Mikie2times

I agree with how we should spend the Picks, and wanted to add a day 1 Mock to the orginal post anyway so hear it goes. Day 1 #1A- DT Haloti Ngata- Oregon #1B- LT Marcus McNeill- Auburn #2- FS Nate Sally- Ohio State #3A- G Mark Setterstrom- Minnesota #3B- OLB/SS- Terna Nande- Miami (Ohio)

I think he will be but I still don't see Posey going anywhere next season. To many question marks surround TKO's comeback, and Posey remains serviceable, and somebody we might need if TKO can't return to the player he was.

That was the point I was trying to convey in the original post. Of course I don't want to see Moulds leave, but his cap hit is unmanageable. JP looks like the future and thankfully for us JP's chemistry with Evans is outstanding. In many of the moves I projected the purpose was creating cap space for 2006 and 2007, and getting younger as a team.

Crowell was a beast today, and has really started to develop into a fine OLB. I decided to compare Angelo's stat line to that of TKO's 2004 pro bowl campaign; I think it will really surprise some to see the results. Projecting Crowell’s current stats over 16 games his line would look like this 112 Tackles 76 Solo 36 Assist 6 Sacks 2 Forced Fumbles 4 INT 6 Passes defended TKO's 2004 line 99 Tackles 64 Solo 35 Assist 3 Sacks 3 Forced Fumbles 5 INT 17 Passes defended 2 TD's The point of this is not to say Angelo is playing at TKO's level, because TKO is simply a game changing defender, and one of the best coverage LB's in the NFL. But this first year starter is surpassing TKO's outstanding 2004 season in many areas, and I think it's safe to say he will be a big part of our future. Also while people have many legitimate beefs with TD we should take a step back and look at the draft we had in 2003. Our first four picks that year included Willis, Kelsey, Crowell, and Magee. That's a pretty sick draft and certainly one of the best that year.

Counting on Mike Williams to convert to G and play well is asking a lot. The guy's center of gravity is too high to play G, and even if he did why would he so graciously renegotiate? Also if he's playing RG how are we addressing the weakest part of the line at LG? Why dump CV and create another position of need? As for Gandy, I said I can live with his play at LT next year. I have us going after a LT early in the draft but a rookie LT usually doesn't play well, and Gandy could probably beat him out for at least one more season. Again why create a need when so many exist in the first place? As for Adams what in the last two years leads you to believe he can be an OL eater at DT? The dude is a pure free lancer, and has gotten in the coaches dog house two straight seasons because he plays outside the system. Either get him a buddy at DT that can let him roam around, or cut him outright. I've always been a fan of Moulds but he's become 5 million a year possession receiver that we continuously have to renegotiate. Regardless of his cap hit we need to part ways sooner or later, and I just see that time coming sooner rather then later.

