Fake-Fat Sunny

I think that all of us are reduced tio sophistry when we make what is essentially a flase comparison between the performance of two players who do what they do so well because they are both playing together and doing their jobs well. I agree with the point folks are making that Spikes is more of a playmaker than Fletcher and his ability to turn his INTs into TDs is extraordinary and is performance which is a step above what Fletcher produces. However, giving Spikes sole kudos for this production while giving the constant reliable work Fletcher does playing with Spikes no reciognition whatsoever is the sophistry here. It is simply the ability which Fletcher has shown to watch the middle, play sideline to sideline and pick up the trash play after play as reflected (not proved but reflected or indicated) by his team leading tackle numbers as long as he has been a Bills which allows Spikes to freelance comfortably and make plays like he does at an extraordinary rate and level. The items which set Fletcher a part in my mind and actually rise above mere sophistry (though i agree much of it is firmly grounded in opinion and neither you, I or any poster is on the inside and truly knows more than what we see with our unpaid eyes) is that he also has excelled for the Bills in roles in which Spikes is not even on the field or Fletcher has extra duties. Specifically: 1. It is amusing that KTD says both that he is respects and is not badmouthing Fletcher and then he reduces the D playcalling he does to some rote simple act that any MLB does. One of the most fun parts of watching a Bills game is to watch the chess match going on between a good QB and Fletcher. Even a novice such as I can see the "dance" play out as an opposing QB approaches the line and surveys the D and from his body language as he yells signals and the shift in the offensive set-up he seems to be audibling to a new play. Fletcher often even more rapidly because time is ticking by as we move to a snap seems to be yelling and the Bills D also shifts to an alignment which seems to match the moves of the D. Individual reads become a key as the ball is snapped and it does not matter what the D captain is yelling because people are playing now and a player like Posey or Denney is making a read on whether it is a run or a pass and he is either closing in or dropping back. Some of this is pre-determined by the call Fletcher has made (fior example Sam Adams may have the rush assignment regardless and Edwards job is to move laterally and cover the run regardless but a lot of this is based on individual reads and the Bills are good because they all see the same things and make the same reads, attack and pressure the ball and cover for each other when necessary, but it all starts with Fletcher and this is a separate and initiated task by Fletcher separate from what Spikes is doing. It also seems contradictory that a poster would invest in the sophistry of praising Fletcher somewhat but then dismiss his role on ST in which Spikes ain't even on the field. Like it or not, Fletcher was second on the Bills last year in kick returns and handled the ball almost at a double digit number of times. He did not fumble as would not be unexpected for a non-skill guy. When he did not return the ball, his job was to make blocks and how someone can dismiss his effectiveness and contribution in this role when McGee did so well on returns is also beyond me and beyond football common sense. Look, I didn;t frame this thread with question of who is the best LB the Bills ever had. This question is where the sophistry stems from and lies because it asks the answerer to divide the play of two LBs playing together as though they can be truly separately judged. they really can't. All I am saying is that for the few items which really are separate tasks such ST work where Spikes is not on the field or playcalling duties which Fletcher has but Spikes does not we see tremendous production that I think one needs to credit Spikes for. It is silly to really claim to compare the two since the hallmark of both their games is that they work well together. However, if one insists by posing the question as it is posed then I think one has too acknowledge that Fletcher deserves credit for both the stuff he does with Spikes and also some tremendous production he has done without him or based on his employing skills beyond their playing extremely well together. If you force me to choose one (and i do mean force) make mine Fletcher, the best LB on this team!

Many thanks also for some great analysis. I tend toward being one who emphasizes systems and that the running of them correctly will eventually make the difference. Yet, in this case it seems that not only are these teams closely matched in terms of level of performance, but they also are closely matched in terms of how they perform (great D and learning O). I think this game more than most will be determined by: 1. Individual efforts which simply make plays, 2. Dumb luck in terms of how this oddly shaped ball bounces and the refs make stuipid calls or non-calls. My hope is that the Bills simply have more playmakers in terms of D performers like Spikes, Sam Adams and Vincent on D, McGee and Clements on returns. and eventually WM on O and it will be the difference. How the ball bounces we will just have to see but that is what makes the game interesting.

