sllib olaffub

I was just reading a post on the Patriots and how they've managed players over the last few years, and people on this board were enjoying their woes - and I thought, the Patriots aren't the team at the top of the mountain anymore, so to speak. I'm thinking the Ravens have built up a team that will really be hard to stop, with their good running game, and now their WR's and TE's - ouch - and then their front seven on Defense... the only thing missing from a team that could be considerably better than their Super Bowl winning team of 2000? is a shutdown corner. Well, if they had a better cornerback duo they would be without apparent weakness. So, my proposal is this: we've got a good cornerback stable. We could use Gaither. Couldn't we offer them one of our cornerbacks and a lower round pick for Gaither? I'd send either McGee or Florence if I were getting Gaither in return. Anyway, as I see it, Baltimore is so close to being a championship team they might be willing to deal Gaither for some security in their secondary.

I'm glad someone brought this up. I'm not saying I believe it, but I'm asking you to merely consider this - and, keep in mind, there are a ton of people who would deliberately dismiss anything but very hard proof because it would damage the reputation of the NFL. A few years ago Michael Vick was arrested and put in prison for a dog fighting ring and whatever was tied to that. It was reported that many players in the NFL and other sports had viewed these dogfights. Why do players or people, for that matter, get into dogfighting? Gambling. These guys were gamblers. How many players in the NFL look and act like thugs, gangsters? How many times do players show the fans what is their main priority - money. They'll hold out and underperform because a few millions isn't enough for these guys. Look at Marvin Harrison. The guy was quiet and no one noticed, but it looks like he might have been a real gangster, too. O.k., now consider this. Vick, before he went to prison, his previous two seasons, I think if you were to look at his week to week QB ratings, you'd see something like 90, 60, 100, 55, 89, 60... and on and on, over two seasons. How could a guy throw a game? Well, this QB who was so good that people would bet on his team to win merely because you can't ever count out Vick - right?- who, coincidentally got busted for a gambling ring, has a record of performing outstanding one week, and terrible the next. If he threw a game, who would know?

-I actually hit the return button three or four times on that post - I just didn't skip a space on the paragraphs - which is what, apparantly, you have to do on this format to make it look like a new paragraph... So, I wasn't so much supporting the idea of Campbell, so much as paraphrasing Dikes. My point was that this staff didn't address the O-line or QB situation, or, they did address it and most of us just don't realize what we have in Wang, Brown, and Green. I like to give these guys the benefit of the doubt and think that they intend to try and win a SuperBowl this year. I don't know how you could coach in the NFL and not believe you can win it with what you have put together in the offseason. I think that was Jauron's biggest weakness - he didn't seem to think we could beat the good teams - and that washed over the whole team, and we even managed to find ways to lose against the good teams (Dallas and N.E. games come to mind). What it looks like is that Nix and Gailey are merely going to see what they have this year and make moves next year. That, though, flies in the face of what I just wrote - expecting to be able to win every year. Maybe that is unreasonable. Personally, although I don't care for Rex Ryan's personality off the field, I think he has the ideal mentality for a coach - that is, we're going to win, and we're going to be tougher, harder, and want it more than anyone, and we're going to expect to win it all. Look what he did in one season. So, I'm just hoping that is what we have here, only less outspoken. I hope they do expect to win this year, only, since they didn't improve the QB and O-line much, they either have more than we think they do, see more than we do, and will surprise people with a more potent passing game than expected, or they'll find a way to win without a strong passing game. That was the point. Is our Blueprint for this season going to be win on the ground? Maybe they'll prove that it doesn't have to be a QB league after all.

We should be o.k. on Defense - so, our offense will probably determine how many games we win this year. My guess is that teams will play our run and blitz our QB, cover the screen and the short routes. So, Gailey will have to have an answer. We know this - so, Nix and Gailey must've known this in February. That is what puzzles me - they either are comfortable with getting pummeled, think our tackles will hold up enough to go the intermediate and long routes, or have some kind of strategy designed to deal with it. I'm hoping we can play better and operate like a normal offense (something we haven't seen here in about three years or more!), but, if we can't I'm hoping Gailey has some new system in mind to make us capable of scoring.

Long winded, o.k., but my point was this - why does it have to be a passing league? Why can't it be a run league? Is it the rules that make it a passing league? Or, is it just that there are some really good QB's in the league right now? Still, if we don't have a good QB - and I hope one of ours turns out decent - then maybe we can be a winning team with a different formula?

