Fake-Fat Sunny

The view in this column does seem ratber half-brained in that ignores several points of broader context as stated above (ex. if one wants to broaden the assessment of TD from simply the Bledsoe move to a broader discussion of his 2003 drafting why he somehow never gets to commentary on McGahee choice seems odd, add to that TD showed great acumen in passing on taking Kelsay with his first pick which few would have complained about and he got him anyway with our second pick, also the bonus to the business side and fan excitement after a 3-13 season was clear and Bledsoe was a part of that). However, simply sticking to the on-field stuff I think that the big Bledsoe mistake was not in giving up the 2003 pick but in resigning him instead of cutting him after he sucked in 2003. Perhaps its just because I value the draft fairly little (its important but just another method of acquiring players that actually has far less import and provides less value than good FA moves) but I view the sum total with Bledsoe after two years as a wash (great 2002 and sucky 2003) and the Bills should have just cashed it in and cut him at that point. Perhaps the real debate here is one of how valuable the draft is or not. Between the crapshoot of choosing collegians as to whether they will be good pros and the potential for injury to wipe out good assessment wotk, I find it neither extrordinary or a big thing even if the 03 1st round maneuvers had been a total bust,

The way you express it is a technically accurate way of expressing it, but it does not reflect the full reality of the situation. The Bledsoe trade provides an even clearer indication of this becaise the 2002 season is in the books and Bledsoe's career as a Bill is done. I think TD really has hit upon an approach to the draft that really reflects the reality of the ultimate in fantasy league activities. It is best seen by adapting your question to the reality of the situation. Specifically: How does Bledsoe's contribution to the 2002 Bills match-up against how our 2003 1st round pick would have contributed to the 2002 Bills if we had not made the trade? The answer is that our 2003 pick would not have contributed anything to the 2002 Bills if we had kept it, Trading Bledsoe for the future consideration was by far the right thing to do if Bledsoe provided any contribution to the 2002 team at all. In fact, by playing QB to an 8-8 record which represented one of the largest improvements in NFL history by a team in W/L and by him qualifying for the Pro Bowl (if you think someone else deserved the reserve Pro nod more that year feel free to name 'em) and doing this in exchange for a resource that would have contributed nothing to the 2002 team TD came as close as one can get to getting a lot for nothing as you can get. The equation gets more complex in the outyears as Bledsoe's production is now compared to the woulda/coulds/shoulda of who the Bills might have taken with the choice, or by who the Pats took with the choice, or even who the Bills took with the choice they materialized out of the PP trade which gave the Bills a 1st eound pick. Deciding how you want to look at it (there are not unreasonable arguments for each of these views) one can compare Bledsoe to Warren who I think NE took with the pick, Bledsoe to whatever QB was available if that is who you allege we would have picked, or lump Bledsoe and WM together as the players acquired by the Bills using the 1st round of the draft resource, Still, all in all I think this was perhaps the best use of the 1st round draft resource by a GM that I have ever seen when one looks at the Bills use of the 2003 1st round. The numeric method used in a post above which assigns a value to picks and discounts them over time tries to get at this, but I think it also fails to describe reality. In general it treats all drafts as being of equal value (a 2nd round pick in the middle of the 1st round is worth x points regardless of the year) but at least does attempt to take time into account by skewing the value of a traded pick by giving it value skewed by 1 round. However, this fails to recognize the reality that one year's draft may be stronger or weaker than the next year's draft and a choice in the middle of the 1st round may be worth a lot one year but have a totally different worth the next year. Not only does this method of discounting not really reflect the differences in player quality from year to year, but there actually can be significant variation within a draft by need so that a 1st round choice in a draft may actually produce a lesser player than a later choice or that the comparison of values is not logarythmatically consistent within a draft. What I mean by this is best seen in the 2003 draft. The Bills had a clear need on their team for a DE, We had switched with GW ro a 4-3 froma 3-4 and made this more intensive DL usage switch at the exact same time as we were losing Wiley to FA, Big Ted and Bruce the year before as cap casualties and Hansen to retirement. We had chosen Denney in the 2002 draft but he had disappointed being inactive most of his first year. Most pundits had the Bills taking a DE in 2003 and talked about us taking Chris Kelsay as a reasonable 1st round choice for us who might be there for our 20 something pick even if there was the expected rush on DEs in this talented DL draft. Surprising to virtually all we took WM which seemed off to folks since though WM was viewed as a top-5 talent before the injury that left him there for us, we had an RB coming off a Pro Bowl berth, Fortnately TD is not a believer at all in the draft methodology that assigns particular values to particular slots. He not only chose WM specifically because TH was so good at RN we could afford not rush WM's development along, but he also recognized that because 8 other teams before the Bills had chosen DL players, they were quite unlikely to devote the salary a second round pick would be slotted to bring to another DL player. As it turned out, Kelsay whom if TD had taken him with the pick used for WM would have complained (mostly folks would have whined he should have traded up to get one of the top 4 DLs chosen) he instead was able to have his cake and eat it to by getting the man our board showed as the best player available and also filled our need at DE, Again as good as our use of the 1st round resource was in 2003 in terms of benefits for the team its hard to imagine doing better than adding a player who became a starter for out 2nd ranked statistically D in his second year with our second round choice.

I agree that it is apathy because even though he seems like a nice guy an has enough years in the league to have a good disaster QB resume, he does not have enough of a resume to seem to be a good #2 for us. I think we want a #2 who has: 1. Seasoned nice guy who has proven he is a team player- Matthews seems to be OK here. 2. A QB who has been there before with a record of success leading a team to the playoffs and preferably the SB- Mathews does not seem to have this and this would particularly seem to be a useful thing in training a young QB. 3. A reasonable chance of leading the team to a few wins in a Frank Reich kind of way if the starter gets knocked out for a few games- I see no real proof that Matthews has what it takes here, but actually few back-up can prove this until they get the chance. There are players like Hobert who have the physical tools but not the mental power to be a back-up. There are players like AVP who can win games and be outstanding in mid-game relief, but if the other team and DBs get to look at a little film and prepare to exploit his weaknesses he can be had. There are perfect back-ups like Frank Reich who cannot only come in relief but actually are even better when they have a little time to prepare. There are the Tom Bradys who should be starting. 4. Know there role and will not be a cancer when they do well snf have a #2 cap hit. I have real doubts about Matthews for numbers 2 and 3. The ironic thing here is that Bledsoe sucks as a #1 but actually has clear indicators that as far as #1, 2 and 3 he would have been the perfect back-up for JP. Unfortunately his cap hit was too high and though he is unlikely to ever be a cancer he still sees himself as a starter and needed to be cut.