QB- Find out if JP is the guy for next year, if so he’s the starter, and have Kelly playing back up. We should also use a late round pick in the draft to replace the aging Matthews, and serve as a solid #2 option when Kelly leaves. RB- Draft a player that can play in a few games if Willis ever goes down. Shaud is a change up back, and decent receiver out of the backfield, but he just isn’t a player that can start for us and get 25 carries. I was hoping Gates could be that player, and he looked decent at times in the preseason but he has yet to record a carry this year. Other needs might force us to hold serve here. WR- Cut Eric Moulds, and try and land Reggie Wayne as a FA. Eric Moulds costs over 10 million on the 2006 cap, no way does he see that money, and IMO 2005 was the last time the Bills will try and restructure him. It would be risky to go into 2006 with Lee unproven as a #1, and Roscoe still unproven as a #3 let alone a #2. Moulds isn’t affordable, and Wayne won’t be cheap either, but the combination of Wayne, Evans, and Parrish would give us some serious young talent at WR. With other needs we can’t afford to draft another WR early, so it’s not difficult to picture TD going after the only potential #1 in FA this year. TE- Cambell is a solid blocking TE, and after drafting Everett last year we need to find out if he is going to give us that athletic TE before we pursue other options. T-Peters at RT, and Gandy at LT is a combination I can live with. Both are affordable, and both should improve as Peters has virtually no experience and Gandy split time at G while in Chicago. I would also decide to part ways with Mike Williams. Williams isn’t as bad as he’s made out to be, but the cap situation is forcing either a renegotiation or a cut. I have argued before for a renegotation, but now I just don’t see it being in our best interests. A successful switch to G for Mike seems very unlikely, and he can’t stay healthy. With Jason Peters making pennies, not getting injured, and possessing potential at RT why would we want to sign Mike back to a deal that he would have to accept (don’t expect him to willingly take a 6 million dollar pay cut, or Ralph to shell out a huge signing bonus given the circumstances). I would finally like to see us spend our 2nd round pick, or additional 1st if we get that for Nate on one of the drafts talented LT’s. G- CV is solid when healthy, and I don’t feel like it’s a pressing need to replace him. The same cant be said about LG, a position that really needs our attention. If TD wants to prove to everybody he is serious about upgrading this line we should make a run a Steve Hutchinson, one of the leagues best LG’s. C- Out with Trey Teague in with the Duke. It’s pretty obvious the Bills intended on Duke replacing Teague when he becomes a FA next year, and I see no reason to think anything has changed given their two performances this season. DE- Of course I would like to see an upgrade at DE like John Abraham but it won’t happen and probably shouldn’t given the rest of our priorities. Schobel signed an extension last season so you know he’s entrenched at RE. At LE Raheem Brock is available from the Colts, but his production would probably equal Kelsey’s anyway. Don’t expect the Bills to do any major upgrading at DE this off-season. DT- This is probably the most difficult task for the 2006 season. Sam Adams can still be a good DT with that big cog next to him, but it appears like he might have outlasted his welcome with the Bills defensive staff. Many think Grey will go but I don’t see that happening, if he stays we still need to get that massive DT to eat up blockers as its obviously critical to this defense. Sam is massive but he can’t fill that role, but a player that could is Grady Jackson from GB. He’ll be 33 next year but in terms of FA DT’s he is the only real OL eating DT available. GB is playing decent run defense this year so Jackson could be an affordable solution for a couple years. I then think we should draft DT with our first rounder, the guy I like is Ngata from Oregon. He’s supposed to be the best interior pass rusher in the draft, really looks like he has a great future. OLB- Crowell has to remain a starter next year, and if TKO returns that might mean Posey becomes a back up. It also probably wouldn’t hurt to look at an OLB in this years draft at some point. We just don’t know about Takeo’s health and with that factor involved it gives us little depth at OLB. MLB- I don’t see the need to mess with this spot as an improved interior line should be enough to take care of any problems London’s been having. CB- Franchise and trade Nate. He’s worth a ton to this team and I hate to see him go but we can’t shell out the money he will be getting. He will get us an additional #1, or at the very least a high #2, which I factored in earlier in getting a LT. To replace Nate we should probably look at FA as opposed to the draft. I like Jerry Azumah a starter from the Bears, or Will Allen of the Giants. King should then finish the unit off as our Nickel guy. I expect some drop off without Nate but I doubt a unit comprised of these players would be our downfall, and a more talented DL should make it much easier on our secondary. FS- Our safeties make to much money, and while Vincent has made some picks at FS he isn’t a very consistent player. I say we make the move to Baker right now and see if we can possibly count on him next season. If not keep Vincent around until we have a viable replacement, either way I would like to look at FS with one of the 3rd rounders. SS- Like FS I would like to get a little younger at SS, but with everything else we need to address Milloy isn’t a pressing issue. Perhaps we could match our 3rd round FS with a 3rd round SS, or later in the draft pick pick up a raw SS prospect. If we don’t address SS at all this year I fully expect the Bills to draft a SS in 2007. K- Rian Lindell has had a great year up until today, let’s wait and see how he closes out the year before we say anything about his future status. If we do wan’t to switch kickers 3 of the best are available in Neil Rackers, Vinateri, and Vanderjacht.

