Ronin

They're lucky that they've been in our division during Brady's tenure. Any other division and they would not have had the same "success" as they've had. 13 seasons playing against three teams none of which had decent QBs or usually even coaches and hardly ever a bona fide playoff talent among the three.

It was re: Mario several seasons ago, that's exactly what it was all about. The problem with this team is not that they don't ever spend money on players, they do, but when you give the biggest contracts to mediocre players like Fitzpatrick, Dockery, Walker, Tripplett, and then give players like Spencer Johnson, Dwan Edwards, and Kawika Mitchell nearly 20M apiece, well, you're not exactly setting the pace. This org needs far better talent evaluators, it's not all the admin's side of the FO's fault.

I can understand your annoyance, but I cannot understand your surprise. I mean did you really expect this leopard to change its spots this offseason? Did you really buy into the notion that Whaley was going to be any different? I realize, blah-blah-blah, it's all Littman's et al's doing, but hasn't that then been the case for years? There's one event that might change things, until that happens, que sera sera. and we know what that is and will continue to be. Come on, if they are we know that it's with lowball offers. Given this new stance on the chasm between now Whaley/Marrone, and Littman & Co., I'm curious why they spent all that cash on Mario. Or Fitz, or any number of other players. Clearly they've spent money at times, the problem has always been that they spend it on the wrong players, usually obviously players not nearly worth what we give them. The counterargument is that we have to overpay, but if we'd offered that money to other better players that got less elsewhere, why wouldn't they have taken it? Again, rhetorical.

I'm somewhat ambivalent on the resigning of Byrd to a huge contract. The problem is that at some point the team, if it's every going to be competitive, needs to begin retaining its own top draft picks that pan out. Having said that ... That won't happen until there's a change of ownership, read into that as you will, but until Wilson is no longer the owner, nothing will change. Even then, clearly it'll be a coin flip. Will a competent owner(s) buy the team? Will the team stay in Buffalo? All rhetorical questions of course. Either way, until Wilson kicks, there's no hope for change. Also, I don't understand the empathy for Wilson by some, he's lied through his teeth to us all over the years about doing all he can to keep the team in Buffalo. Clearly that's a crock-o-creamed-drawers. With no one in his family interested in keeping the team after he kicks, he has absolutely no reason not to sell it given that his mind is far from capable of competent management anymore. He's nothing but a figurehead at this point who cares more about his legacy than he does in retaining any semblance of integrity.

What I don't buy is that the defense got that much better. The only indicators are sacks and the pass D, but we hardly played any of the top passing Ds and the few that we did had pretty good games despite sacks against them. Vs. New Orleans we logged 4 sacks, but Brees still had 332 yards, 5 TDs, 0 INTs, and had 76% complettion %. The Saints scored 35 offensive. Was that good? Vs. Atlanta we have even more sacks, 6, yet Ryan still had over 300 passing yards, 60% completion %, no INTs, and the Falcons scored 34 offensive? Was that good? That's 10 sacks in two games that didn't seem to make any difference. Vs. Cincy we had 3 sacks, but Dalton also had 337 yards, 65%, 3 TDs, and only one INT as Cincy put up 27 offensive, in Buffalo. Was that good? Against New England, hell, they didn't even need Brady this year, who had the worst set of receivers he's ever had in NE. They were a bunch of inexperienced novices and other WRs, not one of which had even sniffed a 1,000 yard season coming into this season. Gronk didn't play either game. But they had 425 rushing yards against us as Belicheat once again schooled our coach, as they had 5.5 yards-per-carry from one second-rate and two third-rate RBs that shredded our D. Meanwhile, overlooked by everyone defending this D is that we allowed 3 more passing TDs this year than last. But hey, that's just another one of those inconvenient facts that we sweep under the rug. All in all we allowed not even 3 points fewer but against a schedule that featured hardly any of the top-half offensive teams, and of the ones we did, we lost. Of the top 16 scoring teams, we played 5 of those teams in 6 games, NE twice, Cincy, KC, NO, and Pitt who ranked 16th, ... we lost all 6 of those games. We played 8 games against teams ranked among the worst 25% of the league in offense. .5 of ourl 6 wins came against bottom 8 offensive teams. The lone exception, 18th ranked Carolina. So was our D really that good? Or was it more smoke-n-mirrors just like it's been in several other seasons where people don't actually take a detailed look at the particulars and rant about a one-dimensional pass D and a bunch of rating from PFF that our players obviously got by playing the worst offensive counterparts in the league? (semi-rhetorical) There are going to be an awful lot of disappointed people next year that now think that we took a step forward, especially if we're not handed a second-rate schedule again. Just some honest questions and some food for thought. Our next big waste of money signing that's going to materialize next year is Aaron Williams. He's massively overrated due to the ease of schedule of offensive opponents along with our put-everything-into-the-pass-rush-while-ignoring-the-run-D defense. Lawson has always been either a very low-end starter or depth player. This season he "excelled," with a whopping 4 sacks, primarily due to a scheme that put all of its eggs into the pass-rushing basket and for no other reason. If he's the basis for hope going forward, then same as it ever was. Agree on Kiko. As to your statement, both Miami and New England had more defensive snaps than we did, both with similar schedules, neither with notably better talent overall on D, perhaps less in Miami, certainly not more in NE, and yet, both teams allowed over 3 fewer points per game. Miami's offense scored nearly 5 fewer points per game than we did. A team whom by the way we played twice in amassing our big bad sack/D stats. New England was hardly prolific this season on offense either despite 3.5 ppg more than us. Again, just some food for thought.

