Josh Allen is all that matters

[Ronin]

10 hours ago, K-9 said:

Like I said, if you want to argue the decisions made with the draft capital specifically acquired to do what they did, fine. But that’s a different argument vs. “giving up the farm” as was suggested. 

 

Doing what they did while still maintaining first round picks last year and this year is not the definition of giving up the farm. You have to mortgage future high picks in the process. The Bills simply didn’t do that. 

 

So you don't think that in essence costing the team a 1st, two 2nd's, and the first pick in the 3rd round, when they had all the other needs that are obvious to someone that doesn't even know football very well wasn't giving up the farm?  

 

Do you think it was a good deal?  

 

I'll put it into perspective for you.  

 

The Jets gave up merely a 1st for Darnold.  

The Browns merely a 1st for Mayfield. 

The Cards a 1st, a 3rd, and a 5th for Rosen.  

 

It is what it is, but if you can't see that they could have built a helluva an OL with that, I simply don't know what to tell ya, and that's what the post was about.

 

Otherwise we simply see it differently, but that's a helluva a lot of picks for one player, QB or not, which again, is the point of my post.  Whether or not it fits the description of selling the farm, which I used somewhat loosely, the point entirely being that McBeane's futures are directly tied to that pick, a part of which is what they could have had otherwise.    

10 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

No one knows what draft position the Bills will have yet.

No one knows what the final # of picks will be.

No one knows that the 1st round pick will be a WR.

No one knows what trades will be made before the draft.

No one knows what players the Bills will pick up during FA.

 

A minimum amount of capital will be needed to be used on the D side.

A lot can be done to build the O this offseason.

 

No, but everyone talks about "10 picks" as if the fact that 7 of the 10 are on day 3, two each in rounds 4-7, are for some unbeknownst reason, are likely to provide starting players.  Otherwise they have absolutely nothing extra in the first 3 rounds, one pick each.  

 

We do know, or should, anyone having paid much attention to football for years, that you don't build a team on day-3 picks when you have as many needs as we have. 

 

Keep in mind too that the three most performing players on the team now are 35, 35, and 30 years old, the youngest of which is only signed thru next season.  

 

Either way, the point being, that those "10 picks" aren't likely to do much in terms of stocking the team with starters.  We should be happy if they get their round 1, 2, and 3 picks to hit.  

3 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

You do realize that the higher they pick.....the more they can potentially get in rounds 1-3 in a trade down?

 

That is the whole point.....

 

Hypothetical trades is the point?  

 

OK

[John from Riverside]

6 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

So you don't think that in essence costing the team a 1st, two 2nd's, and the first pick in the 3rd round, when they had all the other needs that are obvious to someone that doesn't even know football very well wasn't giving up the farm?  

 

Do you think it was a good deal?  

 

I'll put it into perspective for you.  

 

The Jets gave up merely a 1st for Darnold.  

The Browns merely a 1st for Mayfield. 

The Cards a 1st, a 3rd, and a 5th for Rosen.  

 

It is what it is, but if you can't see that they could have built a helluva an OL with that, I simply don't know what to tell ya, and that's what the post was about.

 

Otherwise we simply see it differently, but that's a helluva a lot of picks for one player, QB or not, which again, is the point of my post.  Whether or not it fits the description of selling the farm, which I used somewhat loosely, the point entirely being that McBeane's futures are directly tied to that pick, a part of which is what they could have had otherwise.    

 

No, but everyone talks about "10 picks" as if the fact that 7 of the 10 are on day 3, two each in rounds 4-7, are for some unbeknownst reason, are likely to provide starting players.  Otherwise they have absolutely nothing extra in the first 3 rounds, one pick each.  

 

We do know, or should, anyone having paid much attention to football for years, that you don't build a team on day-3 picks when you have as many needs as we have. 

 

Keep in mind too that the three most performing players on the team now are 35, 35, and 30 years old, the youngest of which is only signed thru next season.  

 

Either way, the point being, that those "10 picks" aren't likely to do much in terms of stocking the team with starters.  We should be happy if they get their round 1, 2, and 3 picks to hit.  

 

Hypothetical trades is the point?  

