dpberr

Given that Zach Miller isn't in a Bills uniform, I'm willing to give Chandler a shot. He holds TE records at Iowa in the middle of the greats like Marv Cook and Dallas Clark, so he can't be half bad.

I think he'll be back. With this unusual free agency period, time is of the essence for guys in this buyers market. They want to play and need to play somewhere. I don't think the Bills turn away depth and a decent player familiar with the defense over personal feelings. The Bengals appeared to be the only serious interest and that looks to have ended.

To start he should eat Talley.

That's where I'm at. It's a long winding road of practice and preseason games fraught with peril to Game #1 where the scores count. I've imagined having a stellar, undefeated preseason, hopes are high and Merriman gets dinged in the first quarter of the last preseason game.

We might already have a Kevin Boss on the team in Scott Chandler. Boss is ok, but he's not a superstar, and he's got a different skill set from say Zach Miller. Boss is a big target in the red zone, has taken a ton of big hits, and blocks well. He usually makes the catch when the ball is thrown to him. Much like Buffalo, however, the Giants offense really doesn't rely on the TE with Boss starting at the position. Chandler is 6'7" and started out as a receiver at Iowa before being transitioned to a TE. He's sandwiched between Dallas Clark and Marv Cook in the rankings of best TEs at Iowa. I'm inclined to see what Chandler has if Zach Miller isn't a possibility.

You almost have to wonder if the guy has an illness. You'd think he'd be trying to put on weight, not continue to lose it.

+1 Agreed on that point.

He's done. In twenty years, he'll be in that group of Hall of Fame players that had sad endings to their careers with a picture of him in a Titans uniform. To me, that is a man who will live with a big regret down the road. He was an absolute blockbuster of a player, but he'll regret that perhaps with a little more work, little less distraction off the field, he would have been the greatest player at the position in the history of the game.

To me, it's just a game. And still is. If anything, being a Bills and Pittsburgh Pirates fan over the last 25 years has taught me patience, faith, the importance of hope and not taking things for granted. It's been a learning experience. It makes the good times feel just a bit better. I feel that fans of the Bills will not, and never have, taken the successful years of this franchise for granted.

+1. Not big on handing out money to injury prone players, but I have to admit, I like the signing because of Barnett's skill at coverage.

Eh, I wouldn't anoint them winners just yet. The key to the Eagles season is not at CB nor DT. It's the offensive line and linebacking corps. The line had Michael Vick running for his life last year (34 sacks/12 games played) and the line play was a large part of why the Eagles lost in that wild card game last year. If you think our linebacking corps is ordinary....the Eagles could not stop the run whatsoever last year and so far, the only investment in that unit has been Casey Matthews in the draft. Teams will continue to run on them.

This board is obsessed with name guys, no matter how old or how slow or how injured they are. Why you'd want to drop money on a 30 year old defensive lineman with a bum hip eludes me.

If the Raiders doctors failed him, the Bills doctors will do the same.

It's funny that people are hysterical over Moats at ILB at the second day of practice. We're not even talking preseason games, but a drill at practice, and people are willing to burn the city down over it. I'm not sure there are many "good" options at ILB in Free Agency. A precious few. A lot of the "names" are liabilities just as Poz was...or worse. Guys get old and slow real quick at that position.

Say what you will about the current roster, but Barnett would have been a liability on the field during a game. There isn't much left in that tank.

Panicking about drill formation at practice? Sometimes to run the drill, you need guys that have run it before.

That's because a majority of folks here believe that the business of the NFL and its players, and hell, game strategy must comport with Madden on the Xbox. .Haynesworth is no different than any other player in history that had one, albeit awesome, contract season.

I agree with Doc. This man cannot be motivated. He's not motivated by money, fame, winning, playing in a big market, or any combination of them. It's not an inspiring move.

Jim Washburn used him just like that last year. Buffalo isn't the only team that switches between the 3-4 and 4-3. All he was asked to do was go after the QB. He failed as an OLB in the 3-4 in Houston. I'm trusting Nix and Co. know that already. I'm surprised he isn't in Philadelphia already. For whatever reason, Washburn got more out of him than anybody else has. He'd be an ok pickup. I wouldn't do a four year contract though.

Hmmm.....good point.

Jacksonville overpaid for Poz. I'm glad we did not.

I don't think many successful teams build through FA. That seems to be a strategy for the guys who think the NFL runs on Madden rules or run the Washington Redskins. Successful teams have successful drafts and development of thoroughbred players and organizational consistency. That's where championships are won. The Bills are recovering from nearly a decade of crap drafts with no thoroughbreds in the mix and a rotating door of coaches, GMs and different philosophies every other year. I'm not one of the fans that will be panicking at low FA activity. I feel we had a blockbuster haul on draft day this year after a solid draft last year, and that's where it counts.

This is an interesting topic and a difficult question to answer. Do you judge the entire body of work, or just a snapshot in time? Only on-field performance, or overall franchise health? Let's take for example, the New York Giants. The Giants have had their rough stretches both on and off the field during the later half of the 60s well into the 70s. They missed the playoffs for nearly 20 years and there was a big meltdown over the Mara family decision to move the Giants to NJ. It wasn't until the mid 80s that the franchise had things turned around, mostly in thanks to Pete Rozelle for recommending George Young run the team (and build those 80s teams of Taylor etc.). For many football fans that's all ancient history and may not matter. My point is for every glory year a franchise has, there are usually two to three bust years.

I don't buy what Chris Brown says at this juncture. I remember all the talk coming from Brown about the draft and its contrast with what transpired. Besides, what does the top 60 FA mean in football speak? 21 position evaluation, ranked by depth? Or top 60 overall like the media usually handles it? 60 players in the largest free agent class in NFL history isn't that big of a deal.

I don't think the Bills will stand still. Doing so would damper the momentum they are trying to generate with the new uniforms, new turf, draft with great grades, etc. I think the last thing the FO wants is to kill that momentum. While I don't think they will have a spending spree of "name" guys, I'd expect them to be competitive in landing a solution to the bigger problem areas. A shorter free agency period is a benefit to the Bills. Players are going to have less time to go around the league, make visits and play offers off one another. They will have to make decisions quickly.