Fitz is a backup caliber QB that was paid as a mid-range, if not greater, starter. So it wasn't what "all QBs were getting." Bona fide starting QBs maybe, which he wasn't and which was obvious to anyone that knew anything about football, which clearly wasn't our FO. Dockery, overpaid. Langston Walker, overpaid. Marcus Stroud, overpaid. Tripplett overpaid although at a lesser tier. We've overpaid the wrong playres for years and I include Mario Williams who besides sacks is all but useless. You can get bargains in this league, just ask Bill Belicheat. That's the challenge for any FO, which ours clealry isn't nor has been up to. Either way, we agree that if you are going to overpay players, best to overpay the Byrd types. Again, we've had so few worth the thought of overpaying for years. You're right about the rest, and as long as fans continue to pay for mediocrity, then there isn't much incentive for the team to be judicious or wise in its spending, is there. It's more than just a QB. Look at Denver, they have the best and still got blown out in the Super Bowl due to other major weaknesses on their team. We found out the obvious this year in NE, that Brady (a QB), cannot carry a team by himself. For starters you need protection for that QB. The value of RBs has faded somewhat in this pass-oriented league, but they are still very much relevant and important to have a good 3-down RB. Also, receivers. We hit on Woods, Johnson's a low-end starting caliber WR, but after that we really don't have much depth. Defensively after Kiko we're empty at LB and the secondary now will be interesting w/o Byrd.

You raise a very good question, however in your response you neglect to mention just about everything that isn't money related, such as, and primarily, chemistry. This is where IMO the distinctions between the NE Patriots of the world and the Bills of the world get made. Besides merely money, you have to look at several other key things, again, primarily being chemistry. What happens if Byrd is removed from the secondary? Tough to tell based on this last season because Pettine implemented a sack-first at all other costs Defense that failed miserably elsewhere and contributed to netting us the same 6-10 we had last season and about where we've been for years. Also, you have to look at the gap in the step down at the same position. Who takes his place? Searcy? That's an enormous step down. If the replacement were an up-and-comer then no problem, but as it is, for a secondary that's already weak, I dunno, but looks like trouble if you ask me, particularly since more than likely with Pettine gone the F7 won't be nearly as focused on pass-rush and will have to refocus on the entire D, giving the secondary much more to do for their money. These are things that this team's braintrust simply fails to pick up on. I think you guys are all overlooking the real reasons, IMO Byrd simply doesn't want to play for an organization that screwed him over last year as it were and one that's a losing organization. Is that so far beyond the realm of possibility here? I know that if I'm a player I don't want to play in Buffalo, I want to play for a team with a legitimate shot at making the playoffs, one with a winning, not losing, culture, and one the at least has a respectable chance of winning a championship. Byrd's 27 and probably telling himself that whatever team he lands on will be his last shot at a title, so he'd better make the right choice. We all assume that Buffalo's a great place to be out of either nostalgic based reasons or because we grew up in WNY/UNY and are Bills fans. But the reality is quite the opposite. Buffalo has turned into an Oakland or Cleveland whether we like it or not.

