hondo in seattle

I think #4 is potentially very true. There doesn't seem to be a lot of unity in that locker room and Sanchez certainly has his detractors amongst his teammates. I think it will be interesting to see how this plays out. From a Bills perspective, I don't feel Tebow's addition does much to change the odds of us beating the Jets. If they want to want to waste draft picks without making their team appreciably better, I think it's great.

I agree with both of you wholeheartedly. I am not surprised he signed. I'm not surprised that he's excited to work with our retooled DL. I am surprised by the money. What's the opportunity cost? It's great to get a good situational pass rusher but what opportunities might we miss next year in free agency because this guys is tying up too much money? The Mario signing excited me. This one does, too, but only up to a point.

Is this good for the Bills? Did the Jets waste draft picks for a non-NFL QB? Will this generate an unhealthy QB rivalry in New York?

I heard a GM saying once that getting guys to fill spots is easy. Every team has a bunch of role players. But what sets a Super Bowl team apart is that they have more play-makers on offense and defense. If some other franchise really offered a sweet deal for our 1st round pick, I would take it. But the great thing with a #10 is that it should be comparatively easy to find a play-maker at that spot. We have plenty of mediocre players and don't need a bushel-basket more. We need guys who will make a difference. So, in general, I'm opposed to trading down. I don't even care much what position we draft. A difference making OT, WR, LB or even a DE would be a great addition. I would hate to use a high draft pick on a QB when 1st round quarterbacks have such a poor success rate in the NFL and Fitz is serviceable.

You don't "need" great players at any position if you're content with mediocrity. Pretty much everyone on this board 'understands' that Fitz doesn't throw a great long ball and Chan prefers a quick-hitting passing attack anyway so maybe having a great OT isn't as important to the Bills as it is to teams that likes to throw deep. But teams that win Super Bowls usually have good offensive lines. OTs don't just protect 5 step QBs. They open holes for RBs too. And I'm not confident I can count on Hairston to protect Fitz (even just 3 steps back) or open holes for Freddy. I hope he either surprises me - or we find someone better.

Nice article by Bucky on NFL.com: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d827a0d0d/article/mario-williams-takes-stout-buffalo-defense-to-next-level This, in particular, was good to read: "The Williams signing gives the Bills arguably the best defense in the division." I'm not sure I'm buying it and Bucky's expertise as an analyst does leave something to be desired. In this article, for example, he doesn't mention Kyle Williams as if unaware of his importance. Still, I love people are beginning to take the Bills seriously now.

Thanks for posting My biggest worries are: * LEFT TACKLE!!! * No legit #2 WR * Lack of a lockdown corner * Lack of overall depth Kelsay is clearly the weak link on a four man front but few teams have superstars across their D-Line. Finding a bookend to play opposite of Mario wouldn't be a priority to me.

Obviously, money is exceptionally persuasive. But it is interesting that Mario visited Buffalo first and decided to forego visiting any other franchises. Rumor has it that Tennessee would have matched the Bills offer if they didn't get Manning. Mario could have waited to see how that drama played out but he didn't. I think Mario's agent told him that other clubs might match the Bills offer but no one would exceed it, at least not substantially so. So the final question was, did he want to be a Bill? And he did. Let's all celebrate.

Do we even own his rights any more?

Maybe because I'm older, I never joined the "Wilson is Cheap" crowd. I remember the Bills being willing to pay guys like Bennett and Kelly whatever it took to make them happy playing in Buffalo. In the late 80s and early 90s Wilson spent sufficiently to get the Bills into the playoffs year after year, including four consecutive AFC Championships. Ralph's shortcoming, it seems to me, is in talent evaluation. Wilson has not always chosen good GMs, who in turn have not always chosen good Head Coaches nor drafted well. As for money, I think these post-Mario quotes tell us everything we need to know about Wilson's attitude toward money: Buddy Nix: "A lot of times he takes some heat for not spending the money, not wanting to win and all those things. I have told you guys many times that he has never said, 'Don't do it, that's too much money.' He has always said do whatever it takes and if we have the resources we will do it. I think he has proved that and also has in the past." Ralph Wilson: "I didn't give a darn about the money, I can't take the money with me. The money had nothing to do with it."

Yeah, it's got to be close to that if Mario isn't even visiting other suitors.