Actually I answer this having taken this question seriously and done a little researxch (I can;t find the Bengals record for most tackles by a player in one season and if anyone can this number would help). My conclusion is that given the choice of picking one LB between Spikes and Fletcher I would have to choose Fletcher. My rationale is that I know one player cannot make the difference for a team. Neither Fletcher with in his first year with the Bills could make our D a good one with little help (mates like the ubiquitous Eddie Robinson at OLB, Chidi Ahanatou at LDE and Coy Wire starting at SS made this D a drag on the team even with a record setting performance by Fletcher getting more tackles than any other Bill ever. However, Spikes being virtually on his own could not turn the sow's ear of the Bengals into a silk purse either so to some extent picking one LB is a fools errand. However, though the loss of Spikes and his great skills would be tough, I think it would even be tougher to replace: 1. The leading tackler on the team year in and year out, 2. The prime signal caller on a D which has been one of the best in the NFL the last two years. 3. A cllear ST contributor as the short kickoff returner who does not fumble the ball despite he is not a ball handler in normal use and training and who is one of the lead blockers in a return game which cleared the way for McGee to read their blocks and return enough kicks for TDs that he made the Pro Bowl, 4. A D captain who always seem to know what is going on and what needs to be done in a game and despite the fact his main failing is that he sometimes is over the top mentally under his inspired leadership the D has excelled and even TKO bowed to him remaining the captain, TKO is great but I would choose Fletcher over him if you gave me one guy to pick, Despite his great physical skills I do not think that Spikes could pull off the multi-faceted excellence Fletcher does. Spikes is better at getting INTs and one could make the case of him being more of a playmaker but I see little objective indication that TKO is a better LB for the Bills which was the lead premise for this thread. TKO is simply not the best LB in the NFL because he is not even the best LB on the Bills.

Cliffnotes begin: I love Spikes but London Fletcher is da man. Cliff notes end. Don't get me wrong because I think Spikes was a wonderful acqusition by this team, deserved the two Pro Bowl nods he has received here and is a great player. However, I think there is a reasonable case to be made simply looking a their on-field production that he is not even the best LB on this team but that in fact London Fletcher is. When one factors in the reality (whether we like it or not it is the reality in the salary cap level playing field of the NFL) of bang for the buck there is no question to me that Fletcher is by far a bigger contributor to the Bills than Spikes since not only do we get a year in and year out team leadership in tackles for a small cost by NFL standards for Fletcher, but he simply plays manty more essential roles that Spikes while equalling or exceeding his output by many standard LB statisitcal INDICATORS. For example: 1. The MLB can more easily get to both sides of the field than the OLB, but Fletcher does this racking up significantly more tackless than Spikes at OLB. Consideration of Fletchers performance should not be diminished because he plays in the center of the field. He produced tackles at a greater level than Spikes and simply showed he is at least his equal in production and in fact simply plays a role where he is required to cover more area and jobs and he has done thin. 2. His ST contribution is huge and is an area that Spikes is not generally asked to do. Fletcher was our primary short-kickoff guy last year and was reliable in this ball handling role. Whe nhe wasn't showing surprising ball handling skills for an LB, he led the way in a wedge of blockers which player a key role in McGee scoring a ton of TDs often untouched due to the superior blocks and McGee doing a great job of reading these blocks. 3. Fletcher not Spikes is the team captain on D. The big rap i see on Fletcher as a player is that he occaisionally is so rapacious as a player he will draw a personal foul that hurt us in one or two games last year, but this over the top attribute has not stopped Fletcher from also demonstrating that he knows this game. He often is in the refs face making a case that they should have or should not have made a particular call while the TV commentors or me as a viewer is still trying to figure out what the heck happened and who should be bitched about because of the call. Fletched often seems to be there and is actually the lead sign that gives a clue as to what the heck happened. He da man. 4. Cleatrly Spikes creates opportunities for Fletcher to perform but likewise I think Spikes owes many of his accomplshments to the precence of Fletcher. I think this is shown in that Fletcher clearly produced even when Spikes was not here breaking Spielman's tackle record as he was pretty alone the best player on our D. Often the team captaincy will got to the best performer on the field or to the new kid in town with the big contract. Despite Spikes contract, Fletcher retained the captaincy and I think this was a bow to Fletcher's performance from the better paid Spikes and an acknowledgement from Spikes of the fact that in part he does the things which bring him deserved praised for folks like Kelly because Fletcher is such a sideline to sideline terror. 5. Sure there are some measures where Spikes outdid Fletcher last years like I think Spikes got more INTs and turned them into more TDs. I do not remember the fumble recovery comparison (though Fletcher got 1 Sunday picking up the ball Kelsay stripped) from last year. Hpwever, in addition to easily surpassing him in tackles last year both players had 3 sacks in the Bills zone blitz scheme. Sure Spikes has the Pro Bowls and Fletcher does not but I think this says more about the popularity aspects of this selection (though it is a true good thing) than it does about a real assessment of Fletcher's production. Ironically, i think if Fletcher were paid more (a worse deal for us) he actually would draw more Pro Bowl support. My bottomline is that in answer to the question of whether Fletcher is a great LB who is one of the best in the league. I say yes! However, the irony here is that though he is one of the best in the NFL, I don't think he is the best LB on this team!

The Dorenbos cut is interesting in that it coincided with a big improvement in Lindell production, I am one who believes that the placekick does involve the performance of 11 people and specifically good performance by 3 (snapper, holder, kicker) so merely blamig one person is not necessarily the whole story, but the idea that merely by changing snappers we could get such a large difference in production. The nice thing for me about his FINALLY showing some good production at placekicking is that it looks less stupid to emphsize wha I see as great performance by him in a critical part of his game kickoffs. The point remains the same but it simply comes off as less of a lame apology for his horrible long distance placekicking. I'm still not much of a believer that a snapper can make that big or immediate a difference but Lindell and Shreck can prove that to this fan over the next few weeks.

