2003Contenders

Yea, I think the bottom line is that if Chan believes that Newton (or Gabbert, for that matter) has the potential to be a true franchise QB, then that is the direction they will go with the #3 pick. Otherwise, the pick will be a defensive player.

One thing that I remember very specifically is that Jim Kelly called that game for CBS -- his first professional broadcast. Perhaps, Jimbo liked what he saw and whispered in Ralph's ear? Like RJ or not, he was VERY good in that game against the Ravens, and if that was your only real chance to see him play in a live game scenario, it is hard to fault anyone for coming back with a less than stellar report on him. Remember, he even exhibited toughness, coming back in the game after having been knocked out with a high ankle sprain. I wish the interpretation of that would have been that he was injury prone, instead.

Nice summary. In my mind, the real culprit for this mess was Paul Tagliabu -- who strong-armed the owners into signing a deal that wasn't beneficial to them, just so that he could retire claiming to have left behind a legacy of labor peace. Ralph and Mike Brown were the only ones smart enough to have objected. In guaranteeing the players (who represent only a PORTION of labor costs) roughly 60% of gross revenue, I have no doubt that some of the smaller market teams may have indeed lost money. Remember that the revenue is defined in broad terms across all 32 teams and divided by 32 accordingly. Thus, a large market team like Dallas or Washington may only have to pay 40% of their revenue toward player salaries. Whereas, a smaller market team like Indy may be paying 70-80%. It is hard to stay in business when that much of your revenue (not profit) is dedicated to labor -- and not even TOTAL labor -- costs.

Agreed -- for the most part. Where I do disagree is that they should NOT take less than market value to trade down. That works if they are certain to get the guy they are targeting (which they are NOT) -- or if they have multiple guys closely ranked one of whom they are assured will still be on the clock if they do miss out on Jordan (or whomever). But that's the problem: it really does seem like over the years the Bills have allowed themselves to fall too in love with the player they have decided on with their first pick -- and are reluctant to trade down as a consequence.

Call me one who is skeptical. However, if the Bills brass believe that Newton could be something special -- even if he is going to take some time to groom -- then that possibility exists with him sitting behind Fitz for a year or two.

Which makes the model even that much more silly given that Parcells is supposedly the one who came up with it -- and yet the most successful QB that he ever drafted didn't fit the bill. But, of course, Chad Henne met all the prerequisites.

Yep, and when I look at the recap of their draft, perhaps my reading comprehension is off, but it sounds to me like most of the guys wound up injured. Balaga became a serviceable starting RT (which is what you would expect from a first round draft pick) -- and most everyone else became a role player. Now, let's take a closer look at the Bills' own 2010 draft class. Spiller was certainly a let-down, but it is WAY too early too suggest that the Bills made a mistake passing on someone like Bulaga to take him. Troup and Carrington were decent role players. Easley looked good before he went down in preseason with the injury. Wang was pressed into playing time. Moates was a solid contributor and probably the team's best pass rusher down the stretch. And that doesn't even count a number of guys like Nelson who were undrafted free agents. You can take from a single draft less than a year later whatever you wish. Recall that after 2006, we thought that draft class looked like one of the best for the Bills ever. Now, depending on what happens with Whitner, Kyle Williams just may be the last man standing from that class. We'll see what happens moving forward, but even that 2009 class bolstered by Wood, Levitre and Byrd looks pretty good -- even with the Maybin gaffe.

I agree. The only problem is that there isn't (IMHO) a QB like that in this year's draft class, and other teams rarely make elite QBs available.

The OL situation reminds me a bit of what the Bills had back in 1998. Remember to start the season off, when RJ was taking all of those sacks, Mauck had the lineman go on a strike, where they refused to talk to the press. When RJ went down with an injury and Flutie was inserted -- suddenly the line was no longer a problem. The same thing happened last year once Fitz became the starter. In the middle part of the season when they were all healthy, the OL actually played pretty well. Funny how a QB capable of reading a defense and making quick decisions can make an OL look so much better! I will say, however, that the rash of injuries late in the year did reveal a pronounced lack of depth. I believe that the coaches like Bell and believe that he will be even better with a full off-season to get healthy. They look to be in good shape with Levitre, Wood and some combination of Hangartner/Urbick inside. From what I have heard, they really seem to like Pears at RT and believe that he was a nice, low profile pickup. Clearly, they could stand to add some depth -- and certainly an upgrade at either tackle position would be nice. Just do not be overly upset, when the team decides to stick with what they have and add just a few more low profile players for depth.

