Buffalo Bills Talk 2018 - The Offseason

[Yatzhee]

You're going to make my eyes bleed. This mentality is what got us to a 17 year playoff drought. Find a franchise QB. It's. All. That. Matters.

You aren't going to find that QB at the 9 to 12 range, because you aren't getting any higher this draft imho.

Hell, every football analyst has already affirmed the top 5 QB's are gone before 10.

 

[Yatzhee]

Not stirring the pot for the sake of stirring, but legitimately asking...

If you consider the majority of the best pure pocket passers who are champions are long in the tooth:
(P. Manning 39 his final season), Brady 40, Brees 38, Rivers & E. Manning 36, Big Ben 35, Rodgers 34, [let's call this group A]
...And the apparent dearth of up-and-coming pure pocket passers to replace them:
Goff 23, Wentz 25, ...whom else do you want to place on that list [let's call this Group C]?

Would you then consider that any of the handful above-average pocket passer QBs in the in-between "age gap": Alex Smith 33, Matt Ryan 32, Stafford & maybe Cousins both 29, Luck 28 [let's call this Group B] have anywhere near the chance of success that the Group A QBs have had? (I'd argue Stafford has the best shot after Luck, assuming Luck can come back from injury.) Smith, Ryan, Stafford, Luck all Rd1, #1-3.

Let's further assume the dual-threat QBs will have shorter careers (Wilson, Newton, Taylor, Prescott, etc.), so it might actually make sense to avoid drafting them from a depreciation standpoint / preservation of value.

Then to me, it boils down to 3 scenarios:
1. Trade up to draft the can't-miss franchise QB, and have him turn out to actually be that QB, and be on a team good enough to do it. What team would trade with BUF to give the Bills that chance? I just don't see it.

2. Trade up to draft the can't-miss franchise QB, and have him "languish" on a team which can't get over the hump.

3. Draft QB when the player falls to you and develop and hope you get the next Big Ben, Rogers, Brady, (Wilson).

If only it were that easy, each and every year, why don't all teams do it?

Exactly.
And I am not advocating not going for that QB "if they are available". But I just don't see it happening. And to top it off, if cousins comes available or Smith is a gap fillers option, it would be an incompetent beyond belief move to waste these picks in a packaged c r a p shoot when you can address so many needs with them.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

Why can't they get these right!?!

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[Rowley Birkin]

I have some offseason questions /comments largely based on the last few pages of discussion here:

What exactly is the deal with Taylor's contract status since it was restructured. I dont understand the contract/cap workings of the NFL - it seems so much more complicated than the NHL. Is he technically a UFA or is he still Bills property?

Ihave seen Alex Smith's name crop up often. It could make a lot of sense. What does he cost the bills in a trade?

Which of the pending UFAs are resigned? I'm assuming Gaines is at least offered a good deal but is this a given?

Are there any less glamorous Hyde/Poyer types out there who the Bills could target in UFA to fill some gaps? If so - who?

To me their combined UFA /draft needs are:

-Starting QB assuming Taylor is gone
-Top3 speedy WR to compliment Benjamin & Jones
General OL upgrade
Number 2 RB

-LB
-DT
-CB (assuming Gaines is gone this is a big onebbut i hope not)

Someone also also mentioned DE as a high priority / need. What happens with Hughes/Lawson in this scenario? Both seem good players to me but maybe i'm missing something.

Finally - reading that cap calculator Cordy Glenn's contract looks horrendous. Excuse my ignorance as said my knowledge of NFL cap is very poor but is there any way he is moved to free some room?

 

[brian_griffin]

I have some offseason questions /comments largely based on the last few pages of discussion here:

Someone also also mentioned DE as a high priority / need. What happens with Hughes/Lawson in this scenario? Both seem good players to me but maybe i'm missing something.

My opinions here, and I am not a football guru so take with grain of salt. Both are adequate but neither is dominant enough to avoid upgrading. You can never have "too much good" at defensive end, either by having a good platoon of adequate talents or by having a stellar player requiring routine double-team (Bruce Smith, J. Kearse, J. Clowney). Bills secondary is good enough that it's disappointing they were 3rd-worst in sacks and 5th worst in sack rate (% of opponents passing plays which resulted in sacks). Best teams in NFL were ~2x good at both stats as compared to the Bills. Sack rate is the more meaningful stat to me, because it normalizes the data. With the same secondary, Bills should be able to generate an incremental "coverage sack" per game if their DEs were better. Need them to help contain / negate the edge better too on rushing plays.

To me though, LB needs upgrade with higher priority. Bills were dead last in 2nd-level rushing yards yielded per carry and near the bottom in open-field-yards allowed per carry. Plus their ability to drop back in coverage is (subjectively) below-average, and collectively they're not a good enough unit to avoid trying to upgrade. Several of them (the LBs) are either one-dimensional (or even half-dimensional) as individuals.