On th contrary: 1. I do not put myself above others as I flat out say I have not seen the game and only know what the press has said) which given the press is not saying much but even this says more about their stupidity than declare any brilliance from mr. 2. I started this off with my own apology. 3. I make few declarations beyond the relatively obvious three I mention and try to substantiate the claims by citing the general posting style which causes me to wonder whether folks are reconsidering their opinions of Lindell, Posey and Fletcher based on reality. I do not tell folks to apologize to the others but merely ask folks to take this opportunity it they choose. Quite frankly I do not plan to get snotty about things until after midseason, Until then I think my posts are relatively mild.

1. Your are correct that making any sweeping judgment about the impacts of the loss of a very good player would be premature. However, given that 10 of 11 starters besides Fhat Pat are back and that few of the other starters (Adams, Milloy and Vincent) are well into the downhill sides of their career and even those three are coming off a Pro Bowl year, an injury but a good year, and a move to a less speed freak position that will rely on his mental rather than physical ability, this is a pretty good basis for a broad statement that one expects little drop-off from the Bills D. Further, the FACT that Phat Pat only lined up for less than 2/3 pf the Bills D snaps last year and we have two potential replacements in a former starter (who produced as a reserve last year) and a young player who was well-regarded enough to merit a first day draft pick, it is quite logical to expect the Bills to not miss even a good player like Phat Pat. 2. While most Bills fans saw all of this and were not concerned about losing PW, there were a couple of prominent print articles, a murmur on TSW and even PW himself saying his loss would be felt in a big way. 3. I am not surprised that PW played well (though in a losing cause) for MN, but it looks like TD was correct that PW even though he is a good player was not worth what it would have cost to resign him. I wish him well and just like last year there will be a handfull of games where we lost because we did not stop the run, but even these bad outings will not mean the Bills should have spent a lot of $ for PW. Looking at the footba;; #s this was how it looked as the season began and yesterday]s game merely confirmed this.

Alright posters. Which of you are fan enough (or man enough since a lot of the whining about players this pre-season seemed fairly testotorone laced) to admit you were wrong in your complaints or predictions about players or Bills schemes. I'm down here in DC and will not see the actual game until I get home and review the tape middle of this week. However, there seems to be from the game descriptions and a few posts I have read several players that some repetitive posters on TSW owe some props and/or apologies to after their performances yesterday. You can ignore this opportunity if you choose (all Americans are given the right under the Constitution to be idiots if they choose as long as they do not hurt anyone). Since nothing on the web rises to the level of sticks and stones folks are not hurt by complaints anyway. However, if folks want their future whines on TSW to be taken even half seriously they might want to take this opportunity to apologize for their predictions (we're DOOMED) being proven untrue yesterday. I will start by giving some props to Losman. I had predicted we would run and then run again and totally rely on the run and conservative ball to make things work and not call/demand that JP perform. While no one should have a wetdream about this QB whose not good 3rd down and redzone production showed he still has some to learn, I do give him some props for the command he showed from the press reports that seems to indicate he may actually be a lot more vet as a performer than a rooke even though this is his first year starting. I will say for sure after I see the tape, but other candidates for apologies (at least for this game though if folks see the error of their ways in terms of broader trends this notice will be appreciated) seem to be: A. Lindell- It is probably a bit early to declare him a savior as a placekicker since his longest hit yesterday was 42 yards. However, 5 for 5 is 5 for 5 and he clearly was a difference maker scoring 16 points in a game we won by 15. You would think that from some of the rants this past few weeks that this stiff was out the door as he could do no right. However, this attitude has proved to be in terms of a broader view a non-football but popularity based summary as it ignores the outstanding work he does on kickoffs which he repeated yesterday as apparently the coverage team shut the opponent down. Add to this his 5 for 5 day added necessary gravy to make the mashed potatoes of the game not only palatable but downright savory. Lindell will need to prove it 15 more times this regular season but those who ranted about him loudly the last couple of weeks should be ranting good word about him somewhat as loudly this week. If not finr, but if he continues his performance it will certainly be legit for folks to resurrect some their past Lindell sucks post from the archives and demand that they eat a little crow. B. Posey- he has been ragged on consistently by folks who said he took bad tackling angles, turned the wrong way or other problems (though these observations were never matched by folks also being able to claim this led to specific opponents scoring or even getting big yardage due to these supposed Posey errors). Yet, I have seen a few observations that he played very effectively and even like a man possessed on Sunday. I'm curious how those who found shortcomings in Posey's game previously view his performance yesterday (c'mon you know who you are and you include some folks whose views I for one respect on a lot of issues). Perhaps they make a judgement that he FINALLY played like he should have played (though if he was somehow markedly difference in performance yesterday it does not explain how the D was just as productive last season as yesterday with Posey being so bad or why the Bills braintrust started hm 32 straight times in our previous D). At any rate Posey seems to deserve some props or apologies after yesterday's game. C. Fletcher- The badmouthing of Fletcher seems to have died down a bit this year, but there were certainly posters who advocated cutting him last year despite the fact he led the 2004 Bills in tackles, he played a critical and reliable role as a short return guy on ST last year, and he is a clear team leader who knows what is going on in the game almost all the time. Fletcher once again led the team in tackles and I think recovered the ball after a Kelsay strip and there are some folks who owe him props or apologies as well. I have not seen the game yet so there may be others that folks can name, but the apologies and duscussion can start here and i will repetively put up similar posts as I see things after wins this season and also will provide an opportunity to identify goats after some losses.