Football Outsiders is a site that tracks many unusual statistics for NFL teams. If you want to look at the information I used for this post check out the link, and click on Just the Stats link under the banner. Loads of great stuff that I’m sure many of you would enjoy. We all know the problems on the run defense but I think these stats further illustrate what we already know, the interior is horrible. Here is the lowdown statistically on how bad the interior has become. Power = Percentage of runs on third or fourth down, two yards or less to go, that achieved a first down or touchdown. For defense the same format is used but it gets ranked in reverse order. So this stat shows the % of times we stuffed the offense last year in this situation. 2004- Offenses have a 42% success rate against our defense in POWER situations, 1st in the league 2005- Offenses have an 80% success rate against our defense in POWER situations, 30th in the league It also shows the average gain offenses have running to each position of the defense, and ranks them across the league. The run areas are off Left End, Left Tackle, MID/Guard, Right Tackle, Right End. In 2004 our middle guard defense was 3rd in the league allowing 3.53 yards per carry. In 2005 our middle guard defense is ranked 27th allowing 4.53 yards per carry. Let me also add that it shows Buffalo’s opponents running at the Middle/Guard spot 68% of the time. The NFL average is 52%, and only the Colts at 70% get more action in the interior then Buffalo. What we’ve been watching on the field is an obvious weakness we will be exploited at the rest of the season. How can you be a ball control team when your defense begs teams to beat you with a ball control style? Our interior has become swish cheese lately, and IMO is the number 1 priority this off-season. Football Outsiders

I wouldn't touch it either way. I like intangible type plays when the line dictates it, IE overvaluing one team while the other has motivation, emotion, or other circumstances in its favor. The Eagles have many of those circumstances going with theme Monday night, but since they developed the reputation of a winner the last few years they still come with a more expensive price then other teams who have performed better this season.

Not betting on division rivalries is a silly rule, especially considering that so many opportunities exist each year. IMO the familiarity of two teams can often be used to the bettor’s advantage in certain division match ups. In this particular game a couple factors are playing a role that could signal a performance outside the norms of what each team has done. For starters any Monday night home game generally means a stronger advantage. Second is the importance of this game to Philadelphia, and revenge for the earlier thrashing at the hands of the Cowboys. If Philadelphia was ever to respond this year this is the game they must do it. I'm not betting this game simply because without TO we really don't know how good this Eagles team is. McNabb hasn't been right since the hit he took in Atlanta, and frankly nothing the Eagles have done this year even resembles the team that went to all those NFC championships. That said if you’re someone who likes to favor intangibles then the Eagles seem like a strong play.

I'm no cap expert, so if we can't do it we can't do it. I am however familiar enough with the cap, and how it pertains to Williams in regard to us not being able to cut him, or trade him. As I originally said the rest of the line is economical enough for Mike not to kill us. Besides what choice do we have?

That's why I said give him some upfront money, as in signing bonus. We've done this with Moulds, and I think we can make it work with Mike. Most players want that guaranteed up front money because they know their one injury away from there last payday.

Very good post. Two logics seem to exist on weed, and both are extreme. One is an anal retentive look on things, basically thinking that somebody’s life is about to start on a downward spiral because they smoked a J. The other is that weed does nothing, isn't addictive, and everybody else is just needlessly hating on pot. Your post captured the middle area and that’s probably more reality then either extreme. Smoking weed on occasion is not the end of the world, it even has some medical, and psychological positives in certain circumstances. Someone while high, compared to someone wasted, is no comparison, the drunk is much more likely to instigate a problem. I still smoke, and that’s just how I interpret pot as a drug, and how it compares to alcohol effects. But what some smokers fail to recognize is a couple problems do exist to the weed is perfect argument. The fact is your driving is impaired while high, smoking does affect your reaction time. Smoke a bowl and play some catch and you'll figure that out soon enough, combine that with no immediate detection technology and it puts the general public at risk. The other common rallying cry is that weed doesn't have any negative effects, or isn't addictive. Weed isn't like nicotine; it doesn't have a substance that's known to make people crave it. But people still do crave it because it makes them feel good, and they associate that positive with being high. It's not hard at all to smoke everyday for a period of time if you let yourself. If it becomes that way you become lazy, gain weight etc. Those side effects aren’t positive at all, but many people just continue to do it despite the negatives. Like you said, anything in moderation is fine; it just needs to stay that way.

Looking at Mike Williams’s value compared to the rest of the team and he still isn't worth it. Looking at the entire lines value, including Williams in this scenario, and it would be worth it. With Peters at RT, Preston at C, Gandy at LT, and Vill at RG, the rest of the line would be relatively cheap. I look at us allocating a block of money to the different positions, and I would say that compared to the rest of the league our OL would be very affordable. Since we can't cut Big Mike we should try and extend him. Maybe give him some upfront money to motivate him to lower his cap hit over the next few years.

