Dan

I agree with exactly what you're saying. But... if you see something that's wrong and you disagree with it, do you do it too just because everyone else is doing it? Or do you take the high road and lead by example? I try to do the right thing regardless of what every one else is doing, and I'm glad Marv is running the team by doing the right thing and treating players as people rather than just as commodities to be traded, bought, and sold. I know it's not the best business sense. I know it often puts the team (and myself) at a disadvantage. We lose players like Nate with no compensation. But, I can sleep better making bad business decisions albeit good personal moral choices. Maybe Marv thinks similarly. And maybe one day the good karma will turn around and shine on our team.

Rosesnpimp knows exactly what he's doing. Imagine the pay raise Willis gets if he stay in Buffalo for 1 more year, shuts up, learns the playbook, and runs for 1500yds - then hits the open market.

I've gotta say I don't completely nuy into this whole notion that the Bills won't extend a player at some high salary. I guess we'll see in upcoming years with JP, Evans, Peters, etc. But, the Bills could have re-signed Nate if they wanted. They've pretty much spent that much money already. The question is do you spend all that on 1 player when you need 6 (or more)? In a few years, that may change and we won;t have holes all over the place. Therefore we can spend huge bucks and re-sign 1 or 2 players. But, to say "we can't/didn't re-sign Nate because its too much" is not telling the whole story, IMO. It would be more accurate to add "when we have so many other needs" to the end of that.

exactly

If you're playing for 2008, you don't spend roughly $75 mill on veteran linemen. You draft guys and let them develop for a year.

I understand what you're saying. But, look at the monies invovled. Marv had a choice: spend money and attempt to upgrade the O-line or spend money and resign Nate and London. I think we can all agree that we couldn't do both. So, Marv chose to address the O-line. Was that the wrong decision? We'll get an idea of that after the draft and we see all the moves. But, we won't know for certain until sometime next season. For myself, I like the moves. Neither Nate nor London did much of anything to stop the run last season. So why not change those two position up? And we certainly needed an upgrade on the line. Like Marv's choices or not, one thing is clear. They targeted 2 guys and got those 2 guys. So, now we'll see if they were right.

So without Clements our defense is worthless? I know he was a good CB, but the defense doesn't begin and end with Clements. I think what people are saying is that its better to have a great offensive line, than a single great CB.

Excellent correction. Thank you sir.

Couldn't we word this another way and still be somewhat accurate in the spin... One was an aging LB on one of the worst run defenses in the league in 2006.

So you're saying we need a LB, right?

Now, you've really lost me. Where do we find the answers if not in FA or the draft? Space Aliens? Clearly I'm being fecetious, but really what do you suggest if we don't have players on the team good enough, we can't sign FAs that are good enough, and we can't draft players that are good enough?

Very much agree with that statement. It's not like he sucked either. I wonder why he's not re-signed already? Perhaps he thinks he can take advantage of the free money as well? I can easily see us getting a later round CB, but if Thomas or not FA signing comes in, it could be much higher in the draft than I've been thinking.

I thought about that and wondered what he would have to say abot this. But my guess is that he's reasonable enough to see those numbers and realize, Nate just couldn't fit into our plan like that.

Yeah, I see your point. I wasn't thinking about that. I was thinking more just in terms of talent. Not so much numbers. I'm still hoping we sign K. Thomas back as well. So that would help a little with numbers as well.

I'm not sure I'd say that. I think too many people are cutting Youbouty short. They drafted him last year for a reason. Just because we, as fans, see him as a big unkown (and therefore tend to discount him); I'm not sure the coaches see him that way. I guess time will tell and I may eventually change my mind here. Although I think CB is an area of interest, I would rate our biggest need right now as LB. I know many think DL and I could make a strong arguement for that as well. I think the braintrust see Triplet, McCargo, and Williams and say we have something there. Not that it can't use some more talent mind you. But, in comparison to LB (especially if TKO is on his way out) I'd say the DL is marginally better. Now, if Willis is traded; I might change my mind and call RB our biggest need. I mean who do we have after Willis? A whole lotta nothin.

I knew I liked you and your posts. Excellent post! Finally, the line has been given some proper attention. Regardless of how it turns out, at least Marv has tried.

No... you've missed it. Now that Ralph actually spent some money, they're on the "Ralph wasted his money on bad players" horse. See either way they come out bitchin. No FAs signed today... Ralph is cheap. FAs signed... no problem, what a wast of money on those no bodies that I haven't heard of. See the perfect circularity of thought.

I completely agree. And as Dibs said a post earlier, we just signed one of the 3 best FA guards. What more do people want? All this talk about Reyes, the one thing that some people are forgetting is... what did that bad decision cost us? Not a whole lot. So, in the end, it wasn't that bad of a decision at all. It was a shot, that's all. Now Walker and Dockery could be big mistakes, given the amount of money they appear to be getting. But, for anyone to come up now and say they're undoubtedly big mistakes is just BS. Dockery by all accounts appears to be a solid player that the Redskins wanted to keep. We just paid him more and got the guy we wanted. Walker is a little more of a question mark for me, but until I see him fail in Buffalo, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he'll at least be a little better than CV. Some people just can't be happy. There's little doubt that we just seriously upgraded the talent on our O-line today - even the "experts" on ESPN, NFL Network, and Sirius recognize this fact. Yet, some people would rather find fault. It's actually a fairly pathetic attempt to garner attention, IMO.

Total Access reported he's been talking to Seatle all day.

It was. I posted that just before I saw Nate's numbers. And I was thinking $49mill would have been alot for Nate! Man am I glad Marv has more sense than to pay that much to one CB.

When I see that, I'm quitting my job. Because the end of the world as we see it is surely not far behind!

Seriously!?! That's outrageous! No way you can fault Marv or Ralph?

Thanks PtP. It's good to see you take the high road. I've tried to make this point the last few days... do you give a CB the 7yr/49mill deal or do you give that money to a quality Olineman? Thankfully, we have a GM that knows what this team needs. I hate seeing Nate leave, but given our needs, it really is pretty obvious that it had to happen,

It seems several people owe Marv an apology for their posting over the last few days. And while you're at it, throw some thanks to cheap ole Ralph for spending top money on a top OG. I'll look forward to reading the apologies.

I'm not gonna complain about any attempt to bring in offensive linemen. The more the better.