Financially Bledsoe seemed to have two choicesL 1. Get cut and probably get a raise or at least more $. 2. Stay and restructure where he would not have to give back any money (this is not allowed under the CBA) and his cap hit in 2005 would have at least been $2.16 milion (poration of his bonus) + a base salary of the NFL vet minimum (300K plus). The Bledsoe cut is manna from heaven for those who did not want him to start. However, it would have been far better for the Bills in terms of the cap if he had stayed and restructured to the lowest cap hit he could have. I certainly agree with those who did not want Bledsoe to be our starter in 2005. However, I disagree with those who wanted to see this happen by cutting Bledsoe since I felt we would be far better off cap wise if he restructured and gave us $2+ additional cap room to spend improving the team. As it has happened, Bledsoe will have a much bigger negative effect on this team by getting cut. Instead of us saving on the $6.5 million cap hit we would have paid him under the contract we agreed to pay him, instead we only save $2.2 million by cutting him because all the bonus paid to him accelerates into a one time cap hit of $4.3 million. In addition to this lower savings by cutting instead of restructuring, we now have to pay for the credible back-up for JP we will acquire. Who knows how much that will be but given that it cost cap hits over $4 million to sign players like Garcia and Warner last year, figure that we are going to get no one who has suceeded in the NFL before (SB win for Warner several Pro Bowl berths for Garcia) as our back-up QB. A back-up level QB who failed last year like Feeley had a cap hit of something like $2 million so figure that max we are going to get a Feeley level player in as our back-up. As far as Bledsoe goes, he gets to pocket an amortized bonus of $4.3 milllion already paid to him by the Bills + some huge amortized amount remaining from NE contract (an amount already paid to him long ago even thought the cap hit was prorated and actually the cap hit was absorbed by NE in 2002 and played a role in them not being able to even make the playoffs that year). I doubt that the Ciwboys will be able to sign him for the vet minimum but will likely be able to pay him a smaller than normal bonus because the Bills will be subsidizing Bledsoe's new deal. My guess is that he easily pockets another multi-million dollar check as the Boys or someone else signs him to a contract that will be long enough to protate the signing bonus. Do not be surprised if Bledsoe gets a check for $5 million or more in exchange for the indignity of being cut. He can easily play for the NFL mimimum and laugh all the way to the bank, but the market will not demand likely demand this of him and things may get pretty rediculous if there is a bidding war for this player who cannot carry a team to the SB (as though anyone ever could).

I hope he has been studying film for a long time and virtually right from the start in his career. The injury really gave him an inpredented opportunity to sit in the booth during games and soak up the knowledge and wisdom of Sam Wyche. If instead he used this time to sit on the sidelines during games unable to play because of his fracture amd merely yucked it up with the other athletes who were inactive he missed a key opportunity in his development. Perhaps one of the most troubling things I heard from him this season was when he was thrown into the NE game (which truly demonstrated the value of off the field stuff to playing well on the field) was when he said that his poor performance had taught him to take the off field stuff more seriously. What! He didn't take it seriously before? Look its OK for fans like ICE to blather on that only way to learn the game is by starting (as though you learn nothing by playing and that there are other ways to play than by starting), but an actual athlete needs to know and operate with the sense that anytime you put on the uniform you have to be ready to play (unless you are Billy Joe Hobert) and that because of his mechanical issues, practice and repetition are central to his development and like almost all rookies, the film room and the playbook are central to his development as well. Sheesh. The fact that he was first of the Bills to show up in the off-season is a great sign. The improvement in his production from the NE debacle, to the delay of game penalty when he came in the next time but led to his successfully leading the team to a TD by handing off to WM, to his final very good mop-up performance where he did call a clock-stopping TO, but at least he avioded the dumb penalty as he led the team to a TD where he even complete a couple of passes and converted a third down are good signs for the future. However, the two things which strike me as key to a successful 2005 with JP is that 1. we do not depend on him to be Joe Montana and he hands the ball off as much as possible (he will certainly need to pass and to go deep sometimes, but I see these primarily as changes of pace to make the run work even better) and, 2: to have a credible plan B as our back-up QB in case the unfortunate happens and he cannot play. IF JP never throws the ball more than 25 times in a game this season and usually he is below 20 passes I will be one happy camper about our QB play.