Your correct about it being the Counter Trey, and not only did Joe Gibbs use it heavily in the 80's, he invented it. The RB takes a jab step to the side the lineman are pulling from and when the T and G clear he follows them to the opposite side of the field. It was a powerful play back then, but has been gradually phased out of today’s game as offensive lineman have grown, and defensive philosophies have changed. Gibbs still uses it a little in Washington, and a couple other coaches still dabble in it from time to time, but it will never be the monster it was for the 80's Redskins. Much like the Packers power sweep of the 60's, the evolution of football has taken away the ability of an offense to build there foundation on one play.

In one post you trashed me for saying we have some decent players at offensive line, in another you say the same line has potential, which is it? Vill had a great year in 2004, and has been hit bad by the injury bug this season. He is still an above average run blocker, and is more then capable in pass protection. Gandy is certainly still developing at LT, in 2003 he started 14 games at LT, but then in 2004 he started 5 games at RG and none at LT. Making the position switch was enough to keep him under the radar in FA, the Bills must have watched enough tape of him at LT in 2003 to like his potential. So with such a short time spent at LT he is still developing, but rumor also has it that he was breaking threw at G in 2004. Either way he is a player on the rise with versatility, and came with a great price. My entire point of chiming in on this debate was just to say we have some strong players, so a complete fix is not in order. We can tweak this in the off-season a little bit, but as of now why not start this line (Gandy-Williams-Preston-Vill-Peters). Teague is gone next year, the writing is on the wall. If we can get this unit to gel as the year winds down, we will have a talented cost effective line for several years.

Bennie would be gone, along with Teague. What exactly has Gandy done that says he's average at best? This guy is still raw and at the very least has brought the LT position a solid cost effective player. CV has been hurt all year, last year he was a great addition, now he sucks? Obviously the Bills want to try Peters out at RT, in one game he played he did a great job. A guy that’s played 1 game at RT his entire life, and plays that well probably has decent potential. This isn't Madden, the Bills can't or won't just switch out all 5 starters, nor should they. We have a couple bad apples, and it just happens when you have a bad apple on the offensive line it makes the entire line look bad. We need to keep some cohesiveness, remove the bad apples, and replace them with guys that have a history, or potential to perform. Give or take a couple off-season additions and this line is not as bad as it looks.

Well said, it would have been an uphill battle but it was possible. Wasn't the game we smoked Indy in one that would of clinched home field for them? I think that’s a pretty strong statement about how good that team was.

Williams makes a lot for a RT, or a LG, but when you look at the overal investment in the line the Bills will still be in great shape. Of course we hope he takes a pay cut, but I'm just trying to point out that it won't kill us if he doesn't. I would also like to add that Mike Williams (When healthy) is the Bills most dominating lineman. We often lose sight of that becuaes of his draft position, and large contract. I hope eventually we can just renegotiate him to a long term deal, one that provides some major up front cap relief. By the way did anybody see what happend when he was injured? Most guys would be done the year, the guy is truly banged up.

With Fluffer Deon Branch looking on, Tom Brady finishes the Cleveland Steamer on Rodney Harrison in the third quarter Monday Night. Crap really captured the performance of New England against the Colts, as they lost 40-21.

My apologies if this was already posted. Linky

The entire point of this post was that it was extremely unlikely that this would happen given the schedules, and that it's beneficial to go with JP for those reasons. You've been implying this entire time that were in "good" shape for the tiebreakers, but only now are saying that if we keep winning, and the Patriots keep losing, we'll be in good shape. I never factored that assumption in my logic, because my entire argument was we couldn't do what you think we can, and what have we done to show you we can? We have 3 wins against teams with a combined record of 6-18. Now all of a sudden you think this team is capable of winning 3 of 4 against teams that are a combined 22-11? At the same time, we still have to beat the Patriots, and hope they go 1 in 3 against teams that are 12-13, with two at home, and TB without their QB? The only other option is hoping we beat New England, sweep the Jets and Dolphins away, and get one loss by NE in any of the four Jets/Dolphins games. Either way in both scenarios we must make up a game on NE as they play the 28th most difficult schedule over the last 8, and we play the 2nd most difficult schedule over the last 8. As for the Jets last year the situation was we needed either Denver or the Jets to lose, and for us to win in the final week. Denver ended up winning, the Jets lost, and so did Buffalo, but had Buffalo won we would have been in a three way tie at 10-6. Since we split the series with the Jets, and had identical 3-3 division records, the common opponent tiebreaker would have then been used to separate us and the Jets as division rules are always used to separate division teams. The Bills would have then beaten out the Jets having a better common opponent record.

