Fake-Fat Sunny

Actuaslly, my msin criterion for right now is that JMac has shown me as a fan that he is an improvement over the two previous OL coaches and that within the context of a Clements system (which is an improvement over the Kevin Killdrive system) I'm quite willing to put my faith in them to make a judgment on how to acquire the individual players to produce an at least adequate if not a good OL. That being said, I like the commentary and discussion about the individual talents because it provides good information to outsiders such as myself and interesting perspectives. However, I am quite certain that the things which rules the roost are judgments JMac makes to bring it all together. Unlike any other unit in football the OL strikes me as one where the whole can exceed the performance of merely adding together the sum of the individual parts. I am more than willing to see JMac and the gang chose to go with a player I judge to be flawed or less talented because they believe the get better production out of the OL as a whole because this players' holes are complimented by what his partners do well or the strength of his game fits into an area where we are weak even though his failings may be glaringly obvious. On the particular point you raise, I can easily see cuttin MW if in fact he has a #9.17 million cap hit and refuses to restructure. If this horrible situation confronts us, resigning JJ at as cheap a rate as we can (I think the market may well allow him to be resigned for way less than $5 mill a year) and trading Henry for Shektin who becomes our new RT is quite doable. However, it I had to guess, the best we will be able to do is actually restructure MW to a lower cap hit and resign JJ and actually go with Smith (possibly Tucker) at LG because I suspect JMac and the Bills will attempt to upgrade through better teaching and implementation with exisiting players than sign a bunch of new talent. I may well be wrong but that is where I think we aree going.

Based on what I hear regarding the MW cap hit in 2005 (either $6+ million according to NFLPA.com or $9+ million according to Billszone) if the Bills resign Jj for anywhere near the market rate for fairly pedestrian OL talent (about $5+ million) the Bills will be unable to acquire new LG players and resign Jennings. Several things will need to happen to make this possible such as a combination of restructuring MW to lower his cap hit and/or signing Shelton as a tackle for a $3 million cap hit. You tell me what it is because I do not know.

Just clarify and not to assert, I think these numbers come from: 1. A $4 million MW base pay for 2005 according to NFL.com which can be found soecifically at > http://www.nflpa.org/media/playerProfile.asp?ID=32980 < which is his individual profile of this web site. This number is relatively trustworthy as this number represents what the NFL and NFLPA are reporting to each other and if this is wrong one of them lied to the other and broke the trust the CBA is based on. This is double-checked because this is the NFLPA reporting to its members and the press and if it lied to them there would be hell to pay. This number is the fact as best as I can tell and represents a rise in MWs bas salary from a previously reported $726,000 to $4 million. 2. A prorated allocation of about $2.1 million from the original bonus of $12+ million MW received as the bonus he was entitled to from his draft position due to slotting. The $12+ million was prorated over the 5 year length of the original deal though MW has already pocketed the money. 3. A bonus payment due to MW of $3 million at some point prior to the cap casualty date (6/1) and probably prior to the draft this year (Bledsoe's escalator for example was due 3/22). These escalators are agreed to by the players and the owner essentially as a tool to force these contracts to be subjected to the free market. Clumpy has been great enough to do the work to ferret out these numbers amd I have little reason to doubt him but I do not know where this number comes from. It makes a huge difference in terms of an actual deal getting done, but actually does not make a difference in terms of what the Bills should do because even a $5.1 million cap hit (the base salary and prorated bonus I can publicly see) is a lot more than MW deserves from his prior play and is more than the Bills should pay MW to play RT and they should do the same thing of restructuring the deal whether the total is $6.1 million or $9.1 million. Further, regardless of which amount is correct, the combination of the MW cap hit with resigning JJ to amount of $5 million or more would likely make it exceed the Bills OL budget to get more talent at LG. This is what I know and what I think regarding MW's salary and I would love to be corrected with more factual numbers and links to them.

Yeah but hindsight is 20/20 and woulda, coulda, shoulda. If Reed had not been taken how free would we have felt to let Peerless go and the Peerless trade yielded a 1st rounder who turned out to be Willis McGahee. The second guessing is fine because afterall we're just fans and this is just the internet, but I think all of the second guessing (which I have invested in myself on issues like what we would have used the 1st and the 4th for if we had not made the trade for RJ I'm proud to say I advocated using them for Tra Thomas and Tim Dwight long before these two were stars, but even these flights of fancy came with the proper caveats that these suggestions meant little in hindsight) must come with the appropriate acknowledgement that the best arguments for these views is based on hindsight.

