Mickey

I did watch Peters play, for his whole career rather than just the first few games he was back for last year which appears to be the only games you watched. I might find this credible if you could show me all your posts talking about how terrible Peters is before the hold out. No one seemed to think he was undeserving of the pro bowl, or a fat lazy bum until then. I am not sure how he turned from a great player everyone raved about and never complained of into a lousy player even before he missed a single block in 2008. What Brandon did was to stiff Peters when the team fell all over Schobel the year before who had just signed a contract making him the highest paid palyer on the team. The very next year, when they ludicrously overpaid Kelsay, they promptly decided to red-do Schobel's contract giving even more money. The few sacks he has made since the day he signed that second new contract are most expensive in team history, apart from Kelsay's. I challenge you to pick out two palyers on the team more overpaid than those two. Huge, stupefyingly huge, contracts for two players who have been next to useless for two years running is one of the reasons why we haven't been to the playoffs. He could have singed Peters up in March of 2007, avoided the hold out all together and got the same performance out of him that he gave in 2007 which may have made for a much better 2008 than 7-9. We'll never know. Calling a press conference to publicly embarass and call out the player as he did on the opening day of camp was just foolish. I don't think I can come up with a reason why that was thought to be a sound management strategy. Tick off a guy who is already ticked about his contract and the seemingly disparate treatement he was given compared to Schobel? Why? Anger a guy you are trying to get in to camp? Embarass a guy you are trying to negotiate a fair deal with? Get the fans all riled up about a player you are trying to sign; what happens to that anger when you later sign him? You don't have to think much of Peters to concede that Brandon made a mistake. I hope he gets better at his job but the Peters saga was an absolute fiasco. It is his job to avoid fiascos.

Missing camp has consequences and at the time, everyone on both sides of the issue seemed to acknowledge that. What I think many failed to grasp however was that those consequences would be far more costly to the team than to Peters. The result for Peters was to get out of bad contract early, no easy feat, and to land a huge contract with a perennial contender. The result for the Bills was Peters' performance last year in the first half of the season and the loss of one of their only pro bowl caliber players. Add in the necessity of juggling a significant portion of the line just to field a line that isn't outright laughable and there is no rational conclusion other than that Peters' holdout cost him virtually nothing and cost the team plenty. The only value a player has to a team is the quality of his play. Anything that detracts from that quality hurts the team. Missing camp can have a negative impact on the quality of a player's performance. Therefore, when a player misses camp, regardless of the reason why, it hurts the team. The only value camp has for a player is that it helps him perform his best which eventually translates in to longevity as a starter and bigger contracts. But for an established player whose abilities are well known and whose position as a starter is assured, camp is not all that valuable. For a guy like Peters, wedded to a contract paying him far less than other players who made the pro bowl in 2007, he had little to lose and everything to gain with a hold out. And in the end, the strategy worked. Those who endlessly point to his performance last year as awful pretty much make the point for me that the holdout cost the team way more than it cost Peters and that the time to resolve the Peters situation was in March of 2007. This is where someone will start whining "...but the fines, the fines!!!". Talk about the swan song of the truly desperate. Given the money he made by gettting out of that contract early and the huge bucks Philly is paying him, I am sure Peters has not lost any sleep over the fines. Face it, Peters came out of this smelling like a rose while we are trying to figure out if a career RT can play LT and if a LT can play RT. Smooth.

Gee, why did our offensive line suck so many of the years that he was here? Peters was tops on everyone's project list as a future LT that year, he could have signed with anyone after the draft, he signed with us because our lack of talent on the roster spelled o-p-p-o-r-t-u-n-i-t-y. And no coach turns a player into a pro bowler all on his own, the player himself must be driven and willing to put in the time and effort to become one of the best. Peters did that and, with McNally's help, it worked. That should have been the end of a great story for the Bills but it wasn't. Instead, the Eagles will be the beneficiary. But I don't expect the bile and bluster hereabouts to ever be objective with regard to Peters. Not yet anyway. There is just too much man-love around here for Brandon to consider that maybe he handled the Peters situation poorly.

What part of the interior line "looks to be" imposing to you? The fact that two of them are rookies? The fact that one of them never started for his prior team and was not exactly a highly sought after FA? The fact that none of them have ever played a down together? The fact that they will be flanked by a guard playing tackle and a career right tackle playing on the left?