It's a football board and a Bills' board and I see no problem with folks posting about a former Bill and about a former Bill whose team plays our AFC wildcard opponents posting about that player. I think the prim kudos for yesterday's very good Bledsoe performance go to Bill Parcells. He once again showed what he can do to squeeze performance out of a player with obvious great benefits and great shortcomings through sheer force of will and personality. MM/TC did a very good job getting the best you can out of Bledsoe using an alarm clock to undercut his tendencies to hang onto the ball too long. I think the most impressive thing I saw from Bledsoe yesterday was that he not only got rid of the ball quicker (a piece MM pulled off with Bledsoe that led to vast improvement in the '04 Bledsoe vs. the '03 Bledsoe was that he got him to release quicker) but Parcells also got improvement from Bledsoe in that he seemed to use this time to make multiple reads (he checked-off after a couple of looks to WRs and even through a TD pass to the TE). It appears that Parcells was not only yelling throw the damn ball at Bledsoe during practice but also yelling check multiple damn receivers at Bledsoe. I thin kit is a totally relevant post regarding the Bills and MM learning as an HC to point out anything posters notice that Parcells might be doing to get improved perfoemance out of Bledsoe that MM didn't do. I think going with JP rather than Bledsoe was the correct move for the Bills after last year, but I think that MM and Bills fans will learn a lot more about our HC if Bledsoe does well this year rather than those who hope he fails. We'll see, but I for one hope Bledsoe has enough left for Parcells to use him well and that MM becomes a better HC by analyzing what Parcells does with Bledsoe which works that MM/TC did not do last year.

I aggree that on paper the game is closely matched. However, the game will not be played on paper but in their home stadium. Homefield advantage is a big problem for the Bills here, but it is one which I think/hope can be remedied by strong ST play. I expect our D to certainly hold them down early as Caddy Williams like WM showed yesterday that his MO is to have little production early but he got the big play late as the unrelenting rushes wears the opposing D down, We will need to use the time to get a lead in other facets of the game. I do not demand/expect JP to get this early lead from O production as though he played very well yesterday, the lousy third down conversation numbers and red zone production indicates to me that he played very well for a first time starter but he shouldn;t be counted upon yet to be a difference maker in the game. Thus, I see a situation where if the Bills pull off the kick coverage they did yesterday and last year, where if the return game can put points on the board the way they did last year and/or the Lindell who shows up placekicking on Sunday is the same one who showed up yesterday we can secure a lead which allows the D and the O to fire off and be all they can be.

My guess is also that ST performance will tell the tale. Normally, I think the Bills D will set the tone and be the key for the game, but I expect TB if Cadillac can produce again and he will certainly give Griese some room simply from the threat he provides to about hold their own against the Bills D. I think folks who want to discard Caddy's results need to look at the flow of WM's performance this week. The plan is for these high quality runners to pound away earlier in the game and the expectation from the coaches is that they will have lousy initial yardage (as was the case with both players). However, this initial unrelenting pounding is seen by both teams as a prelude to production toward the end of the game. Both players did this as well with WM getting over 100 and Cadillac producing a big run. I prefer WM's output but folks strike me as wrong to try to discount Caddy because most of his yards came on one run. He is a rook so his production is not as certain as WM's, but given the variation in production that game injuries cause neither should be assumed he will do the same thing or that he can be stopped. The key to me is whether the Bills or TB use the time it takes for the running game to get on track to produce in the other facets of the game and build a lead. Likewise when the Bills have the O initiative, JP has certainly raised our confidence level, but likewise I expect this first year starter to hold his own at best against a quality TB defense. Thus, I look to the Bills ST to make this game for us. If the kick coverage is as good as it was last year and yesterday, the return game puts some points on the board as it did frequently last year and Lindell proves to be the Lindell that showed up yesterday on PK work then this one may actually be a laugher for us even on the road. At least I hope so.

You seem correct in your read of the running performance but one better hunker down because this is the plan all along. MM has described a plan where the Bills may well get smoked a lot in the run game for as much as 3/4 of the game, but the plan is to wear down the opponents and have WM end up with over 100 yards for the game. Looks like things went according to plan as far as how things are supposed to work for this team.