 

[Chad Thundercock]

Bradford would be a great fit with these skill players. The obvious issue with him is that he's glass, and you better have a quality backup behind him. Which they don't have. Peterman is not a good backup... and people think he should start... ugh.

 

[Jim Carr's Rug]

Bradford would be a great fit with these skill players. The obvious issue with him is that he's glass, and you better have a quality backup behind him. Which they don't have. Peterman is not a good backup... and people think he should start... ugh.

Bradford's knees may be shot. Personally, I don't think the reward is worth the risk.

 

[is the answer jesus]

Bradford's knees may be shot. Personally, I don't think the reward is worth the risk.

Depends what the cost is. If he could be had on a one year show me deal I'd do it for sure. I'd much rather pay Bradford 18 million for one year than Taylor.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

Depends what the cost is. If he could be had on a one year show me deal I'd do it for sure. I'd much rather pay Bradford 18 million for one year than Taylor.

Creaky knees say no. The guy can't last a full NFL season.

 

[is the answer jesus]

Creaky knees say no. The guy can't last a full NFL season.

He's an injury risk for sure, but if and that's a big if he can stay healthy I think he's a better QB than Taylor, and he'd fit our system much better.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

He's an injury risk for sure, but if and that's a big if he can stay healthy I think he's a better QB than Taylor, and he'd fit our system much better.

Of course he is, but the best ability is availability. I'd pass. No pun intended.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Bradford would be a great fit with these skill players. The obvious issue with him is that he's glass, and you better have a quality backup behind him. Which they don't have. Peterman is not a good backup... and people think he should start... ugh.

He runs into the same problems here he did last season: mediocre-to-bad pass protection compounded by long-developing routes. And the Bills' WRs aren't playing the same sport as Diggs/Thielen.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

I'd rather take a chance on Teddy coming back from the knee, with the caveat I know nothing about long-term impact and re-injury risks. Before the injury he was great at compensating for an absolutely trash line with his feet while remaining a pocket passer, and was hitting all the intermediate throws.

 

[Fezzy126]

He's an injury risk for sure, but if and that's a big if he can stay healthy I think he's a better QB than Taylor, and he'd fit our system much better.

Why? He's never thrown for more than 21 TDs, 4,000 yards, never had winning record, never led a team to the playoffs... This season he looked good driving that ferrari of an offense they've assembled in Minny, but otherwise, he's been replacement level (also, see Case Keenum). This fan base hoped for a healthy Tim Connolly for a decade, no thank you, I'd rather burn out my eyes watching Alex Smith...

 

[kirby11]

I'd rather take a chance on Teddy coming back from the knee, with the caveat I know nothing about long-term impact and re-injury risks. Before the injury he was great at compensating for an absolutely trash line with his feet while remaining a pocket passer, and was hitting all the intermediate throws.

I'd think about that. Question is, would you also take a QB early (Rd. 1 or 2) if one fell, or see how Teddy does and wait to go after a QB with your draft capital in 2019 if he doesn't pan out? Talking injury risk here, too, if he plays decent but misses time off and on again due to the knee injury.

 

[Jim Carr's Rug]

Depends what the cost is. If he could be had on a one year show me deal I'd do it for sure. I'd much rather pay Bradford 18 million for one year than Taylor.

Forget dollars- the cost would possibly be Bradford misses significant time and Buffalo is forced to play a sub-par back-up (Peterman) which in turn, derails a potentially fruitful season. OR, even worse, the injury forces Buffalo to start a young franchise quarterback before he is ready and stunts that quarterback's development.

 

[dugman]

One last thing about yesterday....
My perfect lasting memory of the game could have been Kyle Williams as the lead fullback steamrolling Marcel Dareus (a la Bo Jackson and Brian Bosworh) on first down from the one, allowing McCoy to walk into the end zone.
What a glorious opportunity missed...

 

[enthusiast]

If Peterman enters 2018 as the starter I won't be watching

 

[Fezzy126]

If Peterman enters 2018 as the starter I won't be watching

There's just no way, right?

The thing I'm trying to decide is whether or not I'd be happy with Cousins as my QB. His stats are legit, but I've been watching the dude since college and I think he just doesn't know how to close out a game. I feel like I've been watching his teams come up short for 7 years now...

The Minny QBs are garbage, if we sign/trade for one of them I will be pretty depressed. Even a QB like Fitz would throw for 5,000 yards in that offense.

