2003Contenders

I'll pass... I remember when he came here to play against us a couple of years back. He was totally ineffective and commented after the game that he had a whole new respect fro what Jim Kelly was able to accomplish in the Arctic conditions.

I've also heard that some scouts actually worry about players who score TOO HIGH on the Wonderlic. They fear that the player may be too analytical and prone to over-thinking a situation, rather than being instinctive and processing the information quickly. Looking at Bledsoe's very high score, it would seem to bear this out.

I hate to cop-out and say wait and see what we do in free agency between now and April... but that is the honest to God's truth. Recall at this point heading into the 2003 draft that Linebacker was far and away our biggest need. However, TD was aggressive in signing both Posey and TKO -- and that need was mitigated. As of now, you can't go worng by addressing either the OL or DL -- and if we don't franchise or re-sign Nate, then Jimmy Williams could be a need pick for us. Heck, even Huff, assuming that we move Vincent back to CB.

It just reaffirms that at least the front office tried to bring in quality assistants -- and had trouble getting anyone to bite. In the final analysis that may be why MM left.

I agree. In fact, some of you who have criticized Schobel have disspelled your own point by pointing out that he had NO ONE of merit playing opposite him. Thus, the Hansen analogy probbaly isn't the best. The fact that Schobel's been as productive as he's been, despite no real help from the opposite side of the line, speaks volumes about how good he's been. Imagine how good he'd be if he had a legitimate pass rushing threat playing on the other end! Maybe someone like Darren Howard or Robert Mathis.

OJ's off-the-field problems have since clouded over what a great RB he was. Indeed, he was probably a top 5 all time RB. Like Jim Brown, every defender on the field knew that he was going to get the ball -- and they still couldn't stop him. Not to take anything away from Thurman, who did everything quite well -- and was probably the finest "Jack of All Trades" to ever play the position.

Hmmm. Considering that Abraham is a free agent and that the Jets would have to franchise him first to even have the rights to trade him -- which they can't do right now even if they wanted to, considering that they are so far over the cap -- I'd say that this rumor has little merit.

I wouldn't be surprised if Holmgren at least considers retirement. I seem to recall after that last Super Bowl with the Packers (the one they lost to Denver) that he reportedly went into some real state of depression, where his daughter actually tried to get him some counseling. He strongy considering retiring back then -- and supposedly Favre talked himout of it. A year later he moved onto Seattle.

1. I've seen the replay many times, and I'm still not sure if the nose of that ball managed to nip the goal line or not. Thus, the official did the right thing on review. 2. As far as the official changing his mind on the initial call, why is that so seemingly sinister? Maybe he was just waiting fro some bodies to clear away from the goal line before making the detrmination whether it was a TD or not. 3. Even if Seattle did get jobbed on the play, it is now 4th and an inch. Guarantee that Cowher goes for it -- and it's an easy QB sneak TD. No, I think that some of the ticky-tack boderline calls (like on Jackson's "push off") had a bigger thing to do with the outcome of the game than the controversy surrounding the Big Ben TD -- or lack thereof.

I've never understood this criticsm myself. Let's not forget that the Giants boasted the #1 defense in the NFL that year -- and our offense managed to score a point per minute. The fault squarely lies on the defense for allowing 9 and 10 minute long drives, which kept the offense off the field. If you look back, it's not as if Kelly went completely pass-happy. The dude completed 60% of his passes in that game -- and didn't turn the ball over against a superior defense that routinely had 8 or 9 guys in pass coverage. Also, as mentioned, that doesn't even account for the numerous drops -- which to be fair to Andre, he was beaten to a pulp by LBs and Safeties. The real story of the game is that we lost the battle of 3rd down conversions. The Giants were better than 50% on converting 3rd downs -- and we only converted (if memory serves me correctly) one or two all game. Indeed, when it mattered most and when we needed to make plays to keep the chains moving on offense we didn't get it done. And when the defense needed badly to get off the field, they couldn't force the Giants into 3-and-outs. I've always felt that the Norwood missed FG obscured this fact. In a sick, twisted way, the Norwood miss in the closing seconds has served to make the Bills almost like a tragic folk hero. The added notoriety has probably given that team more notoriety than they ever would have generated had they won the game. No one, for example, really talks about the Giants, who actually won the game. Instead of praising Parcells and his staff for putting together one of the great gameplans in NFL history, all we hear about is the Norwood miss. Maybe that's why I wasn't so upset back then with the outcome -- especially, since I had a feeling that we'd make it back. But if I had known how the other games would turn out -- and the fact that I really think we would have won at least one more of the others if we didn't have this loser's albotross around our neck -- well, it just makes that missed opportunity 15 years ago that much harder to take.

The more this unfolds, the more I'm starting to come around to being on TO's side. Owens still shouldn't have gone public with the lockerroom friction, but Donovan's "Poor me!" act is getting old. In a way I've always understood TO's dissatisfaction. Here he is playing in the Super Bowl -- laying it all on the line with a broken ankle. Meanwhile, McNabb is behaving like a pansy and moving like a sloth with no sense of urgency during clutch time. Personally, I think a coach and QB that don't allow their feelings to get hurt so easily will find a way to live in harmony with TO. There is no question that Owens is going to run his mouth -- the question is why anyone cares about what he says in the first place? Just ignore him -- and throw him the ball on Sundays.

If I recall correctly, Bruce's "sack" was a matter of being in the right place at the right time, as Hostetler tripped over one of his linemen's feet and fell down in the endzone. Even on the one good play that I can recall that Bruce made during those miserable Super Bowls, he failed to get the strip, when Hostetler's arm was exposed with the ball.