Thanks for the post. I also found it thoughtful. Though I agree with lots of it, I will point out a few areas where I think your perspectives might use a little more explanation for us dumb folk or strike me as incorrect. 1. In general, the quicker we can leave the Bledsoe era behind the better life is from my perspective. He never delivered a playoff berth for this team during his time here when he had a central role. Even worse for TSW purposes he made trying to figure out how to make this team a winner with him at the helm a repetitive chore on TSW because the conversation had to involve him to have much to do with reality. Now the Bledsoe era is over and those of us more interested in reality can mention him in passing (as I hope this does) but simply ignore the detail. Thus, though I found your description of the only three options for the Bills completely lacking in describing a realistic option which TD tried to make happen, namely get Bledsoe to accept a back-up role and a lower cap hit as by far the best option for the Bills, Bledsoe did not go for this and TD correctly cut him. I wish Bledsoe had stayed and restructured to a lower cap hit, but he didn't and he is gone and time to move on. 2. The main point though I think you might reconsider in judging the Bills 2004 schedule is the point that Simon and others have picking on that the schedule was not that weak. As you acknowledge upon prodding, all you can do is play the schedule you get from the league and the Bills did that to a winning record. Upon additional prodding, trying to claim the Bills lost all their games against quality teams has correctly evoked an acknowledgment from you that this is only true if you acknowledge that non-quality teams do well in the NFL as we beat several playoff teams like St. L, Sea. and NYJ (its cut but inaccurate to hold the loss against NYJ against them without holding the win against NYJ for them. I think the other big point that you do not give the Bills the credit they deserve as you bring in the RPI point is that actually, I would count the wins against St. L, the Browns, the 9ers, AZ, and at least one of the MI wins as quality wins not because these teams are any good, but because we beat them going away. In my mind a quality win is not merely beating quality teams, but in beating bad teams in laughers. I think the Bills deserve a lot of credit for not only doing what they should do against these teams, but quite frankly for doing more than can reasonably be expected against another proud pro team and particularly against pro athletes on the road by embarassing them in their house. The Bills can and should be faulted a lot for losing to Pitts in our house, but when you put 30+ points on the board against an opponent this is a quality win in my book and deserves some acknowledgement beside just saying this is a bad team and disregarding it. 3. I have great hopes for the Bills in 2005, but they are not because I have great hopes or condifence in JP. I have hope because just like what seemed to be going on with this team with Bledsoe, MM had learned to play the game successfully while minimizing the import and the role of the QB. I think that is winning football in this league. To the extent the Bills can do just as they did during the streak and not depend upon the QB to win it for us, so to do I think we can be even more succesful this year if we give JP the room to learn the games and have his up and downs that most young QBs have, but beat other teams like a drum because of out superior D play, ST play and handing the ball off to WM and then hand it off again, I think our formula for winning football remains the same minimize the role Bledsoe had to play and now minimize the role JP has to play, If we can look back on next season and point to the game or two where JP stepped up because they happened to be the game like Pittsburgh where our D and ST sucked and he filled the gap, it will be a good season. However, if we play a seaspn where JP needs to play like a stud most weeks in order for us to win it is likely going to be a long season.

This really is a case of look this man in the eye and make a judgment. His cap hit is obviously too much for his level of play and his position. However, his future year numbers are either uncertain or not available but I think it would be a reasonable assumption to judge that an accelerated cap hit from would be untenable so cutting him when there is some (though far from guaranteed) prospect that he will reach the level of play we hoped that cutting him now is not an option. He clearly will need to restructure his deal to a more reasonable amount or he is not simply letting down the Bills and the region, but letting down his teammates as well. He did all of these things with his behavior last pre-season, but he at least righted the ship of play though he did not reach the levels he wanted. He needs to redo the deal and continue to make progress or be cut as soon as he reasonably can which will probably be after this season, though I hope and expect with JMac\s guidance he will meet the goals he and we hope he will meet.

I think the unfortunate possibility of injury mandates that the Bills have a back-up that they believe is capable of leading this team to Ws if it comes to that. I do not think that the injury to JP last year proves or means he is fragile or injury prone at all. I think many posters were made gunshy by RJ who truly was injury prone. However, JP can and should win the starting job on the field and be it JP, Bledsoe or whomever, the braintrust needs to make judgments about who plays based on real world production and output and not based on pride, ego, mollycoddling development or some other issue. For me, the #2 should not be expected to be a good enough talent to start, but this is different from being a good enough talent to win in short episodes as a back-up. This to me was the correct assessment of Bledsoe in 2001. Better than Brady? NO! Good enough to be the starter? No probably not! Great as a back-up? You're darn right and he played the role perfectly with Brady and others heaping lots of credit on him for helping the 2nd year QB learn the O like a vet and stepping in when Brady got nicked to play QB in the majority of a must win game to a win by NE. I think its too bad for us that Bledoe did not accept TDs offer and reduce his cap hit to back-up levels in exchange for a fair competition with our QB of the future fir the starter's job. It leaves us in a not good situation with $4.3 million in dead space from the Bledsoe cut which is less than the $6 million+ cap hit from keeping him, but the $2+ million in savings probably are easily eaten up when we acquire a back-up QB capable of leading this team to Ws if JP gets hurt again or sucks. My first hope is that JP plays as well as I hope and think he can. However, it would be foolish of us not have the best plan B we can designed to win games if necessary and not chosen primarily to be a mentor.

Agreed! The trade got us great value for JP. i think we got a far better QB with our 2005 1st rounder than we would have gotten if we didn't make the deal and we got a year of traing as a pro the 2005 pick wouldn't have gotten if we had held the pick.

This is bad and good news for the Bills. It would take one of the far more desirable LTs out of the supply for market and thus raises Jenning price as he moves up the ranking in terms of the most desirable LTs available which is bad news for the Bills as it will likely raise the rate the remaining teams are willing to pay. However, this may well be good news for the Bills as the Seahawks are second in the league for cap room remaining and though they have a lot of unsigned quality players like Alexander/Hasselback (by quality I mean in demand because Alexander is clearly a jerk personally) their large cap room made it quite doable for them to bid on a second tier LT like JJ in order to pretend that losing Jones would be no loss for them. It all comes down to how much actual demand there is for JJ as if as few teams are in the market for an LT as I suspect (subtract the teams committed to an LT with a top 10 OL cap hit, teams committed at LT by the past too large deals given to talents like Cifton and Petitgout at LT, and subtract the team who really need a better LT, but have no cap money to bid high for JJ) there are really only 3 or 4 teams who can even bid against the Bills for JJ services. If Jax, the 49ers, or Chicago is more interested in spending their cap money on JJ than elsewhere his contract hit would probably be too high to make him worth and investment by the Bills (franchise or transition OL cap amounts are too much for JJ if someone wants to pay 1st tier money for him at $7 and $6 million, even the going rate for an LT or minimal talent at $5 million is probably too much for the Bills to commit to an OL player where MW is scheduled for a cap hit of at least $5.8 million, Villareal is in for $3 million and Teague costs $2 million. If we can get JJ for $4 million it probably makes sense to try to upgrades through the better chemistry of keeping him and JMac's work as even this contract would likely preclude us from going into the FA market for an LG. The numbers seem the same, if you want to acquire a better LG one should root against us resigning Jennings as the cap expenditure to resign him will preclude us from getting OL talent above an NFL vet minimum salary.

