I want to see what people think about my logic.
I don't have faith in the Buffalo Front Office. The people making the drafting decision also decided that Fitzpatrick was good enough to make a $59 million contract. I don't want them taking a chance in the first round when we could get a solid defensive player or receiver that can be quality starters for years to come, rather than an eventual back-up.
The Colts and Redskins were revolutionized in one year because of their drafted quarterback. Guess what? That's because they have once in a lifetime (twice for the Colts) prospects. There is no one in the class close to that level. So don't tell me that drafting a quarterback turns everything around. That takes a special, unique individual. Take a look at Jacksonsville. They had the same philosophy. They went out and grabbed the best quarterback available out of a really weak class. How are they doing? An average quarterback surrounded by a weak team makes them look weaker, because they are expected to do all the work. Exactly what happened with Fitz.
I want them to take a quarterback in the draft, we need one, but not in the first round because it isn't worth it; I don't believe they will end up being our franchise quarterback. Awesome if they are. But next year there are plenty of franchise types. Why is this the year we want to trade up? It doesn't make sense. Terrible timing. Build the team for one more year. Christian Ponder made it to the playoffs this year because of AP and a solid defense, and Alex Smith and Tim Tebow got there last year . Those last two teams got rid of their starters and are now Superbowl contenders, because they had great teams and THEN got a quarterback.
Isn't that a better philosophy? I really want some constructive criticism, please tell me that I'm wrong. I want the Bills to be good so bad, I don't want them to enter in the same cycle they have been in for the last decade.