Bills starting to get credit for Whitner pick?

[HarkinBanks]

Maybe Marv is not as dumb as all the "experts" proclaimed after the draft????

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor..._len&id=2588834

 

From Lenny P...

 

So, for a change, let's have a little fun here. Let's reconstruct what the top 10 selections in the first round might look like were the teams making them now, with today's conditions, instead of on April 29. The only ground rule is that choices must be made from among the top 15 players chosen in the first round:

 

8. Buffalo: The Bills were criticized for reaching for Donte Whitner and, while that assessment might be true, the Ohio State safety has played well. The No. 8 slot might have been a little high for Whitner, but he is all football player. With the loss of veteran Troy Vincent (hamstring) for the season, the Bills probably wouldreach again for Whitner if they were making the choice today.

[Kelly the Dog]

Maybe Marv is not as dumb as all the "experts" proclaimed after the draft????

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor..._len&id=2588834

 

From Lenny P...

 

So, for a change, let's have a little fun here. Let's reconstruct what the top 10 selections in the first round might look like were the teams making them now, with today's conditions, instead of on April 29. The only ground rule is that choices must be made from among the top 15 players chosen in the first round:

 

8. Buffalo: The Bills were criticized for reaching for Donte Whitner and, while that assessment might be true, the Ohio State safety has played well. The No. 8 slot might have been a little high for Whitner, but he is all football player. With the loss of veteran Troy Vincent (hamstring) for the season, the Bills probably wouldreach again for Whitner if they were making the choice today.

774901[/snapback]

Except that they play different positions, sure.

[Albany,n.y.]

No matter how good Whitner becomes, the pick rests with how good JP becomes. If JP lives up to expectations, Whitner was the right pick, period. If JP doesn't & Cutler does, then Whitner was the wrong pick-it's that simple (now that Marv is on record saying if the choice was between Leinart & Cutler, it would have been Cutler*). QB is a much more valuable position to fill than safety, but if you have a good to great starting QB, then drafting a safety is acceptable.

*-Source: Marv on WHAM Tuesday night.

[JAMIEBUF12]

when you draft real players it dosnt matter what round you get them in...whitners gonna be a good solid player in buffalo a long time barring injury...and that goes for 5th round pick kyle williams as well!...go bills and squish the fish this sunday!

[VABills]

No matter how good Whitner becomes, the pick rests with how good JP becomes.  If JP lives up to expectations, Whitner was the right pick, period.  If JP doesn't & Cutler does, then Whitner was the wrong pick-it's that simple (now that Marv is on record saying if the choice was between Leinart & Cutler, it would have been Cutler*).  QB is a much more valuable position to fill than safety, but if you have a good to great starting QB, then drafting a safety is acceptable. 

*-Source: Marv on WHAM Tuesday night.

774914[/snapback]

Not just Cutler, but also Leinart.

[Lurker]

Not just Cutler, but also Leinart.

774926[/snapback]

Only if the plan would've been to draft-and-trade Leinart. Trojan-man would never have been a good choice for a cold weather team with a stadium like the Ralph

[/dev/null]

Only if the plan would've been to draft-and-trade Leinart.  Trojan-man would never have been a good choice for a cold weather team with a stadium like the Ralph

774931[/snapback]

I'm glad we didn't take Trojan man. I think his career is going to end up being an abortion

[C.Biscuit97]

No matter how good Whitner becomes, the pick rests with how good JP becomes.  If JP lives up to expectations, Whitner was the right pick, period.  If JP doesn't & Cutler does, then Whitner was the wrong pick-it's that simple (now that Marv is on record saying if the choice was between Leinart & Cutler, it would have been Cutler*).  QB is a much more valuable position to fill than safety, but if you have a good to great starting QB, then drafting a safety is acceptable. 

*-Source: Marv on WHAM Tuesday night.

774914[/snapback]

 

You make a decent point but you mean to tell me drafting a QB with a top 10 pick two years after trading up to get JP would make sense? Especially when Losman is his first 8 starts had better number than Eli Manning and Alex Smith. While I can understand why some would question the Whitner pick, two first round QBs in 3 years would be retarded.

[Pyrite Gal]

No matter how good Whitner becomes, the pick rests with how good JP becomes.  If JP lives up to expectations, Whitner was the right pick, period.  If JP doesn't & Cutler does, then Whitner was the wrong pick-it's that simple (now that Marv is on record saying if the choice was between Leinart & Cutler, it would have been Cutler*).  QB is a much more valuable position to fill than safety, but if you have a good to great starting QB, then drafting a safety is acceptable. 