I think a fuller and thus more accurate summary of your draft descriptions is as follows: I certainly think the Bledsoe acquisition on whole is one of a failed choice. However, it was not a total failure in all individual aspects or years of his production even though the bottom line in total is that he (along with the rest of the team) failed each year that they did not even make the playoffs. If one wants to make this broad general assessment then I agree. However, if you want to parse these by going into details like comparing value received for draft choices spent, then the greater accuracy of a fuller description is mandated. As far as the details of the draft, my assessment is: 2003 1st for Bledsoe- Trade ended up being in favor of the Bills as we got value out of Bledsoe in 2002 for no cost as we gave up a future pick for this production. As our QB spot in 2002 was open as there was no way we were going to pay RJ what we agreed to pay him and AVP demonstrated he is a good back-up but not a starter Bledsoe is most accurately compared to what we suspect would have been the likely output of Jeff Blake (not even a starting quality QB in this league at his 2002 level) or Chris Chandler (also not a starting quality QB) who were the tow most likely prospect before the acqusition of Bledsoe. The improvement of our W/L from 3-13 to 8-8 that year and his qualification for the Pro Bowl all in exchange for future considerations make his acquisition hands down a plus for the Bills and this is even wothout the off field business benefits that initial excitement over Bledsoe gave. However, in my mind, his horrendous production in 2003 makes his great performance the year before at best a wash for the Bills as this acquisition cost only a 1st round choice, but Bledsoe simply proved not to be good enough to stick. I think we moved from the wash to the negative by making the mistake of redoing the Bledsoe deal. If we had cut him after 2003, i think the expenditure of a 1st was a quite reasonable resource to spend to get the wash of the 02/03 Bledsoe performance (this is particularly true if you want to include the actual 2003 draft occurences into the mix which is already done so probably not reasonable for assessing Bledsoe but probably is reasonable for assessing TD. TDs additional manufacture of something out of nothing as he not only turned 2003 considerations into 2002 output from Bledsoe, but turned PP into a 1st rounder we were not owed and that 1st round choice into WM is a good move by today's measures and may go down in history as one of the best GM moves in NFL history if WM stays lucky and has a career like his first season. Too early to give hosannas on the career yet, but definite kudos to TD for his manufacture of something from nothing in the immediate term. 2005 1st, the 2nd and 5th for JP- it seems a little farfetched to indict Bledsoe for this expenditure or TD for making it, as I think that even if Bledsoe has average production that did not justify his cut last year, the Bills needed to draft a QB of the future for this team. Did we give up too much for JP? We'll see. However, given that the top of the 2005 draft seems pretty light for QB alent, I think it was a very good move to trade the 2005 pick to take a better QB than would have been available this year to take JP last year. Again somehow linking this need to expend on the failing of Bledsoe cries out for you to assert some other option as a better choice for TD rather than investing in Bledsoe. The woulda, coulda, shoulda gets pretty complex and into fantasy land, but if you want to make the assesment and claim you are making it is where you need to go to do this credibly, This team committed to a difficult path in this regard by shifting from Cottrell's 3-4 to GW's 4-3 at the same time we were losing Wiley, TW, Hansen and even BS to cap hell, FA and retirement. This team lucked out last year by having Schobel, Denney and Kelsay as the 3 DEs when by all rights were should have at least has a player who could credibly swing between DT and DE or 4 DEs on the roster. Even if Denny had been the second coming of Bruce, we would have needed to draft a Kelsay to bring us to the minimum level necessary to play in the NFL. In terms his performace, it shows a lack of fooball understanding to lambaste his play simply because he is not the pass rusher we want. Denney did demonstrate huge improvement meriting his inactive status most of his rookie year to logging a lot of starter time in his second year (he was adequate as a starter at best, but moving from being inactive to even being a solid sub would have been substantial improvement and his play was above the solid sub level his second year though it was not quite starter quality. His pass rush is merely adequate, but his wing span and some atleticism has allowed him to be an important figure in our fairly successful zone blitz D where he is the strongest of our DEs against the run (compared to the motor and commitment to the rush which makes Kelsay a better pass rusher and given some strength issues which has made Schobel beatable at the point of attack). Further, Denney has shown good flexibility backing up both the LDE and RDE positions which allowed us to get away with going with only three DEs last year. Complaints about his specific failings as a player would have more weight except statisitically our D was among the most productive in the league last year and Denney was a key player in our D. Folks make a mistake in consistently viewing the 2003 selection of WM as some indictment of TH's 2002 play. TH made and deserved his 2002 seaon Pro Bowl berth (received due to an injury of one of the 3 guys above him) as he pounded out roughly 1400 yards and caught over 40 passes. The Bills took WM in 2003 who has to sit a year to recover not because Henry was so bad, but because Henry was good enough in 2002 to allow WM to sit and not be rushed back. TH's play in 2003 dropped a notch from his previous Pro Bowl level, but was outstanding that year in my book as he was still a productive playing in a horrible O run by Kevin Killdrive in which he played through the pain of a fracture part of the season. The pick (and resigning when TH bollixed his finances) worked out well enough that we had the room to pick WM and rehab him slowly and correctly. True as the two factors in my mind are 1: we stupidly asked him to drag along the even less experiened Pacillo under the guidance of the not-ready for primetime Vinky and Ruel and, 2: MW was quite unprofessional in dealing with the unfortunate loss of the grandma that raised him last off-season (though loss of a family member being devastating is understandable, I'm sorry but he gets the big bucks to suck it up and be professional and he wasn't). Again fault TD for stupidly hiring GW (who stupidly hired his buddy Vinky and replaced him with the not experienced enough Ruel) rather than indicting MW. The reality and good news here is that MW seems to have grown up under JMac last year and a good future looks very possible for him here. I think that is difficult to fault TD for passing on picking a guy many had going in the 1st round when he dropped to us in the 2nd. In fact, i think TD deserves kudos for this choice because by picking the best player available even though we had no immediate WR need with Moulds and PP: 1. Reed did produce at levels which justified this pick and revamped out O in 2002. 2. Though we simpletons saw no need, TD was farsighted enough to see this pick allowed us to let PP walk in FA and he was able to turn this walk into a 1st round pick which became WM. I'm pissed Reed developed the droppsies. but i think it is farfetched to indict TD for making a bad move here. So overall, alot ofthis is detailed nitpicking, but by couching your attack in detail you actually leave the door open for a fuller examination of the record. TD is far from perfect. but should not be given full blame when the player fails due to circumstances difficult for any GM tp forsee (MW's grandma dying and his reaction to it) or indict the GM when the player does succeed initially Reed). In addition, a player may fail intially (Denney) or at some point in his career (MW) but one should not discount improvement in his work or future hopes.

