Would you support a trade to Number 1 for a QB

[DesertFox24]

I saw a rumor Whaley has been talking to teams at top of draft to attempt to trade up. They believe for QB Mitch, although this happened in 2014 and everyone thought for Clowney but it was really for sammy.

Brings me to the question if he did trade up to get a guy would you be ok with it. It will cost a lot of draft capital for sure and probably multiple first rounders seconds and thirds.

That said I would be ok with it, we need that first pick overall QB and if thinks a guy is worthy of that designation then he needs to do whatever is necessary to get him. I personally think all three QBs talked about in the first round are not worthy of it, but I would applaud the bills for swinging for the fences and recognizing the odds of them getting a Dak, Wilson, Brady, Carr later in the draft is more than likely not going to happen.

Again I want to clarify of the three Mitch is the only one I would even consider but he has so many issues due to play time that I would not feel comfortable pulling the trigger. Watson I want no part of and Kizer I see EJ and his slow eyes again.

[ParanoidAndroid]

No. He is far from a good bet involving multiple high draft picks. If he was a consensus #1 pick, then yes.

[sukie]

I'll support anything. Wanting a consensus pick is silly. When was the last couple of those? Most times a consensus is wrong.

[jimmifli]

Yes. As long as it doesn't stop us from continuing to try to find a QB.

Meaning free agency and future drafts. He might be the guy, and we can give him 3 years, but we need plan B and C on the roster.

[Thurmal]

I'll support anything. Wanting a consensus pick is silly. When was the last couple of those? Most times a consensus is wrong.
The last couple off the top of my head (Luck, Newton, Ryan) worked out pretty well.

[SpikedLemonade]

NO

[IlluminatusUIUC]

The last couple off the top of my head (Luck, Newton, Ryan) worked out pretty well.

Newton wasn't remotely a consensus pick, Matt Ryan didn't go #1, and Luck (while great) might not even be the best QB from that draft.

[Thurmal]

Newton wasn't remotely a consensus pick, Matt Ryan didn't go #1, and Luck (while great) might not even be the best QB from that draft.
They were all the clear, consensus #1 QBs in their respective drafts.

[ParanoidAndroid]

Wanting a consensus pick if you're going to trade up 7 to 9 spots is silly? If I'm going to spend multiple high picks on one player there ought to be a solid agreement in the scouting community that the guy is worth it.

[paladin warrior]

:no:

[sukie]

I'd rather have the surprise guy like Dax or a Brady or a Brees (I think he wasn't 1st round) consensus is expensive and Luck isn't worth it so far. Not that I don't like Luck. I feel a QB could be found outside consensus and 1 is playing this weekend.

[DesertFox24]

I'd rather have the surprise guy like Dax or a Brady or a Brees (I think he wasn't 1st round) consensus is expensive and Luck isn't worth it so far. Not that I don't like Luck. I feel a QB could be found outside consensus and 1 is playing this weekend.
Brees was first pick in the second round.

I am sorry I was not very clear in what I was trying to get at.

History has shown taking a QB first overall is generally more successful than taking one mid first round or later in the draft. I was not saying consensus first overall we have not had that since Elway, Peyton, and Luck in my honest opinion and none of these guys are like that.

He could take anyone for the sake of this argument. The question is if he does it knowing the likely three options would you be ok with the gamble?

That said I agree with the earlier poster about having option B and C as well. We do have Cardale for the next three years so he would be one of those options but I agree we need another as well.

[Albany,n.y.]

I don't want to see next year's pick traded.

[Buffalogic]

Not this year.

[sudzy]

What makes any of you trust Whaley to not trade the farm to move up to one for another EJ? He hasn't shown any ability to find any decent QBs yet. I'm certainly don't want to mortgage the future of this team to allow Whaley to try and find another QB in what might be another really bad QB draft.

[YardRat]

No. Instead of trading four picks to move up to #1 (which is probably what it would take at the very least) I would rather use two or three of them on multiple QBs and hope one hits, and still have a pick or two to bring in a guy (or guys) at other positions. "All in" doesn't usually work out too well.

[Mr. Pink]

You know how much the Bills would have to give up to move from 10 to 1?

Mitch Trubisky better be the best QB of this generation for what you're giving up to draft him.