It is what the free market has demanded to get deals with players. The NFL has demnstrated to me that the totally free market (or even the sorta free market that predominates in western business) is simply unworkable when running a sports league. Restraint of trade and collective (communistic?) activity are essentially necessary if you want to have a level playing field in finances of the sport to maintain a level playing field in the actual sport. The NHL is dickering right now over what type of non-free market system they will have and what types of deals are necessary to get the players to join the owners in this partnership. The NFL has shown them the way I think with a model which gurantees bonus money so better players are rewarded but pro-rates these bonuses over future years so the business can operate. It has used non-guranteed base salaries and limited restraints like the franchise and transition tags to also protect investments while giving the players some bucks. Why does it work? Because the NFL owners and players have seen they need each other to restrain and control trade and to see that both parties can make a lot more money by co-operating in a partnership than fighting with each other over what is chump change compared to real dollar which can be generated by having a stable product based on cooperating rather than fighting each other. Ideology and beliefs are neat, but they do not pay the bills. Its all about the Benjamins.

I'm sorry that things don't make sense but things in life often do not make sense, they are reality and we just have to deal with or drop out of reality until it kills us doing so. The sad reality is that pro football used to be a sport that happened to be a business (sportsmen like Dan Rooney and George Halas earned their nickels running football teams). Now pro football is a business that happens to be a sport and folks like Dan Snyder or Paul Allen make billions in dot.com land and buy NFL teams as play things and unfortunately run them with that level of achievement. The salary cap provides a level playing field so this sport is won or lost based on how good your moves are rather than by the one willing to spend the most money to pave over their mistakes winning. However, one effect of the salary cap is that the market determines which positions command the most investment to fill and on the OL this investment has to go to the LT or you have to fill the LT slot on the cheap. The Bills have been fortunate and/or played things well the last few years as the relatively cheap JJ manned the LT slot adequately for us giving us the freedom to pay MW escalating amounts for his 4th pick slotted contract. However, the reality is that we are going to need to make positioning moves not simply driven by how well a player plays, but driven by JJ hitting four years and the free market so we are going to have to pay more like the market rate for an LT. It can be JJ at LT if we are willing to pay him the $5 million plus that LTs have recently commanded (or perhaps the market is now saturated by these too buig contracts for talents like Clifton and Petitgout and we may be in a position to pay JJ less than the going rate. However, if we pay JJ even a $5 million cap hit, this would combine with the apparent $9.17 million cap hit MW is going to get to mean that these 2 players will take up over $14 million of the $85 million salary cap we have for the team. This would mean two players absorb 16% of our expenditure while the other 20 starters absorb 84% minus what the back-ups and ST players get. The math simply does not work to pay MW the cap hit we agreed to pay him to play the slot he plays. Something has to give and it may well be common sense because in the end it may not be fair but life isn't fair.

The idea of moving MW to guard only has some logic to mention because JMac mentioned it last year. However, it seems a far more likely explanation that he mentioned it to light a fire under MW that sorry play at RT may well cost him big bucks at LT rather than it being a serious idea merited by what MW has struggled with. Obviously MW has a big butt and is a big boy, but as a pro his problem has not been handling the speed of edge rushers around the end, his actual problem has been coordinating with the tackle to pick up guys coming frome the interior on stunts. Even this could be because of physical agility issue, but if so why aren't moving out to deal with speed rushers an issue for him as well. Instead it seems to be a mental issue communicating the switches effectively and using his strength properly on bull rushing DTs that suddenly are his responsibility. In addition to the on the field performance issues that lead me to see moving MW inside as no solution, the off field cap issues are made even worse by this move. MW is not worth a $9.17 million cap hit at RT and good play at G is found in players like Villarial who cost $3 million. I'd cut MW before I moved him inside and if I were him I'd force you to pay me $9.17 million if you want me to play G rather than take a restructuring to reduce my salary to some guard like level.