The word in the press is that he has decided to return to the couch he was rescued from when the Bills were forced to find a QB by the injuries to JP and Travis Brown. Given his level of past play and the fact he was on no roster during last pre-season, I don't think we can seriously even consider him as our 3rd string QB untile we here some statement from him he wants the job.

To be most accurate about the cap impacts of the Bledsoe cut, the numbers I see is that it will give us $2.3 million in cap room (so up to $14 or $15 million would be the most accurate statement with your numbers rather than assigning it the moest wishful number of $15 mill). However, to be fully accurate of the situation, the cut now places acquiring a credible back-up QB as first on our list of acquisitions. As important as upgrading the OL, getting a back-up RB for Willis and other items are, I think that there is now nothing more essential to the Bills than getting a credible back-up QB. This may change if we lose a starting LT or DT to FA, but overall our decision to go in another direction at QB (a reasonable one in my view) does have the real world impact of lessening our cap capabilty as the likely cost of acquiring a credible back-up (potential starter if JP is not ready yet) is likely to exceed $2.3 million.

I think JP did show a few things and gained alot on the field in his first pro year. 1. There was simply a world of difference in his command of the huddle and of the game between JP when he was thrown to the wolves mopping up in the NE blow-out and his performance leading the team in our blowouts. In each game he showed progressive improvement which I describe below. A. Game 1 mop in NE- He was thrown into this game just off his injury and ge dud bit expect to play. This rude awakening was probably the best thing for his attitude as it demonstrated to him what it means to be a pro. When you put on the uniform you have to be ready to play all the time. This also should have proved something to the fools on TSW who kept claiming that young QBs get nothing out of practice and preparation and must play. JP sucked the big one in this game exactly because he did not do the preparation and had probably not practiced with a sense he might play. Players need to be on the field to produce, but if they do not do what they need to do off the field they probably will not produce either. Overall, JP handled the ball incredibly poorly throwing an INT and fumbling. Not his finest hour, B. Game 2 mop -up against some poor saps we blew out- Yhere was a world of difference in JPs effectiveness as he led the team to a TD by doing nothing but handing the ball to WM. However, hand-off is exactly what he needed to do and particularly after the NE debacle this confidence builder for him and the team was essential. Still though this was much better he showed that there is some work to do as he ran on the field loss track of the clock and took a stupid delay of game penalty. C. Game II Mop-up against some more saps- Again the improvement in his play and production were clear. Our blow-put was so huge he came in and ran a fuller gameplan as we had a whole field to move and over 8 minutes on the clock. We needed some 1st downs to burn the clock, JP suceeded in moving the team on a drive which not only burned clock but he led the team to a TD. He even complete a couple of passes in this drive including a nifty throw on the run to Trafford. Still he showed there is more work to do, He improved by not running in and taking a stupid penalty, but still failed to get the playoff and called a TO which stopped the clock but at least avoided cost us 5 yards. The other mistake came on the heels of a great play were on 3rd and medium distance he dd not see a receiver opened and pulled it down and ran for the first. A good play but stupidly after he had picked the 1st rather than simply sliding or falling down he hit a defender hard as he went after a couple of meaningless extra yards. We all loved his macho play, bur as a Bills fan he has got to get smarter. Overall there was a steady progression from and F performance to a C performance to a B in his last game. 2. Practice is key to his development- I'm not there so who knows what went on, but the Bills having the comfort to go with him obviously does not stem from the game performances above, but bodes well for what he showed in practice. If he looked not ready to start in practice I do not think that TD would being giving JP every chance to take the job nor do I think he would be leaving the decision to Bledsoe to leave. 4. Film and downloading Wyche means a lot to his development- Folks should not undestimate what a singular opportunity the injury provided JP as he had the chance which I hope he took advantage of to sit in the booth and talk to Wyche and dissect and learn the game. If he did this then his getting hurt and recovering completely are great things for the Bills. JP will need to learn even more and assuming Bledsoe is gone, hs decision not to take the back-up role is a real loss for us as buying a credible back-up QB plus the DB deadspace will almost certainly make this cap savings a cap loss for us to manage, Nevertheless I think there are lots of reasons for Bills fans to be hopeful in the face of Bledsoe deciding not to be a back-up. Folks who are overjoyed to see Bledsoe not start need to get over the fact that one can be glad he isn't starting but also correctly lament that he is not backing up here.