Now was that so hard? See, a rational discussion were we disagree but no one is necessarily being an a$$ Rhodes is not going to be on the field absent injury apart from the first three games but last year, we had Lynch and Freddie for the first three games, this year we will have Freddie and Rhodes. I don't see that as an improvement at all. If anything, Lynch's trouble with the law required us to invest a little more than one would like on a third stringer. Lynch and Freddie are good receivers as it is so even if Rhodes does see some time after the first three games on passing downs, I fail to see how he would be an improvement over Lynch and Freddie unless you think he is a significantly better receiver than those two guys which simply is not the case. The fact that once upon a time he played on a Superbowl team is meaningless. That team didn't make the superbowl last year and he didn't make their roster. He is just a garden variety aging vet RB looking for another couple years before hanging up the cleats who we signed to give us depth given that, at the time, we had our starter looking at a suspension and our No. 2 guy in a contract dispute. For all we know Rhodes was nothing more than a tactic to get Freddie to sign. There is not a single coach in the NFL that would agree with you that Bell, a practice squad player, or Chambers, a career back up, will do as good a job as Peters would have. Not one. The only place on the planet where that thought is anything other than laughable is here on this board where so many took his hold out personally and where he is about as popular as a terrorist. Not exactly an objective group. The people whose jobs depend on knowing who can and can't play think differently, even in Buffalo where they tried to sign him afterall the hoopla and made pretty eye popping offers though certainly not what Philly was willing to shovel. I wish I had a dime for every guy ever drafted who was thought to be the best at his position who tanked. It is one thing to bet on that here and there but we are betting on that across the board on the offensive line. Two rookies. Its a fact. They could end up being very good. But this year? I think the odds are against it. In fact, I think the odds are that only one of them will be good and that won't be until late in the year. I am all for it, I like both of them but I am skeptical that a rookie is going to play better than Butler did at RG last year so that isn't an improvement. I am skeptical that Butler will be a better RT than Walker was so that isn't going to be an improvement. I am also skeptical that Walker will be a better LT than would Peters, especially a Peters with his contract mess worked out before camp. So that is not an improvement either. Dockery sucked and so did Preston at C. I think we will improve there but it would be hard not to. The inside of the line is going from 2/3's suck and 1/3 good to 3/3's mediocre. In any event, this discussion started with a guy who posted that he thought the team didn't really meaningfully address what has been a perennially carppy offense so that this year might not be such a good one. Someone responded with a list of the changes they did make as if they were self evident as major strides. I don't think they are and you do. I hope I am wrong.

"Wearing out the defense" is pretty overrated anyway. It is one of those things that seems to make sense but, imho, it isn't often a factor. These guys are athletes who train hard and are in great shape given their body size. Unlike most sports, football has a ton of play stoppages, especially for commercials. Penalties, instant reviews and just getting 11 guys off and another 11 on for special teams and so forth provide additional stoppages. The players get a lot of rest in the course of a game not to mention a whole half time to get their wind back. The point someone was trying to make about it being harder to cover the WR's, I think, is not necessarily true. The defensive backs are some of the best conditioned athletes in all of football and they are the ones doing the covering. All defenses play a good deal of zone coverage which reduces tremendously the amount of flat out sprinting the DB's have to do. Add in all the running play that go for a yard or two where the safeties are never involved. Fatigue on a play by play basis is more of a factor than "wearing out the defense" over the course of a game. The no-huddle can help with that but only if you are actually getting first downs. The defense can get tuckered out, especially the lineman, on a long drive if the offense can get decent stretch of time with no play stoppages. A long gainer, if not followed by an official stoppage, can be a problem if the lineman have to trot down field to get to the line before the snap. If the no huddle offense always caused defenses to break down, to wear out and fold, everyone would be using it but that just isn't the case. It is like any other scheme, it has advantages and disadvantages. I think the real question is whether or not our personnel is suited to the no huddle on both sides of the ball. The no huddle periodically puts a lot of pressure on the defense with those super quick three and outs. Soon, it could be our defense, not theirs that has fatigue problems. Back in the '90's, we had superior athletes and so simplifying things so that it was man vs. man action was to our benefit, we were going to win those matchups. By depriving the defense of situational substitutions, they couldn't load up to stop an expected run or pass. It made it more of a player's game, not a coach's game decided by strategy and game planning. We didn't have to outthink them, just outplay them, and we did. There were games where I swear we didn't have more than 5 or 6 plays we were choosing from at the line. We ran them all to perfection, how could we not? It wasn't as if there was too much to memorize. I don't know that this team is suited to a no huddle offense. It isn't as if our 2 minute offense was gangbusters last year. It was the success of the hurry up at the end of games that lead Kelly and company to ask Levy to go no huddle from the get go and for Levy to agree to give it a shot. Only time will tell I guess but I just don't see that we have top athletes across the roster on offense that are going to beat people one on one all the time. Apart from the line which is an obvious concern, I am worried that Trent just isn't a no huddle kind of QB. He has never forced the defense to play the whole field, quick as he is to go to the check down. Remember, we had Lofton and Reed, two all time greats at WR. Owens, as good as he is, isn't as good as Lofton was and Evans is no Andre Reed, not yet, not by a longshot. But Trent is smart, and disciplined, and accurate. Owens can be a beast when he is focused and Lynch hasn't even begun to play his best football yet. We may see a whole new Evans now that defenses will be focused on Owens. Young lineman might benefit from a faster pace with less thinking and more doing. It could work. Lets face it, Jauron isn't going to out game plan anyone so the more we take the game out of his hands and in to the players', the better off we are.