*-Source: Marv on WHAM Tuesday night.

774914[/snapback]

 

 

I don;t think that JP's performance really makes this a choice between Whitner and Cutler (or Leinart) as picking a QB was simply not an option for this team in this draft.

 

The Bills made a choice to invest their draft QB hopes in Losman when they picked him in the first and dedicated a cap hit in the pre-CBA renegotiation world to JP. Even though the new cap gave some additional room, the Bills having invested in Holcomb (and then Nall) as their FA hopes essentially made drafting yet another "savior" at QB a non option for the Bills.

 

By the time draft day rolled around, the Bills had holes which needed to be filled at DT and SS in order to be even remotely competitive this year. If they had made the alternate option and taken Cutler (or Leinart since he unexpectedly dropped to #8), it essentially would have condemned the Bills to another 3-13 season in 06 (if not worse) and essentially delayed our rebuilding (even if Cutler or Leinart were stars) to the 2008 season at best- I mean do you really see this team with Cutler at QB and and operating with whatever deficits are left by not drafting Whitner at #8 being competive at all this year or moving from that non-competivie result in 06 to a very a .500 record even with Cutler playing well in 2007, if so such a result would be unprecedented as best I can tell in NFL history).

 

Even if he played well and even if JP stinks, picking Cutler at QB would likely have been a death warrant for the next two seasons and even potentially for the Bills in Buffalo if that was our approach and result.

[Tasker]

While I can understand why some would question the Whitner pick, two first round QBs in 3 years would be retarded.

775002[/snapback]

 

 

No. You can't let a past error prevent you from making the right decision at the moment. Just like we can't skip all high pick O-Linemen because of Mike Williams...we can choose them or skip them based on how we think they can help the football team.

 

If we were sure JP was a bust and Cutler was the real deal and better than Whitner, I would have had no problem picking him. However Cutler has to be better than JP by more than Whitner's total contribution, which I don't think is likely, and I know was not clear on draft day.

 

It comes down to who would you rather have:

 

1) Cutler + JP (who would have to be cut, benched, or traded for little value)

 

or

 

2) Whitner + JP, because you can't undo the JP pick.

 

For the 2006 Bills it is no question that Whitner + JP is better, because if Cutler ends up being a whole Whitner better than JP it won't be in his rookie year, and no chance he would have been enough better to make up for not having Whitner at all.

 

For 2007+ it depends. I think Cutler will be excellent, but I think JP will be very good too, and Whitner will be very good. It really does depend on how each one develops, but I don't think it is far fetched at all to think that JP will be at least within one Whitner (funny unit of measure) of Cutler in overall value, and JP could very well end up being better than Cutler straight up.

 

 

Side note...did the redone top 10 put Vernon Davis out of the top 10? Has he not been playing well, or is that just the side effect of the shuffle? Would Detroit take Ernie Sims over him?

[Tasker]

If they had made the alternate option and taken Cutler (or Leinart since he unexpectedly dropped to #8), it essentially would have condemned the Bills to another 3-13 season in 06 (if not worse)

775011[/snapback]

 

 

I agree with most of your comments, and definitely feel it was not the right time to take a quarterback, and am happy we took Whitner over Cutler. I agree that we had more important places to improve than QB, and I am a big JP fan (and a Whitner fan).

 

BUT...I don't think this is a 3-13 or worse team without Whitner. Even though Cutler would be a starting rookie, the assumption for him to be picked is that he's have to be better than JP, and probably about as good even as a starting rookie. So it seems to me that the implication is losing Whitner would make us a 3-13 team. I think we are an 7-9 or better team with Whitner, and don't feel he is a four win difference all by himself.

[C.Biscuit97]

No.  You can't let a past error prevent you from making the right decision at the moment.  Just like we can't skip all high pick O-Linemen because of Mike Williams...we can choose them or skip them based on how we think they can help the football team.

 

If we were sure JP was a bust and Cutler was the real deal and better than Whitner, I would have had no problem picking him.  However Cutler has to be better than JP by more than Whitner's total contribution, which I don't think is likely, and I know was not clear on draft day.

 

It comes down to who would you rather have:

 

1) Cutler + JP (who would have to be cut, benched, or traded for little value)

 

or

 

2) Whitner + JP, because you can't undo the JP pick.

