Typical TBD Guy

Nice avatar! Right off the bat, I like: Kalimba Edwards, DE, Lions Adam Archuleta, SS, Rams Ryan Picket, DT, Rams Each fills a need, would be familiar to our new coaching staff, has great talent, will fit in our cover 2 system, and won't be TOO expensive. I'm also pleased to see several good free agent centers out there. So at least it shouldn't become a Bentley or bust kind of offseason!

Bill strikes me as the kind of fan who doesn't take too kindly to players who disrespect women (Henry banging 15 yr old at gas station, Moulds slapping around gf and going to strip clubs)....especially if their current production can't dwarf these character flaws. This is commendable, but a bit unrealistic in today's NFL. Having said that, Bill happens to be 100% dead-on with his assesment of Moulds (in my opinion). For the past 8 years, we've defined Eric's "leadership" by his stats and eventually his Buffalo Bill seniority. But being a team leader takes more than simply being good or simply being around a long time. How about motivating players around him to be better? How about organizing team get-togethers to build chemistry (I know, sounds cheesy, but guys like Jim Kelly have talked about this as being really important)? How about sacrificing one's individual stats/personal glory for the benefit of the rest of the offense? How about encouraging rookies (JP) instead of backstabbing them and talking bad about them to the media? When you look at how the rest of the offense has performed since Moulds became a starter in 1997, you have to wonder if tying up all this money into one "megastar" WR at the expense of the OL is such a smart plan. Maybe if we had a megastar QB to compliment Moulds, but JP will need a couple more years - if ever - before he can become that. The fact is that Moulds either doesn't want to play in Buffalo anymore, or he's not interested in winning over making money. Because if he wanted to win in Buffalo - over all else - he would take the paycut and demand that this paycut go right to the OL (a la Elway). Actions speak much louder than words, my friends. Especially words from an agent. Finally, I ask all of you to look at this and notice the gradual drop in yds/catch since 1997. Some football experts have defined this stat to be THE most important measure of a WR's offensive impact.

I mostly agree with Mr. Coli's opinion on this topic. But having said that, the Bush-Hitler comparison is a ridiculously trivial and overplayed political hyperbole, and I don't think any rational educational debate can come from it. How about comparing Bush to Teddy Roosevelt? Or Bush to Lincoln? Or Bush to Monroe? Or Bush to Andrew Jackson? Each of these (more accurate) comparisons would be more likely to stir up educational discourse and less likely to incite political grandstanding. Also, this teacher would have been wise to make sure - by the end of the day - that the students knew how Bush is MUCH more different from Hitler than he is similar, i.e. talking about how: A. Hitler assumed dictatorial power; Bush was re-elected by a democratic process. B. Hitler made mass murder a deliberate policy; Bush's "mass murders" have largely been eye-for-eye attacks on terrorists and collateral damage. C. Hitler believed certain races and minorities don't deserve to live; Bush believes certain convicted murderers shouldn't live (and believes all zygotes should!) D. Hitler's army aimed to take over countries for the good of its own (Germany); Bush's army aims to take over countries for its own good (USA), for the good of those countries being invaded, and also for the rest of the world in terms of stability. E. Hitler hated religion; Bush likes it. F. Hitler invaded countries without warning; Bush invades countries with PLENTY of warning ("with us or against us" speech, Axis of Evil speech, tolerance of repeated UN sanction violations, etc...) G. You all get the !@#$ing idea. But he didn't. Bottom line: Independent thinking in the classroom is good, political rants aren't, and this guy was doing too much of the latter and too little of the former.

That's exactly what I've been thinking for the past 2 days. Neither are capable NFL starters, and neither are worth the cap money as backups. So why the hold-up? On the chopping block, we still have: 1. Moulds 2. Posey 3. Anderson With the money saved from these 3, we could add 2 very solid linemen along with a respectable replacement for Eric. Git. Er. Done!

Washington and Ngata on the same line?!

Hell yeah that's a lot! How will Moulds ever feed his family with only $9 million a year?! Them kids gotta eat, man!

If we keep Moulds, I don't think we'll have enough money to fix both lines plus pay for Clements. And outside of the 1st round, it gets much harder to find instant starters along the lines - which is what we need. Maybe a starting G or C can be found outside round 1, but its REALLY hard to find a starting LT or DE or DT outside round 1. Now if we cut Moulds...and if both Ngata and Da Brick are gone at #8, I, uh, er, SUPPOSE I could support drafting Davis...but if so, we better go all out in free agency - LeCharles Bentley, Darren Howard, the works!

The Wonderlic is a crude measure of how fast one processes information. But the problem with applying this test to football is that, like in any "subject," some people may be faster at processing certain types of information over others. So for example: Wire may be great at dealing with words and numbers and general knowledge - so he does well on the SAT's, Wonderlic, etc... But put the guy out in the secondary, and he can't process information (routes, formations, football X's and O's stuff) worth sh--. Jason Peters is a good example of the opposite. !@#$ing dumb as a rock in the classroom, but already he's picking up a new football position (and an allegedly very cognitive one at that...OL's, along with QB's, tend to have the highest Wonderlics) and just forced a #4 overall pick out of town. Go figure...