 

OK

That is what we have right now.....the team is not good

[K-9]

3 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

So you don't think that in essence costing the team a 1st, two 2nd's, and the first pick in the 3rd round, when they had all the other needs that are obvious to someone that doesn't even know football very well wasn't giving up the farm?  

 

Do you think it was a good deal?  

 

I'll put it into perspective for you.  

 

The Jets gave up merely a 1st for Darnold.  

The Browns merely a 1st for Mayfield. 

The Cards a 1st, a 3rd, and a 5th for Rosen.  

 

It is what it is, but if you can't see that they could have built a helluva an OL with that, I simply don't know what to tell ya, and that's what the post was about.

 

Otherwise we simply see it differently, but that's a helluva a lot of picks for one player, QB or not, which again, is the point of my post.  Whether or not it fits the description of selling the farm, which I used somewhat loosely, the point entirely being that McBeane's futures are directly tied to that pick, a part of which is what they could have had otherwise.    

They could have done a multitude of other things with those picks. If I were interested in that aspect of the argument, I'd say that QB and MLB, especially in McD's defense, targeting who they targeted made a lot of sense. There is no way in hell that we can determine if getting those guys was a mistake or not at this juncture. 

 

But I'm not interested in revisiting draft strategy. I am only contesting that given all the picks we retained in the process of executing that plan, however good or bad it may turn out, did not cost the farm in the traditional sense of the term as we had two #1s and and still have our premium picks in next year's draft. Good or bad, Beane acquired the draft capital necessary to do what he did. I don't fault him for that aspect of his strategy. 

 

And the Jets gave up more than #6 to Indy. They gave them 3 second round picks for the privilege of moving up three spots. 

[John from Riverside]

9 minutes ago, K-9 said:

They could have done a multitude of other things with those picks. If I were interested in that aspect of the argument, I'd say that QB and MLB, especially in McD's defense, targeting who they targeted made a lot of sense. There is no way in hell that we can determine if getting those guys was a mistake or not at this juncture. 

 

But I'm not interested in revisiting draft strategy. I am only contesting that given all the picks we retained in the process of executing that plan, however good or bad it may turn out, did not cost the farm in the traditional sense of the term as we had two #1s and and still have our premium picks in next year's draft. Good or bad, Beane acquired the draft capital necessary to do what he did. I don't fault him for that aspect of his strategy. 

 

And the Jets gave up more than #6 to Indy. They gave them 3 second round picks for the privilege of moving up three spots. 

Yeah I was trying to figure out where the "Just a first for Darnold" thing came from for the jets......they had to give up several future picks to jump ahead of us......there was talk that Darnold was also on our radar right along with Allen

[Augie]

4 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Yeah I was trying to figure out where the "Just a first for Darnold" thing came from for the jets......they had to give up several future picks to jump ahead of us......there was talk that Darnold was also on our radar right along with Allen

 

I admit, Darnold would have been my first choice. It is what it is, and I pray for the best! 

[Fadingpain]

On 11/5/2018 at 12:59 PM, oldmanfan said:

The yelling of fans since the day Kelly retired:

 

We will never go anywhere until this franchise steps up and goes to get their franchise guy!!!!

 

The yelling of fans since the day Josh Allen was drafted (pick one of 2):

 

Oh, no , not THAT guy!!!!!!!

 

or

 

We should never have drafted a QB until we had the pieces to put around him!!!!!!!!

 

 

They're all the same according to you, huh?

 

A team just needs to go to the franchise QB store and buy one, and any one is as good as another?  Right?

 

 

 

 

 

[oldmanfan]

4 hours ago, Fadingpain said:

They're all the same according to you, huh?

 

A team just needs to go to the franchise QB store and buy one, and any one is as good as another?  Right?

 

 

 

 

 

Everyone is tired of your Allen schtick.  

[GimmeSomeProcess]

19 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

A pylon would make us more competitive than the other QBs. 

Great rebutle 

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

19 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

Yeah we scored what 3 points just amazing 

 

So far i haven't read 1 positive response from you since being on this site, not 1, are you just trolling or can you not handle sports? I'm trying to figure this out.

