Sisyphean Bills

Not buying. These cats were in stable situations, not being bounced to new positions, and radically changing schemes every few seasons. Furthermore, are you seriously comparing Chris Friggin Kelsay to Hall-of-Famers like Bruce and Strahan?? Saying that you don't need a pass rush from the strong side is just ridiculous. Was Bryce Paup useless to the Bills? He rushed from the strong side. How about Bennett? Would you pass on Reggie White as a LDE because you don't need a pass rush from the strong side? Sorry, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. Who said anything about superstar? I'm thinking upgrade from really !@#$ing bad. Have you actually seen Kelsay at OLB?

The Bills need pass rushers period. Kelsay averages 0.19 sacks a game and is in the downside of his career. (Stats don't tell the entire story either. Watching him, it is obvious he is not a good pass rusher.) Dwan Edwards was allowed to hit free agency for a reason. The Ravens knew not to overvalue a replaceable player.

It's not the money. It's the strategic decision making process. Why the rush? Seriously, is Kelsay truly irreplaceable? A DE going into his 30's that is just starting to learn to play OLB for the first time in his career is irreplaceable? I disagree that the Bills don't need good, versatile 3-4 OLBs that can play the passing game (both aspects) in their new defense. For starters, the Bills play Tom Brady twice a year, and with no pass rush and no underneath coverage skills they aren't going to get past the Patriots any time in the near future.

They might want to start making their Pro Bowl plans.

This is a meaningless argument. Not extending Kelsay now does NOT mean there is another hole to fill. (That only happens if they cut him today to sign a street free agent.) Extending him now only prevents him from hitting the open market when his contract is up. A team that isn't completely dysfunctional would be able to realize exactly what Kelsay is being asked to do here, be able to accurately access his open market value, and have on the radar screen their options. The latter point should be stressed and repeated. A professionally run team always has some ideas about options because players get injured, players retire, and situations change. Extending Kelsay now says that the Bills do not want him on the open market because they think he is highly prized; that if he were to hit the open market, that other teams would be bidding on him and drive up his price and possibly significantly higher than they were willing to pay. Who the hell are these teams? Which teams are still running the Tampa-2 (or a defense that relies on undersized DEs) and will throw out a contract at more than $6M/yr for Kelsay? (The Bills say they are trying to get away from that sort of defense!) Furthermore, it suggests that they think Kelsay is the very best option they have at OLB for the next few seasons. That his terrible play as he transitions to OLB cannot be replaced easily by picking up some other player. To that, all one can ask is WTF?!? This isn't criticism of Chris Kelsay as a human being. I wish him and his family the best, and this is no doubt great news to them. But, this is clearly a strategic miscalculation on the part of the Bills FO. It's blunders like paying top dollar for below average production, see Derrick Dockery, that make this team a statistical outlier in their ineptness and inability to compete. It's all about making bad decisions.

It's more like this. You have a super hot smoking date and she says, "Yes." You decide to go all out and take her to some fancy, romantic place for dinner -- the whole nine yards. When you get there, you're feeling good. It's going to set you back some, but it's worth it. This girl is amazing... Then they sit you at a table that is between the door to the kitchen and the restroom. Then, you notice the rank order from the bathroom because the john's overflowed. It's not too noticable, you tell yourself. Then, the backwaiter pours water in your glasses, right over the top and all over the table. The carelessness splashes your date getting her new dress a little wet, but she politely says, "It's OK." You soak most of the mess up with a napkin and he promises to bring a new one, only to disappear forever and fade in memory. Time passes and nobody ever comes to take an order. Well, you get to talk, right? Thousands of people seem to stream in and out of the kitchen door with dishes and things. Eventually, you notice that there is shouting and the general sound of a no-holds-barred free-for-all melee taking place in the kitchen. You smile at your date. This isn't quite what you thought it would be. The waiter finally comes and asks if you are ready to order. You try to politely mention that things, well, pretty much suck out loud at this restaurant, that you're not really so happy with the table, the service, etc. At which point, some other diner at this place jumps up and starts lecturing your date and yourself that if it wasn't for people like you this restaurant would still be the best in the city. It's not the restaurant you see; it is entirely your fault that the experience you're having on this date is bad and, well, a bit surreal.

Nah. I think somebody in the contract negotiation office, with no ability to recognize football talent whatsoever, realized that because Kelsay is now an OLB and not a DE, that he could get him for "cheaper" and thus this was a frugal, timely move to save the team some money. Like the cartoon clowns say in the Guinness ads, "BRILLIANT! <clink>"

I'd trade him for any of the big 3 positions (QB, OT, DE) in a heartbeat. (I'm assuming trading for a similar quality player and not someone's trash at a position.) How many games has he dominated, carrying the team, and won in his seasons with the Bills? The truth is that productive WRs can be found, but a WR has no value if you don't have the offensive capability to throw the football.

