Jump to content


Photo

No sure fire Franchise QB's in 18' draft class


  • Please log in to reply
185 replies to this topic

#121 KellyToughII

KellyToughII

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 614 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 12:24 PM

if the new regime whiffs on QB they will be shown the door like DW. If you fail at judging talent at the most important position you are not a football man. Taking late round flyers on guys like Pop Gun Peterman won't get it done either. The Kurt Warners, Tony Romos and Tom Bradys of this world come around once a millenium.

Arent we due then with Peterman?  You keep poo poo'ing this guy without seeing what he can do in our offense.  We are more likely to get an RG III, or Ryan Leaf vs a Franchise QB in the first round.


Darnold will be amazing. Rosen is a spoiled entitled brat. All in on Sam for 18'....

How do  you know Darnold will be Amazing in the NFL?  



#122 RyanC883

RyanC883

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,718 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:10 PM

I think we are set w/ TT and Peterman.  



#123 Bakin

Bakin

    UDFA

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 86 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 07:46 PM

I only watched a few of Darnolds games but he looked like the real deal oatmeal.
Allen has stud measurables.
Rosen doesn't impress me.

#124 stuvian

stuvian

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 483 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 07:59 PM

So three guys came along in around 10 years as you state, but they only come around once in a millennium. Great math there.

sorry I'll make my future posts in bar graphs so you can follow along



#125 oldmanfan

oldmanfan

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 815 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 08:39 PM

sorry I'll make my future posts in bar graphs so you can follow along

or quit making dumb exaggerations.

#126 stuvian

stuvian

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 483 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 09:01 PM

or quit making dumb exaggerations.

nice attempt at the last word. I'll get back to watching my Sens advance to the finals. Cheers



#127 BarleyNY

BarleyNY

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,633 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 09:59 PM

No, I'm not joking. Why would a team that desperately needs a QB like us trade their pick if there is a good QB available?


The three team that traded out of pick 2, 10 & 12 where the QBs were selected all needed QBs, but they all traded out anyway. All three teams have regimes that are on their first or second season. Only one of the 3 teams that traded up was in that position - Chicago who went from 3 to 2 - and they traded out with SF who might be waiting on Cousins. For those reasons and because Trubisky was out of range for B-lo anyway I'll disregard that trade. KC-Buffalo and Houston-Cleveland are different situations. KC and Houston are feeling pressure to find their QBs of the future, take a step forward and win now. Both look to be a QB away. But was either Mahomes or Watson really worth it? Two very QB needy teams didn't think so. I didn't see it in those two (or Trubisky for that matter). It sure looks like KC and Houston moved up and reached due to the pressure to win now. The teams that moved back didn't see QBs worth at top 10 or 12 pick and took advantage of the teams that needed a shot at one right now.

#128 jeffismagic

jeffismagic

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,930 posts

Posted 18 May 2017 - 05:31 AM

The three team that traded out of pick 2, 10 & 12 where the QBs were selected all needed QBs, but they all traded out anyway. All three teams have regimes that are on their first or second season. Only one of the 3 teams that traded up was in that position - Chicago who went from 3 to 2 - and they traded out with SF who might be waiting on Cousins. For those reasons and because Trubisky was out of range for B-lo anyway I'll disregard that trade. KC-Buffalo and Houston-Cleveland are different situations. KC and Houston are feeling pressure to find their QBs of the future, take a step forward and win now. Both look to be a QB away. But was either Mahomes or Watson really worth it? Two very QB needy teams didn't think so. I didn't see it in those two (or Trubisky for that matter). It sure looks like KC and Houston moved up and reached due to the pressure to win now. The teams that moved back didn't see QBs worth at top 10 or 12 pick and took advantage of the teams that needed a shot at one right now.

 

 

Buffalo and Cleveland are certainly not model franchises. As for assuming teams like Cleveland Buffalo will try to grab a QB, why assume that? Buffalo's off-season indicated that the key decision maker, a first year head coach wanted to give the Tyrod thing another spin. So Buffalo punted on QB high. Cleveland used to take guys in the first but their analytics guys seem to want to keep trading back and taking random guys in the 2nd or 3rd now. 



