Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***Official Buffalo Bills Thread 2021 Version: The Quest to Sustain Success***


Recommended Posts

I think the Browns make that trade regardless of the Gordon news. They could have still taken a WR with one of their other picks...the fact they didn't indicates to me the Gordon news wasn't driving their draft strategy very much and they are trying to take a long-term view here. Adding that 1st next year will be good for them in the long run as long as they hit on the CB and QB they took this year in round 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Random thought... Too bad this Josh Gordon news didn't break a day sooner. Throwing Stevie into the 1.4 trade might have been able to save next year's #1.

If this news had broken a day sooner, Sammy Watkins would be a Brown.

Browns said they knew for a couple weeks though.

I've seen conflicting stuff on this. Allegedly the top brass knew but are theoretically prohibited from telling the coaches. Not sure how this process works. If the people making the picks didn't know about the Gordon suspension until yesterday, then I feel a little bad for Cleveland. If they knew and just blew it off, that's kind of funny.

Either way, we should all be happy that for once the stars happened to align and we were able to take advantage of a team that's even more cursed and/or incompetent than we are.

Yeah, the whole thing seems crazy- I'm not sure why there would be a rule where only certain people in the organization could "know" the information in the first place, and I really don't see how they could "prove" that they told the coaches- it's not like Watkins would have been an unthinkable pick for Cleveland even if nothing came out about Gordon. I have to think they knew and decided to pass on him anyhow (maybe they know more than we think and he's facing less than a season suspension)- they passed on WR in the 2nd and 3rd after it was public as well.

Disagree with your last sentence- still seems like the Bills are the one who got taken advantage of.

Fair enough -- we gave a lot to move up. But realistically it's weird that we were able to land the player our FO apparently really wanted. If Cleveland wasn't snakebitten, there's no way Watkins is wearing a Bills uniform today.

I don't really think it's weird at all- they overpaid, so Cleveland made the deal. I don't disagree that they are snakebitten, but I think it's likely that they knew in advance, and they still figured they were better off making the deal. Just doesn't make sense that some people in the organization knew, but they didn't at a minimum insist that they draft Watkins even without "disclosing" the info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fan of that trade. They don't need another RB this year.

if Spiller repeats his 2013 season, they will be very happy to have Brown around. also gives them insurance for next year since Spiller/Jackson are in the last year of their deals.

Brown is very talented. I love the move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fan of that trade. They don't need another RB this year.

Fred could fall apart at anytime. He did really well last year which stunned me because he looked downright sluggish in the preseason. But he played very well and I won't take that from him. But a lot of RB's just fall of the cliff, they don't always take gradual declines and I can really see that happening to Fred.

Worst case they've rostered a highly talented big upside RB in preparation of Fred and CJ hitting FA next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fan of that trade. They don't need another RB this year.

Fred could fall apart at anytime. He did really well last year which stunned me because he looked downright sluggish in the preseason. But he played very well and I won't take that from him. But a lot of RB's just fall of the cliff, they don't always take gradual declines and I can really see that happening to Fred.

Worst case they've rostered a highly talented big upside RB in preparation of Fred and CJ hitting FA next season.

If you're looking at this move for 2015, why not just wait and use that 4th on an RB that year. It gives you more flexibility. Maybe you end up using a 2 or 3, if Fred finally breaks down. It is also safer. Who knows how Brown's health will hold up over this season of backup duty.

We'll see, I guess...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can find those positions on the street. The importance of QB makes it different IMO. Throw numbers at the position and you'll probably find a diamond sooner than if you keep following the current strategy.

Adding competition for Manuel is not a bad move, especially for a late round pick. If he can't handle it, he's probably not the guy anyway.

:no:

We've spent the last 15 years trying to find guards, DBs, etc off the street and have yield awful results.

sure, DBs is a position you typically need to invest in and the Bills have done that. Do you think they need more DBs over a QB?

As for OL, my sense is there are a lot of starters at the position around the league that went undrafted. Or you can just pick up other team's scraps like the Bills did with Legursky, Urbik, Rinehart, etc. Wasn't the line pretty good under Gailey with mostly players that were undrafted by the Bills? I think a lot of it is coaching and scheme, as much as raw talent.