Moving MW to LT makes sense due to his cap hit and JJ being an unknown quantity (though cutting MW if he refuses to rersturcture also makes sense). Acquiring Shelton and plugging him in at RT also makes sense (though giving him a shot at LT to replace Jennings also makes sense. Finding a new LG from the several adequate ones likely available makes sense (though the concept of upgrading existing resources like Tucker or Smith by JMac guidance also makes sense since JMac got improvement out of each last year, it is illogical to simply assume that their improvement will simply stop). Teague continuing to develop as a C also makes sense as his play has improved each of the past few years since he firs took up the position not to long ago (though going to a better C in FA also makes sense). Villarial at RG seems like a lock. A lot of this simply depends on what JMac sees and wants to do and we have no clue what the grand plan is, but we will see very very soon.

A list of potential cap casualies has also been posted which contains several LTs, this cuts both ways for JJ as there is the potential that someone paying top 10 OL money right now for an LT may see him as a cut-rate alternative. However, this also increases the potential for someone to be able to pick up a more proven talent at LT than JJ and may cause folks to wait a bit on signing him which will increase the pressure on him to take an offer as a bird in the hand. TD should play hardball on this one.

The prescence of Trey Teague on this list of possible cuts make me feel like the emphasis is on possible because though cutting him is posible it seems incredibly unlikely for the Bills to do this because: 1. Us local fans have heard JMac and the braintrust really sing his praises as they are particularly impressed with his mental grasp of their gameplan. He certainly is easily cut for a more talented player, but the costs of a more talented player whom the Bills would have to train and get to know makes this hard to do for financial and management reasons. If they cut Teague whom they just resigned last year, then neither fans nor players should believe anything they say or even little they write down. 2. The switch from Bledsoe to JP actually plays to Teague's game. Many fans saw him as underweight and screeched when they saw him get bowled over by bull rushes backing up to set up a statci solid pocket for Bledsoe. Under JP, the Bills are more likely to make use of a moving pocket rather than the straight drop-back by Teague. When the pocket moves left or right the guard will likely have the primary duty or attack on the DT amd the defense will have to watch their sides rather than concentrating on bowling over Teague. In addition, since the QB draw should become an even more prominent part of our attack, the bull rushing DT runs the risk that JP will pick the hole to other side of this rusher and be past him before he knows. The "underweight" Teague will provide the benefit of mobility that is the basis for his bullrush problems. 3. When one looks at OL cap hits and factors in performance, I would put Mike Williams on the possible cut list before Teague. Of the 5 OL positions, Teague is likely to have the fourth highest cap hit. In addition, since we may lose a n LT, Teague's previous expereince at LT makes him an unlikely candidate to be cut even if he is moved out as center. The list is interesting because there are so many people and actually makes things more problematic for Jennings if anything, but overall it is a pretty questionable list in terms of reality.

