Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm 100% fine with us signing Bradford and drafting the best QB available at 12 to groom for a couple years. Is that so wrong?

  • Like (+1) 4
Posted

as long as this doesn't stop the bills from trading up to get their guy, (which i can't imagine it would) i'm fine with it.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, fridge said:

I'm 100% fine with us signing Bradford and drafting the best QB available at 12 to groom for a couple years. Is that so wrong?

Not even close to wrong. Scary? Yes. Wrong? No. Sam Bradford is an excellent QB. Sam Bradfords body, however, is a tragedy.

Edited by MiltonWaddams
  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

Calling it now - Bills will have two QBs named Sam this year. (edit: ok, maybe one)

Edited by WotAGuy
Retracting prediction extracted from bunghole
  • Like (+1) 4
  • Sad 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted

Multi year deal and draft a guy.  Doesn’t have to be Allen.  If the rook looks good we can try to flip Bradford in camp or at the deadline if even next year for futures.  Kind of like Philly did a few years ago ... with Bradford.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, PromoTheRobot said:

Per @RapSheet The Bills have engaged Sam Bradford's representatives to try and get a deal done.

 

 

To me he is the obvious best fit for trying to win now while trying to build for the future.

 

Could throw for 4K yards and 25+ TD if he stays healthy and receiving corps gets an upgrade...............or his knee blows up and you can put the rookie stud QB in and hopefully Goff/Wentz incubate him without disturbing the process by upsetting the locker room.

 

Regardless of who they draft they would be hard pressed to get the kind of numbers from them in the first two seasons that a healthy Bradford could produce so you won't be sacrificing much even if the rookie sits until some point in year 2.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
1 minute ago, fridge said:

I'm 100% fine with us signing Bradford and drafting the best QB available at 12 to groom for a couple years. Is that so wrong?

Foles or Bradford were the 2 guys I was hoping we'd target. I don't like the idea of Allen. Give me Darnold, Mayfield or Rosen (in that order). Allen would be a project and require lots of time?

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, fridge said:

I'm 100% fine with us signing Bradford and drafting the best QB available at 12 to groom for a couple years. Is that so wrong?

It is wrong if the target is Josh Allen, who's nothing more than another EJ Manuel - tall, lanky, accuracy issues, folds like a cheap suit against legitimate Power 5 competition.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Well, ok. Not my first desire but I will be good with this. 

 

Woke up today not wanting Allen. Saw rumor we wanted Allen. Wasn't thrilled. Makes sense now.

 

Also helps the trade up process. We have a capable starter so aren't as desperate if Cleveland/NYG/Indy try and drive the price up.

×
×
  • Create New...