What would you trade for Phil Rivers right now?

[BringBackOrton]

I'm not trying to be condescending so I apologize if it comes across as such. Do you really think it's a good idea to trade a solid starter and 3 1st's for a QB that turns 36 during the season? Do you really think that he will pack up his dozen kids and move across the country? I like Rivers more than most people but there is a 0.0% chance of this happening and if the Bills made that offer that would be CRUCIFIED by the media.

Versus waiting around for a franchise QB to fall in our lap while TT muddles us to 8-8?

 

Yes.

 

The solid starter thing is disingenuous because only one QB is on the field at a time. It's not like TT is a depth player.

Edited June 7, 2017 by jmc12290

[Thurman#1]

TT and 3 1sts doesn't get a nibble?

 

 

 

Doesn't get a nibble on Buffalo's side.

 

If he were younger, you don't hesitate for an instant, but he's 36. We would have to build a team around him for the next two or three years, without 3 firsts.

 

Rivers might be worth that, but Buffalo can't give those up. If we already had a terrific roster, maybe. But we don't.

 

 

 

 

It simply isn't going to happen. The likelihood of getting Rivers is pretty much the same as the likelihood of getting Aaron Rodgers. People don't want to accept that, but it's true.

yep and every time I say he has a No trade clause. And that he's not going to be traded. Ever. He is not waiving it. He would rather retire than go elsewhere. But yet...

 

 

You might be assuming too much there. He might go elsewhere. But yeah, not to Buffalo with the state of the roster we've got right now, and especially not if we gave a lot of our chances to improve that roster in the trade.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Thurman#1

[mannc]

Leaving aside the fact that it is basically impossible.....

 

Would I as a fan? Sure. I do think with Rivers under centre we would be a playoff team this year and in a weak AFC (aside from New England) I'd give us a real shot at making the Championship game.

 

Then why has San Diego never won squat in his 13 years there? I would much prefer Tyrod.

I'm not trying to be condescending so I apologize if it comes across as such. Do you really think it's a good idea to trade a solid starter and 3 1st's for a QB that turns 36 during the season? Do you really think that he will pack up his dozen kids and move across the country? I like Rivers more than most people but there is a 0.0% chance of this happening and if the Bills made that offer that would be CRUCIFIED by the media.

Rivers is maybe worth a second round pick at this point in his career. Those who think otherwise are probably the ones who said we should trade a first for Jay Cutler last year. I would not trade Tyrod straight up for Rivers. Edited June 7, 2017 by mannc

[Thurman#1]

Then why has San Diego never won squat in his 13 years there? I would much prefer Tyrod.

Rivers is maybe worth a second round pick at this point in his career. Those who think otherwise are probably the ones who said we should trade a first for Jay Cutler last year. I would not trade Tyrod straight up for Rivers.

 

 

 

Oh, please. Comparing Rivers and Cutler is like comparing Ruth's Chris prime rib and a Quarter Pounder.

 

San Diego hasn't won a Lombardi because football is a team game and even an elite QB needs to be surrounded by a solid team to go far in the playoffs.

 

But they made a conference championship during Rivers' time there. They've won four playoff games from a very quick count and made the playoffs five or six times, mostly in Rivers' early years when they had a decent but not great GM.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Thurman#1

[GunnerBill]

Then why has San Diego never won squat in his 13 years there? I would much prefer Tyrod.

 

Philip Rivers is a better Quarterback than Tyrod Taylor. I'm sorry it is not even arguable. Whether we should trade for him is a different question... and I think probably no we shouldn't and it is impossible anyway..... but he is a better Quarterback than Taylor. I'm sorry to argue otherwise is ridiculous.

[ALF]

Yolo is right

 

Philip Rivers' extension includes no-trade clause

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000511006/article/philip-rivers-extension-includes-notrade-clause

[Thurman#1]

 

Yolo is right

 

Philip Rivers' extension includes no-trade clause

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000511006/article/philip-rivers-extension-includes-notrade-clause

 

 

 

 

Yup. Which he could waive if he liked the destination enough, but he'd be looking for somewhere with a really good surrounding cast, good enough to compete for a title in the short term, which is as long as he's liable to be around.

