SoFFacet

He's a bigger threat to pass, and there's something to be said for letting Fred have a few plays off anyways. I do agree that the triple option and similar plays should be implemented for Smith. Air Force runs a neat plunge/keeper/pass play that aims to create a run/pass responsibility conflict for the CB.

The confidence and chemistry of this team has been very carefully crafted. Bringing in any new guy, particularly a veteran in the middle of the season, always carries this kind of risk. That doesn't mean that we absolutely shouldn't do it, just that its a concern that we can only hope Buddy is taking more seriously than you guys are.

Thanks for the info! That group from UNC looks especially good. Oh also, just wondering but the first 3 mock picks in your sig are currently all in the draftek big baord's top 25. Whats up with that?

Buddy does this professionally. He is far more qualified to appraise the value of a pick than some internet message board mob.

Much more likely that its the fans' valuation of the 4th rounder that is miscalibrated, not Buddy's.

Eh, Davis doesn't exactly suck, but he's the weakest of the four LBs that started the season if you ask me. But I know Kelsay and Merriman haven't done much either, so its close.

Green would have ruined the no name theme our offense has going. Players drafted before the 7th round aren't allowed. ;p

Well that's a bizarre question. This is a fan message board, posts don't really "accomplish" anything - other than stimulating discussion with other fans about the team. Here we have a post simply pointing out that the Bills aren't winning by very much, and it will be nearly impossible for them to keep up this turnover pace. Being a fan doesn't preclude one from thinking critically about the team's strengths and weaknesses, but it seems that there are tons of posters here that can't understand that.

I don't think anyone is saying they are doing it on purpose, but surely the last four games looked at least somewhat similar to you?

A habit? Surely then you are brimming with examples. Thus far you've cited the drop vs Pitt and the "catch" vs Cincy. Even if we're generous and agree that he made a mistake in Cincy, thats a whopping two examples in twenty games. Regardless, the Bills at this point have far too many players who hardly show up at all to be worrying about who is showing up in "big moments."

Well actually, since (as you say) we don't have a real running package, and nearly all of our running plays are draws out of 3/4 receiver sets... we don't know for sure if we are good at running out without the spread offense. Something tells me that Chan thought we could, we would already be doing it.

You can't sell me that Cincy actually has a great offense. They don't. Our defense, on the other hand, has been butchered in three consecutive weeks.

This one has been bothering me. On 2nd & 1 the entire playbook should be open and we should be calling some ambitious shite. Instead Chan always plays it safe and goes for the 1st down right away. And Brad Smith has a 100% conversion rate on 3rd & 1, but instead Chan called a ton of long passes.

Actually he's pretty much always in position to make a play. He just never makes it.

The thing that this game definitely showed was how bad our defense really is. The only time we've been able to stop anybody in the last 3 games is turnovers. Also I was genuinely surprised that Chan and Fitz didn't manage to turn things around on offense. Hopefully they return to form next week, or we won't have much a chance then, either.

I think our primary need is a better pass rush, with secondary needs being better OL, DB, and WR depth. Shutdown corners are even more difficult to find than franchise qbs right now. There are like, 3 in the entire league atm. If Buddy has a reeeeeeally good feeling about one of the CBs in this year's draft, then ok, maybe. But there are going to be a lot of great LB options only available in the 1st round, and a lot good CBs that will still be available in the 2nd round.

It is impossible to indict early playcalling when there are so many early execution errors. There is no evidence that getting the ball first would improve the early offensive execution. I don't know why you feel you need to be rude, I was just disagreeing with you. But now that you've annoyed me, my point is that it is actually your reasoning that is fallacious. NE's lead cannot be solely attributed to deferring, no matter how many times you stamp your feet and insist it can. Would you argue that getting the ball first in the second half was the reason for our comeback, or merely a slight advantage, overwhelmed in the grand scheme of things by the real reason - simply outplaying NE? Thought so. NE executed in the first quarter - we didn't. They would have been ahead regardless of deferring. If you can't understand that, "that says something."