Assuming these numbers are correct, I think one of the things it indicates is that the way TD seems to place value on first round picks in the draft (at best they are a tool to use and in many ways using this tool to minimize the damage done to your team by picking a 1st rounder is a good way to think about them). TDs record with use of the 1st round pick is this: 2001- traded down for needed extra help as recovery from the cap purge was the first order of business. Still getting the first CN chosen with a lower pick and to have that CB make the Pro Bowl is a pretty nice job, though already the pressure is mounting to extend the contract of this pick. 2002- Perhaps the biggest drafting miscue of the TD era was the selection of MW who ironically was the consensus pick to make to fill the Bills needs and has generally been regarded as a better pick than the hold-out and disappointing (one MN paper is talking about them cutting hm this year even though they have tons of cap room) alternative choice McKinnie. TD does begin to show that he views 1st round choices as a simple commodity as he trades the 203 1st rounder for Bledsoe. Bledsoe not only initially pays off big time in 2002 but the Bills essentially got something in the present for nothing in the present as TG found a way to gain value in 2002 for a 2003 pick. 2003- Again TD thinks outside of the box and scored big in the draft for the Bills, He did this by turning PP who we were owed nothing for into a 1st round pick which he surprised everyone by choosing WM. The choice turned out to be nothing short of brilliant as the conventional wisdom viewed this pick as illogical because we already had an RB coming off a Pro Bowl year, when in fact it was quality of Henry's play that made the selection of WM doable so he could sit with little real pressure to start him. In addition by signing a wounded player, TD was able to slot a #3-5 rated player (if WM recovered which he has to date) at $23 money and get him to sign a unusal deal for a draft pick which rewards WM for playing well and reduced the Bills risk if he did not produce, An extra piece of notable 1st round pick manipulation was that few would have complained if TD had used the #23 pick on Chris Kelsay who filled a need beyind those who feel he should have traded up for a DE. However, by reading the market correctly due to the rush on DL picks in the first, he was able to get Kelsay with a second and Kelsay broke into our starting line-up in his second year. 2004- TD chose Evans who filled a definite need for us (ironically one left by our past speed receiver being traded for a pick who became WM and Reed (a consensus first rounder who slipped to the 2nd round in the 2002 drat) failing to equal his first year showing. Evans is viewed as a success by almost all filling out need and being among the best players available at the time. He continued his wheeling and dealing with firsts by dealing our 2005 1st for a 2004 1st who became JP Losman. Again this has proved to be agreat move as not only is the 2005 class of QBs viewed as a weak one with their not being anyone who equals the raw talent of Losman at the Bills position (or maybe in the entire draft) but Losman is a raw talent who needed at least a year of practice before he was able to start (which he will) at the time a 2005 pick would have been able to. Overall the totals are these 6 total 1st round picks on his time in Buffalo (the extra is ATs pick he acquired and turned into McGhee. 6 starters acquired with these picks and also two draftees he got in the second round who were talked about as 1st round talents (Kelsay, Reed) who became starters for this team in his 5 years. Of these 6, 2 qualified for the Pro Bowl (Clements this year and Bledsoe acquired in a trade for the 03 choice his first year) and most of us feel that WM and Evans are probable Pro Bowl talents and we hope JP proves to be one. Even if you consider the MW pick and contract a failed effort on TDs part (the jury is still out as MW s deal can and should be renegotiated and his play improved last year to a level which is still inadequate as he should be playing well enough to switch sides to LT and this maneuver would be risky because though he is better he is not quite there (yet). Still overall, I think TD has to be given plaudits for his handling pf the 1st round pick resource. I think if one looks back in a few years (first you will look to see whether we made the playoffs or won the SB under his leadership and since we have not so far he is a failure as a GM so far) if you want to take apart the individual aspects of his work its hard to imagine a GM doing a lot better handling the 1st round pick than TD has to date.

Actually, I think this dicekering is not about reaching a real aggreement but actually both sides trying to not get blamed for creatingh an impasse when the owners go to the NLRB an call for one. The players attempted to offer a last minute deal and Bettman responded by saying it was too late to negotiate as a prelude to declaing an impasse, but the players seeming willingness to give on the salary cap issue would have put the owners in a bad legal position and a bad petitioning position to declare an impasse. The owners are tryimg to recover the initiative but the players have made this difficult by givig up on their primary demand and actually if the state of events are that hardline owners are going to get blamed for stopping this, it will be hard for the NHL to declare an impasse and thus have the right to do as you suggest. I agree with you about your call for replacements, but actually I would like to see replacement owners because as much as I appreciate what Tom Golisano did, I am not going to pay my nickels to go watch Golisano, John Rigas or Jereemy Jacobs sit at center ice. The game here strikes me is that if Goodenow and Bettman can both be fred, are there any different sources of capital to pay for the best players in the world to play hickey. There may be some as there are plenty of rich people and alttermate sources of capital in North America (this is all the owners orovide) and the main problem for hockey is that moneyed folks will find it easier to make money off of NASCAR than off of hockey if they care about sports. Hockey (particularly in the southern US)is a tough sale to rich sources of capital. However, alternate large sources of capital from coporaions who look to bond with communities everywhere and have far larger cash investments than hocley and the networks which need something to fill air time so they cal sell commercials are possible options. We definitiely need replacements but it is repalcement owners that can save hokey.