You read into my argument way, way too far. This team has has precious few players to build a winning team and playoff contender around. Using Levitre as an example isn't right because he was injured. There's no proof that he would have been injured here. Kind of like when you walk out of your house, get in your car, and get into an accident. Likely that had you delayed your trip by five minutes that wouldn't have happened. We can't say that he would have sucked here for the foreseeable future because of one season like that, and on an entirely different team with different players to either side of him in a unit that demands more chemistry among players than any other. Having said that I wasn't opposed to the team not overpaying for him and had little trouble with his release, or non-re-signing that is, but primarily because he did have potential injury issues. If not, then yes, they should have kept him. I have little trouble with most ot the players we've released, primarily because so few were actually good. The problem is with the initial contracts to begin with. Paying thru the nose for players like Fitzpatrick and Mario limits, severely, what we can do elsewhere. That's all. Meanwhile, they'll overpay a number of other second rate FAs just to get them here which added up might have been the difference for Byrd, a real playmaker, something that this team sorely lacks on both sides. There is having nothing both ways, this team has been a one-way skid into pro football futility that's been led by their own decision-making. But if you're going to keep letting go of arguably your top producers, how far can what's left take you? ... and why should we hold out hope that players like Alonso will even be here in five more seasons? There isn't any reason for hope in that way. Make sense? The ones left "shoving things up their asses" is us, as fans. We're left to shove the futility of this org up there. If you so choose to do so. I choose to opt out until that kick in the groin stops coming every year due to gross mismanagement throughout the org. Being a Bills fan may not be an option, but how much time, energy, and resources we put into it surely is. They're not getting a dime from me until they have a FO in place that knows its bunghole from a hole in the ground. That's the kind of emotional thinking that made this team what it currently is. This team was 6-10, the average of any number of games in winning percentage is .375. Kiko Alonso played all 16 games and was 6-10. Should we tell him to shove off too? Very astute.

Agree completely, or one that has Goodwin and Woods as equals as WRs. Or Bradham as a solid starter. Unfortunately, and it is unfortunate, miserably so, we'll see next season how much the overemphasis on rushing the passer boosted the pass D stats but didn't make the D better overall. 18 sacks from a pair of DTs? Tha'ts gotta be a single-season NFL record. It also won't repeat. Mario's 13 were good but hardly great considering that he's the highest paid defensive player in the league coupled with the fact that the rest of his game is weak. Either way, PFF does not factor in the defensive system used, they simply use high level stats for the most part.

Yeah, that's the trend and has been for years, anyone that doesn't blow smoke is an asshat. The Bills are a case-study in self-fulfilling prophecies. Then the team scratches their little oatmeal shrouds and wonder why their team sucks. Unfortunately, asshat or not, Graham speaks the truth regarding how the team has handled its better players. Meanwhile, they dote over overpaid role players like Mario, guys that they just had to have like Manuel, and now overrely on guys like Spiller, another role-player. At least Whaley and Marrone aren't being cowards and are sticking by their "Manuel's our man" foolishness, so we can give them credit for not backtracking there, although I suspect that they will during or after this forthcoming season. If reports are to be believed however, they won't have anyone behind Manuel to step in should that happen however, leaving them to rebuild once again, at least from the QB spot, next season. As a result, Marrone's days are already numbered despite most not realizing it yet.