Hmmm. That is an interesting observation coming from Smith. And I bet it stems from that game we hosted against Carolina, when Smith was held pretty much in check. Recall that Nate entered that game being heavily criticized after a subpar perfromance against the Chargers. The Carolina game did witness the defense's conversion more to a zone coverage, which worked well for them defensively in that game, since the Panthers weren't prepared for it. However, the scheme proved less successful in subsequent weeks, most notably the very next week against Chris Chambers and the Dolphins. While I tend to agree that Nate is a bit overrated, he is still an above average player at a position, where good players are hard to come by. Thus, I hope that we can re-sign him. Also, with the DL's inability to put pressure on opposing QBs without blitzing, there's no CB alive who wouldn't have had some pretty bad games this year in Nate's shoes.

As we stand today, I agree with you 100%. However, if we address, say, the OL and DL in free agency in a major way, then I can see investing one of our four Day 1 picks on a QB.

OK.... 1. Anyone who blames TD for "letting" O'Donnell go has a very faulty memory of what happened in the off-season between 1995 and 1996. O'Donnell was a free agent -- and the Jets offered him an insane contract, one that TD and the Steeelers had no business trying to match. The contract made him one of the highest paid QBs in the NFL, despite the fact that he was more of a caretaker QB than a stud. How did the decision work out? Well, the Jets went 1-15 the following season with O'Donnell (who was admittedly injured for much of the year). The folowwing year he lost his starting job when the Tuna took over as head coach. Meanwhile, the Steelers were back hosting the AFC Championship Game (which they lost to Denver) by 1997. 2. I won't repeat what many others have already said about the Bledsoe acquisition. Suffice to say that we were in a bad situation at QB. Jeff Blake was the top free agent on the market, and we lost out (looking back, thankfully) on David Carr and Joey Harrington in the draft. I know others will diagree, but even knowing what we know now, if I'm TD I still WOULD have made that trade for Bledsoe ten times out of ten. If nothing else, it brought instant credibility to our team -- and I seriously doubt if free agents like TKO would have signed here otherwise. 3. Again, the verdict is still out on JP. He has clearly shown flashes -- but he was also so mishandled by our coaching staff last year that it isn't funny. With everyone that had a stake in his doing well -- TD, MM, Clements, Wyche -- all gone, I wonder if the new reigme will give him the latitude to sink or swim.

I just heard Kiper say something about Cutler that makes him undraftable as a Buffalo QB if true. He has small hands. In bad weather conditions, that is the kiss of death for a QB.

Since the Jets have SO many needs, I would expect them to move down if given the opportunity. If Mangini has learned anything from his days in New England, you have to think that is exactly what the Jets plan on doing. That being the case, the partner willing to trade up with the Jets would likely be targeting Ferguson. So I don''t think it is fair to assume that the Jets' trading out of that spot is good news for us.

Well, suppose that we address the glaring OL and DL needs in free agency, which I expect Marv and the gang to do. Remember also that we have 4 day-one draft picks, all in the early part of each round. From that perspective I would not be nearly as upset about drafting a QB in the first round. Let's face it. With TD, MM, and now apparantly Sam Wyche all gone, there is no one left willing to go down with the ship over JP. I am personally not ready to give up on the kid just yet, but if the new administration isn't sold on him... Still, I think some of this could be gamesmanship from Marv, trying to see if some team that is interested in selecting Cutler may trade with the Bills -- or even trade up ahead of them so that another top 7 player falls to us. And it could just be that he likes the kid -- even though he may not want to draft him. After all, there are a lot of players to like in this draft -- but only a small number will be drafted by the Buffalo Bills.

Note that the report on the Jets' liking Cutler said that they would be interested in trading DOWN to draft him, meaning that they would not take him with the #4 pick.

In that scenario, I'd be inclined to go with the CB Williams. In fact, if he is still there, I suspect there would be a market to move down with a trading partner.

Actually there is some misinformation being spread around about Henderson. He and the Lions have agreed in priciple, but he has yet to sign a contract with them. Hmmmmm.

One other thing that just occurred to me. If memory serves me correctly, the Packers were not the only team interested in drafting JP. The Rams were supposedly very interested in him too. Now, was it Martz that liked him or Fairchild? One would assume that Fairchild, the team's former QB Coach would have had a say, just as Wyche was a big proponent of our trading up to get JP. Thus, for those who thought one of the advantages to bringing Sherman in was that he was high on JP -- well, maybe we are in the same situation with Fairchild. Count me as one of those who is cautiously optimistic. He managed to get pretty good QB play out of a variety of different guys over the years -- and I don't think that it was all Martz.

I wonder how close he and Sherman are? Is it possible that during his deliberation he gave Sherman and call to get his take on the situation? If that is the case, you'd expect that the feedback he got wasn't good. Either... 1. Sherman has sour grapes for not getting the job and tells Bates how much the opportunity would suck. Or... 2. Sherman turned down the Bills job -- and he emphasizes his reasons for having done so, letting Bates know how much the opportunity would suck.

Any idea how much he was scheduled to make as Packers' DC?

Also, let's not forget that the most important place to find quality OL and DL that will make an immediate impact for us will be in free agency. Remember back to the 2003 draft, at this time that year our greatest need was at LB. After we went out and got TKO, that need was mitigated. We're still going to need some linemen, even if we do land 2 or 3 really goo dones in free agency, but remember also that we have 4 day one draft picks this year. Even if we only invest, say, 2 of them on linemen, that still gives us 2 picks to use on other positions. Remember also that we have a new regime in charge now, which means that they are going to be less inclined to ride the wave of players that the former regime placed a great deal of faith in. That is to say that if Cutler is as good as some of these recent reports suggest, then it may be worth the risk to pull the trigger. With JP still being an unknown commodity and Holcomb inadequate, it's not as if the QB position isn't one of need for us.