[djjimkelly]

Not this year.

exactly what i was gonna say maybe next year but not for these guys

[Luisito23]

Whaley's a dumb ass if he does that, but then again, he already is, so nothing to lose.

[Ingtar33]

Mitch isn't good enough to trade up for him. I don't care how poor our QB position is. I'd rather take fliers on guys later in the draft then trade up for Mitch. That said he is the only Round 1 quality QB in this year's draft. So don't expect much out of anyone else in it.

[SpikedLemonade]

Trading to #1 overall is a decade franchise defining move.

I do NOT trust the current "brain" trust to wipe their own asses let alone roll the dice for a decade on my beloved team.

[TacklingDummy]

I'd support drafting a QB with all 7 picks.

[Mouldsie]

Not this year

[Mace]

Absolutely not. We need more picks not less.

Luck was thought to be "The One" by near everyone, this years QB's pale in comparison to him, and he is still unable to carry Indy. They feasted on their division when it was weak, he is not good outside of it, and now that the division is stronger you see him still unable to carry that team.

You need a team around a QB, and we won't get any better by blowing off more picks for any one player. Taking 2 in various rounds would make more sense than spending more future on a guy who will be developed by a 23 year WR coach.

[stuckincincy]

I saw a rumor Whaley has been talking to teams at top of draft to attempt to trade up. They believe for QB Mitch, although this happened in 2014 and everyone thought for Clowney but it was really for sammy.

Brings me to the question if he did trade up to get a guy would you be ok with it. It will cost a lot of draft capital for sure and probably multiple first rounders seconds and thirds.

That said I would be ok with it, we need that first pick overall QB and if thinks a guy is worthy of that designation then he needs to do whatever is necessary to get him. I personally think all three QBs talked about in the first round are not worthy of it, but I would applaud the bills for swinging for the fences and recognizing the odds of them getting a Dak, Wilson, Brady, Carr later in the draft is more than likely not going to happen.

Again I want to clarify of the three Mitch is the only onethere's nothing to lose! I would even consider but he has so many issues due to play time that I would not feel comfortable pulling the trigger. Watson I want no part of and Kizer I see EJ and his slow eyes again.

Sure. And why not?

It's not as if anything else worked in the past 17 years. What's to lose? :drive:

[Skooby]

Sure. And why not?

It's not as if anything else worked in the past 17 years. What's to lose? :drive:

We can't do much worse right ??? Haha

[Bill Cody]

I like the idea of drafting Trubisky at 10 but I don't support moving up.

Trub is good but hardly a sure thing and the Bills have more holes than QB, we need our ammo. AND there's a decent to good chance Trub is there at 10 without a trade up unless the Jets take him. Cleveland needs a QB but Miles Garrett is too good a prospect to pass up. SF will take a QB but my guess is it will be Kizer. Chicago is looking to deal for Jimmy Garrapolo. The other teams in the top 10 have QB's. If Trub gets by NY he's probably a Bill.

[DesertFox24]

I like the idea of drafting Trubisky at 10 but I don't support moving up.

Trub is good but hardly a sure thing and the Bills have more holes than QB, we need our ammo. AND there's a decent to good chance Trub is there at 10 without a trade up unless the Jets take him. Cleveland needs a QB but Miles Garrett is too good a prospect to pass up. SF will take a QB but my guess is it will be Kizer. Chicago is looking to deal for Jimmy Garrapolo. The other teams in the top 10 have QB's. If Trub gets by NY he's probably a Bill.
I doubt those three will be on the board at 10 or any of them

[IlluminatusUIUC]

They were all the clear, consensus #1 QBs in their respective drafts.
Mel Kiper: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/09/kiper-calls-newton-one-year-wonder-like-akili-smith/“If you hit (on Newton), you could have a sensational quarterback for ten years,” Kiper acknowledged. “(But) if you miss, it sets you back three, four, five years.”
Kiper also assessed Newton’s limited college career, in which he went 14-0 as a starter at the FBS level and 25-1 overall:
“He was a one-year wonder. Akili Smith was a one-year wonder.”