I was watching ESPN the other night and some analysts were discussing the Bills - and they had them sitting at the bottom of our division, as one of the worst teams in the NFL. Their main reason: the NFL is a passing league and the Bills did nothing to strengthen neither - 1. - their QB position (which was listed as the worst in the NFL), and they wondered out loud why the Bills didn't pursue someone like Campbell... and 2. - their Tackle positions - especially LT. They stressed how the NFL is a passing league now and that the Bills had the makings for a disaster offensively. So, it got me thinking. Yes, the Bills did put together what looks like a good defense, certainly it is set and is probably only a player or two away from being very good - the foundation there is laid. But, the Bills front office (Nix and Gailey) knew what they had to work with on the line and with the QB, and they really didn't do much there. I could think of only two reasonable explanations. 1. - they just figured if they lost a lot this year with what they have, then they'll have a good position next year to draft a QB, and maybe a LT - using this year as a rehersal for the team, and next as a plug in the holes kind of really compete year, or... (these might both be accurate)... 2. - Why does the NFL have to be a passing league? Might we try to win with solid Defense and a really good running game? For one, do we have a good enough line to even be a good running team? Second, is there an alternative to "the NFL is a passing league"? Could Gailey try to make something else work? That got me excited - I was thinking of New Orleans and how their coach was an offensive mind and he got a chance to build a team as he envisioned it - and I see Gailey, also, as a coach who will build a dynamic, scoring, offense. And, as puzzling as our roster looks, with that in mind, my only answer is that they are going to try and win differently - I just hope they've got something brewing that will make us competitive. Gailey does fit the mold of a coach who has won with just what we've got - pedestrain QB's and good running games.

Think about it: on the football field he's got the potential to be a top five RB in the NFL. He's EASILY got a five year contract of full production left in him. He would be a great addition to just about any RB group in the NFL. Now, off-field - he might be a decent guy as far as the players in the league are concerned, funny and all, but, he's really screwed up in his first three years in the NFL. He's a screw up away from a one year suspension. I think that, above all, is what scares most teams away from him. And so, with the Bills loaded at the RB position and Lynch a misstep away from missing a year, this first round talent is practically worthless as far as trading goes. Yet, we spent a first rounder on him, and talent wise, he is a first round talent. The Bills hold the cards here. They don't at the moment need him. If a RB gets hurt, though, they might, and still, he'd be a good option to have. We could sit him as a statement and he'd be the one looking at a few more years of not playing, of aging, and of his earning potential decreasing. If we do play him, he's really got to play hard, because, once again, it is his rehersal for other teams. If we trade him now we get not much. If a team in contention - and, with the way the NFL is these days there could be 20 teams still in the hunt up till week 13 or so... if a team loses a RB and needs one - then Lynch becomes real appealing. I think we could get a 2nd rounder for him under the right circumstance. The Bills should do that - wait for a good offer or threaten to bench him, in which case his career suffers.

I just can't see Fitzpatrick making it this year, so, my guess is either Edwards or Brohm - but, the sense here is that we won't see a functioning offense yet again this year. I don't believe that. I think our offense will look a lot more consistent and will be a lot more productive. I don't think we have some key pieces yet, but we do have quite a few potential weapons. I'd be surprised, in fact, if our starting QB didn't pass for over 3000 yards this year, with some 300 yard games sprinkled in. It's easy to just keep with the "we suck" mentality. Gailey has really done wonders with some weak passers in the past. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he'll succeed here, in that area, as well.

I like this roster - the last spot could go to A. Schobel or a F.A. pickup... I don't think we'll see a starter signed F.A. wise unless maybe we can get a LT; so, that roster looks pretty good. I like that you kept the undrafted LB coleman - I think he'll be a really nice pickup. But it looks good.

Lynch is much more valuable as our third/second rotational RB than a 3rd rounder. RB's get injured all the time. Either as fill in if someone goes down, or - he could be capable of challenging for the starting spot - and, at the least, it gives our coach three excellent, different backfield weapons. The only problem - and this happened before with Peters, is if he doesn't want to show up and if he won't put forth 100% effort, on top of staying out of trouble. He's basically saying to the team - you paid me, I got in trouble, you replaced me when I was suspended, and now I want to be traded so I can make starter money somewhere else - even if you can't get fair value for me. So, if you (Bills) don't take one for me, at your expense, then I'll not show up, I'll be a distraction, maybe get in trouble again. As a response to that attitude, that selfish demand, I'd sit him for the next few years and give him as little as possible; let him age, let his production disappear, and stick to it. You lose a little with him, but you set a precedent. Other players will know they aren't going to get away with that garbage. Then it is on him to really stay in shape, to learn the book and to contribute when given the chance - to earn it, which, at this point, he seems childishly angry about having lost. What? Doesn't he want to compete?