[Ronin]

On 11/6/2018 at 11:11 PM, John from Riverside said:

That is what we have right now.....the team is not good

 

OK, to state the obvious, but again, my point being that there's no way that within a reasonable amount of time McBeane can turn this thing around.  No one could, not even Polian in his prime, it's an impossible task.  

 

The only hope that McBeane have is if Allen, remember, "their guy," whom they traded what they traded for regarless of what we call it or what label we affix to it, has to turn out to be a real ringer or they're toast.  We still won't be good for several seasons if he is, but at least they may earn some goodwill and another season or two beyond next one.  

 

One needs some vision, something that is sorely lacking in analyzing football at all levels, in order to view the current situation objectively.  In hindsight, I'd been saying for the past year trade Shady while he still had a value, on paper anyway.  Instead, we hang onto him until, predictably, we see an age-related downturn in his performance that's typical for RBs his age, in fact not only typical but likely.  Now he has no value despite what fans say or opine about.  No one's going to trade for him based upon his past performance, he's finished as a primary ball-carrier.  He'll have some future utility as a receiver out of the backfield ala Larry Centers.  

 

Some people may blame the OL for his demise, but that then doesn't explain why Ivory, also 30, has averaged nearly half-a-yard more per-carry or why Murphy, a journeyman RB is averaging nearly 2-and-a-half yards/carry better.  

 

This year's "vision" component is noticing that the core of why the defense is playing well are players on the cusp of being out of the NFL, and frankly, lucky to be playing at the levels that they are this season.  Lorax and Kyle will both be 36 next season and are living on borrowed time.  Hughes has some seasons left but is clearly in his back-9 and has only one season left on his contract.  Take them off the D this season, as it will be soon, and this D goes from average to well-below average.  

 

This team is getting worse before it gets better and 10 picks with most being on day-2 isn't going to remedy that regardless of how well they draft.  

 

 

Edited November 9, 2018 by TaskersGhost

[NoHuddleKelly12]

11 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

OK, to state the obvious, but again, my point being that there's no way that within a reasonable amount of time McBeane can turn this thing around.  No one could, not even Polian in his prime, it's an impossible task.  

 

The only hope that McBeane have is if Allen, remember, "their guy," whom they traded what they traded for regarless of what we call it or what label we affix to it, has to turn out to be a real ringer or they're toast.  We still won't be good for several seasons if he is, but at least they may earn some goodwill and another season or two beyond next one.  

 

One needs some vision, something that is sorely lacking in analyzing football at all levels, in order to view the current situation objectively.  In hindsight, I'd been saying for the past year trade Shady while he still had a value, on paper anyway.  Instead, we hang onto him until, predictably, we see an age-related downturn in his performance that's typical for RBs his age, in fact not only typical but likely.  

 

This year's "vision" component is noticing that the core of why the defense is playing well are players on the cusp of being out of the NFL, and frankly, lucky to be playing at the levels that they are this season.  Lorax and Kyle will both be 36 next season and are living on borrowed time.  Hughes has some seasons left but is clearly in his back-9 and has only one season left on his contract.  

 

This team is getting worse before it gets better and 10 picks with most being on day-2 isn't going to remedy that regardless of how well they draft.  

 

 

$90 mill might help if solid FA choices are made and can contribute right away. I agree with your point to the extent that I don't see us being able to stockpile a lot of depth yet a la Patriots, but if the starters are decent to solid, then I have trouble believing that this team would get worse before getting better, comparing to this year. 

[Ronin]

On 11/6/2018 at 11:15 PM, K-9 said:

They could have done a multitude of other things with those picks. If I were interested in that aspect of the argument, I'd say that QB and MLB, especially in McD's defense, targeting who they targeted made a lot of sense. There is no way in hell that we can determine if getting those guys was a mistake or not at this juncture. 

 

But I'm not interested in revisiting draft strategy. I am only contesting that given all the picks we retained in the process of executing that plan, however good or bad it may turn out, did not cost the farm in the traditional sense of the term as we had two #1s and and still have our premium picks in next year's draft. Good or bad, Beane acquired the draft capital necessary to do what he did. I don't fault him for that aspect of his strategy. 

