Shaw66

I remember, too. Every Jets game, the first thing I wanted to know was, "Is Mosley playing?" Sports can be so cruel to individuals. When he was healthy, Mosley looked like a truly special player. Couldn't stay healthy.

I wouldn't call him a legit starter. I think if we could talk frankly, Beane would say they were satisfied with what they got in Motor and disappointed that they didn't get more from Moss.

Singletary was a legit starter. 25th, 25th, 16th, 26th in the league in rushing on a team (1) with mediocre run blocking, (2) where the QB was gaining 600+ yards a year on the ground and (3) that featured the pass once they got Diggs. The Bills may have hoped for more, but he gave what they expected to get. Moss, they missed on.

And as I said, I think they knew exactly what they were getting. They got two guys who are still in the NFL and who have produced more yards than most of the running backs drafted in their draft class. They got what they expected and I don't think it was any place close to a fireable offense.

"I would want better" doesn't sound like the same thing as "a fireable offence." Could they have done better than Motor and Moss? Sure. Much better? Probably not. Not fireable better.

I don't agree. They knew what they were getting with those guys. It's not about whether somebody was drafted 15 or 20 picks too high in the 3rd or 4th round. It's about weather they value the guys who go in the first round, and I think it's pretty clear that they don't.

That's an interesting point. I think it's probably in part attributable to McDermott's philosophy that I keep talking about. They draft or sign a lot of all-purpose guys at every position. Rousseau and Epenesa. Their wide receivers. If there are ten criteria for a position - like say for a running back, it's speed, quickness, change of direction, pass pro, route running, hands, and name a few more, the Bills want guys who score very good in all categories instead of guys who are great in three categories and average in the others. That's what they want. At some point, I think that philosophy works against them. They find themselves having to sign a Miller or a Bosa, hoping they can get some splash plays that their all-purpose guys don't give them. That's not a philosophy that gets you a standout skill position player, because with only a few exceptions, the standout skill position plays stand out in college and get drafted before the Bills pick.

I guess I agree with you about Singletary, but the mere fact that people good disagree about Devin freaking Singletary shows why it's foolish to overpay for a running back. Singletary may be close and misses the cut, but there are a lot of running backs who are better than Singletary. To use a phrase that got me in trouble when talking about receivers, good (not Hall-of-Fame good but good) running backs are a dime a dozen, not $180 million (which is a dozen running backs at $15 million apiece.)

I'm glad you guys are having fun talking about who could make that play, but that really isn't the question. The question is whether the totality of what Cook contributes could be obtained in free agency for less than Cook wants. I think the answer to that is probably yes.

This isa great question, and as someone just said, it depends on age. If you're 30, you might actually come up with a number that would leave you set for life, something that would give you financial security. On the other hand, you'd be condemning yourself to a lifetime of no Super Bowls. And actually, that number could be lower than you think, because you'd have a betting advantage in Las Vegas, knowing in advance that the Bills wouldn't win it all. You'd be 1/32 better off than all other bettors. If you're old like me and have enough money to live on for the rest of your life (well, I hope so), then the money becomes less and less important, eventually completely unimportant. I suppose I might take $20 million or more, so I could set up my kids for life, but they're doing fine right now and probably will be okay even if they don't inherit a bundle from me. Maybe if the deal is I get $10 billion, I'd take it. Then I'd buy the Bills from the Pegulas, change their name to the Buffalo Bylls and go win some Super Bowls. After all, the deal was the Bills wouldn't win, not the Bylls.

Actually, it was Gunner.

RIP Another great one from the first great Bills era. A two-time champion.

This is make or break year. Pretty much like Elam.

I'm responding to this and your earlier comments about the vet playing only if all things are equal. I agree with both comments, but I think it's important to understand what all things being equal means. In McDermott world, the best players and the guys who get to play are the guys who execute their assignments correctly play after play with very few mistakes. Being better doesn't mean simply being physically better, which is your point about Bishop last season. McDermott's defense depends on everyone executing, because each of the defenders is relying on each of his teammates to be in the right place. In the case of White, he will be" better" then Hairston if he executes the defense correctly 19 out of 20 times and Hairston executes correctly 9 out of 10 times, even though Hairston may be able to cover more ground than White. This is true because the coaches can adjust assignments for the entire defense to make up for the fact that the cornerback is slow, but there is no way to adjust the defense for random mistakes that leave a player out of position. So when you say if White and Hairston are equal, White will play because he's a veteran, that means in my mind that Hairston has to learn to play the position as flawlessly mentally as White does for him to be better than White. It doesn't matter to McDermott that Hairston can cover more ground, just like it didn't matter to McDermott that Elam had better physical attributes than some other cornerbacks on the team last year. And that, as you said, is why Bishop didn't see the field a lot last year. That's why I think Whites chances of starting are better than a lot of people give him credit for. Once White learns how the defense has evolved over the last year, his execution in terms of reading what's going on on the field and making the right decisions will be more or less flawless. That's what made him so valuable to McDermott in the first place. If he's playing and offenses are targeting him deep, than the Bills will adjust safety responsibilities and defensive calls to take care of that exposure. Yes, it weakens the defense to make those adjustments, and you'd rather not do it, but McDermott won't play a more physically able player who makes mistakes in his reads and decision making. I think Dorian Williams and Milano are another example of the same thing. My view is that Williams is a better player than Milano physically. He's got more speed now, and he attacks the ball better. However, his decision making in past protection is not as good as Milanos, and his overall execution of the defense is not as good, play after play. So Williams sits behind Milano despite his physical superiority. Part of what makes McDermott a good coach is that he is very clear to his players about this. Bishop understands today, and he understood last year at this time, that if he wants to play he needs to fit into the team concept of the defense more or less flawlessly. Understand what's happening and make the right decisions quickly or you don't play.