I think a lot of it has to do with size. 4-3 defensive ends are often the same size as 3-4 OLB's and, certainly almost all the OLB's come from playing 4-3 ends in college. Anyway, we are looking to beef up our run D. Our secondary should do fine in man to man. I can't see our defensive coordinator or LB's coach going into the season just putting these guys on an island - I mean, they've got to understand their abilities better than us and also what it takes to be a dominant Defense in the NFL better than we do - so, I'm thinking we'll have a pretty solid Defense that wont be getting pushed around so easily anymore. I won't mind giving up a few passing plays if it means we can shut down the run game.

It is a point that isn't discussed much - but, we've given head coaches time to find a QB and to install a good offense - we just haven't had a coach do it right, yet. And, I think that is where Gailey and Nix are going to solve that problem. Nix has already set up a replacement for himself, and it's not like he has to groom the guy, either. Whaley and Nix both have the tough, old-school approach to football, and both have keen evaluation skills. Enter Gailey who, I really think, is going to thrive here. He's got the support, and I think he'll only improve over time as a head coach (most head coaches do much better their second or third shot). Another way to look at it: would P. Manning or Brady be dominant if their coordinators were being switched every year or two? Brady might just be proof that it is possible. Favre, also, supports the idea - and, I'm guessing McNabb will, too: that really good QB's will always play decent - they just can't do it all on their own. That is where I'm torn with Trent Edwards. There are many reasons and excuses for not succeeding here in the past three years. Yet, I still think he got scared and played very scared last year. Nevertheless, stability within the F.O. and coaching is necessary for a team to win consistently, and I'd be happy if it were with the guys we picked up this year.

There are some similarities between then and now. I think Kelly made those teams happen - his no huddle, his arm strength, just like Brady and Manning make their teams - and, I believe, McNabb made the eagles, Warner the Cardinals & Rams... So, this year might compare best to the year before we got a winning QB in Kelly. I'm not writing off Edwards - I was really high on him his first two seasons, and I'm hoping last year was more coaching and confusion, rather than bad QB play. If Edwards can regain his form - and I can't forget that Bill Walsh was really high on Edwards coming out of college - then we could have very similar success in the early stages of formation here, too. I also keep in mind many of who we consider to be great QB's had similar stats their first 30 or so games as Edwards, so we can't write him off yet.

We really don't know - and won't - until after training camp, where the recievers will line up because it is open competition and they are all learning a new system. We do know that Hardy has the size that the new coach and GM would like to see on the outside, so that's a plus for him. So, too, do Johnson and Easley, though. The prior regime, it seemed, grabbed Hardy mostly with the redzone in mind - toss it up to him within the ten yard line and he'll outjump any db in the league. Well, we've got Nelson, too, who's 6-5. I like our WR options. I know they're all untested, for the most part - but, as an advantage, they're all young, too. Anyway, we could have Johnson, Hardy, Nelson, and Easley out there on a 3WR, 1 TE set and, I think our shortest guy would be 6-2. On the other hand, a group with Evans, Parrish, Easley, Jackson, and Spiller out of the backfield - and you've got blazing speed everywhere. Even Nelson is fast, though, if you want a TE in there. Yeah, I like our group of wideouts. As for the #2 spot - I think Gailey will be moving our WR's around a lot this year to create mismatches and to confuse the defenses. So, I think we'll see stuff like Evans in the slot with Hardy and maybe Easley on the outside, at times, for example.

I don't know what to expect, but Gailey has shown he can take average talent and make it good enough to win. Sure, we have average talent in some places - but, my point, once or twice before, was that in some areas we have above average talent. So, what can Gailey do with three very good running backs, each a bit different than the other? What can he do with a few different personnel groupings that feature 4.4 or better speed all over the place? I don't expect the Super Bowl this year, and I wouldn't be surprised if we finished with a 4-12 record, but, if Gailey is an offensive genius and if things fall right for him we could see an offense that no one expects - one we aren't known for having and which isn't talked about alot - and that is a very fast offense that can maybe score a lot of long TD's - 30+ yard scores. I think our Defense will be solid and good all around for us. I think we've got some missing links offensively, but I do get excited thinking that we could have the beginnings of something like what St.Louis had the year they came out of nowhere and tore people up.