The jey here is that reality is reality. For Bills fans several things had to happen to make reality good for us and in terms of what our team needed to have happen and chronologically they started with the Bills had to beat Pittsburgh. The Bills did not beat Pittsburgh and the playoff reality stops at that point. Pointing out that the Bills would have made the playoffs if they had won and all other records were the same is dumb because if reality were different it would be different. However, equally as dumb is the theory that oof the Bills had won then the reality would be different specifically in that the Jets would have won also, Both points, the Bills should've won or that the Jets would've won simply are not the realiity of what really happened and to that extent they are both dumb theories that are not what happened in real life.

The important thing for us also in considering this is that the Bills had to know and perform based on the knowledge that if they did not win we would be eliminated. The Bills problems with their performance and response to reality in this game was completely the same whether the Jets won or loss in that the necessity on our part was that WE win and we did not do that. The FACT and REALITY that the Jets loss merely makes it a reality that IF the Bills had won with the other occurences which happened in reality they would have made the playoffs. Would reality have been the same if reality were different? No. However this is why fantasy considerations and actually your point are meaningless. The reality which is meaningful and I think is the point that folks are making is that the Bills were in a must-win game against Pitts and lost. This is the key relevant point which people are making and your point does not change that point based on reality one iota.

I'm surprised that this thread does not have as a suggestion what I think is most likely to happen (but the great thing about MM/TC is that they are tricky devils so who knows really). 1st down- WM run (take your pick left, right, or middle wherever we think they are most exploitable). 2nd down- WM run (if they aren't 8 in the box right away they will be by this run). 3rd down- It depends on the down and distance and the luck and success we have on the first two runs. If WM breaks a couple of tackles and we get the first, then the variation comes from also running the FB or running Burns or Shaud if WM needs a bloe. If one of their LBs shoots the gap well and WM takes a loss we throw on third down (though the way JP runs for his life it would not surprise me if this turns into a running play anyway with JP trying to get a long gain for the 1st. Most likely, WM picks up 7+ to 9 on the first two runs and we go for a short yardage run on 3rd, As I have little confidence in the ability of this line to blow folks back, I think we get stopped and have to punt, but no matter as we ran three bruising run plays and began the punishment of the D. I don't care if the O scores little in the first 2-3 quarters, because Ws are determined by the final score. I expect our D to hold the line or deliver short fields to the O so that by the time the 4th quarter rolls around the score is tight and we have worn down the opposing D and as occured last year WM picks up the bulk of his yards rolling over 100 total in the 4th quarter. If the ST plays as well as last year (a likelihood to me since even the ? of Lindell production was something we had last year) then we actually may have a lead and running against a worn down opponent will give us the W in a laugher. JP may open up with some frantic passes to set up the run game, but I think the winning strategy for us to run the ball on 1st and then to run it again even if they dare us to run with 8 in the box. If we can run on this we win and if they can stop us, but we punish tem setting up for the 4th quarter because our D kept us in the game or the ST gives us a lead (be it a McGee, Clements or Smith return or a Lindell spffy onside kick the start the 2nd half) then we win anyway. Run the ball and then run it again even if they stop us initially and is boring as anything even if they do not stop us. The important thing is not the first series, the important thing is the score after the last series. I think we will be on the correct side of that score if we run and then run it again virtually regardless of initial success in moving the ball.

How are France or Novack at kickoffs. KO is an incredibly important and essential part pf pur kicker's duties. While the other essential element for a quality kicker, placekicking often gets treated as the only important work a kicker does, given the importance of our coverage working to this team putting up Ws, a replacement kicker for Lindell MUST be able to consistently kick it to the location and with the timing that the rest of the ST expects or big returns will happen. Lindell has sucked so bad at long kicks that clearly MM and the braintrust have little or no confidence in this part of his game and also has missed some chip shots that he certainly should be replaced with a better kicker. However, a kicker who does well with the placelkicks and has more distance is simply not a better kicker than even the inadequate Lindell if he cannot handle the tricky winds of the Ralph snf kick off with the same consistency which allowed the Bills coverage team to give up 0 returns for TDs and even few long returns last year. Certainly having a good (or even adequate kicker is going to get you a W or two a year from clutch kicks. But in every game the ability to kickoff as ordered is going to be done and often plays a critical role in the field position battle. Many fans also mistake quality at kickoffs as the ability to boom them consistely like Janakowsi or the the number of TBs to his credit. Now that the NFL has moved the kickoff from the 40 where it used to be to way back toward our endzone, getting a player with the leg to assure TBs is doubtful and the ability to directional kick and also get the appripriate hang time is a far better strategy. In pre-season the coverage game (led by a Lindell kickoff) looked phenomenal and far more often than the norm seemed to even make the tackle so the opposing team ended up with a drive start inside their 20 which is even better than a TB. So bring in France, Novack or whoever, but I am far less interested in them inless there is some tangible evidence that they can handle the critical kickoff duty.

