Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

[Blacksheep71]

Considering the holes this roster has, is this really the year to draft a QB?

Fitzpatrick did well last year behind a below average line and with no TE and raw receivers. There is no reason he should not start the pre-season as the named starter which means any draft pick will no initially see the field. With our holes elsewhere, our No3 and possibly our No34 need to start immediately.

You should IMO only draft QB above BPA if you're having a crisis at the position and I don't think we have. Peterson, Peterson, Miller, Green and Quinn are all better players available than Newton and Gabbert at their positions, and all fill a greater area of need than QB.

I doubt Dareus falls to No3, I don't think Fairley is a 3-4 DE but I do think that we can get guys like Jenkins, Bailey and Guy outside of Round1. I'm hoping Merriman regains his form but even if he is shadow of his former himself he's still a player the opposition need to account for. Miller may not be big enough though I do think he could have a LaMaar Woodley rather than Wimberly like career. No3 is too high however. Whilst you should build a team from the inside out can we really pass up on a talent like Peterson? With McGee constantly injured, Florence and Youboty possibly leaving, a secondary of McKelvin and Corner scares me more than a DL of Carrington-Williams-Edwards plus Troup, Johnson and others.

And as there is only one TE worth taking in this draft can we fail to pass on Rudolph considering he would have been the highest rated TE next year as well? He could be there at No34 too. Look what Gronkowski added to the Pats.

I think we should continue to develop Levi Brown as a future backup, and sign a guy like Bruce Gradkowski to a 2year deal to sit behind Fitzpatrick. With QBs like Luck, Barkley, Foles, Pryor, Lance Jones and John Brantley likely to be in the 2012 mix, alongside LTs of the likes of Kalil, Potter, deChristopher, Datko, Jonathan Martin and Riley Reiff gives a possibility of upgrading most of the offense next year once we've dealt with the Defense this year around.

For the record, my hoped for draft is

1. Patrick Peterson, CB, LSU
2. Kyle Rudolph, TE, Notre Dame
3. Jarvis Jenkins, DE/T, Clemson
4. Lawrence Guy, DE/T, Arizona St
4. Thomas Keiser, OLB/DE, Stanford
5. Darius Morris, G/RT, Temple
6. Alex Wujciak, ILB, Maryland
7. Davonte Shannon, SS, Buffalo

[Don't Panic]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

I'd have no problem waiting on a QB until the 4th or 5th round. We definitely need to shore up other areas, so if Buddy and Chan don't see a guy they're sold on, it would be hard to complain with a DL and TE with the first two picks.

[Night Train]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

Good post. You did your homework.

I wish more here would follow your lead.

[Luisito23]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

Forget about it.

[bigfish2112]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

I'd have no problem waiting on a QB until the 4th or 5th round. We definitely need to shore up other areas, so if Buddy and Chan don't see a guy they're sold on, it would be hard to complain with a DL and TE with the first two picks.

Whats the point of getting another project QB we got one of those last year? Its either 1st or 2nd round this year or I wouldnt take any qb. I would get a veteran qb to back up fitz if i am not going to pick a qb in the first two rounds.

[split71]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

Good post...I think the pick at 3 will be BPA and that won't be a QB.

[X-Era]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

Fitzpatrick did well last year behind a below average line and with no TE and raw receivers. There is no reason he should not start the pre-season as the named starter which means any draft pick will no initially see the field. With our holes elsewhere, our No3 and possibly our No34 need to start immediately.

Fitz won't cost a 4 and 12 team much. But when we get to the point where we are .500 and knocking on the door to the playoffs, he will be inadequate IMO. The Bills lately have done a bad job about getting starting quality play out of rookies, none of our rookies started the whole year last year. I'd love to have that as a requirement but I think it's unlikely.

You should IMO only draft QB above BPA if you're having a crisis at the position and I don't think we have. Peterson, Peterson, Miller, Green and Quinn are all better players available than Newton and Gabbert at their positions, and all fill a greater area of need than QB.

IMO, this is the worst sitaution to throw a rookie QB into. You want to groom them and let them take over when they are much more ready. To me the best plan would be to have our future QB in the fold this whole year developing behind Fitz and being groomed by Gailey. At the same time, we should be developing into a decent team and becoming a threat for the playoffs. At the end of next year Fitz is a free agent and I don't want us to be stuck paying him starting QB money when he may hold us back from a playoff run. I want us to have leverage with a future QB who is ready to play.

As far as where they stack up in rankings, I rank both a bit higher than you, but I respect anyone's opinion on that. So we should just agree to disagree.

[Blacksheep71]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

Fitz won't cost a 4 and 12 team much. But when we get to the point where we are .500 and knocking on the door to the playoffs, he will be inadequate IMO. The Bills lately have done a bad job about getting starting quality play out of rookies, none of our rookies started the whole year last year. I'd love to have that as a requirement but I think it's unlikely.

IMO, this is the worst sitaution to throw a rookie QB into. You want to groom them and let them take over when they are much more ready. To me the best plan would be to have our future QB in the fold this whole year developing behind Fitz and being groomed by Gailey. At the same time, we should be developing into a decent team and becoming a threat for the playoffs. At the end of next year Fitz is a free agent and I don't want us to be stuck paying him starting QB money when he may hold us back from a playoff run. I want us to have leverage with a future QB who is ready to play.