Folks are saying lots of things but the actual contract deal and what it does to our cap room is where reality really exists. For example the Bills can probably afford any of these cap hits, but as we are somewhere between $7+ million (Clumping Platelets number I think it the best number available) and $14 milion (generally the Bills' Daily number but both parties admit up front the limitations on these estimates), its easy to see that if we were to pay JJ a franchise amount we would be hardpressed to do the other things like get an LG in F, resign Phat Pat, get a back-up QB (or two) or an RB that most agree we need to do something. Additional cap room can likely be made available from maneuvers such as trading Henry or cutting Prioleau (though there is some dispute as to how valuable it is to do this as Clumpy has us getting over a million bucks in cap room but Bills' Daily has this cut costing us cap room), but for now dealing with the reality (alleged) of what we got seems the best way to discuss this. Overall I go back and forth on this one, but I think the Bills should certainly not tag JJ and actually should play this one out as I don't think the market will offer JJ anywhere near the LT contracts that lesser talents like Clifon and Pettigout secured at LT in different markets. Looking at individual teams, I think there are only 3 or 4 teams that have the LT need and the cap room to offer a big contract to JJ amd the Bills likely will be offering him the biggest contract offer for a $4 million cap hit and possibly even a $3 million cap hit. I'm willing to risk him going elsewhere if someone offers him a better deal because we have other alternatives like Teague. MW or even Price as a candidate internally and now that Shelton is an extrenal option. I know folks like JJ and I like him too. However, his inability to ever play a full season in his career stops me from advocating the Bills pay him top 10 OL money simply based on potential and our hopes and wishes. Our cap situation makes me willing to pay him less ($3-4 million) but as much as I like continuity on the OL not much more than that.

I agree its a dumb rule, but people do dumb things all the time to make life work (marriage and parenthood for example are all about doing things which are specifically dumb, but necessary to make the whole deal work). The CBA and redzone,com reflect the real world that it simply works to have all the OL players have the same franchise and tag numbers. It may be stupid but it works. If you want some objective showing that this is the case that all OL players are tagged based on the same amont, go to NFLPA.com. In the media section on the side there is a link to be clicked for frequently asked questions. Thw first link in this section takes you to a listing of the actual franchise and transition tag numbers. They are divided by position and all the OL players operate under the same salary number with guard Ruben Brown prominent among the OL numbers as 1 of only 2 guards among this LT crew that sets the tag level for Ts (be they RT or LT), Gs, and I assume Cs (as they have no separate listing. It is simply the reality of how these players are tagged even if it is stupid in a lot of cases because it simply works. The key here is not be to be addicted to logic but to be addicted to reality when the two differ (sort of the same situation as why you never draft a QB in the first rounf there is simply no record of this being a choice for delivering an SB win since Dallas chose Aikman in 1989).

Brandon if $3 million is too much for Shelton at LT the specifically how much is JJ worth? $7 million is the franchise tag number and I think this is simply a rediculous figure for a player JJs output or even his potential. I'll actualy ask this as a specific question in a post on this as the specificity brings reality but I will add this as a response to your comment.

Exactly, not over-relying on the QB is what winning football is all about.

This definition in the CBA may be stupid in itself, but is probably necssary to make the whole thing work (which is really what determines what is stupid and what isn't). The tags are not about the sport primarily they are about the business. Unfortunately, there is a disconnect between how players are paid (supply and demand of folks capable of playing the LT role) and how these roles can be transferred between players in terms of how they play. It is simply too easy to flip-flop players back and forth between the OL line positions to separate out the franchise/transition tags between these positions.. OL players are lumped together because it is simply too easy to do what was propsed with Jennings to purport you are going to use him as a center (or even to use him that way enough in his pre-FA season) simply to hold his price down. Things can get real silly fast if anyone asserted that the letter of the law mandates that because Bannan played DT when he hits FA his cap level is now determined by OL salaries, but no one even goes there because the result would be dumb for everyone. Incongruities would be created more frequently if the partnership between the NFL and the NFLPA tried to divide out cap numbers between OL positions even if the play in the sport are pretty static because it is working. The current framework may be stupid but it works and that is the key.