 

No reason he'd come to Buffalo as things stand right now.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Thurman#1

[Kirby Jackson]

Versus waiting around for a franchise QB to fall in our lap while TT muddles us to 8-8?

 

Yes.

 

The solid starter thing is disingenuous because only one QB is on the field at a time. It's not like TT is a depth player.

Clearly you can only play one guy. 15-14 with 47 TDs and 12 INTs and 12 INTs in 29 games would, at worst, qualify as solid. By comparison Ryan Tannehill is 14-15 with 45 TDs / 24 INTs, Flacco is 13-16 with 44 TDs / 30 INT, Alex Smith is 21-8 with 39 TDs / 13 INTs and Dalton is 16-12-1 with 50 TDs / 15 INTs over their last 29 games. Tyrod absolutely belongs in that tier and potentially on the high end of it. Of all of those guys he's the likeliest to improve as he has far fewer starts. He has been solid.

 

The reason that I posted that is to add perspective. Some people have convinced themselves that Tyrod is awful. He is not. He's unconventional for sure but has played at a level of the game managers. He has more TDs than any of those guys but Dalton and less INTs than all of them.

 

Obviously, Phil Rivers is an upgrade. That's not debatable. If you were the Bengals would you trade Dalton and 3 1st's for a soon-to-be 36 year-old Rivers? The answer should probably be yes based on your argument. It would definitely have to be yes for the Dolphins and Tannehill.

 

The Bills should keep trying to get better. If Tyrod doesn't take a step you have 2 1st's in a great QB draft. If he does, you have 2 1st's.

 

The Bills are set up as well as they have been at QB since Kelly was there. They have a guy that's been solid that can still improve. They have 2 young guys that have different skills but a chance to be the guy (albeit a small one). They have 2 1st round picks in a draft that could produce up to 6 1st round QBs.

 

Your thought is to trade the solid guy, BOTH of those 1st's AND a 2018 1st for a guy that has a family of 10, in Southern California, who has already made over $100M, with a full no-trade clause, that turns 36 during the season. The Skelton for Mario deal was just as reasonable.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Kirby Jackson

[ChanOverChin]

This would have been a good idea a couple of years ago, but not now.

 

Besides, it's a pipe dream. The Chargers are simply not going to trade Rivers.

 

I think the Bills would be wise to give Taylor their full support this year. With guys like Watkins, McCoy, Clay, DiMarco healthy for at least most of the year I think that Taylor could prove to be a top 10 QB, especially in Dennison's offense where the play action pass will be set up well.

 

 

[SoTier]

his late game pick 6s would bother me

Turning into west coast Fitzy

 

Rivers has a history of not playing well in big games, and that goes back to his early years in the league when SD was stacked with talent on both sides of the ball. Early on, he failed to help get SD playoff wins. More recently, he's failed to help SD get into the playoffs. IMO, he's the opposite of Brady or Rogers who seem to play their best when situations are most crucial.

 

I think the comparison to Fitzpatrick isn't far off.

[mannc]

 

Philip Rivers is a better Quarterback than Tyrod Taylor. I'm sorry it is not even arguable. Whether we should trade for him is a different question... and I think probably no we shouldn't and it is impossible anyway..... but he is a better Quarterback than Taylor. I'm sorry to argue otherwise is ridiculous.

Rivers has certainly been a better QB than Taylor over his career, but that is not really relevant to whether a team should trade Taylor for him in 2017. Rivers is 36 years old and is coming off the worst season of his career, in which he threw 21 picks and led his team to a 5-11 record. The year before that, Rivers had better numbers, but the Chargers were 4-12. He is no longer a true franchise QB and there is no way I trade Taylor for him. The idea of trading TT and three number one picks for Rivers (as one person suggested) is quite possibly the most absurd idea ever floated on this board.

[racketmaster]

Rivers has certainly been a better QB than Taylor over his career, but that is not really relevant to whether a team should trade Taylor for him in 2017. Rivers is 36 years old and is coming off the worst season of his career, in which he threw 21 picks and led his team to a 5-11 record. The year before that, Rivers had better numbers, but the Chargers were 4-12. He is no longer a true franchise QB and there is no way I trade Taylor for him. The idea of trading TT and three number one picks for Rivers (as one person suggested) is quite possibly the most absurd idea ever floated on this board.