 

For the 2006 Bills it is no question that Whitner + JP is better, because if Cutler ends up being a whole Whitner better than JP it won't be in his rookie year, and no chance he would have been enough better to make up for not having Whitner at all.

 

For 2007+ it depends.  I think Cutler will be excellent, but I think JP will be very good too, and Whitner will be very good.  It really does depend on how each one develops, but I don't think it is far fetched at all to think that JP will be at least within one Whitner (funny unit of measure) of Cutler in overall value, and JP could very well end up being better than Cutler straight up.

Side note...did the redone top 10 put Vernon Davis out of the top 10?  Has he not been playing well, or is that just the side effect of the shuffle?  Would Detroit take Ernie Sims over him?

775033[/snapback]

 

You made some very good points. However, I gotta disagree with a couple of them.

 

The whole offensive lineman comparison isn't really equal. There are 5 starting linemen. Even if a guy is a bust, a player drafted in the first round isn't necessary gonna replace that player. Both players in theory could play together. However, there is only one QB. What good would it serve having two first rounders? They eat up cap room, and it is just a QB debate waiting to happen.

 

And though you make a good point about not letting past mistakes dictate the future, you have to look at the sample size. This is where MM really screwed us. JP only played in 8 games. No position in sports take as long to master as QB. As a GM, it would be a very ballsy move to give up on a talented 1st rounder after less than a half of season of starting. As I stated before, JP has had a better start to his career than Eli Manning and Alex Smith.

 

This especially doesn't make sense if you were going to just draft another kid out of college to replace a 3 year veteran. To me, Cutler was his class' Losman. Great physical tools and played for a so-so program. Cutler also never had a winning season or went to a bowl game. To myself, that scares the hell out of me. Cutler will greatly benefit by playing for the best offensive mind in football. Imagine if Losman and Cutler switched teams. I believe Losman would have been in much shape after his first two years. There's a big difference in learing from Shannhan than MM.

[C.Biscuit97]

I agree with most of your comments, and definitely feel it was not the right time to take a quarterback, and am happy we took Whitner over Cutler.  I agree that we had more important places to improve than QB, and I am a big JP fan (and a Whitner fan).

 

BUT...I don't think this is a 3-13 or worse team without Whitner.  Even though Cutler would be a starting rookie, the assumption for him to be picked is that he's have to be better than JP, and probably about as good even as a starting rookie.  So it seems to me that the implication is losing Whitner would make us a 3-13 team.  I think we are an 7-9 or better team with Whitner, and don't feel he is a four win difference all by himself.

775037[/snapback]

 

I'm not really arguing with you but I found this stats interesting.

 

 

With Wire (and I hate bashing Bills players and he is a great guy, but he is a horrible football player) starting in the first half, the Pats ran 16 times for 112 yards for a 7.1 avg.

 

In the second half (with Whitner in and playing the majority of the snaps), the Pats rushed 25 times for 71 yards for a 2.8 avg.

 

So maybe Whitner is good for 4 wins.

[Albany,n.y.]

I don;t think that JP's performance really makes this a choice between Whitner and Cutler (or Leinart) as picking a QB was simply not an option for this team in this draft.

 

The Bills made a choice to invest their draft QB hopes in Losman when they picked him in the first and dedicated a cap hit in the pre-CBA renegotiation world to JP.  Even though the new cap gave some additional room, the Bills having invested in Holcomb (and then Nall) as their FA hopes essentially made drafting yet another "savior" at QB a non option for the Bills.

 

By the time draft day rolled around, the Bills had holes which needed to be filled at DT and SS in order to be even remotely competitive this year.  If they had made the alternate option and taken Cutler (or Leinart since he unexpectedly dropped to #8), it essentially would have condemned the Bills to another 3-13 season in 06 (if not worse) and essentially delayed our rebuilding (even if Cutler or Leinart were stars) to  the 2008 season at best- I mean do you really see this team with Cutler at QB and and operating with whatever deficits are left by not drafting Whitner at #8 being competive at all this year or moving from that non-competivie result in 06 to a very a .500 record even with Cutler playing well in 2007, if so such a result would be unprecedented as best I can tell in NFL history).

 

Even if he played well and even if JP stinks, picking Cutler at QB would likely have been a death warrant for the next two seasons and even potentially for the Bills in Buffalo if that was our approach and result.