I think JP is definitely the guy to start and to stick with for the most part in the early season and even slightly beyond even if he implodes. I hope and assume it will not ptove necessary to bench him because the best answer for many of these growing pains will be to play right through them and hope that the D, ST performance or simple dumb luck does not cost us any Ws while these youn QB hiccups are going on. However, i have enough confidence in MM and TC in their ability to build a successful offense with even previously failed QBs with Maddox and Stewart and with the way they steered Bledsoe to a far better (though still inadequate) performance in 2004 than in 2003 that I have confidence in them if the choose to bemch JP at some point because they judge it gives us a beter cbance at winning now. I think fans are almost certainly wrong if they judge the Losman psyche to be so weak that if MM pulld him at some point he will be simply ruined as a QB. In fact, if JP is such a weenie that any show of sitting him down if he isn't doing the job is going to destroy him he probavly would not suceed as our QB in the long run anyway. JP deserves the lonest leash possible the NFL has as he goes through being a first time starter to becoming a vet. However, it is a leash and I have no problem withMM/TC benching him if they judge it helps tje team make the playoffs this year.

The interesting thing to me is the question of who dropped the passes which should have been caught? I did not see the game so I;m not sure. Reed apparently led the team in receptions though I hear he also dropped one. Perhaps we are keeping 7 WRs because no one has really stepped up and taken control of the WR position from amongst the many back-ups. The bad news may be that in fact Reed is an inadequate receiver AND he is the fourth best receiver on this team.

Perhaps it was my typo of Bo for No, but you misunderstand my post. I flat out say we should not root for injury because that would be immoral and gross. I mentioned it however in terms of assessing what I think the Bills are thinking and I'm afraid that I think that like many enployers and the NFL as a whole they are immoral and gross. I do not think TD is rooting for injury to his potential FAs, but I think as far as the business goes they do not root for injury because they can't control and fine tune it to have him hurt enough to diminish his market value but not so badly he cannot be rehabbed. The Bills historically have given no sign of rooting for this, but once it happened as in the case of Andre Reed and in attempt by this regime though he went elsewhere seemingly to Sam Cowart. I'm not rooting for injury nor do I think the Bills are, but I have few doubts that if the Bills find themselves in that position they will do the "good" business thing and push NC to the wall. I don't think it is a bad thing to be realistic about this assessment of the nature of the world its simply realistic. It's too bad from my perspective that this is the way things are but that appears to me to be the way things are.

Economics. Some players make a judgment that the best deal they can get is from a team with a particular ability to meet that need, while other teams are not in a position to do that. In addition, there is a question of how risk averse a person is. All these players are going to likely get the biggest paycheck they have ever seen and if they worry about injury or if their family needs the money this can be powerful incentive to take the bird in the hand even if there is a potential bigger bird in the bush. I don't know Clements personally and thus do not know his motivations, however: 1. The current cap constraints of the Bills are such that a deal for Nate which distibutes an $18 mil cap hit over 6 seasons would force us to restructure some contracts to move our current cap even close to the edge if it included this season. NC's negotiating position is that he thinks he is the #1 CB in performance and by pretty direct implication should br paid that way (Chump Bailey -a lesser player than NC IMHO- took down a $18 million bonus). Dis any of the players you mention command this level of cash in the market and what was the cap status of that team? 2. A deal can be constructed with a segmented bonus which does not have the immediate cap implications for the Bills, but in signing this deal, NC would risk the second bonus is he got hurt and could not perform. If the second segmented bonus is for some easily met requirements to assure NC it will be there (ex. he gets paid if he passes within a 3,000 mile radius of the stadium in 2009) then the league can (and has in other cases) ruled that the bonus should count immediately because it will be easily reached. Who knows, Nate may love being a Bill so much that he will take a smaller salary to stay one. However, though I think this is true to some extent, it strikes me as naive to and wishful to think he will take far less than the market is likely to give him under a significantly expanded cap to play. There is one big question of how far TD is willing to go to trade future prospect signing and flexibility for the benefit of having Nate. Its possible he would show Nate the money but not a sure thing. There is another question which I think is even bigger as to whether it is even possible for the Bills to absorb a cap hit which pays NC the salary of the #1 CB in the league. I don't think it is unless something like a segmented bonus is part of the construction and this is why I would not sign if I were Nate because to do do puts me at a risk that the Bills will not have to put me in if we wait for the new cap.

My sense is that they shoukd get all they can out of NC this year and use him to play CB, return punts and whatever else. I see little reason financially for NC to sign before he hits the free-market and the new much larger salary cap is in place and teams are mandated by rule to spend this extra money by the CBA. If Clements demanda the money that the best CB in the league (which he claims to be) gets the Bills cannot even give him a contract with the $18 million bonus under the current cap restrictions. A deal can be done under this cap if Clements is willing to take a split bonus, but to do this imposes the risk on him that he may get hurt and the Bills refuse (as will be their right( to habg onto him and trigger the second bonus, The Bills have loaded up at CB on the chance that NC may leave and by loading up we will be hurt if he leaves but not fatally so. Bo one should root for an injury, but it is possible that he will get hit just like Andree Reed did in his contract year and the Bills could retain his sercices for a song. Both parties need to start negotiating now on what will be a long discussion in order to get to a deal eventually. Perhaps this recent injury will put the fear of gosh in NC but I doubt there will be a deal this week because it probably is impossible for the Bills and likely would not serve NC's fiscal interests.