I think JP meant and is correct in recognizing that Bledsoe's play was not the reason why we lost. His failure to produce was a big reason we did not win, but his play in particular was not the reason why we lost. What this seeming contradiction (it is merely a seeming contradiction if you do not care enough about football to think this through which is fine by me and particularly to my wife who does not think the NFL deserves much thought at all) means is: 1. I think Bledsoe would clearly be at fault if he made bonehead negative plays which directly or pretty directly scored points for the other team. I think he would solely be at fault or the lead factor in being at fault if everybody else on the team was playing well and without his boneheaded plays we would win. 2. I think that Bledsoe would somewhat be at fault if his boneheaded plays did NOT directly or pretty directly lead tp the other team scoring, but he failed to lead the offense to score enough points to overcome the point total given up by the defense 3. I think Bledsoe would escape being held at fault if his play was in essence like that of Scott Norwood whetre he did the best he could to make a long FG which would have put us over top after we had failed to play our game in many facets. He tried, it wasn't a chip shot. He and I feel bad, but far be it from me to be so small I blame him for the loss though what he was called upon to do is perform difficult tasks like kick 47 yard FGs under tremendous pressure. Even if i didn't condone the miss I certainly understand it. I think blame runs up and down a scale in reality and there are actually many ways to look at it that are not irrational. I think it is irrational to feel that a judgment of Bledsoe (which we are all welcomed to do as fans) is most correct when it adds up to a result like #1 above. In general, one of the great things about the production of the 2004 Bills is that the QB position was really diminished in importance in terms of the game outcome or expectations of QB performance in order for us to win. The D played so well and the ST played so well that as long as the O produced a Trent Dilfer like performance we got results like the winning streak. This is good football in my mind. If however, the team had an approach which depended on the QB to register a Peyton Manning like performance or an early to mid career John Elway like performance in order to win, the result is going to be like those experienced by Manning throughout his career or Elway until he got smart and realized he had to forgo what the market would give him financailly to help the team pay to keep folks like Terrell Davis and Shannion Sharpe. The main problem for the Bills last season was not and does not even start with Bledsoe and his play. BLEDSOE DOES DESERVE ALOT OF BLAME FOR US LOSING, however to me his primary failing was that at a point where the D and the ST fell apart in the final game against Pittsburgh, Bledsoe did not have the ability to produce at a level to compensate for the failings of the rest of the team. Too bad. We need to get better. However, switching from the Bledsoe failings to whatever failings (it is to be hope small) that a young QB has is not likely at all to produce a better result. If JP has an outstaning year he will perform as well as Ben Reothlsburger (sp?). if he achioeves this lofty level the result is likely to be the same as it was for Pitts as a young QB may fiind it possible in some cases to pull a Tom Brady and be part of a winner, but far more likely a young QB will simply stink or at best be like RoboQB and not be enough to carry the team. JP is correct in my viewin feeling like if he has a good year, his play will not be enough to take this team to an SB or even the playoffs unless the D and the ST play the same lights out ball they played last year until the Pitts game. On my sliding scale I would put the Bledsoe fault level somewhere around #2. He was closer to #1 in 2003 as bomeheaded play from Bledsoe produced moments like him throwing the ball OB on fourth down and resulted in his O going almost 3 games in a row worth of failing to score an offensive TD. In 2004, Bledsoe improved his play from horrid to inadequate and MM correctly adopted an approach which may well win with simply adequate play from the QB. Bledsoe could not even mount adequate play against Pittsburgh and this was fatal as the ST was bungling from the Clements fumble to the Lindell miss and the D was giving up over a 100 yards to a scrub RB. I am hopeful that our young QB will play at an adequate level this season (though even this will be tough with the usual ups snd downs of a young QB, but I am hopeful about JPs talents and that he will be more up than down). However, the key for the Bills to put up the Ws this year and make the playoffs is not to get better production and over-rely on the QB. The key is to get Ravens level play out of the D and the ST so that adequacy from JP is merely at a level one can reasonably expect from a young QB and actually what can be produced by an over-the-hill QB if you don't over rely on him. I think the move from Bledsoe to JP may be a good one because expectations for a young QB are small and our over-reliance on the QB will diminish.

Where JP-era is incorrect is that there is no difference whatsoever in what the CBA says and what redzone.com says. He apparently is taking your saying (accurately) that redzone.com is correct as also saying that that the CBA is incorrect. The two use the same method and essentially say the same thing and where he is making a mistake is that he does not seem to realize that. I think there is a dispute here because JP-era does not seem to realize that it is irrelevant that Jennings qualifies only as an LT because even though he played center in college has not played C as a pro, because even if he had played C as a pro or in fact played C all the time he would still be tagged at the rate of LT pay because the top 5 salaries which are LTs and Ruben in 2004 set the franchise amount for all OL players. He may not believe this as he says, but it is simply true. People are confused in this dispute because yes it is true that JJ only qualifies as an LT, but even if he qualified as a center it would not matter because the tag amount would be the same.