If Jim would just loan Trent a set of balls, we'd be all set.

Oh goody, a personal attack rather than a discussion of the facts. You are the one in lollipop land, Suzie. Perhaps you could point out what part of that brief post was not accurate? You know, since I don't have a grip on reality and all, I am sure you can stop drooling long enough to show how wildly inaccurate my assertions were. Three rookies: Levitre, Nelson and Wood Third string running back: Lynch = 1st string, Freddie = 2nd string which would make Rhodes what? Oh yeah, third string. The depth chart at the team website confirms Rhodes as the third string RB. Third tier FA: Hangartner. Never was a full time starter in 4 years with the Panthers. Biggest jerk in football. Really, apart from Bellicheat, who comes close to TO? To top it off, we divested ourselves of the only pro bowler on offense, have a guard playing tackle and a career right tackle playing on the left. I don't see these as cunningly brilliant personnel moves that will instantly address our offensive woes, far from it. Long term, it may pay off but this is, outside of a lot of luck, a rebuilding year.

Lets see, a third string running back, a third tier FA, three rookies and the biggest jerk in football. Brilliant I tell you, brilliant!

Thanks for sharing your excellent research. Unfortunately, its not exactly news to anyone who has watched him coach the Bills. It is pretty clear what his philosophy is: don't make mistakes and keep it close, hope you pull it out in the end. An ideal Jauron game is 13-10, kicking 20 yard FG with 2 second left. "Take what the defense gives you." If they give you a 3 yard dump off on 3rd and 12, take the dump off. I'd rather lose by 50 and go down pissing and moaning and scratching and clawing all the way rather than this chickens*t football. My hope is that even he is going to throw caution to the winds this year, its do it or get fired and lotsa luck ever being hired as a HC ever again. His career is on the line this year.

We have an "...imposing interior OL..."????? Great news. I thought we had a couple rookies and a third tier FA whose never managed to secure a starting position until now. Whew. Glad to hear that isn't the case, that could have been a freaking disaster.

Yes, and the team will take the field on opening day astride unicorns escorted by fairie folk.

I think it is a gimmik that will start to sputter, especially in the division, as teams figure out how to defend it. That being said, given that we were 0-6 in the division last year and the fact that Brady is back, I am not sure we are in any position to be dismissive of any team in our division. In fact, if I was an NFL head coach and I had to schedule one game against an AFC East team, I would want it to be the Bills. They were 0-6 in the division last year and their biggest off season move was to divest itself of a pro bowler in his prime. Their second biggest move was to add the most divisive pain in the a%% WR in the league who is decidedly not in his prime. Until we prove otherwise, on the field, we will be the Rodney Dangerfield of the AFC East. We will get our chance to do that right off the bat.

...and maybe a quarterback though God knows, I hope that is not the case.

Rookies are rookies are rookies. Walker has been around for awhile now, there is plenty of film on him. His abilities are well known and no none has ever thought he should be starting on the left side. He is a vet so I don't expect him to embarass himself but I don't expect anything all that special from him either. Consider that he was serviceable at RT but its not as if he set the house on fire out there. Then you have Butler at RT and again, if he was good enough to play there why was he at guard? Again, I don't think he will embarass himself out there anymore than Walker will on the left side but it is unreasonable to expect anything approaching exceptional. He was a good guard but not exactly a pro bowler. Lastly you have a FA at center who I am pretty confident will be an upgrade from the horrible situation we have had there for several years running now. Still, he was unable to secure a starting slot with his last team and there wasn't exactly a bidding war for his services. He is a veteran with all the experience needed to play well so he will also not be an embarassment but also probably not headed for the pro bowl. These moves were not made because of exceptional ability being identified which demanded some shuffling to take advantage of that ability. These moves were made of necessity because Dockery and Fowler were disasters and we were unable to successfully resolve the Peters situation. No one was saying "damn, we got to get Butler out at Tackle, he is a killer being wasted at Guard..." or words to that effect, same with Walker. Instead, to me anyway, it was more probable that in answer to the quesiton "What the hell do we do now?" Someone said "Well, I guess we could get by if we move Langston to the left side and Butler out to the right so we can hide those young guys inside while they learn..." Hopefully it will be lemons to lemonade and the invention born of necessity will prove to be accidentally brilliant.