I think that was his first start in the post-Kelly era, but if memory serve me correctly (which it cerainly fails to do sometimes) Collins actually started a meaningless game for the Bills (they had already clinched a playoff spot in the game that ended Kelly's career) and Collins played a bad game running for his life and showing the happy-feet tendency which late spelled the end of his time as a Bill and NFL starter.

I will hate if Clements can't play Sunday as well. In my mind he definitely deserved his Pro Bowl nod last year (even if he did just squeeze into a trip to Hawaii due to an injury). Hpwever, the WE'RE DOOMED Sunday if Clements can't play talk seems a bit neurotic at best and even based in some psychsis as folks seemed to be deathly afraid that he will hit the free market next year (I repeat that emphasizing the key point NEXT SEASON). Definite Clements is a talented player but lets think about the football aspects of this and keep some perspective. 1. Clements was one of three Bills defenders (4 if you want to count defender and McGee but he got the ride based on his KR rather than position skills o need to count him for these purposes) who made the Pro Bowl last year and to me Spikes is a far more valuable player individually and to the Bills as a team. I think he would be far harder to replace. In addition to that for those who feel football starts with the ability to run and stop the run, there is a good argument that Adams is a more important and difficult to replace player than NC. 2. If you feel the Pro Bowl is simply a popularity contest (actually not completely true as it is a popularity contest and also a totally accurate statement of good play versus inadequate play and not a bad estimation in most cases of good play versus great play though it is far from perfect) then one of the best examples of this is that actually London Fletcher is a far smarter and in many ways a better player than NC. Fletcher also takes the occasional bad penalty or personal fouls for his semi-controlled mayhem, However, Fletcher is D captain because he clearly knows the game and his calling of signals is critical to this attacking D. The debate really is not whether he is a top 5 CB in this league but whether he is even one of the top 5 players on the Bills as he may be the 4th best guy on the defense and on the offense their are talents like Moulds and WM who may push him out of being one of the top 5 Bills. 3. Even if one wants to forget the subjective ranking argument, one can also look at who is behind him. Again we obviously take a hit losing NC if he cannot play, but we chose to keep only 4 CBs in this pass happy league because we are pretty deep at CB (and this is even the case with Thomas PUPped. There is obviously a big drop-off to rookie Eric King who is thrid string on the depth chart behind Thomas something needs to be done. However, since the something is likely having a former Pro Bowler Vincent take over for NC for a game I see little problem here. Since the FS spot would then be manned by former starting FS Rashad Baker with the hard-hitting newbie Leonhard backing him up I see little fatalality in this move against the Texans who have their own struggles. I hope NC is good to go but get a grip life is doable if he can't.

My recollection is that the full Landrieu account shown described the incredibly valiant and responsible efforts of a particular set of guards and DID Not describe the general disposition of prisoners in the face of the coming hurricane in light of the mandatory evacuation order. It raises an interesting issue for which the answer should be quite findable or it no answer is found it says a lot in and of itself about action by those in charge that they were at best incompetent and and worst pretty inhumane if there is no strategy or plan to deal with these prisoners in light of a mandatory evacuation order. In general, it seems reasonable to me to make a decision to leave the pirsoners in their cells in light of a mandatory evacuation as long as it is judged that the prison has a good chance of surviving the storm. It would strike me that you order a mandatory evacuation of the city not because you are certain it will be destroyed, but as a precaution in that when the hurricane hits you cannot reasonably gurantee safety and after the major storm clean-up and rescue will go better the fewer people there are around. As long as you are reasonably sure that the prison will survive the storm then keeping the prisoners in place is a reasonable thing to do. However, if you have reasomable concerns the prison may be destroyed, you evacuate it completely and remove the prisoners under lock and key before hand not just simply becaise to leave them would be to potentially give a death sentence to someone sentenced tp imprisonment, but you will need to have guards there and they should be evacuated rather than risk death and because any prisoners who survive after the building is destroyed are now free in the ravaged city to break the law if they choose. My guess is that the prisoners remained in lockdown which actually may be one of the safer ways to withstand a hurricane. The man0made disaster of the levees breaking is another issue. This is why the actions described by Sen. Landrieu were so heroic. These guards at great personal risk performed great physical feats which both preserved public safety by holding the prisoners but also save lives by saving the prisoners fro, drowning. It will be interesting to see in the post-mortem what plans there were to both preseve public safety and to save lives in case of disaster. Both things can be done and the question is whether the folks in charge of the prisons did this. As far as the commentary it is interesting but in the end probably has more to do with ideology than reality. The effects of the welfare state is trivia compared to the relaity of the situation. The idea that this clustewhat happened due to the existence of the welfare state and not due to the actions and decisions of individuals who should be praised or punished by society based on their individual action misses the boat of reality. Some folks were heroic and deserve praise and thanks and some folks were idiots and deserve the appripriate censure and whether there is a welfare state or not you will have both types.

