Dan

I think you give Marv and Co. as long as it takes. I agree you don't want to get into the routine of tearing apart and starting over every few years. But, but, you have to see something - some sort of improvement. The problem with TD and Co. was that we weren't seeing anything. In fact, I would say it was kind of like smoke and mirrors. Everything looked ok and seemed good. But last season the wheels really fell off the wagon. And suddenly, a team that looked ok was a team in complete disarray. Now take Cowart and the Steelers for example. Cowart has been there for quite a while and they're not always in the Championship game. However, they always show something. They're a good competitive team each year. So although they may not be in the Superbowl, you don't dimantle it and try something new. They stuck with it, and eventually it paid off. So that's what I say. You stick with Marv as long as he's fielding good teams and we look competitve. Playoffs and Superbowls shouldn't be the final measure of success. Having a good team that plays well and palys competitively week in and out, should be the measure. If you do that, the playoffs will come. And if you really get lucky so will the Superbowl. Would you fire Dungy and everyone in Indy because they can't get to the Superbowl? I'd hope if the Bills ever got to the point Indy is now, that wouldn't even be thought of.

What is this insight based upon?

What's it say when the punter has more votes than the running back.

Given that everyone seemed to think that last year we were headed for the playoffs. And then we sucked. Now, it seems most think we'll suck. So, I'm suddenly feelign better about hittin 8-8 next year.

I like sleeping in on Sunday. So East Coast works great! I was on the West coast for a Sunday last fall... damned if I didn't miss most of the 1st quarter. 10am is way too early for me. How do you even see any of the pregame?

If signing players like TO means we're trying to win now. I'd vote every day to be a loser. I'd find it very hard to root for a team like Dallas. Sure they may win, but sometimes you have to wiegh the cost of winning against the cost of being a winner.

Therein lies the problem. Too many people thought we were a playoff team last year. Too many thought JP wouldn't experience rookie-itis. Too many people think it only takes one player to make the team. For those of us, like myself, that knew we weren't going to the playoffs last year; that know we're not going to the playoffs this year; this offseason is little easier. We realize that it takes more than one big name free agent to build a team. So we're willing to take a more "wait and see" approach to Marv and Co. So has this been a great off season.. I'll tell you in November or December. Has this been a bust offseason? Absolutely not. We got rid of MM and co. That in itself is a step forward.

And this completely sums up my point of view this off season. For a variety of reasons, our current players haven't gotten the job done. Like it or not, the Bills are known more for losing than for winning. We need to change that, and getting new players may just be the best way. I appreciate all the greatness Eric and others have gave us over the years. But its not working. We need a change. Will we be in the playoffs next year? Who cares. I just want us to turn around this losing mentality. First things first.

I can't even read all this, nor should I. Anyone advocating this trade just spent all their credibility. We give our top receiver and 2 picks. They give their top receiver and 1 pick. Let me simplify the math 3=2. How is that something anyone other than a Packer fan would like?!? Unless you argue that Walker is twice as good as Moulds, which we know that's not that case, this is complete bunk. Maybe, maybe you consider it if we give up 1 pick and they give up 2. Then we could entertain the thought of whether or not we want Walker.

I think the negativity stems more out of frustration than anything else. Trust me, if we win the first 2 games the entire mood of the board will change. Of course, you'll still have a few idiots saying its only 2 games, they were bad opponents, or something like that. But I guess that's how it always goes. It really seems to be worse this offseason than in the past. I'm not sure why. But believe me this is perhaps the most knowledgeable boards out there, you just have to weed through the crap. I've been coming for years, trust me you'll come to enjoy it. Just wait till the season starts!

Exactly. Trade 2 of our guys (Moulds and a draft pick) for one of theirs, That makes no sense to me. Moulds may be alot of things but he's definitely got at least 1 or 2 really good years left. Whoever gets him get s a proven commodity. What do we get a crap shoot draft pick. I go to the table and say we want their first 2 picks and that DT guy. see what they say to that.

This is perhaps the best thread I've read in quite some time. Thank you. I agree "fielding a team we're proud of" is likely all we're heading for next season. However, I'll take that any day over a team full of TOs. In my opinion, the best thing about the Levy led Bills of the 90s - they were a team Icould be proud of. Despite the wins and losses. I liked the players, I liked the coaches. And I'll settle for that again.... for now.

True. excellent point about Polian. But maybe its just because he has that bum Dungy. If only he could hire Jimmy Johnson as his coach then he'd win the superbowl for like 20 years in a row.