It's always a gas reading stuff like this. As you say, if the roster were really as good as the opiners say, then we'd have made the playoffs at minimum. Also, so little of these analyses consider the offenses or defenses being run. This season the team poured all of its resources into generating a pass rush and more specifically sacks. Well, they got their wish, 2nd in the league for sacks, nearly 1st, but what did it net us and at what cost? It netted us the same overall 6-10 we got last year. Strangely tho, we also allowed 3 more passing TDs than we did last year. Yet, strangely, or perhaps not so strangely, no one seems to bother to ask why. In the meanwhile, "at what cost," at the cost of not being able to stop even the most pedestrian rushing games. We allowed 120 or more rushing yards in 11 of our 16 games and over 150 in 7 (nearly half) of our games. We faced hardly any of the top RBs in the league either. Of the top 14 RBs, (15/16 were ours), we faced exactly 1 of them. Those disagreeing w/ PFF's assessment of Mario clearly fail to realize that besides being massively overrated not to mention overcompensated, he's a one-trick pony. He managed the sacks that he did this year because of the defensive system and for no other reason. He's only fair, on a good day, against the run, but they didn't sign him to play the run, they signed him to log the far more "sexy" sacks. Well he, and the team, finally did that, so maybe, just maybe, although no one should count on it, someone with an IQ above 100 that works with the coaching staff, probably a very short list, should start asking the tough questions that I've touched on above, starting with, OK, we got our gazillion sacks, but still allowed 3 more passing TDs than we did last season, couldn't stop even the most unnoted RBs from logging bookoo yards against us to dominate games, still couldn't translate those sacks into limited offensive performances of our opponents (See the Atlanta and NO games in particular), and then synergize all that info and make some real corrections. That won't happen of course because that actually requires thought and well, we just don't think well at OBD. Other things to consider, why is McKelvin all of a sudden a "solid starter" when he's absolutely sucked for five prior seasons as a CB as someone whose only utility had been returns, and even then only to top levels in two seasons of six. Why wasn't the D system more responsible for this seeming "increase in ability?" Because it was. We'll all see that next season. Bradham, an "adequate starter?" Maybe by PFF, but in reality he's a depth player at best. Why isn't Spiller's name in red for injury? I also wouldn't call him a solid starter, he's pure role player, how they use him and how many snaps he gets aside. In 6 seasons he's had 5 games in which he's had 20 or more snaps. In those five games he's averaged exactly 4.0 yards-per-carry. He's had only 9 games in 4 seasons in which he's rushed 17 or more carries, he's averaged only 4.1 ypc. How does that translate to being a solid starter when he cannot be relied upon to start and be the primary RB with any consistency whatsover? Short answer, it doesn't. He's also supposed to be the massive "home run threat," but in four seasons he has only 17 total TDs, 12 rushing, 5 receiving, which is 1 TD every 43 touches! Of Spiller's 12 rushing TDs, only two have been against teams that posted winning records, both times in blowout losses, and in the case of the one to the 9-7 2011 Titans, it was a fumble of his that he ended up recovering for a TD. It's not much different for his receiving TDs, only two of his 5 receiving TDs, an average of 1/season, were in wins, both times against teams with losing records. And speaking of "home runs," where are they all? Of his 12 rushing TDs, they've been 56, 54, 44, 36, 24, 17, 14, 10, 9, 5, 4, and 0 yards. But of those top four, they were against the 6-10 Jets (56), 4-12 Browns (54), 2-14 Jags (44), and 4-12 Falcons (36). Where are all of the "home runs" against average or better teams? There aren't any. Talk about being overrated. Branch, a solid starter? Say what! Dareus above Kyle Williams? Seriously. Maybe in a few more years, but not now. Goodwin the same ranking as Wood? I'll concur with the majority of comments regarding Wood, but HTF does Goodwin, with his 283 receiving yards and his 168th ranking in receiving yards in the NFL rank as a "solid starter" which is the same ranking as Robert Woods. Either way, the defense was way overrated because of the overemphasis on logging sacks, which by itself clearly doesn't do anything since our record was the exact same as last season. This idiotic organization can't change ownership fast enough for me.

Apparently he's on the Nike payroll.

LOL ... Manuel is already reminding me of a Bledsoe-like project, ... and one that is predictably futile just like Bledsoe was. I distinctly recall a lot of attention paid to helping Drew with his pocket awareness given his light-speed mobility. /s LOL

Agreed, and there's even more statistical ammo than that. It's what creates all the false hope(s) around here from season to season because most fans, of this team or others, tend to look at cherry-picked stats or view them entirely one-dimensionally. All you can do is lay it out, people are going to believe what they want to believe. What's funny is how things will change next season, like as you said, the caliber of rushing teams, or even passing teams, will improve, will therefore reflect in the stats, yet it will be the fault of Schwartz or whatever else will be the raison de etre. Come on now, to put some perspective in this, 11 teams had 120+ rushing yards against us this year. 7 of 16 opponents logged 150+ rushing against us. That's hardly good, particularly when the best offenses didn't even feature any of the top RBs in the league; NE, Cincy, NYJ, Tampa, the Jags, ... not one of those teams had a RB that was even close to 1,000 yards rushing. We only played four rushing teams that were among the top-16 rushing teams; NE, Jets, KC, and Carolina. They averaged 160 ypg rushing against us. If not for that light schedule of rushing opponents, featuring none in the top-5 and only one (Jets, not exactly laden with rushing talent) in the top-8, it would've been FUGLY. Carolina didn't have anything close to a 1,000-yard rusher either and Deangelo Williams is washed up.