I generally aggree Mr. Bill but actually do not fear he future based on my assessment of the past: 1. I think the Bills have a pretty good draft record under TD. It certainly is not one of hitting a homerun every time, but I think us fans really over-value the draft in terms of asseing the skills of a GM. TD has said that a 50% success rate on even 1st round picks is pretty good for an NFL GM and the past experience indicates to me this is true. Folks do focus on the hits and they are more likely to come from the better players drafted in the 1st round (well duhh). However, even these 1st rounders are slotted for such hefty salary commitments that it now really strikes me as good strategy to try to trade your 1st round pick for a proven talent or a later need. For every great Peyton Manning choice there is going to be a Ryan Leaf choice which kills your team for a year or more (the best thing about Leaf was that he flushed so quick that SD did not go through the RJ experience of a death of a thousand cuts that the maybe/woulda/coulds flirtation brings). Even worse Peyton Manning has brought Indy exactly the same number of SB wins and even SB appearances which Ryan Leaf brought to SD. Manning only finally "roared" out ahead of Leaf year before last in leading his teams to more playoff victories than Leaf. Its great rooting for Mannings play but talk about being bitten to death by ducks which is what Manning has brought to Indy in terms of their untimely death each year of his career. I'm not saying having Manning is bad, but it certainly has not proved to great or even very good outside of 1 year. I think the 1st round draft record of the Bills under TD (Clements, Williams, WM. Evans, Losman) is pretty good as none of these choices is a bust. 1 is a Pro Bowler and 2 have Pro Bowl potential and the other two are starters with not unreasonable hope that they will be at least long-term contributors. In fact, his biggest failing was when he had his highest pick and few say he should reasonably have gone elsewhere than an OL choice and even in hindsight few would have picked McKinnie over the inconsistent MW based on their performance. Once one gets into the second round then one has to recognize the reality that these picks will work out significantly less than the 50% (let's call it the Pro Bowl Standard for lack of a true measure or phrase) success rate of 1st rounders. Here. TD had led the way tp selecting: Schobel, Henry. Reed, Denney, and Kelsay in the the 2nd. One Pro Bowler here (I know you don't like him but he was judged by outside observers as meriting this nod and he returned when we wer done with him and traded him a 1st day pick), Schobel is a quality starter, Reed is not and has disappointed but is still on the team so he has one more chance not be a bust, Denney is referred to as a co-starter with Kelsay and I would argue that to understand the Bills D which is very productive by most measures Denney actually plays a critical productive role which allows us to go with only 3 DEs in a D which rotates DL players and Kelsay is the other co-starter. A 1 out of 5 record of busts in the 2nd even if you choose to write off Reed while there is still a season to play is pretty good. The third round (and we are beginning to decend to a level of picks where one hopes but clearly should not expect a performance that gets a Pro Bowl nod and if this player starts he has done better than many players and I would not be surprised if anyone wants to do the statisitical analysis better than average) TD oversaw the selction of: Edwards, Jennings, Wire, Crowell, and Anderson. Of these players Edwards is a starter this year and Jennings is gone but not a player one would call a bust as a choice. Wire is a Reed like type who has a year of play to go but will be a bust unless he produces (which he might on ST we'll see), Crowell who has produced on ST and shows signs of being a good back-up and Anderson who is easily categorized as too early to tell. At any rate, again if you want to be harsh no gove reality a chance to define things there is one bust here. All in all, I think it is hard to really find fault with 14 1st day picks of which 0 are completely done with the team and NFL and are clear busts. Of these 14 2 are likely busts (Reed and Wire) and the rest are actually reasonable NFL picks. It is the conventional wisdom that one needs three seasons before a player can be reasonably assesed. As the Bills have gotten a couple of Pro Bowl nods from the 9 players selected on the 1st day in 2001 and 2002 and 7 of these 9 remain on the roster I don't think this is a bad performance at all. I think one actially has more legitimate complaints that under TD we have not seen a lot of Pro Bowl types from the second day (Only McGee) but again most of these picks remain contributors on our roster and i see no obvious indictment here. I think you go in the right durection with a draft analysis of particular playuers and position because this ultimately gets you to the real reality of Ws and playoffs. The bottomline here is simply one of failure because we have not made the playoffs, however if one invests in this reality to try to indict TD's work it is impossible to also no acknowledge the reality that this team did finally poduce a winning record last year and improved from 6-10 to 9-7. Folks cannot on the one hand claim that it proves TD is bad because of the Ws last year failing to be enough to make the playoffs but then they turnaround and ignore the fact that the Ws improved to the level we had a winning record.