The Bills should definitely not pay Bledsoe the cap hit he is scheduled to have, the 3/2 bonus payment or anything remotelty resembling quality starter money after the horrendous performance he had in 2003 which only improved to inadequate in 2004. However, this is why TD gave Bledsoe the choice of take a restructuring which will drop you cap hit to back-up levels or we'll have to cut you. It looks right now that Bledsoe is going to opt for the cut, but by far the best thing for the Bills to put up Ws next year would be for him to restructure, express his true willingness to be a second string guy assuming JP wins the role on the field, and play the role he played perfectly for Brady in 2001 when Lewis force him out. I can see why every body who is addicted to how is Drew doing will hope that he takes the cut (Bledsoe worshippers who love him want him to go be a starter, Folks who worship at the alter over-focusing on Bledsoe by hating him want him cut so he is out of their hair). However, by far for Bills fans the best outcome is for JP to be our starter and Bledsoe to be his back-up and have him play the same role he played perfectly for Brady in 2001. Bledsoe looks like he is going to be a child about this and be gone, but it is going to be tough for us to sign a credible back-up for JP for only $2.3 million and after that it is going to restrict our ability to improve this team,

High on TDs list in addition to the things you mention is going to be the need to get a #2 QB and a #2 RB. Shane Matthews has apparently said he plan to retire and return to the couch the Bills rescued him from after our injuries to Losman and Brown. Even with a journeyman QB and disaster QB we hope never sees the light of day the $2,2 Bledsoe savings and Matthews 04 cap hit is going to make it tough. The costs of getting even a semi-talented former NFL starter like a Garcia or Warner will probably be cost prohibitive, If we pick up a player like Charlie Batch or Kordellia or would seem to fit into the cap room left by the Bledsoe exodus prayer for the health and well-being of JP may be the best strategy for a fan to take. At RB Shaud Williams proved to be a nice pick-up. However, no one would mistake him for a guy who should be expected as a number 2 should to be able and ready to step in and take 30-35 carries several weeks in a row as WM looks very good but preparing for the horrors of injury is something every team should do but will need to be extra careful about with WM. I love Shaud as a change-up and third down back (he needs to demonstrate he can catch though) but do not see him as our #2 RB.

Actually. I think I am fully aware of the cap impacts last year and this year and I think there is a more accurate description of them than laid out in your post. 2004 off-season- The trade for Bledsoe was a good move on the football and business side since RJ clearly had to go and AVP was a great guy who was not the answer. The likely choices seemed to be FAs like Jeff Blake (now a third stringer in this league and beaten out for the starter job last year by Delhomme in Carolina- suffice to say not a starter) or Chris Chandler (what hospital is in today?). In terms of the less important but critical side which is business (mentioned first here to dispose of it and not because of its importance). Bledsoe played a key role in reviving a region and fans who had lived through a 3-13 season as we went through cap hell. On the field, this proved to be a wash for us as Bledsoe played QB with us pulling off a near historic improvement from 3-13 to 8-8 (I think 5 games at that time was the second best one season improvement in league history though worst to first is possible now like ever before). Bledsoe played QB for a far more productive offense which saw several O players (including Bledsoe and if you think someone else deserved the nod more then please say who ans why or move on) make the Pro Bowl. Meanwhile NE made the right move because choosing Brady over Bledsoe was a no-brainer, but paid the price as the accelerated cap hit from trading Bledsoe played a major role in NE getting raped by the trade and not even making the playoffs that year despite being virtually guaranteed two wins over the Bills as Belichick knew better than anyone how to exploit Bledsoe's failings. I view his comeback player of the year 2002 star turn as a wash at best for the Bills though because Bledsoe simply sucked with his 2003 play, I advocated thanking him for the revival post RJ which coincided with his QB work but for us to say goodbye and cut him last off-season. One can take the view that by cutting him we spent a 2003 1st round choice to get him and that cost was gone. However I think this view does not correspond to reality in that Bledsoe paid us enormous returns on the field when we most needed them in the post-RJ era. Further, the absence of the 2003 1st rounder traded for Bledsoe was replaced (and certainly had a role in increased urgency by TD to manufacure a first round pick out of nothing for PP) with an AT pick which was used to get McGahee. Maybe the same thing with PP/WM would have happened without us missing our 1st rounder because of the Bledsoe deal. Who knows. I think it is farfetched to claim that the Bills intentionally traded their 2003 1st rounder and Price for Bledsoe and a 1st rounder who became WM, but this is actually how it lays out. At any rate, under his contract which we assumed from NE we got subsidized for two years by NE taling the accelerated cap hit. We paid an extremely reasonable base salary hit alone for Bledsoe in 2002 and 2003. In 2004 he was owed a $7 million balloon payment. However, we could have "saved" this amount by cutting him as well as we could by restructuring him. The restructuring move was a bad move by us because the "new" bonus paid to Bledsoe prorated over the 3 year life of the contract made it very hard to cut him before his march 2nd payment this year as $4.3 million of the Bledsoe deal becomes deadspace. Management of this cap hit is the problem we face now. We could have saved the $7 million due Bledsoe last year and also the deadspace we have noew by cutting him. The difficulty we would have had in doing that was that we would have had to buy QBs for 2004. In my world we would have still traded the 2005 pick for Losman, used the $6 million or so in 2004 Bills cap hit to pay Billy Volek to come in as our starter (a deal we tried to make for him as a back-up but he actually went back to TN for less money and interest than we offered him). We also would have had enough money to get Kordelis and used hin as a slash/disaster QB if everyone bought this fiscally possible arrangement. If you believe that restructuring Bledsoe was the only way we could deal with his bonus and still put a competitive dquad on the field you are probably wrong. Cutting him and going elsewhere was certainly fiscally possible. You also do not do full cost accounting for the Bills in terms of the effects of cutting him pre 6/1 this year. Yes there is a $2.3 million cap savings in the deadspace charge for Bledsoe versus his salaried cap hit if we kept him. However, if we take over a $2.3 million cap hit charge for our back-up to Losman this year then we will pay more for QB than if we kept Bledsoe. Judging bu the 4 year/$25 million contract which Jeff Garca signed and the several million $ cap hit contract Kurt Warner signed we are going to go after a true journeyman as our back-up QB. We probably will npt have to go so low as a Shane Matthews talent for $2.3 million, but JP better play like RoboQB did for Pittsburgh because for $2.3 million we will not be able to get a former SB player or likely a former Pro Bowl accomplished back-up QB. We'd be far better off if Bledsoe took TD up on his offer and restructured his deal to a lower cap hit as we would have even more cap room to spend on FAs, would not need to spend the cap room we have on QB and would have a former Super Bowl player and a fellow who is a proven teacher of young QBs (based on what Brady says) and who stepped in when Brady was nicked and successfully played QB in the majority of a must win game. Its doubtful but not too late for Bledsoe to do the right thing for the Bills an restructure his deal.

