Fake-Fat Sunny

I think your point #3 does not reflect the general view of players I have heard in terms of reflecting that there is some diversity of opinion and many players would be happy to cross the picket line and even under the new contract would receive more money than they have in their lives to this point or meet some immediate financial need they have because of illness in their family or mismanaging their money. However, I think it also does not reflect the view of the lionshare of NHL players who control the union who: 1. Do not want to be used to restore a sustainable fiscal model to the NHL when not enough has been done to rein in owners who gave them the unsustainable deals in the first place. 2. Have actually made far more money than they ever have seen from the fatted calf of the NHL over the last few years under their non-sustainable business modeled which has been fueled by fat cats choosing to pay too big contracts. 3. Many NHL players are doing quite fine because they have arranged to play in Europe for less money but still bigger bucks than they would get if they worked for a living, they have contracts like Thomas Vanek which pays them big bucks fir perfecting their game in the minors which is what they would be doing anyway, and this strike was a long time in coming and players of even average intellect have salted away enough money from their past lining up at the owner's trough that they can go a year or more without working. Like the NFL, a deal will eventually be worked out I suspect that will mean an increased partnership between the owners and the players. In the NFL this happened when the owners essentially broke the union in the mid-80s replacement player strike where the players demanded 52% of the gross. The union responded to being beaten by actually threatening to disband and thus force the owners to live in a true free-market where efforts like the draft the NFL colluded with the NFLPA to hold would be eliminated. If the owners were forced to live in a freeer market where the owners with the most money and willingness could buy the best players it would have been the end of football as stalwarts like the Rooneys or small-market owners like RWS would lose out to the Dan Snyders and Jerry Jones's of the world. The NFL instead agreed with the union to collude to dedcate 65-70% pf tyhe "designated" gross to player salaries. This designated amount does not count huge cash streams like luxury boxes, but as the stability and labor peace has allowed for huge revenue gains from TV, the players are making far more money than they ever had before and have a truer operating partnership rather than a battle with the owners. My guess is that the NHL strike will likely end one of three ways: 1. Dissension among the players eventually boils over and Goodenow and the union are essentially broken. When this happens the players will fall back into decertifying the union and more real partnership will be negotiated with the players gaining greater power and authority but losing the owners as the TV-type cashcow. 2, Cooler heads will prevail and they will agree to adopt an NFL style agreement where the players recieve less cash but get more shared control (I really doubt this will happen because it involves too much shared interest and not enough individual interest). 3. There is tons of capital in North America but a limited number of the best hockey players. Things may come to head where there is a recognition that the owners are pretty replaceable and the playera are the bankable commodity with not easily reproduced talents. If enough cash cows can be organized (somewhat doubtful because there is better money to be made raping the rainforest) the owners may find themselves on the outs. I think you misstate #3 because while there is no cash cow to pay for the league like TV, there are a lot rich people and one guys green is the same color as another's the difficulty is in organizing them but the longer the player's can hold out because they had ample time to arrange their finances and other smaller cash cow efforts, the more possible it is that the NHL (or whatever its new name is) will organize replacement owners.

Certainly lack of confidence in his ability to be "money" on long kicks is the important part of his lack of long FGs made or even tried. However, part of this was the nature of the Bill's season this year where the vast majority of the games like our wins during the streak where there was no need to try the long FG or the blow-out against NE where the FG was not what we needed. Of the close games like the first Jax game the FG was never appropriate and the first Jets game they got the chance before we did. One of the most perverse things was that Lindell did put a couple of kicks from over 40 yards through the uprights, but in both these cases we had called TO just before the play began and we never put the 3 points on the board. In these two cases, we ran a play on a 4th and 1 and Bledsoe did a great job of faking the QB sneak and making an accurate pitch to WM who ran and dove in for the TD. In the other play we lined up for the kick but either by a dumb plan or a muffed catch Moorman threw a pass and missed Denney in the endzone. This is not to argue that Lindell should be kept because I believe if there is an available player good enough (I say take Nugent in the 3rd if he is still there) we should look elswhere. My guess is that TD probably won't want to do this because cuttin Lindell will make for $600,000 in deadspace and TD hates deadspace, so there has to be an alternative that he belives in who will bring excitment to thefan base which will allow us to gloss over his faux-pas of signing Lindell.

I think that the fact Henry is under contract makes him far easier for the Bills to trade than Peerless as an FA. The Bills were scheduled to recieve and were owed nothing for Peerless as an FA, but, we have Travis under contract for another year and TD has made the approriate noises about wanting to keep him here while also allowing him to do TDs work by aggressively shopping himself around/ TD is also far more tradeable than PP because a team had to trafe and sign for PP in order to make the deal work. A team can trade for TH and work him out or even see how he plays for a few games if they wish and then sign him if he merits it. PP amd TH are not a perfect analogy for each other at all. The Bills have far more cards and a lot more leverage to trade Henry. We had to create leverage by putting the transition tag on Price, but this would have been a risky maneuver for us except Blank had already publicly promised to the fans and to Vick he would do what was necessary to bring him in. He thought that was going to simply be a big contract, but because of his big mouth it became a 1st round pick also.