Um, it's called "punk rock." To each his own. I personally think bands like the Beatles suck major balls, and I cringe every time I hear their lame-ass, overplayed music. HOWEVER, that being said, I can still acknowledge that the Beatles are one of the greatest rock bands ever - most likely THE greatest. Too bad you can't do the same...what a shame.

If this is the best essay on drugs you have ever read, then you need to be reading more. A lot of guys at the Cato Institute have written more extensively on legalizing drugs in America. FYI, Gore Vidal is a !@#$ing loon: scroll to bottom, read his views on 9/11

Huh? Before you were arguing that keeping Price was critical to maintaining steady progress in 2003. And now, you're acknowledging that the 2002 offense tapered off because the OL sucked. So how were we ever going to keep Price (at market value circa March 2003) AND fix the OL at the same time AND keep Bledsoe, whom you speak so highly of? Plus, there's the tiny issue of the 2002 defense that needed fixing...all of this within the restrictions of a salary cap. In case you're not keeping track, my opinion is that the right player personnel solution in March 2003 was to: A. Dump Bledsoe B. Let Price go like we did. C. Fix the OL D. Fix the defense mostly to the extent that we did in 2003. PS: I'm not a Holcomb fan either, so I don't know where that attack came from...

Citing the 31-49 record is not "throwing that number around" when you're referring to the GM, the man who ultimately assembles the roster and head coaching staff that produces such a record. I'm not sure what to make of your random Bledsoe attack. All I can say is that, looking back on the 2003 and 2004 seasons, I would place greatest blame for those 2 disasters in this order: 1. TD 2tie. Drew 2tie. OL 4. Coaching staff

This is an absurd statement. That 2002 offense sucked in the second half of the season after NE exposed Drew's O in Week 9. Why does everyone always forget that? Keeping Price would not have helped much. In fact, it would have made us worse because keeping him would have meant not getting the D help that we got in 2003. This team took a step backward in 2003 because: A. The offensive line was not addressed in the previous offseason. B. Kevin Killdrive was calling the plays. C. Drew Bledsoe was Drew Bledsoe. To the original poster, aside from the obvious answer of TD or of either of his head coach choices, I'd say that Mike Williams was the biggest reason for our team's failures. A #4 overall choice always has big expectations to live up to, but as a lineman protecting our so-called "franchise QB's," it was bigger. Plus, the drafting of MW might have influenced TD into thinking that the OL didn't need much more help in future draft years.

You are correct. No one should judge TD on the MW pick alone. He should be judged on this: 5 seasons, 31-49 record, 0 playoff appearances, 4th worst team in the NFL over this timespan (ahead of Lions, Cards, and Texans). Whether or not us Bills fans have become "whiny bitches," TD was fired because he sucked at what he did.

Yeah...so I'm clearly getting worked in this thread over that final sentence . Now that all football credibility has been lost, I will go hibernate for a while. See you all around September!

I wasn't misleading. My goal was to show everyone how little respect the Bills have been giving the offensive line IN THE DRAFT only, and I feel I did that. If you'd rather I compare Buffalo's current starting OL with the Super Bowlers (drafted PLUS free agents), we can do that now. Looking over them, we see Gandy (3rd round) as the lone first day draft pick (MW is a backup LG, currently). So Pitt has 5/5, Seattle no less than 3/5, and the Bills 1/5. Make of this as you will; my interpretation is more of the same.... If you want to continue believing in the Belichick/NE model for OL success, be my guest. There is certainly no single correct formula for building an OL, let alone an entire football team. Other teams like the Broncos have had similar success building an OL mostly with day 2 picks and UDFA's. But my opinion is more of a "been there, tried that, let's try something else" mentality with our line. I bet most of this board feels the same way as I do. TD tried to emulate the Pats model in his last 3 years, and he failed miserably. Butler ignored the OL for most of his time here too, and his offenses had similar failures.

You are correct. It's been edited.

Well in my defense, it's fair to say that Big Ben wasn't a Big reason for that team's success, right? I think the rest of the Pittsburgh offense (OL???) and the defense had a much bigger impact than did the rest of the Cowboys teams that helped Aikman.

Good thread! You may also be interested in this info: Offensive linemen the Bills have drafted in the first day (the first 3 rounds) since 1995: 1995, Ruben Brown, G, 1st round, 14th overall 1998, Robert Hicks, T, 3rd round, 68th overall 2001 Jonas Jennings, T, 3rd round, 95th overall 2002 Mike Williams, T, 1st round, 4th overall And this: Buffalo's first day draft picks devoted to QB's since 1995: 1995, 2nd round, Todd Collins 1997, 3rd round, Billy Joe Hobert trade 1998, 1st round, Rob Johnson trade 2003, 1st round, Drew Bledsoe trade 2004, 2nd round, JP Losman trade 2005, 1st round, JP Losman trade So in the past 11 drafts, the Bills have devoted 6 first day picks on 1 position and 4 first day picks on 5 positions. Perhaps not coincidentally, 1995 was the last year that the Bills won their division and also won a playoff game . My conclusions based solely on the data from our two posts? 1. Don't be afraid to draft interior linemen in the first round. 2. STFU about 1st round QB's already - have any even won a Super Bowl since Aikman?