This week has already been pretty ugly. What's on tomorrow's menu? Maybe they can announce they are going to run the wishbone the rest of the season. Or fire the Def. Coor. and replace him with Billy Buffalo. http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/SJpecL52o5z/Detroit+Lions+v+Buffalo+Bills

It puts him at or above all the household names at the LB position. 'Nuff said. For a guy that has issues breaking down and tackling someone in space.

Link?

Far be it for the Bills to pay a LT market rate. They have to find the money to wildly overpay for a bad OLB from someone's pocket.

There was a post the other day that claimed the only important thing in an NFL franchise was the QB. This move sort of points out why that hypothesis is just plain wrong.

Happy day in the Kelsay household, eh? Good for you folks.

And what will happen around here if Fitz has a terrible day?

Donahoe, who was President of the organization, made some comments to the effect that people would not believe the interference and roadblocks that were thrown up in front of him. A lot of fans blew it of then as sour grapes and as something they didn't want to hear, but if it is truthful, how can anyone come to any other conclusion than the organization is hopelessly dysfunctional?

Who does these valuations? A Magic 8-Ball?!?

Say, anybody seen Russ "Hard Ball" Brandon lately?

As an FSU fan, I don't doubt it. Oh, and comparing Nesbitt's numbers in the offense he is running to the so-called pro-style offense that Ball was trying to run (when he wasn't stepping on his Wang) is utterly ridiculous.

Good discussion. To be honest, I wasn't following all the discussions this summer. Was Jeff Garcia's name brought up? Mark Brunell? I realize these guys are quite old now, but having a veteran that has won games in the NFL come in and help a potential project QB who's had his struggles is a common approach. I still think there is more to this than the simple answer that Gailey decided after two games that he'd seen enough of Edwards to cut the chord permanently. It just doesn't add up that that was his plan all along. One don't invest that much time and effort into a solution if he is going to flush it down the toilet at any second, at least most people wouldn't. I don't know if there are many other Georgia Tech fans here, but I must say that this seems way out of character for Gailey vs. his days in Atlanta. He stuck with Reggie Ball for 4 years, and Ball was about as erratic a QB as I have ever seen. He was constantly making mistakes that cost games. Yet, Chan stuck with his guy through thick and thin, and it was almost certainly a contributing factor in the coach's firing.

Not to mention it goes against human nature. People don't normally pour tremendous effort into a project, and then at the first sign something isn't quite right, throw it away and start another one. It is curious also that there would be both this "long-range rebuild" plan and a very short-term do-or-die plan with the QB going on simultaneously in the same person's head. Of course, I don't really think it was Chan's idea anyway, as I said before. People greatly underestimate the power of Overdorf and others in this dysfunctional organization.

It's all about the timing. If you cut the chord before free agency, you can go out an sign a free agent or draft someone. Then you invest all your OTAs and training camp in the player you are going to play, the guy that you think is going to give you the best chance to win the next game. Cutting coaches and team captains (we're not talking about the #7 WR who's never dressed for a game here) in the season causes confusion and can backfire causing yet more problems and more losing. In a way, it is showing disgruntled, underachiever players that there is an easy way out of Dodge. A further point: Who's to say that Gailey's firing 10 days before the season last year didn't cause him to have an unusual, unorthodox approach to this job? In his shoes, would it be a big surprise to someone if he was deeply distrusting of the last regime and to the point his mindset is "I'll see it for myself, thank you very much!"?

It's just an audition. Big deal.

Good post. The actions do support a sort of "long-term project" or "bottoming out" approach to the season. One aspect doesn't fit though. If this season is about evaluating QBs regardless of the outcome of games (i.e. this year is a 20 game pre-season slate), then were 2 games enough to evaluate a QB? Maybe it was. Secondly, if the QB of the future is definitely not Fitzpatrick but could be Brohm, then why is Fitzpatrick the starter now? If this is a throw-away season, why wouldn't you play Brohm for a couple games and see if you need to turn that page too? The easy answer is that he isn't ready, of course, but the question is "Why?" The answer to that, accordingly, is that he demonstrated that he wasn't as good as the guy they just cut all spring and summer. Besides, Brohm is in his third year now, and it's not like other teams haven't thrown younger QBs into the deep end to sink or swim. If he's not ready, give him 4 or 5 games to prove he's The Man before cutting him. As far as this bottoming out approach to the season, as someone else wrote, it is pretty unorthodox. Most coaches want to win games and they play the guy at each position that they think gives them the best chance to win the next game. Coaches say it all the time, "Just win a game." So, this notion that games are just auditions for the eventual re-building phase is, well, unorthodox. I guess it means that Buddy and Chan are feeling extremely confident about their job security.