No doubt. Rivers is a big name and a lot of people like to cling to the past. Let's trade 3 firsts for a 36 year old who has 1 or 2 years left of decent football. Rivers is the only qb to lose to the Browns last year. But somehow those same people will be telling us that the NFL is all about the quarterback and you must have a good one in order to win. It just does not add up.

Edited June 7, 2017 by racketmaster

[PaattMaann]

I would trade a dozen Paula's donuts in a heartbeat for Philly Riv's

[oldmanfan]

Trading three #1 picks for a team looking to build a sustained winning organization would be suicidal.

[rodneykm]

He's getting up there in age and already seems to be in decline. I'm not sure I'd go higher than a 3rd rounder and I know that absolutely wouldn't come close to getting it done. I'd rather run with what we have in this particular case.

[BringBackOrton]

Clearly you can only play one guy. 15-14 with 47 TDs and 12 INTs and 12 INTs in 29 games would, at worst, qualify as solid. By comparison Ryan Tannehill is 14-15 with 45 TDs / 24 INTs, Flacco is 13-16 with 44 TDs / 30 INT, Alex Smith is 21-8 with 39 TDs / 13 INTs and Dalton is 16-12-1 with 50 TDs / 15 INTs over their last 29 games. Tyrod absolutely belongs in that tier and potentially on the high end of it. Of all of those guys he's the likeliest to improve as he has far fewer starts. He has been solid.

 

The reason that I posted that is to add perspective. Some people have convinced themselves that Tyrod is awful. He is not. He's unconventional for sure but has played at a level of the game managers. He has more TDs than any of those guys but Dalton and less INTs than all of them.

 

Obviously, Phil Rivers is an upgrade. That's not debatable. If you were the Bengals would you trade Dalton and 3 1st's for a soon-to-be 36 year-old Rivers? The answer should probably be yes based on your argument. It would definitely have to be yes for the Dolphins and Tannehill.

 

The Bills should keep trying to get better. If Tyrod doesn't take a step you have 2 1st's in a great QB draft. If he does, you have 2 1st's.

 

The Bills are set up as well as they have been at QB since Kelly was there. They have a guy that's been solid that can still improve. They have 2 young guys that have different skills but a chance to be the guy (albeit a small one). They have 2 1st round picks in a draft that could produce up to 6 1st round QBs.

 

Your thought is to trade the solid guy, BOTH of those 1st's AND a 2018 1st for a guy that has a family of 10, in Southern California, who has already made over $100M, with a full no-trade clause, that turns 36 during the season. The Skelton for Mario deal was just as reasonable.

No one is debating TT's ability besides being an inferior QB to Rivers. I meant that saying "we have to trade a solid guy" as if we're losing a starter without replacement is disingenuous.

 

If Rivers was cut tomorrow, do you think he retires?

 

I personally do not. He is one of the most competitive and fiery QB's in the NFL, probably second to Brady alone. I don't think he's ready to walk.

[Kirby Jackson]

No one is debating TT's ability besides being an inferior QB to Rivers. I meant that saying "we have to trade a solid guy" as if we're losing a starter without replacement is disingenuous.

 

If Rivers was cut tomorrow, do you think he retires?

 

I personally do not. He is one of the most competitive and fiery QB's in the NFL, probably second to Brady alone. I don't think he's ready to walk.

I love Rivers and have been driving his bandwagon for years. He's one of the most under-appreciated players of this era. With that being said I think he does retire (unless he goes to the Rams). He almost retired before going from SD to LA. He's made his money already ($174M so far). He's not young. I suppose that he MAY uproot his giant family and move somewhere for 2 years. I doubt it though. Rivers used to feel gettable (maybe 2-3 years ago) but that seems like an impossibility now.

[SoTier]

No doubt. Rivers is a big name and a lot of people like to cling to the past. Let's trade 3 firsts for a 36 year old who has 1 or 2 years left of decent football. Rivers is the only qb to lose to the Browns last year. But somehow those same people will be telling us that the NFL is all about the quarterback and you must have a good one in order to win. It just does not add up.