Undrafted Jason Peters also worked out a lot better than #4 overall pick Mike Williams.

so your position is you want to roll with Manuel, Thad, and Tuel and don't bring in any new competition no matter the cost? They spent late round picks on two safeties last year and a kicker. Why not take a lottery ticket QB at some point?

You guys forget how badly our third and fourth CBs got torched last year at key times. We also lost our starting FS with not much depth behind him.

And thinking you can get an all-pro tackle as an UDFA every year (ie, Peters) is fools gold. Drafted players outperform undrafted guys by a huge percentage - and there's a reason for that.

With respect to the Gailey offensive lines, our tackles were competent and we had high round picks (Woods and Levitre) solidifying the middle. And even then, the line struggled with traditional blocking concepts and Gailey had to resort to a lot of misdirection and spread blocking. Fitzpatrick's hyper-quick release was also a gigantic factor in limiting sacks.

There's no point in wasting another pick at the QB position when you know Manuel needs another full season as the starter to determine if he's the guy. The team already spent late round picks on a couple developmental guys that have showed promise. Why go back to the drawing board just one year later?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fan of that trade. They don't need another RB this year.

Fred could fall apart at anytime. He did really well last year which stunned me because he looked downright sluggish in the preseason. But he played very well and I won't take that from him. But a lot of RB's just fall of the cliff, they don't always take gradual declines and I can really see that happening to Fred.

Worst case they've rostered a highly talented big upside RB in preparation of Fred and CJ hitting FA next season.

If you're looking at this move for 2015, why not just wait and use that 4th on an RB that year. It gives you more flexibility. Maybe you end up using a 2 or 3, if Fred finally breaks down. It is also safer. Who knows how Brown's health will hold up over this season of backup duty.

We'll see, I guess...

It's not just for 2015, both Spiller and FJax have some health concerns. Either way they obviously like him, they tried trading for him last year as well. Time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fan of that trade. They don't need another RB this year.

Fred could fall apart at anytime. He did really well last year which stunned me because he looked downright sluggish in the preseason. But he played very well and I won't take that from him. But a lot of RB's just fall of the cliff, they don't always take gradual declines and I can really see that happening to Fred.

Worst case they've rostered a highly talented big upside RB in preparation of Fred and CJ hitting FA next season.

If you're looking at this move for 2015, why not just wait and use that 4th on an RB that year. It gives you more flexibility. Maybe you end up using a 2 or 3, if Fred finally breaks down. It is also safer. Who knows how Brown's health will hold up over this season of backup duty.

We'll see, I guess...

I'd offer a few reasons.

They might like Bryce a lot more than any RB available in the 4th round this year, I know I do. It may not be a 2015 move, they might have concerns about Fred holding up another year as I do. They don't have to pay for him until the 2015 draft.

Lastly if they like what they see out of Bryce FA in 2015, like every year, is before the draft. So knowing they have Bryce under contract and they like what they see it can help make their FA decision making easier next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fan of that trade. They don't need another RB this year.

In fairness, Jackson isn't going to be around much longer. I will personally fly out to Buffalo and punch Brandon in the liver if they let Spiller walk.

Exactly in re Jackson (who also hasn't been injury free himself the last few years). And it sounds like they are going to try resigning Spiller long-term after the draft. Even if they do, getting another talented RB on the cheap is not a bad thing particularly in re Jackson leaving after this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Falcons had Vick but still added Schaub. Packers had Favre but still added guys like Hasselbeck, Brooks, etc. Manuel was out of the lineup a lot last year. Counting on him to stay healthy and saying you're all set at that position seems silly when they are clearly trying to make a push. Thad is a fine #2 but I'd like to see them upgrade from Tuel because I think he's terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can find those positions on the street. The importance of QB makes it different IMO. Throw numbers at the position and you'll probably find a diamond sooner than if you keep following the current strategy.

Adding competition for Manuel is not a bad move, especially for a late round pick. If he can't handle it, he's probably not the guy anyway.

:no:

We've spent the last 15 years trying to find guards, DBs, etc off the street and have yield awful results.

sure, DBs is a position you typically need to invest in and the Bills have done that. Do you think they need more DBs over a QB?

As for OL, my sense is there are a lot of starters at the position around the league that went undrafted. Or you can just pick up other team's scraps like the Bills did with Legursky, Urbik, Rinehart, etc. Wasn't the line pretty good under Gailey with mostly players that were undrafted by the Bills? I think a lot of it is coaching and scheme, as much as raw talent.