OK. just to show how bored I am (as well as how tired I am of idiots bashing Marv). I took those stats and deleted everyone's 4 best years. Here's a summary of what you get (details below): Parcells | Adj TTL | 112 110 1 | 4 5 |**** win % 0.50 (0.444-playoffs) Gibbs | Adj TTL | 93 67 0 | 5 5 |**** win % 0.58 (0.50-playoffs) Levy | Adj TTL | 94 97 0 | 2 4 |**** win % 0.49 (0.33-playoffs) Belicheck | Adj TTL | 49 63 0 | 1 1 |**** win % 0.43 (0.50-playoffs) Noll | Adj TTL | 145 137 0 | 4 6 |**** win % 0.51 (0.40-playoffs) Johnson | Adj TTL | 34 46 0 | 1 2 |**** win % 0.43 (0.33-playoffs) You can't say.."but they won the Superbowl", because if you take out everyone's 4 best years; there's no Superbowl teams in the mix. So just based on win/loss percentage, Levy would rank 4th on that list (only marginally behind the great Parcells). Although, if we really wanted to be fair we should add Shula, Lombardi, Landry and a few others to this mix (but I'm not that bored). Bottom line, if you take out the best years of their career, Johnson and Belicheck aren't evenin the same league as Levy. So, I'd suspend any further discussion of them in the same breath as Levy. Also, another not too surprising conclusion, if you delete the 4 best years of anyone's coaching career, all but Gibbs seem pretty darn ordinary. So what does this tell you, you shouldn't manipulate numbers just to prove a point. And a person's career is more than just the sum of a bunch of numbers. But, even if you do add the numbers, Levy still stands with the best coaches of the game. ======================================================= Parcells | Year TM | W L T | W L | +----------+--------------+----------+ | 1983 nyg | 3 12 1 | 0 0 | | 1984 nyg | 9 7 0 | 1 1 | | 1985 nyg | 10 6 0 | 1 1 | | 1986 nyg | 14 2 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1987 nyg | 6 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1988 nyg | 10 6 0 | 0 0 | | 1989 nyg | 12 4 0 | 0 1 |**** | 1990 nyg | 13 3 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1993 nwe | 5 11 0 | 0 0 | | 1994 nwe | 10 6 0 | 0 1 | | 1995 nwe | 6 10 0 | 0 0 | | 1996 nwe | 11 5 0 | 2 1 | | 1997 nyj | 9 7 0 | 0 0 | | 1998 nyj | 12 4 0 | 1 1 |**** | 1999 nyj | 8 8 0 | 0 0 | | 2003 dal | 10 6 0 | 0 1 | | 2004 dal | 6 10 0 | 0 0 | | 2005 dal | 9 7 0 | 0 0 | +----------+--------------+----------+ | TOTALS | 163 123 1 | 11 7 | | Adj TTL | 112 110 1 | 4 5 |**** win % 0.50 (0.444-playoffs) Gibbs | Year TM | W L T | W L | +----------+--------------+----------+ | 1981 was | 8 8 0 | 0 0 | | 1982 was | 8 1 0 | 4 0 |**** | 1983 was | 14 2 0 | 2 1 |**** | 1984 was | 11 5 0 | 0 1 | | 1985 was | 10 6 0 | 0 0 | | 1986 was | 12 4 0 | 2 1 | | 1987 was | 11 4 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1988 was | 7 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1989 was | 10 6 0 | 0 0 | | 1990 was | 10 6 0 | 1 1 | | 1991 was | 14 2 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1992 was | 9 7 0 | 1 1 | | 2004 was | 6 10 0 | 0 0 | | 2005 was | 10 6 0 | 1 1 | +----------+--------------+----------+ | TOTALS | 140 76 0 | 17 6 | | Adj TTL | 93 67 0 | 5 5 |**** win % 0.58 (0.50-playoffs) Levy | Year TM | W L T | W L | +----------+--------------+----------+ | 1978 kan | 4 12 0 | 0 0 | | 1979 kan | 7 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1980 kan | 8 8 0 | 0 0 | | 1981 kan | 9 7 0 | 0 0 | | 1982 kan | 3 6 0 | 0 0 | | 1986 buf | 2 5 0 | 0 0 | | 1987 buf | 7 8 0 | 0 0 | | 1988 buf | 12 4 0 | 1 1 | | 1989 buf | 9 7 0 | 0 1 | | 1990 buf | 13 3 0 | 2 1 |**** | 1991 buf | 13 3 0 | 2 1 |**** | 1992 buf | 11 5 0 | 3 1 |**** | 1993 buf | 12 4 0 | 2 1 |**** | 1994 buf | 7 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1995 buf | 10 6 0 | 1 1 | | 1996 buf | 10 6 0 | 0 1 | | 1997 buf | 6 10 0 | 0 0 | +----------+--------------+----------+ | TOTALS | 143 112 0 | 11 8 | | Adj TTL | 94 97 0 | 2 4 |**** win % 0.49 (0.33-playoffs) Belicheck | Year TM | W L T | W L | +----------+--------------+----------+ | 1991 cle | 6 10 0 | 0 0 | | 1992 cle | 7 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1993 cle | 7 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1994 cle | 11 5 0 | 1 1 |**** | 1995 cle | 5 11 0 | 0 0 | | 2000 nwe | 5 11 0 | 0 0 | | 2001 nwe | 11 5 0 | 3 0 |**** | 2002 nwe | 9 7 0 | 0 0 | | 2003 nwe | 14 2 0 | 3 0 |**** | 2004 nwe | 14 2 0 | 3 0 |**** | 2005 nwe | 10 6 0 | 1 1 | +----------+--------------+----------+ | TOTALS | 99 77 0 | 11 2 | | Adj TTL | 49 63 0 | 1 1 |**** win % 0.43 (0.50-playoffs) Noll | Year TM | W L T | W L | +----------+--------------+----------+ | 1969 pit | 1 13 0 | 0 0 | | 1970 pit | 5 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1971 pit | 6 8 0 | 0 0 | | 1972 pit | 11 3 0 | 1 1 | | 1973 pit | 10 4 0 | 0 1 | | 1974 pit | 10 3 1 | 3 0 |**** | 1975 pit | 12 2 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1976 pit | 10 4 0 | 1 1 | | 1977 pit | 9 5 0 | 0 1 | | 1978 pit | 14 2 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1979 pit | 12 4 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1980 pit | 9 7 0 | 0 0 | | 1981 pit | 8 8 0 | 0 0 | | 1982 pit | 6 3 0 | 0 1 | | 1983 pit | 10 6 0 | 0 1 | | 1984 pit | 9 7 0 | 1 1 | | 1985 pit | 7 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1986 pit | 6 10 0 | 0 0 | | 1987 pit | 8 7 0 | 0 0 | | 1988 pit | 5 11 0 | 0 0 | | 1989 pit | 9 7 0 | 1 1 | | 1990 pit | 9 7 0 | 0 0 | | 1991 pit | 7 9 0 | 0 0 | +----------+--------------+----------+ | TOTALS | 193 148 1 | 16 8 | | Adj TTL | 145 137 0 | 4 6 |**** win % 0.51 (0.40-playoffs) Johnson | Year TM | W L T | W L | +----------+--------------+----------+ | 1989 dal | 1 15 0 | 0 0 | | 1990 dal | 7 9 0 | 0 0 | | 1991 dal | 11 5 0 | 1 1 |**** | 1992 dal | 13 3 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1993 dal | 12 4 0 | 3 0 |**** | 1996 mia | 8 8 0 | 0 0 | | 1997 mia | 9 7 0 | 0 1 | | 1998 mia | 10 6 0 | 1 1 |**** | 1999 mia | 9 7 0 | 1 1 | +----------+--------------+----------+ | TOTALS | 80 64 0 | 9 4 | | Adj TTL | 34 46 0 | 1 2 |**** win % 0.43 (0.33-playoffs)