 

To underscore your point, here are some teams that have been to the playoffs with QBs no better than Tyrod Taylor and sometimes worse ...

• 2001: NE Patriots won the Super Bowl with second year pro/first year starter Tom Brady. Remember when we all debated whether he was a "flash in the pan"?
• 2002, 2004, 2006: Chad "Noodle Arm" Pennington took the NY Jets to the AFC Championship.
• 2004: Pittsburgh Steelers went 15-1 with rookie Ben Roethlisberger.
• 2005: Chicago went 11-5 and won the NFCN behind rookie Kyle Orton filling in for injured Rex Grossman.
• 2008: Chad "Noodle Arm" Pennington took the Miami Dolphis to the AFCE championship with an 11-5 record after the team went 1-15 the previous season, edging out the NE Patriots (also 11-5) under Brady's sub, Matt Cassel.
• 2009, 2010: Mark Sanchez took the NY Jets to back-to-back AFC Championships.
• 2011: Houston Texans won the AFCS and won a wild card game without a QB after Matt Schaub went down. They finished up with Jake Delhomme, Jeff Garcia, and TJ Yates.
• 2011: Denver Broncos actually won a playoff game on aTim Tebow TD pass in OT.
• 2012: Seattle Seahawks made the playoffs with rookie Russell Wilson, who threw for 100 yards or less in a couple of games.
• 2013: Minnesota Vikings made the playoffs with Christian Ponder as their QB.
• 2013: Philadelphia Eagles made the playoffs with Nick Foles at QB.
• 2015: Brock Osweiler got the Broncos to the playoffs, although he was benched for the playoffs in favor of Peyton Manning.

"Game manager" type QBs like Matt Schaub, Alex Smith and Andy Dalton have led their teams to the playoffs for years. Joe Flacco is a decent QB with a Super Bowl ring to prove it but HOFer he ain't. Brad Johnson won a SB with Tampa Bay. Jake Delhomme got to the Super Bowl. Kurt Warner resurrected his career in Arizona and almost won another Super Bowl. OTOH, Drew Brees won a SB ring in New Orleans but in recent years the Saints have struggled because they haven't been able to build a good enough defense. The same is true for Andrew Luck in Indy.

 

My point is that it takes more than a great QB to win. Teams can win games and make the playoffs with less than perfect rosters, even at QB. The Bills have tried really hard to disprove that over the last 17 years, but it's true. Just about every year, other teams around the NFL prove this.

Edited June 7, 2017 by SoTier

[GunnerBill]

Rivers has certainly been a better QB than Taylor over his career, but that is not really relevant to whether a team should trade Taylor for him in 2017. Rivers is 36 years old and is coming off the worst season of his career, in which he threw 21 picks and led his team to a 5-11 record. The year before that, Rivers had better numbers, but the Chargers were 4-12. He is no longer a true franchise QB and there is no way I trade Taylor for him. The idea of trading TT and three number one picks for Rivers (as one person suggested) is quite possibly the most absurd idea ever floated on this board.

Well I haven't advocated them doing that. I simply said if we sign Maclin and had Rivers (pure hypothetical) then we would be a contender in a wide open AFC outside of that one team we all know about. You questioned that and said you'd rather have Taylor. Apologies if what you meant was you'd rather have Taylor than the trade... so would I at a price of 3 1sts.... but it read like you were saying all thing being equal you'd rather have Tyrod. That to me would be ridiculous.

[Luxy312]

What would I trade for Rivers right now? Nothing. There's absolutely no reason to trade anything for Rivers. It's honestly a purely hypothetical question as the simple reality for this management team and front office, is that Taylor is going to be the starter. If, and I emphasize that it's a big IF, the team were looking to get a quality quarterback with the potential to propel this team into playoff contention, they could sign Tony Romo without trading anything. The idea of 3 first round picks is absolutely idiotic given the state of the team. It's not like we're just a QB away from winning the AFC. So simple recap here, 37 year old Tony Romo signs without trade or 36 year old Rivers for THREE first round picks? Pretty easy call for me. None the less neither is going to happen.