Undrafted Jason Peters also worked out a lot better than #4 overall pick Mike Williams.

so your position is you want to roll with Manuel, Thad, and Tuel and don't bring in any new competition no matter the cost? They spent late round picks on two safeties last year and a kicker. Why not take a lottery ticket QB at some point?

You guys forget how badly our third and fourth CBs got torched last year at key times. We also lost our starting FS with not much depth behind him.

And thinking you can get an all-pro tackle as an UDFA every year (ie, Peters) is fools gold. Drafted players outperform undrafted guys by a huge percentage - and there's a reason for that.

With respect to the Gailey offensive lines, our tackles were competent and we had high round picks (Woods and Levitre) solidifying the middle. And even then, the line struggled with traditional blocking concepts and Gailey had to resort to a lot of misdirection and spread blocking. Fitzpatrick's hyper-quick release was also a gigantic factor in limiting sacks.

There's no point in wasting another pick at the QB position when you know Manuel needs another full season as the starter to determine if he's the guy. The team already spent late round picks on a couple developmental guys that have showed promise. Why go back to the drawing board just one year later?

The reality is that it's very difficult to find impact players at any position on the 3rd day of the draft. There will certainly be some, but there will be many more who are not. Drafting for perceived need is something that the better teams in the league shy away from for good reason. If the BPA is a QB, it would be foolish to pass just because they have EJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can find those positions on the street. The importance of QB makes it different IMO. Throw numbers at the position and you'll probably find a diamond sooner than if you keep following the current strategy.

Adding competition for Manuel is not a bad move, especially for a late round pick. If he can't handle it, he's probably not the guy anyway.

:no:

We've spent the last 15 years trying to find guards, DBs, etc off the street and have yield awful results.

sure, DBs is a position you typically need to invest in and the Bills have done that. Do you think they need more DBs over a QB?

As for OL, my sense is there are a lot of starters at the position around the league that went undrafted. Or you can just pick up other team's scraps like the Bills did with Legursky, Urbik, Rinehart, etc. Wasn't the line pretty good under Gailey with mostly players that were undrafted by the Bills? I think a lot of it is coaching and scheme, as much as raw talent.

Undrafted Jason Peters also worked out a lot better than #4 overall pick Mike Williams.

so your position is you want to roll with Manuel, Thad, and Tuel and don't bring in any new competition no matter the cost? They spent late round picks on two safeties last year and a kicker. Why not take a lottery ticket QB at some point?

You guys forget how badly our third and fourth CBs got torched last year at key times. We also lost our starting FS with not much depth behind him.

And thinking you can get an all-pro tackle as an UDFA every year (ie, Peters) is fools gold. Drafted players outperform undrafted guys by a huge percentage - and there's a reason for that.

With respect to the Gailey offensive lines, our tackles were competent and we had high round picks (Woods and Levitre) solidifying the middle. And even then, the line struggled with traditional blocking concepts and Gailey had to resort to a lot of misdirection and spread blocking. Fitzpatrick's hyper-quick release was also a gigantic factor in limiting sacks.

There's no point in wasting another pick at the QB position when you know Manuel needs another full season as the starter to determine if he's the guy. The team already spent late round picks on a couple developmental guys that have showed promise. Why go back to the drawing board just one year later?

The reality is that it's very difficult to find impact players at any position on the 3rd day of the draft. There will certainly be some, but there will be many more who are not. Drafting for perceived need is something that the better teams in the league shy away from for good reason. If the BPA is a QB, it would be foolish to pass just because they have EJ.

:no:

Good and bad teams both favor drafting for need in later rounds unless there is a clear outlier on your board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can find those positions on the street. The importance of QB makes it different IMO. Throw numbers at the position and you'll probably find a diamond sooner than if you keep following the current strategy.

Adding competition for Manuel is not a bad move, especially for a late round pick. If he can't handle it, he's probably not the guy anyway.

:no:

We've spent the last 15 years trying to find guards, DBs, etc off the street and have yield awful results.

sure, DBs is a position you typically need to invest in and the Bills have done that. Do you think they need more DBs over a QB?