Folks, this is all a balancing act with many parts at play: 1. Who is the best football player available? 2. What are the team's most pressing needs? 3. What is the variation between the level of the player that the Bills seek to draft at a given position versus the existing starting player at that position? 4. Money. 5. How QUICKLY do you expect the drafted player to contribute? Everyone always talks about 1, 2 and 4 (and to a lesser extent 5) above -- but I think too often that 3 gets overlooked. The Bills were a 4-12 football team. They have MANY needs, and practically every position (besides RB and possibly OG) could stand an upgrade. The question is: how much of an upgrade can they hope to find in the draft? I would argue that LB (both inside and outside), DL (both DT and DE depending on the scheme), OT, and TE are all positions that COULD immediately be upgraded if the right player is drafted. However, the team could certainly stand an upgrade at QB, WR and DB -- although IMHO none of these needs are as dire. Specifically, in regards to the QB position, I think a fair assessment of Fitzpatrick after the 2010 season is that he is an adequate starter -- but not an elite one. It makes no sense to invest a high (and by high, I mean first 2-3 rounds) draft pick on a young QB that projects to be no better than a "solid NFL starter", given that it is unlikely that the player will ever be a real improvement over Fitzpatrick. However, if the team sees a youngster that they believe has the potential to be a franchise QB -- even if they believe it will take a couple of years for that player to get on the field -- then they should by all means strongly consider drafting such a rare commodity. Given that Fitz is a serviceable starter, the Bills certainly have the luxury of allowing a youngster to sit for a couple of years. The prior regime's philosophy was to shy away from that mind-set, fearing that drafting a young QB with such a high pick would place too much pressure on the team to rush the kid out there. (That is the reason Marv passed on Cutler back in 2006.) The current Nix/Gaily regime strikes me as a patient crew -- willing to allow the hypothetical rookie QB to sit until he is ready (even if Fitz struggles). I am by no means a scout and many of you on here are much more in tune to the college game than I am. From my untrained perception, I do NOT see any QB in the this class that I would label a can't-miss-prospect. Certainly not one that I would bank on becoming elite. Newton has the most upside -- but plenty of risk. The presence of Fitz helps mitigate that risk -- but it also diminishes the reward, given the odds that Newton will develop into a QB that is truly elite and THAT much better than Fitz. The money piece of the equation (given the bust factor) also plays a pivotal role here. Had Luck come out, the risk certainly would have been worth it. As it stands today, I just do not see a QB in this draft with that kind of ceiling and at the same time with so little risk. Quite simply, the Buffalo Bills are not going to draft a QB with the #3 overall pick, knowing that they will have to pay him a ridiculous amount of money -- just to watch him ride the pine for a year or more, wondering the whole time if he will ever be better than what they already have. I could, however, see them drafting a Jake Locker late in the 1st/early in the 2nd where the risk is not nearly as high and there exists a capacity to let the young man sit and learn. While it is bad news that the Bills have so many needs, it is also good news that they will have plenty of quality players to choose from WITHOUT having to "reach" based on need.

The problem dates back to 2007 when Tagliabu jammed the agreement down the owners' throats so that he could vacate the Commissioner position claiming to have orchestrated labor peace. Ralph and Mike Brown were the only owners smart enough (and ballsy enough) to cry BS. That agreement guaranteed the players over 60% of TOTAL revenue. For bigger market teams like the Cowboys and Redskins that didn't matter too much, since their % of the overall pie was significantly larger than the smaller market teams, like Buffalo. Thus, from the owners' standpoint, the existing CBA is broke. The players would love nothing better than to continue to play under the existing agreement. Things like extending the season to 18 games, imposing a hard rookie cap, extending roster sizes, etc are just window dressing.

Sounds to me like the salesman was looking for trouble. If my boss asks me to take off a tie -- I take off my tie.

You know it is a shame that this dude will forever be remembered for the ridiculous trade that netted the Cowboys all those draft picks (and eventually a Super Bowl roster). I blame the Vikings more for not using Walker properly than I do for giving up so much to get him. He was one of the absolute greatest athletes to ever play in the NFL. He was edged out by Darrell Green as the fastest man in the NFL -- AND won a competition as the NFL's strongest man.