They didn't finish 8th in passing TDs allowed, they finished 20th, and as I'd mentioned, 6 other teams were logjammed at 21st thru 27th with merely one more pass TD allowed. Sacks schmacks! It's all about the points. This team allowed 21 more points passing this season than last. Ain't no hiding that. To me this was just one more shred of evidence at how shortsighted this team is. For years they've been whining about pass-rushers and sacks, to the extent that they break the bank on so-so overrated inconsistent players like Mario, and this year they finally get their one-dimensional return of sacks, but oddly it does not result in any more wins. Imagine that. One day, after Wilson kicks, maybe, just maybe, we'll have an organization that understands from the FO and coaching levels the entirety of the game. Clearly this one doesn't nor has since Polian left. Hell, even prior to Polian altho that was an entirely different era. I'll be happy if after Wilson croaks the team is still in WNY, or NYS at all for that matter, no thanks to Wilson.

Also, while the team's 30 Takeaways may seem impressive, probably based on the 6th ranking or whatever around there it was, it really was a pretty average figure. The league average was 25.4 but the standard deviation nearly 6, so over 2/3 of the league was between 31.3 and 19.5. More specifically, and narrowed down a bit, 15 teams were between 26 and 31 Takeaways. So how impressive was 30 really? Not all that much except in contrast with other crud seasons. When we consider that 23 of the 30 were INTs it's even more telling. When we consider that of those 23 INTs, 5 were against Flacco, 5 against Geno Smith, and 2 against Henne, QBs on the most anemic offenses in the league, how impressive is it really.

Try reconciling why with those sack numbers and to a lesser extent those TOs, the team allowed 28 passing TDs, 3 more than last season, and only 1 Passing TD allowed from a 6-team logjam at 29. Teams like NO and Atlanta had plenty of sacks on them but it didn't seem to make any difference. Even the worst rushing teams ran on us easily. People suggesting that this D was good this season are shortsighted and one-dimensional in their thinking.

LOL Good one. Either you're joking or you became a Bills fan within the last few seasons. Words like "plan" or "planning," "vision," and "strategy" should never be used when discussing this team. Silly fan, don't you know that this organization never has a viable plan. Not since Polian was ..., LOL, fired by the braintrust of the team at the time, its owner. Think about that for a second, it would be like the Pats firing Belicheat right now, his having cheated aside. This same org has plans? ... I don't think so.

OTOH, Brees' and Manuel's collegiate stats are worlds apart. Manuel's issues are obvious and plagued him throughout four seasons, two of starting, at FSU. Otherwise, of all the QBs that started similarly, the vast majority never amount to anything. Comps like this are ridiculous. In Peyton Manning's first five games he threw 4 TDs and 12 INTs, so we might as well say that any QB that plays just as poorly in his first five starts can easily end up being as good as PM.

Have you asked yourself why this might be? Here's an exercise for you and anyone else that thinks that this stat is meaningful this year. Take a look at the schedule, and how many yards each of the teams on it gained against us, then contrast that with their offensive yardage rankings. Then ask yourself why you think this status exists. This is the kind of thing that everyone gets excited over but which is largely circumstantially based, so when it doesn't happen again the following season everyone's left scratching their noodle instead of already knowing why it didn't repeat.

What if we just traded for Andrew Luck. Let's be realistic here. Houston has a contender otherwise and is a decent head coach and QB away from doing that along with one good offseason and Draft. Why on earth would they trade a pick like that? We'll be drafting 9th thru 15th again, so let's look at the options there. But again, consider, last season all we heard were reasons for why we had reached for Manuel, and the simple answer was that Manuel was their guy and that they couldn't risk waiting 'til round 2 to see if he would still be there. What now, you think that the same people that said that less than a year ago, or a year ago by the time that the Draft rolls around, are going to admit that they really didn't want him? How utterly ridiculous would that be? More importantly, what would it say about them? To me it would say that they're the bunch of in-over-their-head fools that I already think that they are but that not everyone realizes that yet but soon will. They'll sink their own ship over time, but don't expect them to be so obviously foolish to scuttle it voluntarily. I can see them drafting a QB in round 2, a prospect that may still be better than any of last year's, but still, that would add issues to an already volatile situation. Is that really what this team needs? Hardly. It needed a solid strategy to Draft a legitimate ringer of a QB on which to pin its future hope. It didn't need reaching for Manuel with lame reasons for why followed by the predictably obvious current situation. Again, this is just one more instance where this team has no vision whatsoever. None!