As for OL, my sense is there are a lot of starters at the position around the league that went undrafted. Or you can just pick up other team's scraps like the Bills did with Legursky, Urbik, Rinehart, etc. Wasn't the line pretty good under Gailey with mostly players that were undrafted by the Bills? I think a lot of it is coaching and scheme, as much as raw talent.

Undrafted Jason Peters also worked out a lot better than #4 overall pick Mike Williams.

so your position is you want to roll with Manuel, Thad, and Tuel and don't bring in any new competition no matter the cost? They spent late round picks on two safeties last year and a kicker. Why not take a lottery ticket QB at some point?

You guys forget how badly our third and fourth CBs got torched last year at key times. We also lost our starting FS with not much depth behind him.

And thinking you can get an all-pro tackle as an UDFA every year (ie, Peters) is fools gold. Drafted players outperform undrafted guys by a huge percentage - and there's a reason for that.

With respect to the Gailey offensive lines, our tackles were competent and we had high round picks (Woods and Levitre) solidifying the middle. And even then, the line struggled with traditional blocking concepts and Gailey had to resort to a lot of misdirection and spread blocking. Fitzpatrick's hyper-quick release was also a gigantic factor in limiting sacks.

There's no point in wasting another pick at the QB position when you know Manuel needs another full season as the starter to determine if he's the guy. The team already spent late round picks on a couple developmental guys that have showed promise. Why go back to the drawing board just one year later?

The reality is that it's very difficult to find impact players at any position on the 3rd day of the draft. There will certainly be some, but there will be many more who are not. Drafting for perceived need is something that the better teams in the league shy away from for good reason. If the BPA is a QB, it would be foolish to pass just because they have EJ.

:no:

Good and bad teams both favor drafting for need in later rounds unless there is a clear outlier on your board.

You can keep shaking your head, but you're way off base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winston and Mariota are supposed studs. Bills could just grab one of them if they suck this year.

How? They just dealt away their 1st rounder.

That's the joke.

Are they not allowed to trade for a first round pick next year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next years crop.

PLAYER POS. POS. RANK SCHOOL CLASS HT. WT.
Bryce Petty QB 1 Baylor rSr 6-2 230
Sean Mannion QB 2 Oregon State rSr 6-4 220
Taylor Kelly QB 3 Arizona State rSr 6-1 204
Andrew Manley QB 4 Eastern Illinois rSr 6-3 225
Chuckie KeetonInjured QB 5 Utah State Sr 6-1 200
Hutson Mason QB 6 Georgia rSr 6-2 202
Braxton Miller QB 7 Ohio State Sr 6-1 215
Bryan Bennett QB 8 Southeastern Louisiana rSr 6-2 205
Cole Stoudt QB 9 Clemson Sr 6-3 210
Anthony Boone QB 10 Duke rSr 6-0 230
Bo Wallace QB 11 Ole Miss Sr 6-4 210
Rakeem Cato QB 12 Marshall Sr 6-0 188
Shane Carden QB 13 East Carolina Sr 6-2 218
Devin Gardner QB 14 Michigan rSr 6-4 210
Cody Fajardo QB 15 Nevada rSr 6-2 215
Connor Halliday QB 16 Washington State rSr 6-3 190
Dylan Thompson QB 17 South Carolina rSr 6-2 218
Tyler Heinicke QB 18 Old Dominion Sr 6-1 205
Nick Montana QB 19 Tulane rSr 6-3 205
Quinn Epperly QB 20 Princeton Sr 6-2 220
Ryan WilliamsInjured QB 21 Miami (Fla.) rSr 6-5 223
Jake Waters QB 22 Kansas State Sr 6-1 210
Kevin Rodgers QB 23 Henderson State rSr 6-3 215
David AshInjured QB 24 Texas Sr 6-3 220
Austin Sumner QB 25 South Dakota State Sr 6-4 225
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winston and Mariota are supposed studs. Bills could just grab one of them if they suck this year.

How? They just dealt away their 1st rounder.

That's the joke.

Are they not allowed to trade for a first round pick next year?

There's no way you could trade into the top of the 1st round without at least a mid-to-late 1st. You'd need about 15 2nds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winston and Mariota are supposed studs. Bills could just grab one of them if they suck this year.

How? They just dealt away their 1st rounder.

That's the joke.

Are they not allowed to trade for a first round pick next year?

