decent Qb that is tough to find a replacement for is not a bad thing. It means your team is going in the right direction in terms of acquiring upgraded talent.

[oldmanfan]

If they believe there's a QB in the four that are talked about the most that is a definitive upgrade from TT, and that has potential to be the long term starter, they should draft him at 10. If not, they shouldn't.

 

How many times do teams have to see that taking a marginal talent at QB in round 1 doesn't work out before they stop doing so?

[PolishDave]

If they believe there's a QB in the four that are talked about the most that is a definitive upgrade from TT, and that has potential to be the long term starter, they should draft him at 10. If not, they shouldn't.

 

How many times do teams have to see that taking a marginal talent at QB in round 1 doesn't work out before they stop doing so?

 

Exactly.

 

If they see a "confident overall upgrade" - they will draft him at 10.

 

If they see a QB that they aren't confident in but they think that "maybe" "could be" a franchise QB (better than Tyrod) then they might draft him, but it won't be until a later round because they aren't going to spend a first round and probably not a second or third on him either. He would be a low round guy.

 

And that guy would not come in with the expectation that he is going to start this year or next. He would come in with the expectation that he only starts if and when he proves he is better than they other quarterbacks they already have. - Like Cardale - You don't draft guys in round 1 to throw into that mix. You draft immediate starters in round one and likely round 2 as well.

[TheLynchTrain]

Personal emotions about the writer aside, the article is just a list of the safer prospects universally expected to be first round picks under the heading of players he expects to be good. No kidding, so does everyone else. There's no new information or actual work there. He doesn't even go out on a limb and project what a player will be, only a possible ceiling. I could've written that article in under an hour. It's just a rah-rah fluff piece.

 

I have no skin in this game and found the article fairly interesting read, but as a counterpoint Albert Burneko did have a fairly scathing review earlier in the month related to Lombardi's review of QBs - http://deadspin.com/the-ringers-mike-lombardi-claims-seven-insights-into-go-1794051550.

[dave mcbride]

 

I have no skin in this game and found the article fairly interesting read, but as a counterpoint Albert Burneko did have a fairly scathing review earlier in the month related to Lombardi's review of QBs - http://deadspin.com/the-ringers-mike-lombardi-claims-seven-insights-into-go-1794051550.

A major problem with this piece: he calls Lombardi a failure. Lombardi worked for three years with the SF dynasty, presided over the building of a good Cleveland team in the late 80s/early 90s, and presided over a mini-Raiders renaissance in the late 1990s/early 2000s.

 

What has this guy ever done?

 

Plus Burneko's take on RG III is entirely unconvincing.

Edited April 25, 2017 by dave mcbride

[1billsfan]

 

Exactly.

 

If they see a "confident overall upgrade" - they will draft him at 10.

 

If they see a QB that they aren't confident in but they think that "maybe" "could be" a franchise QB (better than Tyrod) then they might draft him, but it won't be until a later round because they aren't going to spend a first round and probably not a second or third on him either. He would be a low round guy.

 

And that guy would not come in with the expectation that he is going to start this year or next. He would come in with the expectation that he only starts if and when he proves he is better than they other quarterbacks they already have. - Like Cardale - You don't draft guys in round 1 to throw into that mix. You draft immediate starters in round one and likely round 2 as well.

 

I think Pegula flying all over the country attending the top QB prospects workouts suggests that they might have a higher grade on them than fans might think. Them tweeting out a pick of the Trubisky workout makes me think it's not Trubisky they would be favoring.

 

They have really done a great job of looking at all the QBs and still the consensus around the league is that they aren't picking one at #10. I think QB at #10 is a real possibility.

[dave mcbride]

More on that Deadspin piece:

 

'The thesis, so far as I can tell, is I, Michael Lombardi, can tell you how to identify successful quarterbacks. This is rather a bold claim coming from someone whose résumé—after something like two decades spent hiring football players for a living—contains no notable examples of having identified a theretofore unidentified successful quarterback.'