"Breaking News" on NFL.com is not really breaking news.... Bills closing in on Williams The Bills and free-agent LB Mario Williams are moving closer to a deal, league sources tell NFL Network's Albert Breer.

Agree 100%

What does it mean when two of the four QBs on the crappy winning SB QB list got their rings against the Bills?

My two hopes regarding Manning. 1. He doesn't sign with the Fins or Jets. 2. He doesn't sign with anyone quickly so QB-hungry teams will have to keep cap money available to woo him. With less people competing with us, we might have an easier time wooing other top-tier FAs.

The article recommends a Ditka-like trade. How did that work for Ditka? I agree Fitz isn't an elite QB. But to mortgage the ranch for one guy is just too much. If QB were our only problem, this idea might make sense. But we have so many needs, we can't give up 4 high draft picks for one guy. Especially when about half of 1st round QBs fail to become serviceable starters, let alone stars.

Along with some others, I wondered aloud on this board if the Pats were making good decisions when they signed Ochocinco and Seymour last year. Of course, we were attacked as football neophytes and worse for daring to second-guess the infallible Bill Belichck & company. Obviously, those indeed turned out to be missteps by the Pats and there have been others recently as well. You don't create the league's worse passing defense with consistently great personnel moves. I'm hoping the trend continues and their dynasty comes to a quick end. Could create a vacuum that the Bills then occupy.

Great discovery but it is 20 years old. I'm sure Wanny's defensive philosophy and schemes have evolved since then. Still, you can see Wanny isn't a pure X's and O's kind of guy. He's big on attitude. Surprising how inarticulate Wanny is, though, if he indeed is the author of this document.

This is a far better draft prediction than I could make but... do you really think two of the top four picks will be WRs? Seems unlikely.

Football Outsiders uses some simple formulae and makes them sound fancy/accurate by tossing around statistical terms like "regression analysis" and the like. I don't always agree with their methodology. Even statisticians have to evaluate things, weigh categories, etc. It's a subjective process no matter how many numbers are involved. In any case, they assign the Bills a 3.8% adjusted sack rate which is the league's best. Nobody is arguing that the Bills didn't do a good job avoiding sacks. The question that no statistician can ultimately decide is why. Was it scheme? Play selection? Quick decision making by Fitz? Or was it, as you argue, good offensive line play? Personally, I think all deserve some of the credit, including especially scheme and quick QB decisions. Fitz did a good job of getting the ball out of his hand before taking the sack. The throw might not have been pretty but at least it wasn't an 8 yard loss.

(Note: I am a registered independent). I agree that Fitz is not an elite QB. I also agree, however, that Gailey's quick-hitting offensive scheme and Fitz's quick decision making made the sack/pressure statistics look better. Assuming Fitz could throw deep, would you really feel comfortable throwing deep with that line? I wouldn't. And look at the lack of push on 3rd and short situations when we ran the ball. It's just not a dominant line. (Yes, Fredex and CJ both averaged over 5 yards per carry, but a lot of that was (1) good play calling and (2) runners making something out of nothing). All in all, we have an okay line and okay QB. I wouldn't mind seeing upgrades both at LT and QB. But for now, both are serviceable. Bigger needs include DE and WR.

Thanks! That was the point. Just seems like a lot of both coaches and players we've been more-than-happy to jettison have gone on to have success elsewhere. Admittedly, I was among those happy to see both Clements and Gilbride say goodbye.

I noticed Tom Clements, former Bills OC, is now the Packers OC. Curious how our trash becomes treasure for others.

Simplicity and Complexity aren't an either-or choice. It's a continuum of choice. Defenses that are either too simple or too complex will fail. Nix and Gailey apparently think that Edwards was too far toward the Complex end of the continuum to bring out the best in his players. Wanny will bring the Bills back toward the middle - complex enough to confuse offenses but simple enough that players can react quickly and play aggressively. Sometimes simple defenses can appear complex through a few simple disguises.

Of course you still need Defense. How do you beat a team scoring 34.5 points per game? With a defense that slows them down! Every game is really three games: Our Offense versus your Defense Our Defense versus your Offense Our ST versus you ST. If you want to win the game, you want to win all three battles. Or at least two of three. So Defense is just as important as before. It will always be important because it's 1/3 of the final result.