Tweet
Why do you think we should address QB this year? I just don't see how we can do that effectively.
That QB won't play this year because Ben will start (and I think it's unlikely we sit him unless he's absolutely terrible).
So that wastes at least 1 of the 4 rookie contract years.
Then next year we've piled up more dead money than we had this year with Ben (and we may pile up more still if we want to add another UFA).
So we'd have the 2nd year of the rookie contract with one hand tied behind our backs with the cap.
Plus, our pick this year won't be high enough to draft one of the top 3 QBs, maybe not not of the top 5. That feels like another Mason Rudolph level talent. Doesn't seem like a great idea to me.
And trading up would require lots of draft capital and leave open a bunch of other needs (like LT and C).
Franchise QBs don't fall from the sky. You don't get one just because you want one (ask a fan of the Bills or Browns). You usually have to (1) be bad enough to draft high and (2) lucky enough that the guy you draft pans out (because QBs are notoriously hard to scout).
So it's easy to say "we should address QB this year", but doing it in practice in a way that sets us up for future success seems like a really low probability outcome IMO.
I think brining Ben back means we'll be in a similar situation next year. Trapped in the "Bills zone" where we're not good enough to be truly competitive and not bad enough to draft a QB with a good chance of being above average to elite. Then if we reach for a QB next season (which I'm afraid we'll do), we'll get the equivalent of Tyrod Taylor.
That QB won't play this year because Ben will start (and I think it's unlikely we sit him unless he's absolutely terrible).
So that wastes at least 1 of the 4 rookie contract years.
Then next year we've piled up more dead money than we had this year with Ben (and we may pile up more still if we want to add another UFA).
So we'd have the 2nd year of the rookie contract with one hand tied behind our backs with the cap.
Plus, our pick this year won't be high enough to draft one of the top 3 QBs, maybe not not of the top 5. That feels like another Mason Rudolph level talent. Doesn't seem like a great idea to me.
And trading up would require lots of draft capital and leave open a bunch of other needs (like LT and C).
Franchise QBs don't fall from the sky. You don't get one just because you want one (ask a fan of the Bills or Browns). You usually have to (1) be bad enough to draft high and (2) lucky enough that the guy you draft pans out (because QBs are notoriously hard to scout).
So it's easy to say "we should address QB this year", but doing it in practice in a way that sets us up for future success seems like a really low probability outcome IMO.
I think brining Ben back means we'll be in a similar situation next year. Trapped in the "Bills zone" where we're not good enough to be truly competitive and not bad enough to draft a QB with a good chance of being above average to elite. Then if we reach for a QB next season (which I'm afraid we'll do), we'll get the equivalent of Tyrod Taylor.
Comment