There's no way

Stopped reading here. Someone says "always" or never" whatever follows is meaningless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winston and Mariota are supposed studs. Bills could just grab one of them if they suck this year.

How? They just dealt away their 1st rounder.

That's the joke.

Are they not allowed to trade for a first round pick next year?

There's no way

Stopped reading here. Someone says "always" or never" whatever follows is meaningless.

Yup. Every single time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go, KC and Cincy each take a QB- both playoff teams with much more established QBs than Buffalo.

Exactly - established. Big difference from Buffalo's situation. There is no potential there for any QB controversy with those starters any time soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can find those positions on the street. The importance of QB makes it different IMO. Throw numbers at the position and you'll probably find a diamond sooner than if you keep following the current strategy.

Adding competition for Manuel is not a bad move, especially for a late round pick. If he can't handle it, he's probably not the guy anyway.

:no:

We've spent the last 15 years trying to find guards, DBs, etc off the street and have yield awful results.

sure, DBs is a position you typically need to invest in and the Bills have done that. Do you think they need more DBs over a QB?

As for OL, my sense is there are a lot of starters at the position around the league that went undrafted. Or you can just pick up other team's scraps like the Bills did with Legursky, Urbik, Rinehart, etc. Wasn't the line pretty good under Gailey with mostly players that were undrafted by the Bills? I think a lot of it is coaching and scheme, as much as raw talent.

Undrafted Jason Peters also worked out a lot better than #4 overall pick Mike Williams.

so your position is you want to roll with Manuel, Thad, and Tuel and don't bring in any new competition no matter the cost? They spent late round picks on two safeties last year and a kicker. Why not take a lottery ticket QB at some point?

You guys forget how badly our third and fourth CBs got torched last year at key times. We also lost our starting FS with not much depth behind him.

And thinking you can get an all-pro tackle as an UDFA every year (ie, Peters) is fools gold. Drafted players outperform undrafted guys by a huge percentage - and there's a reason for that.

With respect to the Gailey offensive lines, our tackles were competent and we had high round picks (Woods and Levitre) solidifying the middle. And even then, the line struggled with traditional blocking concepts and Gailey had to resort to a lot of misdirection and spread blocking. Fitzpatrick's hyper-quick release was also a gigantic factor in limiting sacks.

There's no point in wasting another pick at the QB position when you know Manuel needs another full season as the starter to determine if he's the guy. The team already spent late round picks on a couple developmental guys that have showed promise. Why go back to the drawing board just one year later?

The reality is that it's very difficult to find impact players at any position on the 3rd day of the draft. There will certainly be some, but there will be many more who are not. Drafting for perceived need is something that the better teams in the league shy away from for good reason. If the BPA is a QB, it would be foolish to pass just because they have EJ.

:no:

Good and bad teams both favor drafting for need in later rounds unless there is a clear outlier on your board.

You can keep shaking your head, but you're way off base.

You're also the guy that told me back in October that teams routinely draft guards in the first round too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go, KC and Cincy each take a QB- both playoff teams with much more established QBs than Buffalo.

Exactly - established. Big difference from Buffalo's situation. There is no potential there for any QB controversy with those starters any time soon.

:lmao:

First it's all teams favor drafting for need later in the draft, and because that absurd comment is blown out of the water minutes after you made it, you're changing it to they shouldn't draft a QB because it could cause a controversy? Can't make this stuff up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can find those positions on the street. The importance of QB makes it different IMO. Throw numbers at the position and you'll probably find a diamond sooner than if you keep following the current strategy.

Adding competition for Manuel is not a bad move, especially for a late round pick. If he can't handle it, he's probably not the guy anyway.

:no:

We've spent the last 15 years trying to find guards, DBs, etc off the street and have yield awful results.

sure, DBs is a position you typically need to invest in and the Bills have done that. Do you think they need more DBs over a QB?

As for OL, my sense is there are a lot of starters at the position around the league that went undrafted. Or you can just pick up other team's scraps like the Bills did with Legursky, Urbik, Rinehart, etc. Wasn't the line pretty good under Gailey with mostly players that were undrafted by the Bills? I think a lot of it is coaching and scheme, as much as raw talent.

Undrafted Jason Peters also worked out a lot better than #4 overall pick Mike Williams.

so your position is you want to roll with Manuel, Thad, and Tuel and don't bring in any new competition no matter the cost? They spent late round picks on two safeties last year and a kicker. Why not take a lottery ticket QB at some point?

