Heavy Kevi Posted May 20, 2017 Posted May 20, 2017 (edited) I don't buy into the whole "next year's class will be better" stuff, especially this early. Guys can go back to school. Others can have down years or get injured. Then what was once supposed to be a great class is now average or mediocre. Then there is the possibility that teams worse than us will pick QBs before we get a chance to. I don't think just because we have an extra first round pick that we're a lock to trade up. You need a team that doesn't need a QB to be bad enough and want to trade down. So many variables to even pretend like next year is finally the year we get our guy. I agree to a degree. There have not been elite prospect lately, but go back just a bit. We heard about Stafford, Bradford, and Luck for years before they came out. The real problem may be college not preparing QBs for the NFL by using talent exploitive offenses, as opposed to a legitimate under-center, presnap read, timing offense. So maybe yeah now you guys are right, all QBs from now on are a crap chute, so just take a chance on one. That does not mean overdrafting. When everyone sucks, just wait and take who's left. Never would I advocate for a Trubisky-like trade up. I do disagree about next year. Because all the QB prospects suck, they are not universally loved. Clearly we didn't think Mahomes was worth drafting, KC was in love. Because of such a disparity in grade opinions, I don't see any obstacles in the way of a trade if we really want to. Edited May 20, 2017 by Shotgunner
oldmanfan Posted May 20, 2017 Posted May 20, 2017 It should also be remembered that Buffalo passed on Paxton Lynch when he was available last year... It's gonna be alot of "fun" watching their careers while we fail to make the playoffs year after year... Lynch is behind a seventh round pick
Doc Posted May 20, 2017 Posted May 20, 2017 (edited) They are similar. Tyrod, though, is much younger and has only started 29 games in the NFL. Smith's ceiling is pretty well established by now.Maybe. But I think Tyrod is that his ceiling right now. We shall see It should also be remembered that Buffalo passed on Paxton Lynch when he was available last year... It's gonna be alot of "fun" watching their careers while we fail to make the playoffs year after year... Lynch is a scrub. Edited May 20, 2017 by Doc
JohnC Posted May 20, 2017 Posted May 20, 2017 Would you have preferred the Bills to have traded two second round picks for Tyrod, like KC did for Smith? They have put up very similar numbers... I would take Alex Smith over Tyrod under any circumstances. The deal for Smith worked out well for KC. They are a playoff team with him taking the snaps. And compared to TT he uses whole field. The criticism of him that he too often throws the underneath stuff because he is overly cautions is warranted. But without question the trade that KC made for him has worked out well for them. Tyrod could have put himself on the market if he wanted to but didn't because there wasn't much interest in him. He ended up taking a pay cut and the term of his contract was shortened so the team could be in a better position to walk away from him if it decided to.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted May 20, 2017 Posted May 20, 2017 I would take Alex Smith over Tyrod under any circumstances. The deal for Smith worked out well for KC. They are a playoff team with him taking the snaps. And compared to TT he uses whole field. The criticism of him that he too often throws the underneath stuff because he is overly cautions is warranted. But without question the trade that KC made for him has worked out well for them. Tyrod could have put himself on the market if he wanted to but didn't because there wasn't much interest in him. He ended up taking a pay cut and the term of his contract was shortened so the team could be in a better position to walk away from him if it decided to. That's not why.
Section242 Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 I agree to a degree. There have not been elite prospect lately, but go back just a bit. We heard about Stafford, Bradford, and Luck for years before they came out. The real problem may be college not preparing QBs for the NFL by using talent exploitive offenses, as opposed to a legitimate under-center, presnap read, timing offense. So maybe yeah now you guys are right, all QBs from now on are a crap chute, so just take a chance on one. That does not mean overdrafting. When everyone sucks, just wait and take who's left. Never would I advocate for a Trubisky-like trade up. I do disagree about next year. Because all the QB prospects suck, they are not universally loved. Clearly we didn't think Mahomes was worth drafting, KC was in love. Because of such a disparity in grade opinions, I don't see any obstacles in the way of a trade if we really want to. Ya all picks are a crap chute. It's just that taking Myles Garrett may improve Cleveland by a win or two max while hitting on a QB sets the franchise up for years. The Bills are hoping that Taylor can give them an Alex Smith type year so they can get blown out in the playoffs. KC decided it wasn't good enough and Alex Smith wasn't good enough. That's the Bills goal, something that's not good enough.