 

And the Jets gave up more than #6 to Indy. They gave them 3 second round picks for the privilege of moving up three spots. 

 

You're right about the Jets, but regardless, it's still arguably less than we used to acquire Allen, and frankly, the Jets gave up too much too as per my analysis Darnold isn't going to live up to his status.  That's why the Jets' history over the past 20 years isn't much better than ours.  

 

What you said here is the core of my point, which obviouusly you agree with; 

 

Good or bad, Beane acquired the draft capital necessary to do what he did.

 

And that's what's going to define them and determine whether or not they're around for long.  Whether you or I fault him/them or not is irrelevant, what is relevant is that their futures in Buffalo and quite likely then as future GM/HC of other teams is directly attached to "what he did."  

[Jerome007]

12 minutes ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

$90 mill might help if solid FA choices are made and can contribute right away. I agree with your point to the extent that I don't see us being able to stockpile a lot of depth yet a la Patriots, but if the starters are decent to solid, then I have trouble believing that this team would get worse before getting better, comparing to this year. 

Exactly. Things can turn quickly in the NFL! Both upwards and downwards but come on, easy to improve this current roster. At worst it'll be same level, which would be going down as FA and draft picks would have been misses. I know the Bills have been on the losing side for years and are currently one of the NFL doormats just after making the playoffs, and that is hard to take, but the "everything will be bad forever" crowd are tiresome.

 

Keep the exact same coaches and players but add just one very good OLineman and one very good WR,  put Josh back in, and suddenly a lot things become better on offense, defense is as good but doesn't have to be on the field so much and on and on. 

 

The Bears and Trubinski have got from 30th offense (and a supposed bust) to a top 10 offense in a year. Ravens looked good early with the added WRs. Raiders have been the doormats, then a serious playoff caliber team, now back the cellar super quickly. This year Bills have the least paid active roster of the NFL, the OLine by far the least paid. Hopefully they get some quality players next year in FA and draft. They have the $$$ this time. McD and Beane's reputation depend on next year's draft and Allen's success or lack of.

Edited November 9, 2018 by Jerome007

[Ronin]

11 minutes ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

$90 mill might help if solid FA choices are made and can contribute right away. I agree with your point to the extent that I don't see us being able to stockpile a lot of depth yet a la Patriots, but if the starters are decent to solid, then I have trouble believing that this team would get worse before getting better, comparing to this year. 

 

I'm not sure that 90M goes as far as you think it might in that regard. 

 

Either way, a wealth of NFL history suggests that it's not a team's prowess in free-agency that determines how good it is, teams must draft well in order to build their teams.  

 

McBeane swapped out the opportunity to bolster a good chunk of the team in exchange for Allen.  [Fact]  

 

What happens now will clearly hinge upon that decision.  

[Jerome007]

6 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

McBeane swapped out the opportunity to bolster a good chunk of the team in exchange for Allen.  [Fact]  

They hoarded picks so they could select high for a QB! That was well known. People are never happy. I agree that the strategy will hinge on how well Allen does, but it was a calculated move. They hoarded picks so they could then trade to move up in the 1st round of the draft this year. And guess what, they have a lot of picks and cap space in the next two years. So the plan makes total sense! It remains to be seen if it's executed well or not, if they pick the right players and set them up to succeed. That certainly remains to be seen, but very sound strategy IMO.

Edited November 9, 2018 by Jerome007

[jrober38]

8 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

I'm not sure that 90M goes as far as you think it might in that regard. 

 

Either way, a wealth of NFL history suggests that it's not a team's prowess in free-agency that determines how good it is, teams must draft well in order to build their teams.  

 

McBeane swapped out the opportunity to bolster a good chunk of the team in exchange for Allen.  [Fact]  

 

What happens now will clearly hinge upon that decision.  

 

Agreed.

 

The tops teams around the NFL outside of the LA Rams haven't got where they are by spending money in free agency. 

 

For the most part, teams who spend big in free agency do so because they're compensating for poor drafting, and as a result they usually wind up overpaying for players and regretting that decision 2-3 years down the road. 