AZ deemed him a good enough player that they signed him to a signficant LT contract when he hit FA. However, given the inflated LT contracts which are far above the relative play or impact of a player its hard to say that he is very good but reasonable to say that he is at least adequate as an LT. Jennings has also at least been adequate with signs of good potential. However, it is a real truth that he has had at least as many penaltie/game as the norm if not more. he was beaten like a drum by a good talent in Abraham in one of the games against the Jets, and he has never played a full season as a Pro so deeming him adequate is about as much as canm rationally be done looking at his past real world accomplishments. 1. I'd give the nod to Shelton over Jennings here in terms of accomplishments. The injury to Shelton was also real year before last and seemingly was part of the reason he reported to camp overweight. His rep in terms of injury however, is a very good one as he has been able to play several full seasons in his career without injury and even generated a nickname as "The Last Man Standing" a couple of yeats back as he one of the few and best performing Cards to escape injury. The same docs who made a great call on WM need to see him to judge his most recent injury created no permanent deficit. Injury is simply a major drawback with JJ as he never has been able to start every game and he has had to leave several games with injuries even though he answered the call the next game to start in several cases. 2. Assuming the docs give him passing grades, a bbig advantage here to Shelton. Age an contract issues are relevant here. JJ is younger but not by a lot as he has 4 years and Shelton has 6. Contractually, Shelton brings a cap hit of $3 million and JJ easily will match this and probably will cost at least an annual average of 4 if not 5 million or more to sign. 3. Big advantage for Shelton in this regard. Overall, i think looking at past accomplishments Shelton is a major upgrde over Jennings. The docs will need to attest that the recent Shelton injury will not diminish his ability beyond the past. Due diligience also requires checking to make sure his demotion in AZ occured because of his run-in with a new HC and a world class contract LT (Davis) being available again not due to some performance issue. However, if the docs say he is fine this one seems like a no-brainer to me comparing JJ with Shelton.

The premise behind the original post was not to play JJ in a particular spot, but was based on the false assumption that there would be a cap room savings by tagging him based on the top 5 average salaries of center rather than the top 5 salaries of LTs. The premise is incorrect as centers and LT salaries are all lumped together for franchise purposes as the 5 top OL salaries even if they were all LTs.

I saw the following on NFLPA.com which had an article from a Dallas-Forth Worth paper which said: Not only did Parcells draft Bledsoe first overall with the New England Patriots in 1993, but he practically defines the "bus driver" Parcells so desperately desires in a quarterback. Bledsoe has averaged only about one turnover a game in his career. "Dallas is intriguing for obvious reasons, playing for my old coach and looking at the weapons they have offensively and all of that," Bledsoe said. "There are a number of teams that are possibilities and Dallas is one of those. But that would be an interesting option. No question." Other teams who might be interested in Bledsoe are Cleveland, Detroit, Tampa Bay and Arizona. Bledsoe could have stayed in Buffalo, but he decided he did not want to be a backup to J.P. Losman, who was drafted by the Bills after a first-round trade with the Cowboys during the 2004 Draft. If there is a bidding war for Bledsoe between any two of the 5 teams mentioned, Bledsoe may end up laughing all the way to the bank about getting cut by the Bills. Go figure.

This is because all the OL players share a common tag regardless of position. If you tag a center for example, the tag is set as an average of the top 5 OL salaries though most (or maybe all) of them are LTs.