A three-way trade perhaps: TB gives up a third rounder and gets a former Pro Bowl RB- Sounds fair from my perspective, there are a lot of details because I want to sign him long-term to a conditional deal but if they drafted a rookie RB he probably would not contribute more to the team next year since for example our 3rd round pick was Tim Anderson so TB would be likely passing by on nothing (whi knows maybe they woud have picked Terrell Davis but this is unlikely) so getting Travis would be fine for them. DC gives up Gardner and gets the 3rd from TB they are looking for. The Bills give us Henry and get Gardner who is a #3 WR who caught 51 last year fir the Skins and demonstrated the ability to run trick plays throwing three passes. Given the floundering of Reed and questions both good and bad raised by Aiken we woulduse Gardner. However, as far as this 3 ways go, I think that DC gets what they are after, but TB does well and the Bills probably get shorted. Even if you think Travis is bad, the Bills need to pout and ask for more even if they feel good about the deal. If TB though in a lower round pick (or got the Skins to) or on of them has a workhorse though low TD RB, they got a deal.

The irony here is that there is a perfect QB to play the back-up role to JP. He: 1. Has a record of grooming a young QB who won an SB and gives this back-up great credit for helping him understand NFL offenses and defenses even though like JP he was a second year NFL vet who never started his rookie year. 2. This back-up took over the QB spot when the young QB got nicked by injury and the back-up successfully played QB in a must win game and even through the winning TD that allowed the youngster to come back in win the SB. 3. The bak-up has a record of gracefully seeing that the youngster was the future for the team and that his QB play in the must-win game was successful but far from stunning and went back to the back-up role rather than becoming a cancer. 4. The back-up had actually led a team to the Big Dance before and that experience not coupled with being on a team that won an SB has got to be helpful for a team. That QBs name? Drew Bledsoe! I can see why TD offered him a shot at an open competition with JP. it doesn't look like he will be man enough to take on this challenge and it is unfortunate for the Bills because his $4.3 million in deadspace in conjunction with what a back-up QB in 05 will cost us will be hard to manage. Oh well, those of us who lived through the DF/RJ contract debacle and fight have seen worse. I hope he stays as a back-up because it is so much better for us but I doubt he will.

I will be bummed if/when Bledsoe is cut/traded because i think the accelerated cap hit from TD's dumb resigning of Bledsoe last off-season will be very hard to manage and may well make it hard for this team to win this year. By far I see the better course of action for the Bills putting up Ws this year is for Bledsoe to accept the fact he is on the backside of his career and that the offer to him to trust in the Bills braintrust to give him a fair chance to win the starting job on the field in a competition with JP Losman is a good deal for the Bills and for him. I suspect he will lose that competition (not because JP is a great finished product as a QB) but because JP actually will need to produce less than DB because merely by showing potential he will get the nod over Drew who would have to demonstrate that his improvement from the horrendous job he did in 2003 to merely being inadequate in 2004 will be matched in 2005 with improvement from him being inadequate to him being adequate or a stud (it could happen but I don't see it). We would have a mucn better team if Bledsoe were to restructure and lower his cap hit than a situation where he turns the majority of his contract into deadspace and we would likely need to add on the cost of buying a quality back-up to the QB cap hit. Unlike those who falsely claim that Bledsoe has lost at every level, my view is that in 2002 he played the back-up QB role perfectly because injury gave him no other choice. Brady gives him lots of credit for helping this young 2nd year QB learn to be a pro and clearly this would help JP. In addition, Bledsoe stepped in when JP got hurt in a must-win game and played QB in the majority of this must-win game and even threw the winning TD. The complaints from some posters (even some I respect for showing they had their heads screwed on straight about football- except that odd belief in Raion Hill) that Bledsoe sucked in that game strikes me as whining about style point because all I demand from my back-up QB is that they just win win baby. Bledsoe did not play as well as a starting NFL QB should in that game against Pitts but who cares as he was not NE's starter and by my judgment should not be the Bills in 2005 unless he accepts he is on the backside of his career AND JP simply sucks. So defintiely mark me down as one who will be bummed if we have to deal with Bledsoe's potentially derailing another team with an accelerated cap hit from cutting him. Even a genius like Belchick and his Pats completely missed the playoffs in 2003 in large part in my view because absorbing the Bledsoe cap hit stopped them from buying a bunch owe well scouted players as they did in 2003 and from buying FA stalwarts like Rodney Harrison for 2004. The Pats made the right choice because keeping Brady over Bledsoe was a no-brainer. However, I do fear that if Bledsoe chooses to make us cut him instead of restructuring he will be able to put another notch in his belt for killing a team that cut him in the season after they dissed him