Heavy Kevi Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 Ya all picks are a crap chute. It's just that taking Myles Garrett may improve Cleveland by a win or two max while hitting on a QB sets the franchise up for years. The Bills are hoping that Taylor can give them an Alex Smith type year so they can get blown out in the playoffs. KC decided it wasn't good enough and Alex Smith wasn't good enough. That's the Bills goal, something that's not good enough. So much anger. My point has not much to do with Tyrod. It's about taking one of the later guys (late round 1, 2nd, or 3rd) And lets be honest, getting blown out in the playoffs would be a massive upgrade for us.
John from Riverside Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 I would take Alex Smith over Tyrod under any circumstances. The deal for Smith worked out well for KC. They are a playoff team with him taking the snaps. And compared to TT he uses whole field. The criticism of him that he too often throws the underneath stuff because he is overly cautions is warranted. But without question the trade that KC made for him has worked out well for them. Tyrod could have put himself on the market if he wanted to but didn't because there wasn't much interest in him. He ended up taking a pay cut and the term of his contract was shortened so the team could be in a better position to walk away from him if it decided to. Lets throw some credit at the feet of whoever biult that KC defense as well.....
mannc Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 I would take Alex Smith over Tyrod under any circumstances. The deal for Smith worked out well for KC. They are a playoff team with him taking the snaps. And compared to TT he uses whole field. The criticism of him that he too often throws the underneath stuff because he is overly cautions is warranted. But without question the trade that KC made for him has worked out well for them. Tyrod could have put himself on the market if he wanted to but didn't because there wasn't much interest in him. He ended up taking a pay cut and the term of his contract was shortened so the team could be in a better position to walk away from him if it decided to. As to your first paragraph, I agree that the trade has worked out pretty well for KC, but Buffalo acquired TT without giving up a single draft pick and at a much lower cap hit. Your preference for Smith over Taylor is certainly not supported by their comparative stats for the past two years; Smith has enjoyed a far better defense, as well as vastly superior coaching. Taylor is seven years younger than smith and has started only 29 games. I'll take Tyrod at this point, and it's not close. Your second paragraph is nothing but speculation that has already been thoroughly discussed.
JohnC Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 That's not why. Name a team that was interested in Taylor and made an effort to acquire him? Taylor took a pay cut cut in salary and had the terms of his contract altered so he could remain with the Bills. Again, name a team that showed an interest in him and took any measure to get him when he was available?
mannc Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 Name a team that was interested in Taylor and made an effort to acquire him? Taylor took a pay cut cut in salary and had the terms of his contract altered so he could remain with the Bills. Again, name a team that showed an interest in him and took any measure to get him when he was available?Tyrod was never a free agent, so your question is just silly, even when you ask it twice.
JohnC Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 Tyrod was never a free agent, so your question is just silly, even when you ask it twice. If Tryod was not willing to modify his contract he was going to be released. That was a fact. You don't think that his agents or reps unofficially checked the market to see if there was an interest in him by other teams?
BuffaloHokie13 Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 Name a team that was interested in Taylor and made an effort to acquire him? Taylor took a pay cut cut in salary and had the terms of his contract altered so he could remain with the Bills. Again, name a team that showed an interest in him and took any measure to get him when he was available? Teams could not make an effort to acquire him because he was under contract; unless you're thinking trades, but nobody was going to trade for someone that was potentially going to be on the open market. His agent put out feelers in case he was cut and got responses, but in the end he renegotiated to stay here due to several factors. If you think money is the only piece to determining these decisions you are mistaken. Family, relationships with players and staff, the current offer on the table, potential future earnings, time until the next contract, etc., all play into whether a move is worth it for the other hypothetical contracts. The renegotiated contract was in the ballpark of other potential options, but on the lower end. Other factors made that deficit on this contract opportunity worth it.
Kirby Jackson Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 If Tryod was not willing to modify his contract he was going to be released. That was a fact. You don't think that his agents or reps unofficially checked the market to see if there was an interest in him by other teams? I'll say this Hokie knows whether or not that is the case better than anyone on this board. If he's saying that's it's not the case it's not the case. He may not disclose the specific teams but that doesn't mean that he doesn't have the info. My guess is Chicago, Cleveland and SF.