 

In actual fact, Mike Lombardi brought Rich Gannon to the Raiders in 1999. Rich Gannon was a phenomenal player for them.

[norton20]

Personal emotions about the writer aside, the article is just a list of the safer prospects universally expected to be first round picks under the heading of players he expects to be good. No kidding, so does everyone else. There's no new information or actual work there. He doesn't even go out on a limb and project what a player will be, only a possible ceiling. I could've written that article in under an hour. It's just a rah-rah fluff piece.

 

If you say so

[PolishDave]

 

I think Pegula flying all over the country attending the top QB prospects workouts suggests that they might have a higher grade on them than fans might think. Them tweeting out a pick of the Trubisky workout makes me think it's not Trubisky they would be favoring.

 

They have really done a great job of looking at all the QBs and still the consensus around the league is that they aren't picking one at #10. I think QB at #10 is a real possibility.

 

Could be.

 

In my opinion, they do have their eye on a guy - maybe 2 guys - but that guy will be a late round pick - and that is if that guy is still available where they would be willing to spend that pick. Not sure if that is Mahommes/Trubisky/Watson in the second round or one of the other guys in the 3rd or later rounds.

 

No problem with them taking a guy at 10 as long as they are that confident in him being a better overall quarterback than Tyrod - (not better in every area but better sum total of all quarterback traits). If they take a QB in the first and he flops bigtime - well then it is a major mark against McDermott and will likely kill his chance at a long coaching stay in Buffalo.

[Big Turk]

Bills can get a very good player at 10 that is for sure...likely going to be on D

[1billsfan]

 

Could be.

 

In my opinion, they do have their eye on a guy - maybe 2 guys - but that guy will be a late round pick - and that is if that guy is still available where they would be willing to spend that pick. Not sure if that is Mahommes/Trubisky/Watson in the second round or one of the other guys in the 3rd or later rounds.

 

No problem with them taking a guy at 10 as long as they are that confident in him being a better overall quarterback than Tyrod - (not better in every area but better sum total of all quarterback traits). If they take a QB in the first and he flops bigtime - well then it is a major mark against McDermott and will likely kill his chance at a long coaching stay in Buffalo.

 

I think another way to look at this is that you want the guy in your locker room now.

 

If you wait till 2018 to pick a QB (in the likely event that Taylor fails), then you're actually looking at year three of the McDermott regime when he has the QB he selected, and that guy has a year of experience under his belt, and he and the team are finally ready to make a push for the playoffs in 2019. That's much too long in today's here today gone tomorrow NFL game. The roster will change 50% or more by then.

 

If I were a head coach, I think I would much rather get the franchise QB now, in year one, and let him get acclimated to the NFL so that the whole team is ready to make a long, sustained push at playoffs in year two and beyond.

[PolishDave]

 

I think another way to look at this is that you want the guy in your locker room now.

 

If you wait till 2018 to pick a QB (in the likely event that Taylor fails), then you're actually looking at year three of the McDermott regime when he has the QB he selected, and that guy has a year of experience under his belt, and he and the team are finally ready to make a push for the playoffs in 2019. That's much too long in today's here today gone tomorrow NFL game. The roster will change 50% or more by then.

 

If I were a head coach, I think I would much rather get the franchise QB now, in year one, and let him get acclimated to the NFL so that the whole team is ready to make a long, sustained push at playoffs in year two and beyond.

 

Of course you would.

 

So would anybody who is a head coach or GM. You want them yesterday.

 

The catch is that if you have to make an accurate assessment about which guy to get and whether or not that guy will be good enough. If you over-reach for a guy by drafting one in the first who doesn't pan out - then you haven't just wasted a first round draft pick - you have also wasted the opportunity cost of the guy you would have drafted there instead of your miss. You can't afford to miss in the first round - especially a team like the Bills.