Indeed, the beginning of the end for TD in terms of fan perception was the day that he announced that Gregg Williams wouldn't be back just days after the 2003 season ended. In that press conference he chastised the fans for not having been more supportive. Many fans never forgave him for that. Prior to that here was the fan perception: 2001: Cleaned up salary cap, oversaw quality draft with plenty of wheeling and dealing 2002: Made the bold move to trade for Bledsoe WITHOUT giving up a pick in THAT year's draft 2003: Turned Peerless Price into a 1st round draft pick. Negotiated hard to attract quality free agents to shore up defense (Takeo, S Adams, L Milloy)

Same goes for Pittsburgh too.

We all give Mel a lot of crap, but had he been doing our drafts for us since 2006, I think we would have been better off. Here is who he had us taking: 2006: Ngata (thought Whitner was a reach and the move up to get McCargo puzzling) 2007: Revis or Leon Hall (understood the "need" for Lynch but thought 12 was too early) 2008: Don't remember who had mocked for us to take, but I think he was OK with the McKelvin pick there 2009: Orakpo (was down on Maybin; McShay loved Maybin) 2010: A Davis (He agreed that Spiller was probably the BPA but thought he was a luxury pick) What's funny is that most of those picks were in line with conventional wisdom. Maybe it would be alright for once if the Bills didn't try to outsmart everybody. One good thing: most of those players this year at the top of the draft played in the SEC, which is in Nix's wheelhouse.

I have never understood the crowd that claims that Ralph is a cheapskate. The reality is that financial parameters have changed in a major way since the late 1980s. When Kelly signed that "massive" contract in 1990 that (briefly) made him the highest paid player in the NFL, the average annual salary was about $3M. Today, the top players in the league make close to $20M per year -- which is about what an entire roster payroll was back in those days. And we are talking just 20 years ago. Last year, Ralph paid about $120M in player payroll. When the salary cap kicked in in 1993, the first cap was less than $40M. By the time Tom Donahoe took over in 2001, the cap was up to $67M, and the Bills were in desperate peril as they had to make huge personnel moves to get under that figure. The last capped season (2009), it was around $127M. Ralph's never had a problem paying players. Look at that ridiculous contract that Dockery signed just a few years ago. That is the real problem, though, right? Investing too much capital in mediocre players. And it isn't Ralph that makes these decisions; he just signs the check. I blame Ralph for firing the best GM (Polian) the team ever had, giving too much power to a GM that was hit-or-miss (TD), and relying on marketing guys to run the team after the Donahoe era. The verdict is still out on Nix.

And yet when these two teams met in what amounted to a road game for the Bills, the Bills very nearly beat these Bears.

I think you have to give Sanchez the nod for being clutch. However, I honestly believe that minus the QB position, the Jets are the best team top-to-bottom in the NFL. When Sanchez plays well, they are almost unbeatable. When he doesn't play so well...

If the manner in which the Bills played both teams is any barometer, the Jets should beat the Steelers convincingly. Of course, that doesn't work in the NFL. One thing I will say is that the Steelers looked VERY lethargic in the first half against the Ravens on Saturday. They were actually lucky to come away with a win. The Jets beat them a few weeks back, so I expect them to come out motivated and ready to play on Sunday. One thing the Steeler defense does very well is stop the run. In the absence of a running game can Sanchez play well enough to go toe-to-toe with Big Ben? (I know he had 3 TD passes on Sunday -- but was he REALLY asked to do very much against the Patriots?)

You know I was thinking the exact same thing. Part of the reason that the Pats won the time-of-possession battle is that on each pass play Brady held onto the ball for like 5-6 seconds and STILL couldn't find open receivers. Of course, it helps that the Jets have such a good front 7 that they can mix-and-match their coverages like that so that even a seasoned pro like Brady starts worrying about the pressure -- even if there isn't any.

You know, try as I might, I just can't bring myself to dislike ol' Rex. There is something almost lovable about him. I would call him a "likeble a-hole".

Additionally, I believe that drafted players have until Week 10 to sign with the team that drafted them -- otherwise, they go back into the draft the following year.

Our 2nd round pick is #34 overall -- almost a first rounder. The Bills need to get an instant impact player here (like a DL, OL or LB) rather than roll the dice on someone like Ponder.

Oh well. Do I despise Tom Brady? Yes. Do I hope every week that he gets humiliated by the opposing team? Yes. Do I wish he were the QB of the Buffalo Bills? Yes.