#129 JohnC

JohnC

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,102 posts

Posted 18 May 2017 - 07:15 PM



The three team that traded out of pick 2, 10 & 12 where the QBs were selected all needed QBs, but they all traded out anyway. All three teams have regimes that are on their first or second season. Only one of the 3 teams that traded up was in that position - Chicago who went from 3 to 2 - and they traded out with SF who might be waiting on Cousins. For those reasons and because Trubisky was out of range for B-lo anyway I'll disregard that trade. KC-Buffalo and Houston-Cleveland are different situations. KC and Houston are feeling pressure to find their QBs of the future, take a step forward and win now. Both look to be a QB away. But was either Mahomes or Watson really worth it? Two very QB needy teams didn't think so. I didn't see it in those two (or Trubisky for that matter). It sure looks like KC and Houston moved up and reached due to the pressure to win now. The teams that moved back didn't see QBs worth at top 10 or 12 pick and took advantage of the teams that needed a shot at one right now.

I don't understand your reasoning. KC traded with Buffalo and acquired Mahomes with the intention of developing him and playing him down the road. All teams have a pressure to win but KC has made it clear that Alex Smith is their starting qb. Houston, as does KC, clearly has a playoff roster. They announced that Savage will have the first crack at starting. If Watson eventually beats him out then he will earn the playing time. 

 

It's interesting to observe that the Bills hired top scouting staff from Houston and KC, both teams that were aggressive in their pursuit of qbs. In addition, there were multiple teams that had a strong desire to trade up with Buffalo to acquire one of the qbs that we bypassed. That tells you that a number of teams ranked the qbs that we bypassed very highly. It also should be noted that the Bills have not had a legitimate franchise qb for almost a quarter century. The lesson to be learned here is that dithering is not a solution to an entrenched problem. 


Edited by JohnC, 18 May 2017 - 07:16 PM.


#130 cba fan

cba fan

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 228 posts

Posted 18 May 2017 - 08:41 PM

 

I read comments from the new HC that we already have our guy.  Draft class of QB's in 2018 irrelevant.

I guess you stopped short of reading the rest of the article then. After McD said that, he then immediately did a 180 pivot by answering a question, he actually asked himself no less, and said TT is not guaranteed to even be on the roster this year.


Brian Brohm ends Aaron Rodgers era before it begins.
https://www.google.c.../19950.amp.html

And Matt Barkely. He was a preseason first round pick.

I get what you are saying.

 

I would like to have Matt Barkley over TJ Yates right now though as b/u or potential bridge if Taylor implodes.


Edited by cba fan, 18 May 2017 - 08:43 PM.


#131 Doc

Doc

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,451 posts

Posted 19 May 2017 - 11:01 PM

Buffalo and Cleveland are certainly not model franchises. As for assuming teams like Cleveland Buffalo will try to grab a QB, why assume that? Buffalo's off-season indicated that the key decision maker, a first year head coach wanted to give the Tyrod thing another spin. So Buffalo punted on QB high. Cleveland used to take guys in the first but their analytics guys seem to want to keep trading back and taking random guys in the 2nd or 3rd now. 

 

There are no "model franchises" when it comes to drafting a franchise QB, which is mostly what it's about these days.  Especially not the Chefs, who haven't drafted a good QB ever.



#132 Putin

Putin

    Probation

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 42 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 02:11 AM

No, I'm not joking. Why would a team that desperately needs a QB like us trade their pick if there is a good QB available?


Didn't KC give us 2 1st round picks to get their QB ? Unless you believe that the Bills are all set at the QB? If not there's your answers

#133 Gigs

Gigs

    Probation

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 10 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 07:59 AM

if the new regime whiffs on QB they will be shown the door like DW. If you fail at judging talent at the most important position you are not a football man. Taking late round flyers on guys like Pop Gun Peterman won't get it done either. The Kurt Warners, Tony Romos and Tom Bradys of this world come around once a millenium.

I hate to be the guy who takes a big steaming pile on your theory that if you can't judge QB talent (scouting is a crap shoot, Jerry Rice and Emmit Smith and Thurman Thomas were toooooooo slow for the game according to everyone and their mothers) you aren't a football guy "factoid" there, Cliff Clavin:

Bill Walsh said Rick Meier was the 2nd coming of Joe Montana. Kinda like when he said Trent Edwards was good.