That is definitely not McDermott's mindset. McDermott does it the way Gunner describes, which is that he favors the vet over the rookie until the rookie shows that he can execute his assignments play after play without mistakes. Mistakes. McDermott clearly values execution excellence over raw physical talent or potential.

That's a point I've been trying to make around here for a couple of years now. My own opinion is that the Bills have had so much success in the last 5 years that it's hard for me to argue that their philosophy about how to build a team is wrong. That's not to say that there is no room for argument, because there certainly is. For example, I have said for a long time the same thing several other people say, namely, the bills need a difference maker on the defensive side of the ball and Beane's only attempt to get one, Miller, didn't work out. But with respect to running back, I think it's quite clear that the Bills philosophy is that it is not wise to spend big dollars for a difference maker at that position. And that was my point in this thread - it isn't enough to say that Cook is worth x million dollars. He may be worth that in the market, but within the Bills system he is not.

This is this is an excellent statement about the reality of the situation. It is pretty much exactly what McDermott would say himself. I would add only two things. First, the evaluation of who belongs on the team and who will need to be cut has only barely begun, and whatever it was that White showed on the field during OTAs is going to have very small impact on the final decision. The issue will be determined almost exclusively based on what he does in training, camp and preseason, not how good or how bad he looked during OTAs. Second, the evaluation will include not only what the guy shows on the field during training camp in preseason, but the impact the guy can have in the locker room and in the cornerback room. It has been very clear for several years now that McDermott places a very high value on having a senior leader within every position group, and that leader cannot lead from the practice squad. That means, I think, in White's case if he can be close to being physically good enough to make the final 53, his knowledge of how McDermott operates and his ability to be that senior leader could be enough to include him on the final 53, even though a marginally better player in terms of on-field performance might have to go to the practice squad.

I've been looking at this thread off and on. You're correct about what you're saying, and it even goes beyond that and. It isn't simply about evaluating film of the player in question, and it certainly isn't about paying for past performance. It's about how a team wants its offense to work and what kind of talent best fits that offensive philosophy. How much more poorly will the offense perform, for example, with Davis carrying the load at running back rather than Cook. And it even goes beyond that. It's also about how best to spend the limited dollars that are available. The real question is how much better will my team perform per dollar invested in any particular player. That's why quarterbacks get more dollars than other positions, because the quality of the quarterback has a bigger impact on the quality of the teams play than the quality of the running back. That's why left tackles get paid more than guards. I think in the Bills case they have made it very clear that at least relative to other teams, they think the quality of the team is best improved by spending dollars on positions other than wide receiver and running back. All of this means that discussions that view Cook in a vacuum and that look simply about how good he is and how much the Bills need to pay to keep him are more simplistic than the actual conversations that are taking place at One Bills Drive.

You don't say that Joe B went on to say this:

That's not saying much. You're so old, your life expectancy is about 38 days, so you probably only need $500 for the rest of your retirement.

I hear you, but I'm confident. AJ Klein made this team repeatedly based on nothing much more than heart. White almost certainly is closer to NFL-worthy physically than Klein. McDermott loves his veteran leaders, and he doesn't have one at corner. I'm confident, but obviously we will have to wait and see.

I have a much different view. Playing corner in McDermott's defense is all about, all about, knowing and executing the assignment. Very good physical ability, let alone exceptional ability, is a plus but not essential. That's why Levi Wallace could start in Buffalo, and why a player like Dane Jackson can survive on this roster. When he gets on the field, McDermott knows that Jackson will execute every play as well as he possibly can, play after play. White thrived in Buffalo because he understood and execute the defense flawlessly, and he had first-round physical ability. If he's lost a step, he's Levi Wallace, and McDermott will be happy to him on the field, because he will help anchor the defensive backfield. I don't think he's taking a spot from either Hairston or Benford, but I think he's nearly a lock for the final 53. He's almost certainly taking Jackson's spot.

Well, that's interesting, but I don't think it's correct, for a couple of reasons. First, of the 90 guys on the roster, probably 40 of them were either drafted by the Bills or were undrafted free agents who've never been on other teams. So that means that if your 10% is correct (probably about right), there should be four or five ex-Panthers, not nine. In the early years of McBeane, I'd guess that there were more than that. I didn't mind - there's a real benefit to having guys who are familiar with what you're doing. In those years, I think the Bills had more than four or five. Lately, however, I think you're correct. The joke continues, but the Bills aren't picking up every guy the Panthers let go, not by a long shot. Makes sense. Thompson is one of the few guys left who were with the Panthers when McBeane were there.

Broken leg isn't an issue. Achilles is always iffy, but that can be full recovery.

Of course, it will depend on how well he comes back from the Achilles tear, but he was a first round pick and apparently a talented guy. Sounds like he brought more to the table than Klein ever had.