As far as where they stack up in rankings, I rank both a bit higher than you, but I respect anyone's opinion on that. So we should just agree to disagree.

I think we could find our 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounders starting - Peterson will be a no-brainer as would Rudolph, whilst a DE in Round3 would really push Carrington, Edwards and Johnson for immediate playing time. The fact was last year we drafted players we were always likely to have riding the bench as we had decent players on the roster at RB and NT. I think the brain trust realise with little FA, whoever we draft on Day1 and Day2 will be on the field.

As for QB, I like the Rams situation where Bradford and Saffold were Day1 starters. You can look at the likes of Ryan, Stafford etc and see that it doesn't hurt to start a QB from Day1 and formulate an offensive strategy to hide their initial inexperience. Sitting on the bench for a year does not always help a rookie especially when the only real experience they get over 12months is the odd few mop up minutes and practise against team mates.

If we tank, I can see 2012 bringing someone like Luck in R1 and a LT like Andrew Datko in R2, and you could say that Luck might be more ready to start from Day1 than either Gabbert or Newton with a year riding the pine.

[alohabillsfan]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

I would say no to a QB in rounds 1 and 2. We need a DE, ILB x2 (POZ gone), OLB, CB (possibly 2 gone), and SS (goodbye Whitner) just for the defense......

I seriously would love to be able to trade down. ehhh.

[X-Era]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

I think we could find our 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounders starting - Peterson will be a no-brainer as would Rudolph, whilst a DE in Round3 would really push Carrington, Edwards and Johnson for immediate playing time. The fact was last year we drafted players we were always likely to have riding the bench as we had decent players on the roster at RB and NT. I think the brain trust realise with little FA, whoever we draft on Day1 and Day2 will be on the field.

As for QB, I like the Rams situation where Bradford and Saffold were Day1 starters. You can look at the likes of Ryan, Stafford etc and see that it doesn't hurt to start a QB from Day1 and formulate an offensive strategy to hide their initial inexperience. Sitting on the bench for a year does not always help a rookie especially when the only real experience they get over 12months is the odd few mop up minutes and practise against team mates.

If we tank, I can see 2012 bringing someone like Luck in R1 and a LT like Andrew Datko in R2, and you could say that Luck might be more ready to start from Day1 than either Gabbert or Newton with a year riding the pine.

My issue with the Luck comment is that it happens every year. Every single year we hear that next years class will be better or that we can simply grab Player X next year. We have to address the position. Luck will require a trade up to #1 overall which will require our 1st, 2nd, and probably more. No, I don't think we will be picking 1st next year. Are you saying you want us to spend that many picks on him? My guess is that you wouldn't especially if you want our first several picks to be day one starters.

If Gabbert or Newton is deemed worthy, do it and move on.

[Extremebillsfan247]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

Whats the point of getting another project QB we got one of those last year? Its either 1st or 2nd round this year or I wouldnt take any qb. I would get a veteran qb to back up fitz if i am not going to pick a qb in the first two rounds.

Gailey likes to have it competitive at every position, even for backups. Taking a QB in the late rounds to compete with Brown is something I could see this team doing. A veteran QB isn't a bad idea, but if your building for the future, you take gambles on the young guys first before going after veterans who already come with uncorrectable baggage. JMO

[X-Era]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

Gailey likes to have it competitive at every position, even for backups. Taking a QB in the late rounds to compete with Brown is something I could see this team doing. A veteran QB isn't a bad idea, but if your building for the future, you take gambles on the young guys first before going after veterans who already come with uncorrectable baggage. JMO

First, the lower you draft a player, the lower the likelihood they ever become great. That's the rule. BTW, "rule" allows for exceptions but is the generality that can be drawn. It's a usually valid generalization.

Using your plan, we could easily end up close to being a playoff team with a FA starter (Fitz) who has made it obvious he can't take us to the playoffs, and two late round QB's that just don't seem to have what it takes to take over as the starter.

Or, we could have a guy sitting there that was the best in his draft class (or #2) and someone we believe can get it done and develop way past Fitz.

None of this is a given of course, it's simply my take on what I think will happen.

[TigerJ]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

I would not be inclined to go QB at #3, but I could be tempted to do so at #34. Still, yours is a valid position, and if that's what the Bills choose to do, I wouldn't be devastated.

[X-Era]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

I would not be inclined to go QB at #3, but I could be tempted to do so at #34. Still, yours is a valid position, and if that's what the Bills choose to do, I wouldn't be devastated.

Nor will I and I can't state that strongly enough. I will be happy with several different players at 3.

[Extremebillsfan247]

Re: Do we really need to spend the No3 or No34 on a QB?

Here is my opinion on that 3rd or 34th pick being a QB. Do you need to select one in those slots? no, but then again, if you have the opportunity to land a good prospect even if he doesn't look like the next Peyton Manning, you have to do it. Otherwise your left with another year of debating the old would have, could have, should have that's been a topic of many discussions with the Bills for such a long time. The only way to change the discussion is to roll the dice when the opportunity presents itself, and take a chance. He could be the next Ryan Leaf for all we know, but then again he could turn out to be the one to get you a Super Bowl ring. You only ever find out if you take a chance. JMO