It's a characteristic of human nature to - or, at least it is ingrained in us culturally - that we are what we were yesterday. To some extent that is true, yet, to a large extent it is our own idea of our limitations that create our limitations. The belief that the Bills will be bad this year because we've been so bad - jokingly so of late - is quite a bit like that. I don't care if I'm proven wrong by the Bills losing a lot this year - I expect them to be good, and this is why: We lost a lot of close games, point wise, last year, and in a sense were close to making the playoffs as a wildcard. We were terrible as a team, though, and I wouldn't have wanted us to make the playoffs because we just didn't have what it took to win - our team didn't believe they could. A lot of guys had fight in them, it just seemed like they knew they were fighting against all odds to win, rather than believing they should win. With a new coach, a bunch of new young players, new schemes - a new culture and mentality, coupled with good game planning and good teaching/coaching, and our team is good enough to compete. I think if our O-line can hold up in the passing game then we have enough speed on offense to light some teams up, not unlike the surprising Rams of a decade ago. I really think if our O-line holds up our QB (T. Edwards) will play and can play good enough to beat a lot of teams.

I agree. I can see waiting until next year to get the QB of your choice - while objectively evaluating what is on the roster this year - as a coach and GM coming in, you can't say or think that you're going to have anything but the Super Bowl in mind for this year. You can rebuild - by drafting players that fit your scheme as you would like to run it - but, you better have a plan to win every game and believe that you can - and I think that was D. Jauron's failure - that he seemed at times to expect to lose against good teams - and they did! So you show toughness, heart, believe in your players and let them play - and if you have to trade a ton to move up and get your QB in the draft next year, then you do whatever you have to. There is no reason our team can't beat anyone - as, I think, our record last year proves. As bad as our coaching was, and our injuries, we still were only a handful of plays away from a wildcard berth.

Yeah - having been a Bills fan for twenty plus years I'm pretty used to disappointment - but, I think our coaching these past four years has been really bad, and I think we have a more talented roster than most people give us credit for. I've said it before - you put Shanahan, Cowher, or Bellicheck here and with our roster people would say, "you never know - they could make a wildcard". Our team is young and hungry - and now we have a coach who seems to know about simple things that we haven't seen around here in about a decade - like realizing we have a home field advantage by playing in the weather - how many people have wondered why we look less prepared to play at home in the winter than some of our opponents? I think our team will be restored to, at a minimum, competitiveness again, and could be a surprise team if our O-line holds up.

As if Roscoe Parrish was the only Buffalo Bill who made a costly in-game mistake. I can't blame him for trying - if I was used to playing offense and had all of my receiving opportunities taken away from me, I'd also try to make plays any time I had the slightest chance to do so (as I'm sure 80-90% of ppl on this board would do as well). If you were in his situation and wanted to be a full time receiver, but had that stripped from your resume, you'd try to force the issue when given other opportunities, trust me. If not, then you're not a true competitor... Good point. I never considered that. I don't mind being optimistic - even in light of this team's repeated failures - because there is a new G.M. and a new coach and new scheme; and my optimism is rooted in seeing potential and hoping it materializes - and although the offensive line could be bad - it might not be that bad. If it holds then I think our offense could surprise some teams at first - because we have a lot of speed. Spiller, Evans, Hardy, Nelson, Easley, and Parrish - if we use him right or if he figures it out as a WR. Sure, most people mock the idea that we could be good this year, but that bunch has speed.

Who are you referring to? I'm referring to Brown in New Orleans or Gaither in Baltimore.

I we're not confident in already having a good LT on the roster, and we're debating bringing one in from the outside, then I say why go for a guy who is maybe fourth or fifth on the list of possible LT F.A.'s - why not get one of the top two best? An answer to that would be that the top two would need draft compensation. Yes - but, if you get F. Adams, then you're still going to spend a lot of money, and you're still going to commit a relatively high draft pick in the near future on a starting LT. You probably can't get a starting LT and a franchise QB in one draft - so when we didn't get either this year it was a sign, I thought, that we either had a LT on the roster that Nix and Gailey thought could be pretty good, or that we were going to trade for a guy. Otherwise they're pretty much saying they're going to get both in next year's draft. I'd be much more confident in next years draft if they already had the LT situation figured out, so they could throw whatever was necessary at getting the QB of their choice, and also, you'd think they'd want a starting line to have already gotten familiar with each other so a rookie QB wouldn't be getting killed. Does F. Adams have two or three years left? If he did, and could play at a high enough level, then I'd be alright with getting him. If it's just a one year stop gap kind of signing, then what? - are we looking at another two years without a starting LT and QB? Just wondering out loud...