JohnC Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 I'll say this Hokie knows whether or not that is the case better than anyone on this board. If he's saying that's it's not the case it's not the case. He may not disclose the specific teams but that doesn't mean that he doesn't have the info. My guess is Chicago, Cleveland and SF. My basic point regarding TT whether he is with the Bills or with another team is that he was looked at as a bridge qb. No team considered him to be a player with the potential of being their long term starting qb. The contract he got with Buffalo or the potential contract he would have been able to garner from another team is a bridge qb valued contract. I would say with confidence that Chicago, Cleveland and SF (teams you cited) would not be satisfied to have a TT caliber qb as their starting qb, at least not on a long term basis. (Chicago went out and got Glennon as their bridge qb.) I'll also say the same thing about Buffalo. If this franchise has any serious aspirations it will not be with TT as their franchise qb. My comments are not to diminish him as a player. He is the best that we currently have. We should be happy to have him as our bridge qb. But I don't consider him a franchise qb and I don't believe that this new staff does either.
Kirby Jackson Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 (edited) My basic point regarding TT whether he is with the Bills or with another team is that he was looked at as a bridge qb. No team considered him to be a player with the potential of being their long term starting qb. The contract he got with Buffalo or the potential contract he would have been able to garner from another team is a bridge qb valued contract. I would say with confidence that Chicago, Cleveland and SF (teams you cited) would not be satisfied to have a TT caliber qb as their starting qb, at least not on a long term basis. (Chicago went out and got Glennon as their bridge qb.) I'll also say the same thing about Buffalo. If this franchise has any serious aspirations it will not be with TT as their franchise qb. My comments are not to diminish him as a player. He is the best that we currently have. We should be happy to have him as our bridge qb. But I don't consider him a franchise qb and I don't believe that this new staff does either. Someone made an important distinction between a "bridge" deal and a "prove-it" deal. Hoyer is a bridge QB. McCown is a bridge QB. Glennon (now) is a bridge QB (but wasn't at the time of signing). Bridge QBs are guys that you are certain to move on from. Often you have the successor in the building already. Tyrod is on a prove-it deal to me. It's a totally new staff and scheme. They had an opportunity to add his successor this year and they punted. They kicked that can down the road, electing to evaluate him instead. They've insured against a bad season with the extra 1st rounder. I would suspect that the plan is to use it on a QB but certainly wouldn't guarantee it. The actions that they've taken show us that they want to evaluate. Edited May 22, 2017 by Kirby Jackson
mannc Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 If Tryod was not willing to modify his contract he was going to be released. That was a fact. That most certainly was not a fact. That might have been the Bills' negotiating stance, but IMO it is unlikely they would have released him, especially after McDermott was hired. You're statement that Tyrod would have been released is nothing more than your uninformed speculation. Someone made an important distinction between a "bridge" deal and a "prove-it" deal. Hoyer is a bridge QB. McCown is a bridge QB. Glennon (now) is a bridge QB (but wasn't at the time of signing). Bridge QBs are guys that you are certain to move on from. Often you have the successor in the building already. Tyrod is on a prove-it deal to me. It's a totally new staff and scheme. They had an opportunity to add his successor this year and they punted. The kicked that can down the road, electing to evaluate him instead. They've insured against a bad season with the extra 1st rounder. I would suspect that the plan is to use it on a QB but certainly wouldn't guarantee it. The actions that they've taken show us that they want to evaluate. Exactly right. They want to see what Tyrod does this year, with another season under his belt, a new system, and (hopefully) some healthy WRs.
BillsFan4 Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 Ya all picks are a crap chute. It's just that taking Myles Garrett may improve Cleveland by a win or two max while hitting on a QB sets the franchise up for years. The Bills are hoping that Taylor can give them an Alex Smith type year so they can get blown out in the playoffs. KC decided it wasn't good enough and Alex Smith wasn't good enough. That's the Bills goal, something that's not good enough. Getting blown out in the playoffs means that we actually MADE the playoffs, so I'd take it as a first step for a team that hasnt seen the post season in 17 years. I don't see any scenario where the Bills go from never making the playoffs to playing in the Super Bowl in a single season... So playoffs sound like a good starting point to me. Also, Kansas City spent 4 years with Alex Smith, building up their entire team and having back to back successful seasons before they finally decided to take a shot on a QB high in the draft going into their 5th season. John Dorsey and Andy Reid did not address the QB position in any meaningful way (in the draft) until they were going into their 5th year with the team. They built up the rest of the team first, and got to a point where they knew they had to take a shot at a QB to likely make it any further.
Big Turk Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 I read the title and skipped ahead. There is NEVER a sure fired anything. The draft is a crap shoot. Sometimes your odds are better than others. Go with the odds. Let it play out for a year, but I'm guessing QB options are better than usual in the next draft. Exactly, if there were sure fire players, 50% of first round picks wouldn't be busts.
Recommended Posts