775011[/snapback]

For everyone's sake, I hope JP works out, if he does then everything is fine. However, if he doesn't (which better not happen), then we've done worse than "delay our rebuilding to the 2008 season at best". I'm happy with the Whitner pick, but if JP fails-which I hope & think will not happen-not drafting Cutler will have set us back even further. As a result, Marv has shown that he has faith in JP. Marv is in charge & it's his job to make the tough decision-he made it and he better be right.

I found it interesting that Marv made it quite clear that Leinart was never considered an option and the team obviously had Cutler rated a lot higher.

[Swift Sylvan]

Well, obviously if JP doesn't turn out well we should have had a different quarterback, but the point is Whitner so far is showing that he was worth the #8 pick. Also would Mario Williams really slide down the scale then?

[Albany,n.y.]

Just for the record, the Bills have given up or used the following year's 1st round picks on a QB:

1998 (trade for RJ)

2002 (trade for Bledsoe)

2004 (traded up for JP)

Therefore, the Bills used #1s 2 years apart on a QB and it can even be stated that they used back to back #1s since the #1 for Bledsoe was 2003's and JP was drafted in the 1st round in 2004 (with some 2004 picks & 2005's #1). So just because you spent a #1 a couple of years ago on a QB, it doesn't mean you don't do it again a short time later. The short timeframe between 1st round QB picks, in history, include when the Baltimore Colts spent back to back picks on QBs-in 1982 (Art Schlichter) and 1983 (John Elway), with neither one lasting long with the team due to a gambling addiction and elway's refusal to play in Baltimore. In 1989 Dallas spent 2 1st round picks on QBs, making both their (own) 1989 & 1990 picks QBs. Troy Aikman was a 1st rounder in 1989 & Steve Walsh was a supplemental 1st round pick-giving Dallas 2 rookie 1st round QBs in 1989-So much for Jimmy Johnson's draft genius tag (although he later hoodwinked NO into giving up a #1 for Walsh. In 1965 the Jets had both Joe Namath & Heisman winner John Huarte as rookie QBs. Now all this was done before the salary cap, but the bottom line is you better find a quality QB by whatever means necessary, otherwise your franchise is not going to be a Super Bowl contender.

[Chilly]

Just for the record, the Bills have given up or used the following year's 1st round picks on a QB:

1998 (trade for RJ)

2002 (trade for Bledsoe)

2004 (traded up for JP)

Therefore, the Bills used #1s 2 years apart on a QB and it can even be stated that they used back to back #1s since the #1 for Bledsoe was 2003's and JP was drafted in the 1st round in 2004 (with some 2004 picks & 2005's #1). So just because you spent a #1 a couple of years ago on a QB, it doesn't mean you don't do it again a short time later.  The short timeframe between 1st round QB picks,  in history, include when the Baltimore Colts spent back to back picks on QBs-in 1982 (Art Schlichter) and 1983 (John Elway), with neither one lasting long with the team due to a gambling addiction and elway's refusal to play in Baltimore.  In 1989 Dallas spent 2 1st round picks on QBs, making both their (own) 1989 & 1990 picks QBs.  Troy Aikman was a 1st rounder in 1989 & Steve Walsh was a supplemental 1st round pick-giving Dallas 2 rookie 1st round QBs in 1989-So much for Jimmy Johnson's draft genius tag (although he later hoodwinked NO into giving up a #1 for Walsh.  In 1965 the Jets had both Joe Namath & Heisman winner John Huarte as rookie QBs.  Now all this was done before the salary cap, but the bottom line is you better find a quality QB by whatever means necessary, otherwise your franchise is not going to be a Super Bowl contender.

775071[/snapback]

 

This also doesn't mean that it is not a perfectly valid plan to build a team, and then acquire a quarterback that fits the team and that the team can build around.

 

There isn't just one way to build a team.