A few things occurred to me: How good our team is overall will certainly be different than where we draft next year. I looked at what teams would probably be better than us this season (of course it is just guessing) and I see us better than the Browns, Chiefs, Raiders, maybe Jacksonville, maybe Broncos, Detroit, Tampa Bay, St.Louis and Seattle - so, that would be drafting, based on talent, between 8 and 10. But, when you look at our schedule, it is certainly possible that we could walk away with only 3-5 wins. My guess is that if our line holds up we'll finish much better than expected, somewhere near a wild-card spot. If we can't keep our QB's standing - like last year - we could finish with as few as 2 or 3 wins.

There is so much to like about those few comments. During the last few years it seemed like - and infuriated me - teams were dictating to us what they would do. We'd bend but not usually break until the fourth quarter. But, we were soft. We couldn't stop teams. To see these guys that we have together now attacking the QB and running backs, to think that our secondary has been held back for a few years and that their best is yet to come - that is all encouraging. There is a tangible excitement coming from these players and I think it'll translate onto the field. I think opponents aren't going to know what they're up against, defensively, for the first few weeks, and that we'll surprise some people - Green Bay did it last year, so it can be done in the first year of a switch.

You've got to consider why Nix and Gailey liked and wanted Spiller. Was it because he can be a workhorse RB for seven or eight years? No. Nix & Gailey have been pretty straight shooters about the draft. They felt our offense had lacked, other than good O-line play & good QB play, a player who could go the distance on any given play, regardless of field position. Someone that could touch the ball and turn the tide of the game - going from first and ten on our 20 to first and ten on their 40 in one play. Not only is the guy capable of scoring on special teams (if need be), but he can be a WR as well as a RB. When Gailey is designing plays he can use Spiller along with Jackson, Evans, Nelson and any of the others and make the defense be accountable for them all. And, Spiller has the muscle mass to be a Chris Johnson type back - one who carries 20+ a game. Still, I imagine if Spiller proves he's that much better of a back than Jackson or Lynch then he'll force the coaches to keep him out there. In the NFL you need two good running backs - so, having Spiller - and picking him was justified when you look at the character of the players they're trying to bring in, because that does effect the game & we need more heart on the field, and his talent was good at that pick - having him will be good when Jackson or Lynch gets hurt, or if we manage to trade Lynch. They were picking Spiller, I'll bet, with an eye to the future. The great teams usually have the great RB, QB, and WR trio.

I've been down on Trent Edwards along with most other fans. Last year - mostly after the concussion - he just looked awful. Mostly it was mental, though. You could tell when watching him that he was afraid - afraid to throw it deep, afraid to stay in the pocket, afraid to take chances. Physically, though, he has all the tools to be a very good QB. When he was coming out of college Bill Walsh was very intrigued by him, being very reminded of Joe Montana... I have this theory that a great QB could be drafted by the wrong team, in the wrong system, and never achieve anything, and go on to anonymity - and vice versa, that the right QB selected into the right situation is what makes a QB great, more than anything else, since the top hundred or so in the league probably, to a high degree, all have similar physical tools. Anyway, after hearing Edwards talk lately, it sounds like he might have a bit of a chip on his shoulder. I think it took J.P. Losman being demoted and being thrown into the minor league for him to get to that nothing to lose state of mind where I think Edwards needs to be for a while in order to break that cycle of fear and inhibition. It is encouraging to hear him talk a little cocky - maybe he's gotten to that point where he has nothing to lose, has a new system, a good offensive coach and - here's my positive for today - maybe it'll come together for him this year and he turns it on. I think he could really win a bunch of games for us playing conservative with the occasional long ball, doing something like 250 yrds per game and 2 touchdowns... with a good defense, good running game I think he might really blossom - it depends, of course, on overcoming the mental aspect. With his talents as good as they are - I think he is either terrible because he's terrified (in which case he won't be playing anywhere if he continues like last year), or he overcomes it and, then he really could do anything.