 

[NotABadPeriod]

OK here are all the plausible options (some more than others, some much better than others). I'll admit I don't really follow the NFL salary cap implications, so others better versed in that stuff can chime in on those angles)

Keep Taylor:

1) Draft a QB early, go with Taylor-Rookie-Peterman. This is basically the "Taylor is the bridge to the rookie.
2) Draft a QB late, go with Taylor-Rookie-Peterman. Here you're hoping to find a late round gem but more likely just end up with Peterman, and you're basically committing to Taylor for the forseeable future.
3) Sign/trade a QB you're hoping can steal the job from Taylor, going with Taylor-FA-Peterman. This could be a guy like McCarron or other backup stuck behind an established QB.
4) Sign a journeyman, committing to Taylor for the foreseeable future unless Peterman somehow has the offseason of his life. Taylor-Journeyman-Peterman
5) Stick with just Taylor-Peterman and hope for a miracle

Let go of Taylor (cut or trade):

1) Draft a QB Early. You can either sign a vet to be a bridge if you don't think the QB of the future is ready on day 1, or just start him from the beginning. (Peterman could also be used as a bridge, but probably not a great idea).
2) Draft a QB late. Here you NEED to find a vet to start day 1 unless you want a Peterman disaster year. And the guy you draft might turn out to be another Peterman and not help anything longterm
3) Sign/trade for an established starter (e.g. Cousins, Smith, etc.). Peterman is the backup, though another vet can also be brought in to compete.
4) Sign/trade for a potential starter. Basically #3 from the earlier group, but without Taylor. Again a vet could be brought in, or you could bring in 2 QBs of this type and have an open competition. Basically recreate the Manuel/Cassel/Taylor offseason but hope for better results.

There are a ton of different options they could go with. I think they need to draft a QB of the future (so not a day 3 prayer), but beyond that I have no idea. Keeping Taylor as a bridge to the QB of the future may not be the worst plan, especially since that decision probably needs to be made before the draft--so before you know who you'll end up with. If you're counting on the draft, there needs to be a backup plan for when FA starts.

 

[is the answer jesus]

Why? He's never thrown for more than 21 TDs, 4,000 yards, never had winning record, never led a team to the playoffs... This season he looked good driving that ferrari of an offense they've assembled in Minny, but otherwise, he's been replacement level (also, see Case Keenum). This fan base hoped for a healthy Tim Connolly for a decade, no thank you, I'd rather burn out my eyes watching Alex Smith...

Tyrod hasn't done the 1st two either. The last two are hard to pin on Bradford. He's spent the majority of his career on terrible Rams teams. He's no savior, but he's an upgrade over what we've got and unlike Smith he won't cost anything but money. I think KC will keep a relatively high price tag on Smith if not, He'd be a good pickup.

Forget dollars- the cost would possibly be Bradford misses significant time and Buffalo is forced to play a sub-par back-up (Peterman) which in turn, derails a potentially fruitful season. OR, even worse, the injury forces Buffalo to start a young franchise quarterback before he is ready and stunts that quarterback's development.

and that's a legit argument, counting on Bradford to stay healthy is a gamble for sure, but I'm with Jaeger in his assessment of this team though, it's got some holes, but we just made the playoffs, there's a good amount of talent here. Playing a rookie here isn't like the Browns throwing QB after QB to the lions, a rookie would be fine if forced into action. I don't think we necessarily even need to make a guy sit for a year if we get a more NFL ready prospect.

 

[Yatzhee]

Kirk Cousins

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Works well if you’ve got a top five pick and the foundation built. But that’s not really how it played out.

Giants paid though their teeth for Manning.
Rodgers fell.
Steelers had a down year.
Ryan went to a bad team.
Eagles traded up for Wentz.
Colts tanked.
Panthers were terrible.

What you wrote applies to Wilson and Flacco.

I'm not talking about instantly inheriting a Super Bowl quality situation, I'm saying that the past decade's worth of finalists have either:

• Let their QB matriculate without first round investment - Pats, Seahawks, 49ers
• Added a UFA with a veteran team - Broncos, Saints, Cardinals
• Drafted a QB outside of the top 10 with a veteran team - Ravens, Packers, Steelers
• Traded up for a QB with a veteran team - Giants
• Rebuilt around their own pick with a bad team - Colts, Falcons, Panthers

The common thread here is that these teams had key pieces in place before adding a QB, and the only exceptions had their own picks. Meanwhile, our best offensive player is a 31 year old RB, none of the wide receivers benefit a young QB, and the 3 best players on the OL are aging out. Not to mention we'll have to add pass rushing, replace both week 1 DTs, 2-3 LBs, and rebuild the entire bottom half of the secondary including #2CB.

As it stands, the Bills trading up for a quarterback would put them closer to the RG-III Washingtons than any of the above - a team with too many holes influenced by thirsty, "QB or bust," ownership, and then constantly behind the eight-ball in terms of surrounding that player with talent. Even relative successes like the Rams and Eagles had a lean year after aggressively swinging, and needed significant follow-up offseasons to rebound into what they are today.

I just don't see the point of trading up for a QB this year - or maybe even drafting one - given how that player will inherit the least talented version of this team for like five years in either direction, and will also make it harder to rebound from that point unless they're already good.

Stylistically, the league hasn’t changed since 2007 in the passing game. Only big change was dual threat QBs. And we see how that went.

That was actually a big reason why that season was my cutoff point in addition to being a nice round number. The 07 Pats and the QB protections post-Brady/Pollard in 08 is right when things really tilted towards the passing game.