[/dev/null]

Just for the record, the Bills have given up or used the following year's 1st round picks on a QB:

1998 (trade for RJ)

2002 (trade for Bledsoe)

2004 (traded up for JP)

Therefore, the Bills used #1s 2 years apart on a QB and it can even be stated that they used back to back #1s since the #1 for Bledsoe was 2003's and JP was drafted in the 1st round in 2004 (with some 2004 picks & 2005's #1). So just because you spent a #1 a couple of years ago on a QB, it doesn't mean you don't do it again a short time later.  The short timeframe between 1st round QB picks,  in history, include when the Baltimore Colts spent back to back picks on QBs-in 1982 (Art Schlichter) and 1983 (John Elway), with neither one lasting long with the team due to a gambling addiction and elway's refusal to play in Baltimore.  In 1989 Dallas spent 2 1st round picks on QBs, making both their (own) 1989 & 1990 picks QBs.  Troy Aikman was a 1st rounder in 1989 & Steve Walsh was a supplemental 1st round pick-giving Dallas 2 rookie 1st round QBs in 1989-So much for Jimmy Johnson's draft genius tag (although he later hoodwinked NO into giving up a #1 for Walsh.  In 1965 the Jets had both Joe Namath & Heisman winner John Huarte as rookie QBs.  Now all this was done before the salary cap, but the bottom line is you better find a quality QB by whatever means necessary, otherwise your franchise is not going to be a Super Bowl contender.

775071[/snapback]

 

To further illustrate the point we have also spent

1995 2nd: Clodd Tollins

1996 3rd: Billy Joe Gunrack (trade)

1997 4th: RJ (in addition to 1st rounder)

2003 1st: Bledsoe

2004 2nd: JP

2004 5th: JP

2005 1st: JP (count him as 2005 first rounder since we swapped our 05 for Dallas' 04)

 

And the most successful QB over that time period? A Free Agent from the CFL

[Pyrite Gal]

Just for the record, the Bills have given up or used the following year's 1st round picks on a QB:

1998 (trade for RJ)

2002 (trade for Bledsoe)

2004 (traded up for JP)

Therefore, the Bills used #1s 2 years apart on a QB and it can even be stated that they used back to back #1s since the #1 for Bledsoe was 2003's and JP was drafted in the 1st round in 2004 (with some 2004 picks & 2005's #1). So just because you spent a #1 a couple of years ago on a QB, it doesn't mean you don't do it again a short time later.  The short timeframe between 1st round QB picks,  in history, include when the Baltimore Colts spent back to back picks on QBs-in 1982 (Art Schlichter) and 1983 (John Elway), with neither one lasting long with the team due to a gambling addiction and elway's refusal to play in Baltimore.  In 1989 Dallas spent 2 1st round picks on QBs, making both their (own) 1989 & 1990 picks QBs.  Troy Aikman was a 1st rounder in 1989 & Steve Walsh was a supplemental 1st round pick-giving Dallas 2 rookie 1st round QBs in 1989-So much for Jimmy Johnson's draft genius tag (although he later hoodwinked NO into giving up a #1 for Walsh.  In 1965 the Jets had both Joe Namath & Heisman winner John Huarte as rookie QBs.  Now all this was done before the salary cap, but the bottom line is you better find a quality QB by whatever means necessary, otherwise your franchise is not going to be a Super Bowl contender.

775071[/snapback]

 

 

I think your selection of Aikman is a good one to illustrate a couple of points about using the draft as one of the any means necessary to find a quality QB.

 

Drafting a QB in the 1st round has simply proven be a pretty unusual way to secure an SB win (or even an SB berth) in the real world looking at NFL history. Aikman was the last QB to deliver an SB win to the team which selected him until Pitts pulled it off by selecting Robo QB who joined in with a TEAM (as seen by the difficulty in even selecting an SB MVP from this squad, RoboQBs major contribution to this win was making a rumbling, stumbling, bumbling tackle to prevent a TD after they turned the ball over) since Dallas chose Aikman in 1989.

 

In the intervening decade and a half, we saw the field of multiple different means for finding a QB capable of being part of a team that won it all, such as FAs (Dilfer for example), UDFAs (Warner), trades (Elway, Young, Favre for losts of examples), and later round draft picks (Brady).

 

One issue which all members of the field share in common which differentiates them from most 1st rond picks for your team is that their cap hits are quite manageable because even higher priced players who have been run out of town as failures (like Johnson for example) is that their cap hit is manageable so you can build a team to play with this QB, or alternately, once can find a QB capable of getting a win by paying him at or near the NFL minimum for his winning season (Warner, Dilfer and Brady all were acquired and paid near the minimum though they then could be renegotiated long term in a manageable way if the team chose).

 

Even in the Aikman example you site a big key for the 'Bioys even without the cap constraint present today was the gift which MN gave them them of a bunch of rol players for Herschel Walker.