You guys forget how badly our third and fourth CBs got torched last year at key times. We also lost our starting FS with not much depth behind him.

And thinking you can get an all-pro tackle as an UDFA every year (ie, Peters) is fools gold. Drafted players outperform undrafted guys by a huge percentage - and there's a reason for that.

With respect to the Gailey offensive lines, our tackles were competent and we had high round picks (Woods and Levitre) solidifying the middle. And even then, the line struggled with traditional blocking concepts and Gailey had to resort to a lot of misdirection and spread blocking. Fitzpatrick's hyper-quick release was also a gigantic factor in limiting sacks.

There's no point in wasting another pick at the QB position when you know Manuel needs another full season as the starter to determine if he's the guy. The team already spent late round picks on a couple developmental guys that have showed promise. Why go back to the drawing board just one year later?

The reality is that it's very difficult to find impact players at any position on the 3rd day of the draft. There will certainly be some, but there will be many more who are not. Drafting for perceived need is something that the better teams in the league shy away from for good reason. If the BPA is a QB, it would be foolish to pass just because they have EJ.

:no:

Good and bad teams both favor drafting for need in later rounds unless there is a clear outlier on your board.

You can keep shaking your head, but you're way off base.

You're also the guy that told me back in October that teams routinely draft guards in the first round too.

Thanks for the reminder. Of course I never said that, I simply pointed out that you were factually incorrect in saying that guards aren't drafted in the 1st round. You seem to enjoy making stuff up pretty regularly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go, KC and Cincy each take a QB- both playoff teams with much more established QBs than Buffalo.

Exactly - established. Big difference from Buffalo's situation. There is no potential there for any QB controversy with those starters any time soon.

:lmao:

First it's all teams favor drafting for need later in the draft, and because that absurd comment is blown out of the water minutes after you made it, you're changing it to they shouldn't draft a QB because it could cause a controversy? Can't make this stuff up.

Ya, some teams NEED to develop a backup QB behind their established starter, Ace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if Manuel has another year that doesn't really convince you one way or the other on his long-term viability as the team's starting QB? can you then draft a QB?

I hate the irrational fear of QB controversies. Manuel hasn't really done anything to earn that type of kid glove treatment at this point, apart from being drafted in the first round. If you draft a QB who is good enough to compete with him for a starting job, then you have 2 possible starters and I think that's not a bad situation to be in for a franchise who has been in search of a QB since the days of Flutie/Johnson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go, KC and Cincy each take a QB- both playoff teams with much more established QBs than Buffalo.

Exactly - established. Big difference from Buffalo's situation. There is no potential there for any QB controversy with those starters any time soon.

:lmao:

First it's all teams favor drafting for need later in the draft, and because that absurd comment is blown out of the water minutes after you made it, you're changing it to they shouldn't draft a QB because it could cause a controversy? Can't make this stuff up.

Ya, some teams NEED to develop a backup QB behind their established starter, Ace.

Another moving of the goalposts, but like the Bills don't?

You make less sense with every post, Ace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if Manuel has another year that doesn't really convince you one way or the other on his long-term viability as the team's starting QB? can you then draft a QB?

I hate the irrational fear of QB controversies. Manuel hasn't really done anything to earn that type of kid glove treatment at this point, apart from being drafted in the first round. If you draft a QB who is good enough to compete with him for a starting job, then you have 2 possible starters and I think that's not a bad situation to be in for a franchise who has been in search of a QB since the days of Flutie/Johnson.

Agreed 100%. The Panthers spent a first round pick 2 years in a row on QBs. Do you think they regret taking Cam with that second one? I mean, yeah, maybe it ruined Jimmy Claussen's confidence, but I think Carolina is OK with that.

It's a QB league. You HAVE to have a good one to compete year after year. If a guy can't take some competition, then he doesn't have the confidence to be that longterm guy anyway. Murray and McCarron were great value picks in the 4th and the Bills blew it by not giving themselves the most possible chances to be better at the most important position in football.

Edited by GroveDiesel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if Manuel has another year that doesn't really convince you one way or the other on his long-term viability as the team's starting QB? can you then draft a QB?