Agree on the playing time issue, which is a huge part of it and something that threatens continuity. The point about saving face is that you simply can't reach for a player and claim that "he's your guy," whiff, and come out of it smelling good. It has nothing to do with rectifying the situation, it has everything to do with taking a questionable coaching candidate to begin with and then having a very serious challenge to his credibility when there wasn't exactly a whole lot on the positive side of the ledger in that way to begin with. Everyone credited him with "turning the SU program around," but with with a sophomore first-time starting QB and a rookie and novice head , this year's SU squad came one win shy of Marrone's best ever record there and in a tougher conference than Marrone was in, and also took the team to a more impressive bowl victory in a more established and more relevant bowl game. I'm not really sure that says much for Marrone's soft credentials coming in. Anyway, the discussion this time two years from now will be all of those thinking that he's going to succeed here talking about nuking the place and how he needs to be thrown out of town by his shirt collar. LOL It's pretty clear now that he's in over his head and that's just not what this organization needs. I'm just hoping that they can dig deep and put in one of those overachieving games where they pull a nugget out of their sphincters. Exactly right. But he wasn't, and with 16th overall, expectations exist that don't exist for players taken in later rounds. I realize that you know that, but that's why reaching for him in round one was stupid. Or part of the reason anyway. The other parts are that it now ties us up with three more years of some combinatoiin of Bledsoe, Holcomb, Edwards, and Fitzpatrick. Remember when everyone liked Edwards based on the buzzword of the year that season? Poise? He played poised, remember. That's all anyone, including the national level media, was saying. Well, what did "poise" get us when otherwise it was obvious that Edwards would never go anywhere in this league. You cite the least important on-field traits about Manuel as evidence that he might succeed. Every winning QB and many losing ones have the same attributes. It's meaningless in terms of whether or not he will succeed in the NFL. What's far more meaningful are the things that you say he lacks. Yes or no, are you actually defending this FO's draft record? Really? I hate to be the one to break it to you, but if they whiff on Manuel, then Alonso will be a footnote. If they drafted well, they'd draft more players like Alonso and ones that wouldn't "take more time to develop" at 16th overall. Everyone is talented in the NFL. The question is whether or not he is capable of succeeding at a level that features only the very best of the very best. I like most are simply not seeing it and never did. The team's mistake is hitching their wagon to him last season and therefore leaving themselves few options down the road. At some point when you do things like this and then admit mistakes so soon it makes you look like you don't know what you're doing and I don't believe that they do know what they're doing. We know and have known for years, for those honest enough to admit it, that the FO doesn't know what they're doing, so the only question that remains is does the new coaching staff know what they're doing. All one has to do is review the post-game threads here to see clearly that Marrone is a bigtime OJT coach. Is that really a high percentage chance coach? Hardly.

That's what I love about this board, it's only atune to the highest profile stuff. http://blogs.buffalonews.com/press-coverage/2013/12/doug-marrone-says-bills-should-simplify-offense-for-ej-manuel.html It's been an issue for weeks. Either way, and argue as you may, he's not succeeding in whatever system they've implemented. ... I also love the fans that talk about the playbook as if they have a copy sitting on their family room table. LOL

Here's the thing, if he had been drafted in round 2 or 3, this team wouldn't look like the pack of fools that they are in drafting a QB in round 1 this year. In fact it would have made perfect sense to do so. Instead, we must not forget that "Manuel was their guy" and they "had to have him." When you make statements like that then you unquestionably attach your future credibility to having that pick work out. In other words, you can't say those things and then overdraft your own pick the next year and have people continue to think that you know what you're doing. That's what should be discussed, not what this team should do. It's run by idiots, of course they're not going to draft and otherwise run this team like a competent contender and perennial playoff team. They've failed miserably at that since Polian ... LOL, ... was fired.