So either Super Bowl winning Coach Bill Walsh isn't a football guy, or some random guy behind a keyboard, who's never run a team, scouted or coached or played in the NFL isn't the football guy. You tell me, Cliff

Edited by Gigs, 20 May 2017 - 08:05 AM.


#134 JohnC

JohnC

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,102 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 08:06 AM

 

There are no "model franchises" when it comes to drafting a franchise QB, which is mostly what it's about these days.  Especially not the Chefs, who haven't drafted a good QB ever.

You don't have to draft a qb to have a good qb. You can also trade for one like they did with Montana and Smith. It doesn't matter how you get a franchise qb as long as you do get one. If you can't get an elite qb through the draft or through trades and free agency that doesn't mean that you can't get a good enough qb to allow you to be competitive, as KC is on a long term basis. 



#135 bills.avfc

bills.avfc

    Probation

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 08:48 AM

it's a good job teams aren't finished judging them for another year or so then isnt it? i don't see how he can make that assessment with another whole season of college ball yet to play, at least.



#136 mannc

mannc

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,379 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 08:51 AM

You don't have to draft a qb to have a good qb. You can also trade for one like they did with Montana and Smith. It doesn't matter how you get a franchise qb as long as you do get one. If you can't get an elite qb through the draft or through trades and free agency that doesn't mean that you can't get a good enough qb to allow you to be competitive, as KC is on a long term basis. 

Would you have preferred the Bills to have traded two second round picks for Tyrod, like KC did for Smith? They have put up very similar numbers...

#137 Bangarang

Bangarang

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,959 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 09:37 AM

Didn't KC give us 2 1st round picks to get their QB ? Unless you believe that the Bills are all set at the QB? If not there's your answers


My point is why would a team who needs a QB trade the pick away if there is a great QB prospect available? Having an extra 1st round pick doesn't make it a slam dunk.

Edited by Bangarang, 20 May 2017 - 09:43 AM.


#138 Doc

Doc

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,451 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 09:42 AM

You don't have to draft a qb to have a good qb. You can also trade for one like they did with Montana and Smith. It doesn't matter how you get a franchise qb as long as you do get one. If you can't get an elite qb through the draft or through trades and free agency that doesn't mean that you can't get a good enough qb to allow you to be competitive, as KC is on a long term basis. 

 

I was talking about drafting a QB, i.e. the topic of this thread.  Again the Chefs have never drafted a franchise QB, much less a HOFer.

 

As for Montana and Smith, they weren't franchise QB's when the Chefs acquired them, and as such (in Smith's case), they gave up a lot to move up and draft Mahomes.  The question is: will Mahomes buck their draft history when it comes to QB's?


Would you have preferred the Bills to have traded two second round picks for Tyrod, like KC did for Smith? They have put up very similar numbers...

 

They're the same type of player.  They both work to minimize turnovers to let the defense, running game and ST's win games, but in the process leave lots of yardage on the field.  It's also the reason both teams are looking to replace them. 



#139 mannc

mannc

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,379 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 09:45 AM


 
They're the same type of player.  They both work to minimize turnovers to let the defense, running game and ST's win games, but in the process leave lots of yardage on the field.  It's also the reason both teams are looking to replace them. 

They are similar. Tyrod, though, is much younger and has only started 29 games in the NFL. Smith's ceiling is pretty well established by now.

#140 DefenseWins

DefenseWins

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 321 posts

Posted 20 May 2017 - 10:26 AM

 

 

Buffalo and Cleveland are certainly not model franchises. As for assuming teams like Cleveland Buffalo will try to grab a QB, why assume that? Buffalo's off-season indicated that the key decision maker, a first year head coach wanted to give the Tyrod thing another spin. So Buffalo punted on QB high. Cleveland used to take guys in the first but their analytics guys seem to want to keep trading back and taking random guys in the 2nd or 3rd now. 

 

It should also be remembered that Buffalo passed on Paxton Lynch when he was available last year... It's gonna be alot of "fun" watching their careers while we fail to make the playoffs year after year...


Edited by DefenseWins, 20 May 2017 - 10:27 AM.