I hate the irrational fear of QB controversies. Manuel hasn't really done anything to earn that type of kid glove treatment at this point, apart from being drafted in the first round. If you draft a QB who is good enough to compete with him for a starting job, then you have 2 possible starters and I think that's not a bad situation to be in for a franchise who has been in search of a QB since the days of Flutie/Johnson.

Agreed 100%. The Panthers spent a first round pick 2 years in a row on QBs. Do you think they regret taking Cam with that second one? I mean, yeah, maybe it ruined Jimmy Claussen's confidence, but I think Carolina is OK with that.

It's a QB league. You HAVE to have a good one to compete year after year. If a guy can't take some competition, then he doesn't have the confidence to be that longterm guy anyway. Murray and McCarron were great value picks in the 4th and the Bills blew it by not giving themselves the most possible chances to be better at the most important position in football.

:goodposting: to both of you. I agree completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if Manuel has another year that doesn't really convince you one way or the other on his long-term viability as the team's starting QB? can you then draft a QB?

I hate the irrational fear of QB controversies. Manuel hasn't really done anything to earn that type of kid glove treatment at this point, apart from being drafted in the first round. If you draft a QB who is good enough to compete with him for a starting job, then you have 2 possible starters and I think that's not a bad situation to be in for a franchise who has been in search of a QB since the days of Flutie/Johnson.

Lose every game in 2015 and draft Hackenburg in 2016

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go, KC and Cincy each take a QB- both playoff teams with much more established QBs than Buffalo.

Exactly - established. Big difference from Buffalo's situation. There is no potential there for any QB controversy with those starters any time soon.

:lmao:

First it's all teams favor drafting for need later in the draft, and because that absurd comment is blown out of the water minutes after you made it, you're changing it to they shouldn't draft a QB because it could cause a controversy? Can't make this stuff up.

Ya, some teams NEED to develop a backup QB behind their established starter, Ace.

Another moving of the goalposts, but like the Bills don't?

You make less sense with every post, Ace.

If you don't see the differences between those situations and Buffalo's, then this conversation is pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if Manuel has another year that doesn't really convince you one way or the other on his long-term viability as the team's starting QB? can you then draft a QB?

I hate the irrational fear of QB controversies. Manuel hasn't really done anything to earn that type of kid glove treatment at this point, apart from being drafted in the first round. If you draft a QB who is good enough to compete with him for a starting job, then you have 2 possible starters and I think that's not a bad situation to be in for a franchise who has been in search of a QB since the days of Flutie/Johnson.

Agreed 100%. The Panthers spent a first round pick 2 years in a row on QBs. Do you think they regret taking Cam with that second one? I mean, yeah, maybe it ruined Jimmy Claussen's confidence, but I think Carolina is OK with that.

It's a QB league. You HAVE to have a good one to compete year after year. If a guy can't take some competition, then he doesn't have the confidence to be that longterm guy anyway. Murray and McCarron were great value picks in the 4th and the Bills blew it by not giving themselves the most possible chances to be better at the most important position in football.

Again, that's not a comparable comparison to Buffalo. Clausen was an unmitigated disaster in Year 1 and the Panthers had an opportunity to draft a guy they thought was a franchise player head and shoulders above everyone else in that draft (and, safe to say, much higher than the Bills ever rated Manuel). Manuel at least showed some promise last year and the Bills were never in a position to draft a QB this year that was rated as highly as the Panthers thought of Cam.

If Manuel completely falls on his face this coming year (which is possible), then yes, picking another QB should definitely be considered at that point. But Manuel is still in the stage of trying to build up his game and confidence. Bringing another young guy as competition and potentially stealing time away from him will only #######/stunt his development. You've made a huge investment in the guy - now is the time to try to maximize your value.

ETA: apparently re-tard is a banned word even when used in a non-offensive way.

Edited by OC Zed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this discussion over a 5th round QB. All the QBs left were projects. I'm much happier with a big OG then another junk QB. How many QBs are drafted in the 5th? And how many of those turn into Pro Bowl (not a great bench mark but good enough) QBs? The odds of hitting are very low for any player in the 5th or later so it's better for a team which ever player they think has the highest chance of becoming a productive starter then it is to take shots at positions they "need."

