Kirby Jackson Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 2 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: I guess the whole not starting him this year is puzzling to me them. I'm not sure why they are waiting to see what he can possibly become? Yeah, it is beyond weird.
yungmack Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 2 hours ago, jrober38 said: We should just target Mayfield with our 1st round pick. He'll probably be available in the 12-20 range, which is where we'll end up picking. Then cut Tyrod, bring in a cheap veteran, and let Mayfield, Peterman and the vet compete for the job. Then spend the rest of our picks fixing the defensive front seven. You see no red flags with a 5' 11'' QB who exhibits some Ryan Leaf-like characteristics?
xRUSHx Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 6 minutes ago, Real McCoy said: I guess the whole not starting him this year is puzzling to me them. I'm not sure why they are waiting to see what he can possibly become? Maybe they have a hidden deal with another team to trade with before the draft?
BillsFan4 Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 The problem with trading up is that we need talent on the field to surround a QB with, and especially a rookie QB. This team has been stripped down. I know many people seem to think that the Bills front office collected all these picks just to trade up for a QB. But I don't think that's the case At All... I think they collected all these picks to rebuild the whole team, not just the QB position. I want a great QB as much as all of you do. But I just don't think we are in a position to give away a draft (or two) for a single position. The Bills need talent at sooooo many other positions too. If you stick a rookie QB on this current Bills team, you are just asking for him to fail. Id like to see them use their own 1st on a QB and the rest to help fill out the Bills roster. IMO you can't just trade away a draft and stick a 1st or 2nd overall pick on a team that's void of talent. That is setting him up to fail. We are not the Eagles when they traded for Wentz, or the Rams when they traded for Goff. We dont have that type of talent right now to surround a rookie QB with and give him a chance at success. Adtually using all of our draft picks on a bunch of players could go a long way to adding the talent that the Bills need to be successful. Using all those picks on 1 guy doesn't IMO. We are at the start of a rebuild. If you trade away our stockpile of picks, how do you get the draft capital to rebuild the team?
billieve420 Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 1 hour ago, dave mcbride said: Cleveland is taking a qb. I pretty much guarantee it. Unless Cleveland makes a run at Cousins or Jimmy Garoppolo they have to draft a QB at #1 can't see anyway around it.
Kirby Jackson Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 2 minutes ago, xRUSHx said: Maybe they have a hidden deal with another team to trade with before the draft? That would be so Brownsie. They didn’t trade for him with the 2nd and now give up 2 2nds for him. The other scenario, I think, is that they are really high on him and are trying to keep that contract down. 1
BarleyNY Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: If I were to rank the list above in order of guys that I’d want it would be: - Rosen - Darnold - Baker - Jackson - Allen - Rudolph (but I’d prefer Falk and Finley) I think the opposite with Cleveland. They are over being the smartest guy in the room. They will pick a QB at 1 and it will be Rosen or Darnold (if he comes out). I love Mayfield. Cleveland has even said that now is the time to cash in on their draft capital, so yes, they’re taking a QB at 1. Almost certainly that’ll be Rosen. Darnold will be in the conversation but Rosen is showing more. And that is where my agreement with you ends. I’d be fine with Mayfield if he was taller but he’s not close to tall enough for the NFL. That makes his odds of success very long.
Dr. Who Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 2 hours ago, jrober38 said: We should just target Mayfield with our 1st round pick. He'll probably be available in the 12-20 range, which is where we'll end up picking. Then cut Tyrod, bring in a cheap veteran, and let Mayfield, Peterman and the vet compete for the job. Then spend the rest of our picks fixing the defensive front seven. Well, I mostly agree, but you better use some draft capital or free agency to improve the o-line as well.