McCargo but maybe that really wouldn't be a surprise.

Not surprised he doesn't like it but that doesn't really matter. The fact is, he does it, a lot. Unless our offense is so poorly designed that it isn't possible to get anyone open downfield, either Lee Evans is not the player we think he is or Trent is too quick to go the check down. I don't buy that Lee can't get open solely because there has been no legit 2nd target. Lots of top WR's throughout the league face that very same problem and still manage to perform. The offensive scheme could certainly be the problem as Fairchild did nothing to distinguish himself nor has Schonert. But despite all that, it is pretty obvious that as a young guy, Trent has been overly risk averse. I think we will find out this year if that is his nature, an arm strength problem or if he just needed more experience. I certainly hope and expect that its the latter.

Why do you think there will be more "cohesion" produced by: 1. 2 of the same players, at different positions no less. 2. a lower tier FA who was unable to secure a starting position until now 3. 2 rookies Is "cohesion" more important than talent? What do you mean by cohesion? Do you mean knowing the plays? I am sorry but that just sounds like a cliche to me. They all need to know the plays and know who has who when the blitzers fly but that is the result of knowing the playbook, the scheme and making fast, accurate judgments. And even then, that just gets you in the right place, it doesn't keep you from getting beat by a better player. That takes talent and experience. We have guys who have one or the other, but not both. This could be a good line in years to come or perhaps by the second half of the year but I think it is unreasonable to expect too much out of this unit this year. Clever game planning, play calling and execution by the skill guys will have to carry this offense this year.

Because I have enough IQ points to recognize the faults, as well as the virtues, of the people and things I love. And I can do it all at the same time. I understand though that there are those who can't hold two opposing thoughts at the same time and people like you, so afflicted, have my sympathy and understanding. See, I like you even though you are an idiot. See how that works?

I honestly beleive they brought him in for one year out of sheer desperation. Besides, whether they think they are close to the playoffs or not doesn't really matter. My opinion that this is a rebuilding year isn't based on what the team hopes they will do this year. It is based on the fact that we ditched a pro bowler and are shuffling the entire line around including injecting two rookies and a lower tier FA. The O-line is the fundamental building block of a successful offense and we just pretty much threw ours into the trash can in favor of starting over from scratch. Again, it looks like a reload kind of year to me. Maybe we will get lucky with scheduling. Maybe Schobel has another good year in him. Maybe Trent will go downfield more. Maybe Lynch will stay out of jail. Maybe a whole new line full of rookies will turn in to a play off caliber offensive line instantly. You never know. If all of that happens, it could be a great year.

Still, with a record of 7-9 coupled with having brilliantly managed to divest ourselves of our only pro bowler, you'd expect some respect, *sheesh* Go 0-6 in your division and all of a sudden everyone thinks you suck. Go figure.

Oh joy, a Losman thread.

I blame it on the quarterback and the receivers. If he wasn't physically fit to play, they wouldn't have played him.

Oh well, if the announcers praised him.... The come back was the product of a great game by both running backs and over 200 yards in returns by Leodis and Roscoe. All Trent did was throw a bunch of picks and then go to checkdowns on 3rd and long for the rest of the game. Perhaps you forgot Lynch's 28 yard run setting up a first and goal from the one before Trent's "heroic" dive? Rob Johnson could have done that but if you want to credit Trent for that and not Lynch, go ahead. 180+ yards on the ground, 280 in returns including a 98 yarder for a TD and you want to credit the guy who threw 3 picks in the first four posessions. The guy who couldn't get it in to the endzone with a first and 10 at the 12. Besides, the word "comeback" is usually reserved for when you win. We lost that game. Oh, and don't forget, over a 10-quarter span, including the first quarter against Cleveland, Edwards threw eight interceptions, lost two fumbles and gave up a safety. Very JP like don't ya think?

I hope you are right but it looks to me like other teams in the division, already quite a bit better than we are if the outcome of actual games means anything to anyone, have moved forward where, at best, we have not gotten any worse. It really does look like a rebuilding year to me, perhaps one we will later look back on and see that something good was started with this draft. But for this year, I just don't see it. I have hopes for Edwards just like everyone else but I can't deny what I saw last year, quick to the checkdown and a total loss of confidence in himself in the Cleveland game the likes of which I am not sure I have ever seen from a Bills quarterback. Learning from disaster rather than being crushed by it is something every QB needs. With any luck, he will learn from that failure and emerge a better player.