This being said, I'm not against taking a QB in the 5th (or any other round) as long as he is the highest rated player on the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this discussion over a 5th round QB. All the QBs left were projects. I'm much happier with a big OG then another junk QB. How many QBs are drafted in the 5th? And how many of those turn into Pro Bowl (not a great bench mark but good enough) QBs? The odds of hitting are very low for any player in the 5th or later so it's better for a team which ever player they think has the highest chance of becoming a productive starter then it is to take shots at positions they "need."

This being said, I'm not against taking a QB in the 5th (or any other round) as long as he is the highest rated player on the board.

I am a big fan of the Baylor guard taken in the 5th round. Our guard play was poor last year and I'm not a believer in free agent acquisition Chris Williams. At least this draft pick will have the opportunity to crack the starting lineup before the end of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if Manuel has another year that doesn't really convince you one way or the other on his long-term viability as the team's starting QB? can you then draft a QB?

I hate the irrational fear of QB controversies. Manuel hasn't really done anything to earn that type of kid glove treatment at this point, apart from being drafted in the first round. If you draft a QB who is good enough to compete with him for a starting job, then you have 2 possible starters and I think that's not a bad situation to be in for a franchise who has been in search of a QB since the days of Flutie/Johnson.

Lose every game in 2015 and draft Hackenburg in 2016

as a browns fan, i fully endorse this strategy.

and enjoy sammie. he's gonna be a stud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what if Manuel has another year that doesn't really convince you one way or the other on his long-term viability as the team's starting QB? can you then draft a QB?

I hate the irrational fear of QB controversies. Manuel hasn't really done anything to earn that type of kid glove treatment at this point, apart from being drafted in the first round. If you draft a QB who is good enough to compete with him for a starting job, then you have 2 possible starters and I think that's not a bad situation to be in for a franchise who has been in search of a QB since the days of Flutie/Johnson.

Agreed 100%. The Panthers spent a first round pick 2 years in a row on QBs. Do you think they regret taking Cam with that second one? I mean, yeah, maybe it ruined Jimmy Claussen's confidence, but I think Carolina is OK with that.

It's a QB league. You HAVE to have a good one to compete year after year. If a guy can't take some competition, then he doesn't have the confidence to be that longterm guy anyway. Murray and McCarron were great value picks in the 4th and the Bills blew it by not giving themselves the most possible chances to be better at the most important position in football.

:goodposting: to both of you. I agree completely.

Hell, Washington took two QBs in the same draft who ended up contributing to a playoff run. It worked out well for them then. I got to agree: I really wish they would have taken McCarron. But then again, I understand why they went all in with 3 picks of O-linemen too. How long have we all been crying for them to address the offensive line's holes? Granted, they weren't BAD last year, but the right side was noticeably weak compared to previous years. They needed to do something about it before EJ died back there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this discussion over a 5th round QB. All the QBs left were projects. I'm much happier with a big OG then another junk QB. How many QBs are drafted in the 5th? And how many of those turn into Pro Bowl (not a great bench mark but good enough) QBs? The odds of hitting are very low for any player in the 5th or later so it's better for a team which ever player they think has the highest chance of becoming a productive starter then it is to take shots at positions they "need."

This being said, I'm not against taking a QB in the 5th (or any other round) as long as he is the highest rated player on the board.

I am a big fan of the Baylor guard taken in the 5th round. Our guard play was poor last year and I'm not a believer in free agent acquisition Chris Williams. At least this draft pick will have the opportunity to crack the starting lineup before the end of the year.

:goodposting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go, KC and Cincy each take a QB- both playoff teams with much more established QBs than Buffalo.

Exactly - established. Big difference from Buffalo's situation. There is no potential there for any QB controversy with those starters any time soon.

:lmao:

First it's all teams favor drafting for need later in the draft, and because that absurd comment is blown out of the water minutes after you made it, you're changing it to they shouldn't draft a QB because it could cause a controversy? Can't make this stuff up.

Ya, some teams NEED to develop a backup QB behind their established starter, Ace.

Another moving of the goalposts, but like the Bills don't?

You make less sense with every post, Ace.

If you don't see the differences between those situations and Buffalo's, then this conversation is pointless.

Oh, the conversation is pointless for sure, but it has nothing to do with seeing the differences in situations. You've changed your story for why they shouldn't draft another QB late several times, and none of them make a bit of sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • GroveDiesel changed the title to ***Official Buffalo Bills Thread 2021 Version: The Quest to Sustain Success***

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...