Good post. As to your first point/question, they had this info prior to drafting him. In fact, there was a fantastic piece on Manuel that pretty much says the same things, and many of the reasons why, for the conclusions made by us and by the Buffalo Rumblings piece. Again, here it is, it won't and shouldn't give anyone any confidence that Manuel will ever be a top NFL QB. http://www.tomahawknation.com/2013/4/25/4264734/nfl-draft-2013-ej-manuel-next-level-florida-state Read thru it, it's a fantastic pre-Draft piece on him. I guess I don't understand two things, why people getting paid millions I suppose first of all didn't see this piece, and if they did, why did they ignore it, and secondly, why they can't make these assessments on their own for players that they "have to have." I mean isn't that part of the job for these highly paid coaches and scouts with highly sought after jobs in the NFL? Clearly it is, so why is it that two amateur reporters do a better job than the pros. (entirely rhetorical) As to the rest of your post, this situation underscores the single biggest flaw with this organization, namely that they have no vision. They seem to forever be out of sync with the Drafts every season. For example, everyone knew, or should have known, that this upcoming Draft would be QB rich, so why not bide one's time and wait for this year's Draft to get that franchise QB, or at least one that had a much better shot at becoming one than Manuel did or does. But nooooo, this team "had to have" Manuel because "he was their guy." Well, OK, but that then says something, and what it says is that clearly whomever's guy it was didn't know what he was doing or thinking. Also, the only thing standing in the way of the notion that Manuel would have been available in round 2 or 3 are rumors and speculations. There's not one shred of evidence that suggests that Manuel wouldn't have been around in round 2 if they really "had to have him." No biggie if he works out, but clearly he isn't "that kind of QB." So now the team faces a dilemma. I agree with you, they need a QB and should grab one with their first pick this year. But what would that say if they did? First, the person that "had to have Manuel," namely Marrone, would have egg all over his face and look like the fool that he might very well be. He certainly would appear to be in over his head already, which IMO he is anyway. Secondly, it would say that of the entire scouting staff, not one person, presumably, had the balls to stand up to the team and lay out their own assessment that Manuel was overrated by the decision makers. Thirdly, it would also create a QB controversy situation since any rookie is likely to have rookie struggles, ones that don't necessarily translate to a lack of hope for the future, that might invariably cause the coaching staff to swap QBs next season between the two giving neither the appropriate shot at success. This situation has "Bills" written all over it in so many ways. One of the biggest problems over the years has been the inability of the FO to piece together enough talent to build an actual good team. They whiff on high draft picks, don't select others that would have been much better had the FO known what they were doing, like Russell Wilson. And honestly, how does one "have to have Manuel" but with the same FO and scouts overlook Wilson the year prior? (again, entirely rhetorical since we all know that our FO blows monkey chunks) There are no visionaries in positions of power in this FO. It's the gift tht keeps on giving, ineptitude and incompetence. There's no use in even hoping for change, it'll never happen with this crew. I'm sure that they'll find another way to make themselves look like the dumb and dumber of the NFL again this offseason. One thing's all but certain, this team ain't goin' anywhere with Manuel at the helm as you seem to imply. As the guys in that article point out, FSU also had to dumb down their offense in order for him to be effective. That alone bodes poorly for him as an NFL QB. Same thing has now happened in the NFL. It is becoming unmistakeably more clear that he is mentally incapable of working out more than one or two aspects of his game simultaneously. It's very Bledsoe-like in that sole regard. The smart thing would be for the team to draft a QB in round one with their given pick this Draft, but I doubt that will happen. Doing so necessarily entails that Marrone didn't know what he was talking about, and I don't see anyone in a position of decision-making authority admitting a mistake in favor of real progress. That's too professional and competent to happen here. Here's the problem with that line of thinking, Manuel didn't start playing football this season. He's played it for years and played significantly in four seasons at FSU and started two seasons there. There are a bunch of pre-existing data points. Manuel's issues in the NFL are the same as the ones he had at FSU where, just as happened here this season, the offense was dumbed down so that he could understand it and/or play better. That's never a good sign and I can't think of a single QB that started like that that became a top notch QB in the NFL. So it really isn't 2 preseason and 10 regular season games, it's a whole bunch of stuff that this team, Marrone in particular, overlooked prior to drafting him and stuff that made him what he should have been, namely a 2nd at best or even 3rd round prospect last year. Blame this FO for forcing a QB pick in a QB bereft Draft once again. Manuel is a project at best at this point. Marrone & Co. can't outlast a project like that before getting canned at the end of the 2015 season.