I agree with everything you said here. Campbell isn't nearly as bad as people make him out to be. He'll never be a big-play guy, but he can put up Riemersma numbers if we actually had him run more pass routes. Everett and Euhus are still too young, but if all "The U" hype is true, Everett could be the real deal for us. About Peters: I always thought he'd make an excellent TE/H-back, but I trust the coaches know better. And if you can find a guy who could be great at LT, you put him there instead of TE/H-back. End of story. Regarding the FB position: having a FB in its pure sense (not the H-back) is a waste of a roster spot (my opinion only). Just use a 3rd WR/2nd TE/2nd RB as your 11th man. More offensive bang for the buck and less predictable play calling! Cut Shelton, save almost a million, and move on!

Incorrect response. You were supposed to make a degrading remark about how you'd like to put this young woman into compromising sexual positions. Your failure to do so has now raised questions about your masculinity.

At the undergraduate level, the academic programs may be more or less the same, but the caliber of students IN these programs is way different. So Ivy professors will tend to move faster through course material, consequently cover a bit more, and also expect higher levels of work quality than an average university professor would. Rich or poor, your typical 3.0 GPA Harvard undergrad is normally - for an equivalent major - at a MUCH higher level of intellect than your 3.0 GPA undergrad from your run-of-the-mill state university. Whether or not you think I'm taking an Ivy elitist position here is irrelevant because employers and grad schools alike happen to have the same position as mine on this matter. Furthermore, the Ivies have ridiculously large enough financial endowments that they can accept ANY undergrad student they really want from ANY financial background. With the exception of Brown (and they're changing this policy starting next year), all the Ivies offer "need-blind admissions," meaning that they review your application independent of the financial background papers you fill. A poor or middle class applicant who wants to go to an Ivy - and is qualified - and gets accepted - will be given some combination of financial aid to ensure their attendance (private university grants, federal grants like Pell, student loans to a limit of 20K or so, and parent loans also to some limit).

Yeah, Levy was definitely not rich and well-connected when Harvard accepted him. I don't know much about Jauron's background, though I do know that he attended a prep school in Massachusetts. FYI: you may be interested in knowing that your "lower" Ivy is kicking the crap out of the others here, while holding its own here.

Eloquent? Precise? Modicum? Them those fancy words you Ivy Leaguers use? They don't teach us them over at Dumb!@#$ U.

Maybe I disagree with you (and The Dean) in the sense that I think the best and brightest American minds DO tend to come from the Ivies and the other top schools. Statistically speaking, they do. Fewer than 1% of all American adults will have ever had the academic qualification necessary to get into an Ivy, and about 5-10% tops could make it through the easiest Ivy program if accepted - even history BA at Harvard! So if you're not among the top 10% intellects in the country, maybe an Ivy degree would seem impressive (unless you're a top 10% intellect at a "lesser" school for whatever personal reason - financial or other). Hey, if your son or daughter got accepted to one of these programs, wouldn't you be proud? Certainly you wouldn't "yawn" at such an accomplishment early in his/her life, right? Your perception of the Ivies as a sort of "rich boy network" also seems outdated. Undergrad acceptances at Ivies moved from social status-based to merit-based decades ago. Many still happen to be rich, but that's because there's still a strong correlation with wealth and aptitude, i.e. doctors and lawyers tend to have and raise smart children who can pump out the high school GPA's and SAT scores needed for Ivy admittance. Finally, I don't think liberal arts degrees are anything to laugh at, especially at the top schools. I'm sure there are some burn-outs who do nothing but drink, bang hot chicks, and take communications courses after getting accepted into an Ivy. But the vast majority probably continue to remain pretty serious about whatever their academic interests become - history or the like. A typical Harvard-qualified liberal arts major isn't the same personality as a typical Dumb!@#$ U. liberal arts major - just a guess. However, I DO completely agree with you in the sense that those who constantly look up to or - even worse - brag about these degrees are pathetic human beings. A Cornell engineer, for example, would be wise to STFU if he's constantly screwing up at your engineering firm while you, SDS, with your questionable academic pedigree ( ) are doing laps around the other employees. Back to the original subject, no I don't think there's an Ivy League conspiracy at OBD. Jauron probably would have gotten the job even if he graduated from Dumb!@#$ U. Levy wanted a smart, competent leader for the job. Levy saw a smart, competent leader in Jauron. And yes, there are smart, competent leaders who come out of Dumb!@#$ U....though percentage-wise, there are undoubtedly less of them than at Harvard or Yale. WOW! OK, rant over.