xRUSHx Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said: The problem with trading up is that we need talent on the field to surround a QB with, and especially a rookie QB. This team has been stripped down. I know many people seem to think that the Bills front office collected all these picks just to trade up for a QB. But I don't think that's the case At All... I think they collected all these picks to rebuild the whole team, not just the QB position. I want a great QB as much as all of you do. But I just don't think we are in a position to give away a draft (or two) for a single position. The Bills need talent at sooooo many other positions too. If you stick a rookie QB on this current Bills team, you are just asking for him to fail. Id like to see them use their own 1st on a QB and the rest to help fill out the Bills roster. IMO you can't just trade away a draft and stick a 1st or 2nd overall pick on a team that's void of talent. That is setting him up to fail. We are not the Eagles when they traded for Wentz, or the Rams when they traded for Goff. We dont have that type of talent right now to surround a rookie QB with and give him a chance at success. Adtually using all of our draft picks on a bunch of players could go a long way to adding the talent that the Bills need to be successful. Using all those picks on 1 guy doesn't IMO. We are at the start of a rebuild. If you trade away our stockpile of picks, how do you get the draft capital to rebuild the team? Its about getting one worthy of calling a franchise QB. IMO even if they use more picks to move up some in this draft we can fill in with FAs and what is left of our draft picks then reload in the 2019 draft. The Bills do not have enough to fix the team all in one draft anyway but they do have the tools to get us a top QB from this draft. This is why IMO there is zero reason to win anymore games this season Edited November 24, 2017 by xRUSHx
apuszczalowski Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 18 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Then they would have to tag Jimmy G again or let him walk or trade the other QB. Why wouldn’t they trade down or draft BPA and see if Garoppolo can play? If he can’t they will be picking early in 2019. If he can they will be on their way. That’s just a terrible use of resources. You pick a guy and give him the shot whether you are right or wrong. The 49ers picked Jimmy G. Of course not but you can’t commit to 2 guys at once. You have to pick a guy and see if he can play. The redskins took RGIII and Cousins, the Pats have Brady and continue to add was early to sit behind him. It never hurts to have too many QBs. They can sign Garrapolo to a decent deal right now because of the lack of experience as a starter and still have another in case he doesn't work out. If he works out you now have another QB that a can be dealt later. If you don't pick another just because you don't know what you have in Garapollo, you risk setting yourself back even further and wind up similar to what we have here where tour scrambling for stop gaps and waiting til next year's draft
Kirby Jackson Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 1 minute ago, apuszczalowski said: The redskins took RGIII and Cousins, the Pats have Brady and continue to add was early to sit behind him. It never hurts to have too many QBs. They can sign Garrapolo to a decent deal right now because of the lack of experience as a starter and still have another in case he doesn't work out. If he works out you now have another QB that a can be dealt later. If you don't pick another just because you don't know what you have in Garapollo, you risk setting yourself back even further and wind up similar to what we have here where tour scrambling for stop gaps and waiting til next year's draft They took Cousins in the 4th round or something. That’s totally different. The plan was for him to be RG’s backup. The Pats took a 2nd on Jimmy G and like a 3rd on Brissett. Their QB is 40. It turns out that he doesn’t age so they moved both young guys for basically what they used in the draft. They got Dorsett and a 2nd. That is a net zero.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: Why would Jimmy sign that deal? He will get more on the open market. Not accurate enough for me, I wouldn’t want him in the middle rounds. What deal? I didn't say the 49ers could sign Garoppolo for what the Eagles spent on Bradford, just that if they do sign him (and why would they trade so much if that's not their intent?), don't assume they intend to trade away their pick. 21 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: The other scenario, I think, is that they are really high on him and are trying to keep that contract down. I've thought of that. On the other hand, 1) I don't think they should underestimate the fervor with which quarterback hungry teams will pursue him anyway - the bitter lesson of the Osweiler signing has worn off a bit around the league, and if they keep him under wraps it may enhance, not diminish, his value 2) They shouldn't underestimate the handicap they place on their negotiations by keeping a competitive athlete on the bench behind a QB he may see as less competent. Edited November 24, 2017 by Hapless Bills Fan
aceman_16 Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 1 hour ago, billieve420 said: Also, seems like a bit of a head case wouldn't be surprised if he slid to the 2nd round. Height is also an issue we already have a smaller QB who struggles seeing the field. Would Dennison be creative enough to cater an offense to Mayfield I have my doubts. I think the organization prefers bigger QBs with traditional measurables. Yeah the height 6'1+ is Tyrod height. However, Drew Brees (6'0") and Russell Wilson (5'11") make it because they improvise and anticipate. Measurables are good but not the only thing ... it is how the Bills screwed themselves over with the Rob Johnson (6'4") vs Doug Flutie (5'10") debacle.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: It’s possible. Teams fall in love with their guys, supposedly the Jets really like Allen. Last year Whaley was in love with Watson. I actually think Baker and Lamar go higher than projected for that reason. It is kind of like Mahomes. It only takes one team to love them. While they may have some polarizing traits you don’t need a consensus of all 32 teams. You need one that sees through it. It’s the same reason that I think Rudolph drops. He doesn’t do anything special. That’s a big investment for a guy that could be “solid.” If Whaley was in love with Watson, then why didn't we draft him? We could have!