Sports Illustrated:
http://thecomeback.com/thisgivensunday/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2016/02/sicover1.jpg

Mike Mayock's gut says "No" to Cam Newton
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-draft/09000d5d81f77c62/Mayock-s-gut-says-no-to-Cam-Newton

Arizona Cardinals: http://blog.azcardinals.com/2011/03/17/the-time-to-consider-gabbert/
"I do think that if the Cards took a quarterback in the first round, they’d be much more likely to go with Gabbert than Newton. There’s just something about everything that swirls around Newton off the field that I think they think Gabbert would be a safer pick."

Matt Ryan was in a weaker class overall than Newton, but there were still those leaning on Flacco, but I'm not gonna dig up articles from 2008 over it. A few years after a draft, it gets real easy to find "consensus" on a player that wasn't there on draft day.

[Night Train]

NO !

[DesertFox24]

Here is what I will say, you will never get a hit if you never swing

[Mace]

Here is what I will say, you will never get a hit if you never swing

You'll never get one either if you swing at wild pitches, balls way over your head, balls behind you, balls coming at your face, balls aimed at your inside ankle.

A pitch is either hittable, or isn't. Trading three potential pitches for a random one means you get less pitches you might be able to hit.

[Turf]

Could Trubisky fall to 10, or 7 or 8 and you make a minimal move up? I don't know why but WR Williams reminds me of Michael Irvin. I want this guy and a QB, even if that QB is Cutler. Maybe they could get one and trade up for the other. Don't know. All I know is going all in to draft a QB at #1 when there is no clear cut number doesn't make sense.

[Skooby]

Mitch thinks Mitch will be ours, Romo if he could be sold.

[Mace]

Could Trubisky fall to 10, or 7 or 8 and you make a minimal move up? I don't know why but WR Williams reminds me of Michael Irvin. I want this guy and a QB, even if that QB is Cutler. Maybe they could get one and trade up for the other. Don't know. All I know is going all in to draft a QB at #1 when there is no clear cut number doesn't make sense.

Just to me, even dabbling in trading up is wasting picks, you can do something with that other pick even if you only move one. It's hard to say Trubisky is going to be much, lots of them aren't. Swinging wild is swinging wild, we've done that before.

Here's a list of QB's taken in the 1st round since 2010 ; http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/draft-finder.cgi?request=1&year_min=1936&year_max=2016&draft_round_min=1&draft_round_max=1&draft_slot_min=1&draft_slot_max=32&pick_type=round&pos=qb&college_id=all&conference_id=any&show=all&order_by=default

Newton & Luck stood out more than any QB this draft. But look at the rest. Are those guys worth spending other guys on ?

I still say we need more picks not less of them. Has Whaley really dazzled with his remarkable prowess ? No.

If you want to swing for the hell of it, swing at your position or even lower, gaining other picks you can use, because we're just not getting much better swinging wild. If you think for sure "he's the man" sure. I don't know how anyone would think any of these guys are for sure the man, but if he isn't, people need to be fired without waiting 3 more years.

Picking a couple, well, I'd find better use for the picks, but fair enough. Trading UP ? He'd better be right and quick or you're gone, because you just cost us positions down the road and we've been dorking around way too long now for this to be tolerable, imho.

[YardRat]

If there ever has been a year to trade down and accumulate more picks, this is it. New coaching staff that needs new players, a plethora of free agents and lack of signed bodies, no real blue-chippers outside of the top 8 or 10.

[Turf]

I'm fine with TT, a FA QB, but I want Williams and you may draft Kelly 5th round.

[DesertFox24]

You'll never get one either if you swing at wild pitches, balls way over your head, balls behind you, balls coming at your face, balls aimed at your inside ankle.

A pitch is either hittable, or isn't. Trading three potential pitches for a random one means you get less pitches you might be able to hit.
Very true, but to be fair we need to start swinging more because this passive thing we have been doing is not working either. Like Graham said after EJ drafted keep drafting them until you find one.

Heck maybe Cardale surprises and beats everyone out, we trade this years pick in three years for something I would rather have that problem then what we have had

[Mad Max]

Trubisky at 10 take him. No trades.

If he goes, take best available at 10 or trade down, take best available. Take Mahomes in the second.

[DesertFox24]

Trubisky at 10 take him. No trades.

If he goes, take best available at 10 or trade down, take best available. Take Mahomes in the second.
Mahomes might be my second favorite this draft class, he might end up being a late first or sky rocketing like Wentz did