I don't think the playoffs are nearly as attainable as people think. The Patriots got worked last night by the best team in the NFL, that was as motivated as a team can get. Now all of a sudden their going to go 8-8 or 9-7? They have a ton of holes, but are still the most talented team in the east. Name one other team in the east capable of going 4-4 at the break when playing, @ CAR, @PITT, SD, @ATL, @DEN, and IND. Christ we would of lost every one of those games and be 2-6 at the break. Our only wins this season have been at the hands of the Dolphins, Jets, and Texans who have a combined record of 6-18. But now right when we get to face what NE had to, and a virtual murderers row of running backs, were supposed to make our run, while NE falls back to us playing the cupcakes we did our first 8 games. In order to win any tiebreakers with NE, we must sweep our two away games with the Jets and Dolphins, beat NE, and hope NE loses 1 of 4 with the Jets and Dolphins. If we don't overtake NE in the division game tiebreaker, we will lose the next tie breaker which is common opponents. Right now in common games, (not counting division games because that is a prior tiebreaker) Buffalo is 0-4 in games NE has played or will play, while NE is 2-3 in games Buffalo has played or will play.

Yes their is a definitive answer, and I apologize for coming off so harsh, I just thought everybody had this figured out with the same situation between us and the Jets last year. What this says is that common opponent is after Division games, so that means for common opponent to even come into effect you’re already assuming a tie in games played within the division. Your point was that the Bills hold a major tiebreaker advantage with the Patriots, even if they do tie NE in games played within the division. If we both finish with the same division record, we won't win the common opponent tiebreaker. Here is a list of the common opponents we both have Oakland- Patriots Win, Bills Lose Carolina- Patriots Lose, Bills yet to play Chargers- Patriots Lose, Bills yet to play Atlanta- Patriots Win, Bills Lose Denver- Patriots Lose, Bills yet to play New Orleans- Patriots yet to play, Bills lose Tampa Bay- Patriots yet to play, Bills Lose Kansas City- Patriots and Bills yet to play Bills 0-4, Patriots 2-3

Please read NFL tiebreaking procedures before you begin to tell me what I don't know about. Why the hell would you include division games in the common opponent record if division record comes before common opponent? You include the record of the Bills and Patriots in games OUTSIDE the division that both teams have or will play. As I stated the Bills are 0-4 against teams the Patriots have, or will play, and New Bruschi (We're not worthy!) 2-3 in games the Bills have, or will play. I even posted the remaining games to show how unlikely it is we overtake the Patriots in that tiebreaker.

That’s just not correct, if anything it's the other way around. What it comes down to it in order to win the division record we would need a sweep of the Dolphins and Jets away, beat New Bruschi (We're not worthy!) at home, and hope New Bruschi (We're not worthy!) loses 1 of the 4 games between the Dolphins, or Jets. If we tie in division standings and overall record, AND beat New Bruschi (We're not worthy!) the tie breaker will still go to the Patriots. AFC conference record is after common opponents in breaking up division ties, this rule was instituted with NFL realignment. Right now our common opponent record is Bills 0-4, Patriots 2-3, even worse is we now take the leagues best teams, while New Bruschi (We're not worthy!)’s has already accounted for them. The rest of our common games sound like this KC, @SD, CAR, DEN, while New Bruschi (We're not worthy!) are NO, @KC, TB, to have any chance of tieing NE in common opponents we will need to win 3 of those games, and hope New Bruschi (We're not worthy!) only wins 2. Again we don't match up to New Bruschi (We're not worthy!) in any tiebreaker scenario, are already a game back, and play an infinitely more difficult schedule. Starting JP is the best decision the Bills can make at this point.