Not sure what you're trying to get at here. I would also prefer not to spot our opponents large leads, but the fact is that errors in execution have much more to do with our early struggles than playcalling. The players even said so after both of the last two games - there were no halftime adjustments, they just went out and executed the same plan without all the errors. Thats completely incorrect. NE's offense simply outplaying our defense was a far greater contributing factor to their lead, than was the mere fact that they had the ball first. Also, since we did not score for several possessions, and New England did, we would have played from behind regardless of our coin toss decision. Certainly, there is nothing wrong with asking. But there is simply no evidence that supports the idea that our offense would play better if it received the ball first. I would like to compete more in the first half as well, but based on the performance so far, the answer lies almost entirely in improving execution, not in changing strategy.

I agree that we need to take fewer penalties. They have killed several of our 1st half drives this season. Regarding #2, far too few snaps have been played thus far to make that kind of past-results-based argument about which plays are likely to work better in the future. It is all within the realm of noise and coincidence right now. And for #3, deferring is clearly not reason we fall behind. Against Oakland both teams punted twice before Oakland finally drove the length of the field and then intercepted Fitz. Against NE, we had what, 2 turnovers and 2 punts before finally starting to fight back? For strong teams that don't fold against an early deficit, deferring is superior for the opportunity to immediately seize momentum in the second half (see Oakland game), or create consecutive possessions on either end of halftime (both Oakland and NE games). While there is still quite a bit of room for improvement (showing up for the 1st quarter would be nice), I like that Gailey is coaching his team like a strong team.

This game is pretty important to our defense imo. They played well vs the Chiefs, terrible vs the Raiders, and "bad" vs the Pats, although considering how many points they're putting on everyone, bad is a relative term there. Cinci has an offense they should be able to stop. If they fail we'll know we have a deeper problem. If they succeed then at least they can stop the people they're supposed to - which is more than a lot of previous Bills teams can say.

Based on the season so far, I'd say our biggest needs are a better pass rush, OL depth, DB depth, and WR depth. I'm favoring a draft order that looks something like this... DE or OLB, Round 1: Brandon Jenkins, Florida State Bruce Irvin, West Virginia Zach Brown, North Carolina Courtney Upshaw, Alabama OL, Round 2: Levy Adcock, Oklahoma State Mike Adams, Ohio State Bobby Massie, Ole Miss Ricky Wagner, Wisconsin CB, Round 3: Donnie Fletcher, Boston College Leonard Johnson, Iowa State WR, Roound 4: BJ Cunningham, Michigan State Juron Criner, Arizona One deviation that I would seriously consider is ILBs Luke Kuechly (Boston College) or Manti Teo (Notre Dame) in Round 1, if they somehow dropped to us.

I agree. Talking draft is interesting to some people regardless of the time of year. Doing so does not in any way mean that a person is less appreciative of the present.

Much more appropriate, but it doesn't make any sense in the context of your previous post. I would give up on the analogies until you're a little bit more grown up.

We couldn't get anything worthwhile in return if we did trade him, so he will be kept. More than anything else the thing thats keeping him on the sidelines is Fred Jackson. Regarding the usage of a #9 pick, consider the Nix's mindset at the 2010 draft, before he and Gailey had much time to evaluate the team. There was no way to anticipate the needs of the 2011 Bills without making assumptions based on (highly unreliable) fan and media impressions. While it is unfortunate that he has underperformed expectations thus far, and plays a position we've turned out not to need this year, BPA was the right call. Keep in mind that while Spiller might not be what the 2011 Bills need, he might be what the 2012, 2013, 2014, etc Bills need. Having so few carries is extending his career - RBs tend to have about 2000 touches in them, instead of a fixed number of years. We won't know the true wisdom of the Spiller pick until we also see his impact on those teams.

Gailey has deferred the past two weeks, no reason to believe he'll break the trend now. I think its almost always better to defer unless there is bad weather expected in the second half only.