On the contrary, TH is a cancer in the internet world of TSW but he shows real signs of being a cancer to the Bills. 1. Henry is working hand and glove with TD to get him traded which gives the Bills maximum value for him and also gives him maximum value from his FA contract. I've seen cancers and I believe me TH is no cancer to this team as the relationship with a cancer would feature both sides (usually the player) bad mouthing each other. 2. Henry has said many things about his desire to go elsewhere and about him being a productive RB when used properly , but his comments about the Bills beyond saying we should have used him more have not been negative about the team or the institution. If he were badmouthing Ralph, TD or WM then I would say he is a cancer but if he has I haven't seen the quote. 3. Many posters seem to go out of their way to turn anything TH does or says into some alleged cancer. He clearly has bad musical tastes (as seen in one article where the interview seemed to be done over the din or his stereo). TH was sitting on the bench while WM racked up yardage (though complaints from some posters about him pouting seem neither here nor there to me, if he were shown laughing they would probably complain about him obviously not caring if he were cut so I'm not sure how he was supposed to act or what gameface he was supposed to show last year. The only negative thing I can remember TH saying in particular in the past year plus was some badmouthing of Kevin Killdrive he joine Ruben and Winfield in doing. Like those two he will probably be gone, but those comments were not cancerous about Killdrive they were simply true/ 4. TD and the Bills have clearly said thy would not trade him unless they got the right deal, Henry was given permission to and has tried to make the right deal happen. My guess is that it will happen, but if it doesn't then it will serve both TDs and THs interests for Henry to suit up and back-up WM. The Bills need a #2 RG badly. No one expects WM to carry it 40 times a game like we want and to survive. No one intelligent expects a small body like Shaud Williams to stand-up to carrying the rock 30+ in a game multiple games in a row if we are forced to start our back-up RN instead of using him to give WM a blow and as a change-up. TH is under contract next year and if the Bills cannot get value for him in a trade then by far the best move for him is to shut up and be a reserve for WM and look for a chance to out 100 yards due to an injury or nick to WM and cash in as FA when he his contract ends. If TH were to sit out he would not accrue time to being an FA and would remain Bill's property. If he were to pout and show up to punch the clock and accrue time but not really try hard, it would lower his ability to sign a big FA contract as a second unproductive year in a row would be added to his resume and the Bills would be correct to badmouth him privately and questions would spring up abou the injury that ended his season last year. There are no real signs that TH is a cancer and though I think we will get a deal that allows us to trade him (in my book a draft pick is a fantasy value and I would prefer we get a proven vet we need- even one of lesser talent than Henry in exchange for him) I will not be shocked if Henry glues a smile on his face and back-ups WM to maximize his monet next year.

Let's talk about the weakness at LG. From looking at the numbers (I could easily be wrong) I doubt that our budget for what portion of an $84 million cap budget we devote to the OL will allow us to shop for the Villarial level talent we would hope to find as a replacement at LG. The today's cap hits (they can go down with restructuring but this is all uninfluencable and generally unknown to us outsiders) includes $9.7 million for MW, $2.9 million for Villarial, $2.6 million for Teague, and whatever amount it takes to resign JJ and that will not leave much for us to acquire LG talent in any likely budget TD has. If we are not able to upgrade the OL by getting more talent, the question becomes whether we can upgrade the OL internally with JMac eliciting better performance? I for one would love to get more talent, but since I do not think we can afford it, I am actually confident that we can upgrade the OL with exisiting resources. This may not be a much as we could do with better players, but I think it will be sufficient to make out OL better and even adequate with a more mobile QB behind it. Specifically, I don't see why folks view last year's inadequate play from L. Smith as the best he can do. JMac elicitied a level of play from Smith last year that surprised me it was as good as it was. Smith was a PS player for the Ravens in 03 and if he had been made a Bill and improved his game enough to even make our roster I think this would have been impressive. However, he made the extraordinary jump from PS to active (it happens but it is rare in the NFL), but he even made the jump to get starting time. I think his talent level was inadeqaute for a starter and the braintrust miscalculated whether R. Brown could be replaced by Pacillo. This is why Smith even got a chance. However, though Smith was not up to the level we want from a starter, he had specific limitations and actually did a number of things well. I think that it bodes well for us that his problems last year were with run blocking rather than the more difficult to teach pass pro. He also had clear effectiveness issues in the red zone (where strong drive-blocking is of great import. If in the off-season he bulks up a little bit, in voluntry camp he improves his technique to give him a bit more leverage in applying his strength and he makes an attitude adjustment and just plays a little nastier and aggressive in run blocking the jump for his 04 levels to be the blocker we want will actually be much less than the jump from the Ravens PS to starting for us. As far as Tucker, I think he has the smarts as someone trained at my alma mater to improve his LG play now that we have an adult there as position coach. However, I think his most useful role as a Bill is to provide us with a back-up at all three interior line positions as needed. Just as Price was the first call at either tackle slot, if Tucker is the first call at LG, RG, and C, I am comfortable that when we exprience the likelihood of a nick a that position we will not miss a beat. If Smith proves to be a dud at LG even with JMac teaching then Tucker is my plan B. I hope we can somehow sign a Wahle or a Rivera but I don't think we will be able to afford to do this and if so I think we can upgrade the OL with existing resources though we would prefer in a perfect world (which last I checked this isn't) we want better players I think we can do this.