Kirby Jackson Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: What deal? I didn't say the 49ers could sign Garoppolo for what the Eagles spent on Bradford, just that if they do sign him (and why would they trade so much if that's not their intent?), don't assume they intend to trade away their pick. I've thought of that. On the other hand, 1) I don't think they should underestimate the fervor with which quarterback hungry teams will pursue him anyway - the bitter lesson of the Osweiler signing has worn off a bit around the league, and if they keep him under wraps it may enhance, not diminish, his value 2) They shouldn't underestimate the handicap they place on their negotiations by keeping a competitive athlete on the bench behind a QB he may see as less competent. I guess my point is that they wouldn’t have given up what they did without believing that Jimmy G is their guy. He may end up being bad. It’s certainly possible. They are going to commit to giving him the chance for AT LEAST 2018. That’s why I see no chance that they miss the opportunity to get a great player at 2 or trade back. They won’t use that valuable of a resource on another QB.
The Frankish Reich Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: What deal? I didn't say the 49ers could sign Garoppolo for what the Eagles spent on Bradford, just that if they do sign him (and why would they trade so much if that's not their intent?), don't assume they intend to trade away their pick. I've thought of that. On the other hand, 1) I don't think they should underestimate the fervor with which quarterback hungry teams will pursue him anyway - the bitter lesson of the Osweiler signing has worn off a bit around the league, and if they keep him under wraps it may enhance, not diminish, his value 2) They shouldn't underestimate the handicap they place on their negotiations by keeping a competitive athlete on the bench behind a QB he may see as less competent. What if CJ Beathard is actually kind of o.k.? Or even better? As a Bills fan, it would just rub salt in my 17 year festering wound if we were to discover that the Niners have two competent QBs AND the 2nd overall pick in the draft, while we have, umm, whatever it is that we have.
Kirby Jackson Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said: If Whaley was in love with Watson, then why didn't we draft him? We could have! He didn’t have the power.
The Frankish Reich Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said: If Whaley was in love with Watson, then why didn't we draft him? We could have! Because by the time the draft came along Whaley wasn't making the decisions anymore? And hadn't been for a long time?
yungmack Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 The problem inherent in going all in on a top QB - aside from the obvious history of flops with so many of them - is the quality of the O as it now exists and with the inept coaching of Rico and his staff. Put any of the elite college QBs into that mess and it's likely to resemble Peterman and the Chargers week after week than Dak Prescott's rookie year. There is an old adage that says you build a team from front to back, inside to outside. With that in mind, I would replace the O staff first of all then spend the picks on the O line and both a top, field-stretching receiver and a running back. Until the O is improved talent-wise, no QB, elite or otherwise, will make a damned bit of difference, and particularly a rookie. The only way the Bills should pick a QB in the first two rounds is if one of the top 3 QBs not named Mayfield happens to fall to them for some unknown reason. Otherwise, use this draft to "set the table" for one next year or the year after. 2 hours ago, jrober38 said: We should just target Mayfield with our 1st round pick. He'll probably be available in the 12-20 range, which is where we'll end up picking. Then cut Tyrod, bring in a cheap veteran, and let Mayfield, Peterman and the vet compete for the job. Then spend the rest of our picks fixing the defensive front seven. You see no red flags with a 5' 11'' QB who exhibits some Ryan Leaf-like characteristics?
Wayne Arnold Posted November 24, 2017 Posted November 24, 2017 Teddy Bridgewater is the target. And you don't need to trade valuable draft picks to get him.
Recommended Posts