It's not so much that I miss your point completely (you're not that bad a writer and I,m not that bad a reader though obviously neither of us are perfect), its just that I folded in a thought from another post in this thread (from Puhonix or someome else I think) which supported your view into my argument. I also agree that the NFL is so good because it is the ultimate pro sports team game. No single player wins the SB all by themselves and an individual has far more influence in the NBA. However, I think this perspective supports my thinking in that the best QBs are those who do tangible things to build a team capable of winning and the lesser QBs operate in a method that focuses the team stategy and the business unto them and not onto the team. One of the reasons I think Elway wins out over Marino in my judgment is that Elway was finally smart enough to realize that he had to take less than the market offered him in a contract so that the Broncos could hang onto Terrell Davis, Shannon Sharpe and the other players which allowed this team to win. He did that and they won two. So too with Brett Favre, his cap hit was long below the top 10 QBs in the league even when he was one of the top 5 QBs easily. He took less money so the Pack could hang onto the running game and defenders like Regie White and they won an SB. Kelly never took less than the market would give him since from his USFL days to him closing his restaurant and screwing dozens of local small businesses who were vendors he owed money he has been about the Benjamins. However, Kelly deserves a lot of credit in my book and also his HOF nod because he has that amazing quality that he seemed to make the players around him perform better. Folks love him here because the force of will he demonstrated time and again was virtually a tangible force that willed this team to the SB 4 times. Marino on the other hand is clearly one of these most (if not the most) talented QB's ever. However, time and again we saw the Marino-focused Miami teams spin down the drain as he and no other individual can deliver an NFL chanpionship on their own. Marino is one of the great QBs statistically in my mind but falls way short on my top 1o list because he never made the players around him play their best games and thsus put them over the top to win SBs. Elway finally did this through financial sacrifice. I agree with Felser that Joe Montana is one of the best of all time because in story after story he did this through cool collected leadership and decision-making. Marino is one of the best, but Elway, Montana and even Jim Kelly were better in my book. To the extent Felser agrees with this is may be an idiot but he is an idiot who is correct about this in my judgment.

I think the key questions are: 1. Is Jennings second tier- I think he is and most Bills fans are biased because we love the Bills. Even though I think JJ is a solid player, I think any player who: A. fails to start 16 games in his entire career as an LT; B. gets called for penalties too often and more often than his teammates; C. gets beaten like a drum consistently in a game versus Abraham is not part of the 1st tier. Occaisionally mistakes happen, consistent mistakes happen to players who are not 1st tier. Jenning has some potential, but his inability to start 16 makes this potential too big of a risk for first tier contract when there are other second tier choices available. Does anyone out there want to make the case that Jennings is a 1st tier LT. If you do you need to explain why his record of starts is no issue, why his record of penalties is no issue and why his being beaten in a game by Abraham and from time to time is no issue. 2. How much of a cap hit do you pay for a second tier LT- LT cap hits in the real world are: A. $7 million at franchise tag levels B. $6 million at transition tag levels C. $5 million as a going rate for contracts signed by players I judge to be second tiers like Clifton and Petitgout. Folks have every rght to whatever opinion they want. However, if they have any desire (which they need not have because one of the fun things about the NFL and TSW is tha fact-free opinions are fine and dandy) to even pretend that their opinions are based in some type of logical assessment that the NFL certainly doesn't deserve compared to important stuff like family and world peace, then then should have some type of cut on these questions, In my view JJ is a solid but clearly second tier LT. Thoughts that he has the potential for more are valid, but are not substantiated by the facts beyond hopeful thinking because he has zero record of completing a season without serious (miss a start or more) injury. Further, it is my guess (and we all have guesses when it comes to the future) that though even solid but second tier LTs have been able to command a salary at the $5 million annual level in the past, all the contracts signed by lesser talents like Clifton and Petitgout have reduced demand enough that TD has the ability to stick-up Jennings for a less than $5 million contract because the market demand for LTs is lower because most teams are already financially committed at LT and cap hit limitations stop teams that have a need from offering a boatload to JJ.iI think the Bills can comfortably snatch JJ for a salary a million or so less than the $5 million annual salary and if one of the 3 or 4 teams that can afford to pay more choose to do so, then let him walk because though he has potential, potential means you haven't done anything yet. The bottomline is that JJ has not been able to play a full season yet and the Bills can do better for the same and potentially a lesser expendture.

Certainly I could see a big part of my sales pitch being to take my laptop to a prospective draftees home and I off-handedly type in his name .net and up on the screen pops up this website wth all sorts of ego stroking sales stuff. Even if he did not have a contract, I could see reserving the name as part of my pitch.

I think you are being too harsh in the straw man you put out there in your description of Felser's views. The position you describe are certainly obvious idiocy if they represented the totality of Felser's views but they don't and if you want to harang him with any accuracy they should. I am far from a Felser expert because I pay a lot more attention to records of the athletes rather than focusing on the records of those who watch the athletes. but I remember Felser being a big time booster of Jim Kelly and his record andof his rightful membership in the HOF. As Felser was an active participant and stalwart on that committee it is doubtful that Kelly would have been a first ballot winner or Marv would have got HOF membership with Felser introducing the award in Canton if Felser was as rigidly judgmental about SB wins as you describe. Only a simpleton would take the stance that SB wins is all that matters in determining greatness, but it would be equally simplistic to claim that whether you win the SB doesn't matter at all. An SB win does not elevate Dilfer to HOF status, but the failure to win one is a blot on Marino (or bakley's failure to secure a championship in the Jordan era) and his record. It actually speaks to how good of a QB Marino was that even with this obvious shortcoming he stull deserves HOF membership, but get a clue the fact that Elway won two SBs with his team is part of what outs him ahead of Marino on my list of QBs I'd love to have. In fact, that Kelly came close but no cigar 4 times while Marino only breathed SB air once makes me think long and hard that if I had my choice of QBs in one game or a career I would make my own, I'd choose Kelly over Marino.

Don't mistake the fact that owners lose more money when they play than when they don't play for the owners saving money during this fiasco. The owners are losing money (many of them are losing big time like the NY Rangers in the work stoppage). This attitude is like folks who feel like they are saving money by buying a useless item because the price is marked down an amazing 50% or more. Useless items are still useless even when they are cheap. Likewise when the NHL isn't playing the business is not a going concern and we will begin to see the implications of this now that the season is dead, but the banks that loaned money for the arenas, the coaches and other administrative people still under contract and being paid and the players with pro contracts like Vanek but playing in the minors are still drawing cash and their is less cost because most player contracts are gone, but there is zero income as well. Mke no mistake it would be worse for the owners if they ran their businesses under the existing NHL CBA, but though it is not at its worst the current situation is bad for the owners and will only get worse.