 

The prescence of a number extraordinary players on this team like Emmit Smith and Irvin combined with these other team members to deliver the 'Boys a near dynasty. Using the draft to select a winning QB was done with Aikman but was far from the onlu key factor in building this team and likewise the Bills should look very closely whether they have a winning team for Cutler or whomever to join just as RoboQB joined the Bettis/s, Wards. Polamalus and other players who were just as (and in fact more) essential to them winning it all.

 

Lest you want to claim that laying all this on the criterion of an SB win is too rarified a standard for measuring QB succes, simply note that until McNabb saw the SB without a ticket in the '04 season he was the 1st 1 round drafted QB to lead the team which selected him to the big game since McNair in '99.

 

Between RoboQB last year and McNabb the year before, drafting a QB in the first round has simply been not only a non-form of producing an SB winner or an an SB attending team, but has been generally a minority shot (about 1 out of 4) in even making it to the last weekend as folks like Manning )once) and Culpepper (once at least led their team to the final weekend. I have not run all the numbers for all he final round QBs 1st round selection versus UDFAs or other mechanisms, but even anecdotally you seem more likely to see the names of YDFAs and late choices like a Hasselbeck and a Delhomme as the occurence of these 1st rounders leading their teams to the SB like a Bledsoe (its thin enough in terms of 1st round succes for the team which picked him that even he is one of their most prominent examples of "success" in the past decade and a half or so.

 

How well a Cutler played really would probably make little difference to this team;s success because opting for him at #8 would have really hamstrung this teams rebuilding strategy. Its not that we are so good with Whitner, its just that we would have been so bad with Cutler. Even the Broncos lost with Cutler wracking up a big DNP and they almost certainly are a better team than the Bills.

 

If we drafted Cutler, the Bills also likely would have the rookie as a DNP contributor, and even if he started rather than Holcomb (the likely Bills starter in the Cutler era actually), he would have been playing with a D which already proved to porous against the run either with lesser players that Whitner or McCargo plaing for us.

 

Just as Indy was improved from going 3-13 to get Manning up to 3-13 with Manning, so to that if the Bills had chosen Cutler we would be quite lucky to go 5-11 again and there has been zero case presented we would do better,

 

Let's pick a number which is not outlandish that a 2006 team with Cutler at QB would post. Some have predicted a 1-15 finish even for this squad. 3-13 would be a middle ground prediction for a Cutler led 06 squad between a 1-16 finish and merely reolicating last year's 5-11 result.

 

When a Bledsoe QB'ed team finished 8-8 after a 3-13 season this was heralded as the second best improvement in Ws in NFL history. My sense based on NFL history is that this team with its 1st round improvement being selection of Cutler who might well spend the season learning behind Holcomb (or JP if you really love QB controversy) would need to put on a show virtually unprecedented in NFL history merely to maufacture a winning season in his second year. Maybe he could do this, history simply say this is next to imposible.

 

Maybe the 06 squad with Cutler on it does better than 3-13. Could be but you and everyone else fail to make any case beyond your wish that this could be produced by a Cutler led team which has not used its 1st pick on our DT or SS holes, You even fail to make a case that he would do anything but sit on the bench here as he is doing in Denver. If you do want to make the case that the team is so bad that they need Cutler (again this assumes he will be good right off the bat which is a big unproven assumption) then also take into account that this Cutler led team is not only just as bad but actually worse as the draft was used on him rather than filling another hole.

 

In total, you are looking at a team which has missed the playoffs five years in a row, AND now had a 3-13 (or so season), is going to go into 2007 either with an untested QB or one who got a bunch of Ls, and even if he pulls off one of the best performances in NFL history is still QB for a .500 team.

 

I think the past reality indicates that if we chose Cutler and Ralph happens to kick the bucket you might be looking at theLA Bills since I think even the partisan Bills fan base would let the Bills slide away after 7 non-winning seasons in a row a Cutler era would bring even if he played well.

 

I simply do not see any reasonable football strategy that does not look to get the QB we want through 1. Development of existing players. 2. signing of an FA like a Dilfer or a Collins (NYG SB version), 3. drafting a late round QB who allows you to build a winning team like a Brady or acquiring a UDFA cheaply like a Delhomme or Warner. As unlikely as these strategies are to work, the strategy of drafting a QB in the 1st has even less of a chance of working with this team.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I'm glad we didn't take Trojan man.  I think his career is going to end up being an abortion

774934[/snapback]

If he doesn't get the protection he needs it's a pretty sure thing his performance will be limp.