All I want is a great lineman. If we can trade down and still get the best one on the list then great. But keep the eye on the ball, improve the lines.

To even suggest Marv can't coach, is to not have any clue whatsoever. To simply throw out 4 years of his coaching career as though they were trivial moments in his career and use that as any reference to his ability is absolute absurdity. Why not throw out all the other HOF caoches 4 best years and then compare, at least that would be a veiled attempt at reasonability? But, that's not the point is it. The point is exactly what has been suggested, just inane attempts to get a rise and create a little controversy; an attempt to creat a post and watch that post be responded to in any way somehow justifies a simple existence.

Exactly. Apparently Marv can do nothing right. If he goes after released players, then he's signing scrubs. If he goes after RFAs then he's wasting his time because his offer will just be matched. So what should he do? Double the contracts he's offering to get these guys to sign? It's called business. You win some, you lose some. But you have a plan, you implement that plan, you modify that plan, you move forward. But you certainly don't quit playying just because someone out bid you.

I'm reluctant to reply to such drivel, but its Sunday morning and I'm bored so what the heck. Exactly what should Marv and company be doing? I see all this complaining, but little in the way of reality. Should we sign Wells with a 10mill signing bonus? I bet AZ wouldn't match that. Should we have went all out and signed Drew Breeze? Sure, spend all our money and get a qb who may or may not recover from surgery, only to have him play behind the same crap line that's gotten every qb here in the last several years creamed. And now because we spent all our cap on a qb and 1 lineman, it won't get better. I imagine the people posting that we should be doing more are the ones that go all in if they have a queen, king draw when they play poker. No patience, no understanding of what it takes to win, and no idea of how to really build something with longevity. That's all I'm seeing here. Oh yeah and I forgot... what have everyone else in our division done that's so great? Because at this point, I can't see it. Sure they've made moves, but so have we. Its all a wash until games are played.

Thanks for the clarity.

... do we conclude that they'll be on the team come fall? In other words, if we sign someone today, can we still cut them this summer with no cap hit? Does that happen very often?

Moulds was a liability by the end of last season with his apparent attitude. It appears, if you believe all the "reports", that he still has an attitude problem. Therefore, he should be gone regardless of the money or compensation.

Yes but they knew they had Edge in the wings. So, my question is simple. Do they have someone in the wings now? Without the threat of a running back that can catch out of the backfield where is their offense?

I'm not so sure about Adams. However, Campbell and Reed never did anything to warrant being retained even as long as they were, let alone another year. So even trade or not, I'm all for dumping those guys.

My visions aren't as clear.... i do see Moulds eating breakfast tomorrow or possibly Tuesday. And I see lots of water, lots of water. I sense that water will be important somehow.

That's ok. My comment was more in general, to a line that I've heard repeated for years. I agree this is definitely not a place for politics and definitely something I would never talk about here. I certainly would not have debated the point. It was really just a brief point in passing. It is nice to see that I'm not the only person alive that doesn't buy into it.