 

For example, the Bills just had to gut their roster due to several free agency mistakes made by Doug Whaley. His drafting was HORRENDOUS, and to avoid getting fired he went out and spent more money than the Bills had ever spent, and within a year or two it was clear that the contracts he gave out would hinder us in the future. 

 

The Bills should keep doing what they've been doing, and target guys who want prove it contracts. Go after guys who are willing to sign for 1 or 2 years, and avoid going after the high price guys who want 5 year contracts with huge amounts of guaranteed money. Maybe try to sign one quality offensive linemen, but don't throw around money at this wide receiver group by locking them up with 5 year deals and good chunks of guaranteed money when hardly any of them have had consistent production at the NFL level.

 

If the Bills want to improve, they should parlay their 1st round pick into more picks by trading down, and then hoping that all of the picks they have in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounds pay off. We also need to start finding talent with our 3rd day picks. So far we've added guys who have hardly any NFL traits and seem like nothing more than special teams players. Start rolling the dice on some guys with off field issues or on athletes from small schools. We need to get more athletic across the board. 

 

Stop trading up and giving up assets. 

Edited November 9, 2018 by jrober38

[K-9]

19 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

You're right about the Jets, but regardless, it's still arguably less than we used to acquire Allen, and frankly, the Jets gave up too much too as per my analysis Darnold isn't going to live up to his status.  That's why the Jets' history over the past 20 years isn't much better than ours.  

 

What you said here is the core of my point, which obviouusly you agree with; 

 

Good or bad, Beane acquired the draft capital necessary to do what he did.

 

And that's what's going to define them and determine whether or not they're around for long.  Whether you or I fault him/them or not is irrelevant, what is relevant is that their futures in Buffalo and quite likely then as future GM/HC of other teams is directly attached to "what he did."  

Again, I’ve only argued against the idea that Beane mortgaged the farm. He didn’t because he expanded the size of the farm beforehand and then parceled off some acreage. He still has the farm he started with. 

 

I think it’s obvious that his future is tied to “what he did.” That’s always been the case for every GM that has ever held the position. Fault or praise, especially at this early juncture, is irrelevant as you pointed out.

[LABILLBACKER]

I think the important factor regarding Allen's development and the FO getting him weapons is the timing.  The timing must coincide with the defense remaining good. I will give McD credit for a very promising defensive future but will it still be good in 3 years once the offense is supposedly completed? What a treat to have 1 year where both sides are top 10. Timing is everything. 

[jrober38]

8 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Again, I’ve only argued against the idea that Beane mortgaged the farm. He didn’t because he expanded the size of the farm beforehand and then parceled off some acreage. He still has the farm he started with. 

 

I think it’s obvious that his future is tied to “what he did.” That’s always been the case for every GM that has ever held the position. Fault or praise, especially at this early juncture, is irrelevant as you pointed out.

 

I don't think this makes sense. 

 

He sold off all our good players for picks, and then used those picks to overpay according to the draft value chart so that he could trade picks and move up for specific players he wanted to draft. 

 

Reality is that the Bills could have had 2 first rounders, 2 second rounders, and 3 third round picks. If we held on to each of those picks, the "farm" would be well stocked right now. We desperately need a sweeping infusion of young talent to this team and it didn't materialize. 

 

Instead, we walked away with Josh Allen, Tremaine Edmunds, and Harrison Phillips, and the Bills' "farm" of young talent is one of the worst in the league as a result. Allen is super risky, Edmunds looks great, and Phillips is just rotational depth at this point. 

 

We had an amazing opportunity to stock the cupboard, and instead we decided to go all in on two guys. 

Edited November 9, 2018 by jrober38

[Jerome007]

4 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

We had an amazing opportunity to stock the cupboard, and instead we decided to go all in on two guys. 

Yes. By design. To get that elusive "franchise QB". That draft was considered the year of the QBs. Way too early to know if it was the right decision, but it was well worth the risk, and made sense. People have criticized the Bills brass, whoever it has been, for only "stocking the cupboard" but never addressing the most important position, QB. They did. What is the right move? Nobody knows yet but you can't fault them fort going all out. Next year and 2020 they have lots of draft picks and big money. This will decide what the future of the team is. That and Allen of course.