I think NE views the deal for Bledsoe as pretty eve steven for them as far as they are concerned. The got the long-term benefit they wanted because Bradt has not only more upside than a Bledsoe on the backside of his career but also in the immediate moment Brady is simply a far more effective QB. However, in exchange for making this choice and creatin cap room at the QB positiob so they could sign Brady for the long-term to a cap reasonable contract, their SB win for the 2001 and 2003 seasons are bookends for them completely missing the playoffs in 2002. Belicheck obviously hoped that the 2 wins he was going to get against Buffalo because he knew Bledsoe's stengths and weaknesses better than anyone, but he lost that bet too the tune of them completely missing the playoffs because the accelerated cap hit for 2002 from trading Bledsoe meant they could not replicate his team building fete of 2001 of acquiring about a third of his first SB winning team after June 1, 2001 nor could he afford to acquire pivotal players to the 2003 season SB run like Rodney Harrison. The funny thing is that how things played out with Bledsoe were critical to the Pats 2 SB runs. First, I doubt they would have even made the playoffs in the 2001 season if Bledsoe hadn't gotten a collapsed lung after an 0-2 start that ironically led to them becoming the TEAM which won the SB as they rallied around the youngster Brady. Given the role of the Bledsoe accelerated cap hit in entirely sinking the 2002 season, it was totally eliminating the Bledsoe cap burden and bein able to not only get leaders like Harrison but also pay a little bit more for back-ups who became starters on ths injury burdened team that was a key to their SB win last year. Clearly the NE teams which won the SB in 2001 and 2003 seasons and is knocking on the door this year feels like any debt to the Bills is paid in full by them getting an early exit in 2002. They also subsidize's Bledsoe's play as he reolaced the hapless Rob Johnson (does anyone seriously think he would have been QB of a team which went from 3-13 team under his parttime due to injury guidance to an 8-8 squad in 2002 not to mention the business benefits that Bledsoe brought to this team until he sucked in the 2003 season).

Who cares? I don't think Bills' fans do and in fact we hope he is wrong. What I care about as a Bills is getting the maximum return for trading Henry (in my the preference would be a player who can produce now rather than even a highly rated draft pick who is good as RJ but gives us nada in his first year). I think Travis' comments that if he were used what he see's as correctly (gosh knows that Kevin Killdrive and the Bills's offense did few things correctly and that going with WM over TH was the correct thing for the Bills to do) the he would put up top 5 RB numbers are correct if his premise is correct and getting a Pro Bowl berth his second year at least makes his premise arguable. The issue here is not where Travi ranks among RBs, the issue here is whether the Bills can get good trade value from a team which desperately needs an RB and could use a former Pro Bowler to move beyond the Rickey Williams fiasco. Is that not true?

I think many TSW posters have really missed the boat in their interpretation of Travis Henry's comments in a West Palm newspaper. The deal here (nor were his comments) about whether he has produced numbers which make him a top 5, top 15 or top whatever NFL RB. The deal here is whether the Fins in their desperation to move past the Rickey Wliiams episode will be so desirous of getting a former Pro Bowl young RB with a year left on his contract that they are willing to give up good trade value for him. I think things are setting up nicely for that to be the case and I think Travis's comments will be a nice part of making this so. Again so this not buried in one of the many threads which take a non-Bills cut on these comments, I think that the model for considering getting the best value we can for Henry is the way things went down with AT for Peerless. Among the key elements in that trade were: 1. AT expresses some vague interest in PP once he hits the market. 2. PP expresses strong interest in going AT. 3. The AT media and football pundits express a strong interest in PP being the answer for their team to put their investment in Vick over the top. 4. Arthur Blank, owner of the Falcs makes what I feel were bad business comments in essentially promising the AT fans he would give the value necessary to get Peerless for Vick and TD tagged PP to make giving up a 1st rounder (who later actually became WM) what was necessary to get him. As far as Henry in Miami: 1. TD did a great job by allowing and empowering Trsvis's agent to go solicit interest in a trade and the agent has publicly Miami as being intetrested and they have neither denied or poo-pooed it publicly yet (if i were them I would if only to suppress what I have to give up for Henry). 2. Henry did a great job for the Bills if this deal goes through by espressing strong interest in going to the Fins and moving his stuff there. 3. Certainly the situatiion is set up for Miami to not only need an RB (I think they already have said someone of L Girdon talent was worth a 3rd) but they have both sports and business reasons to get beyond the Rickey Williams era (error). If pundits start talking specifically about a former Pro Bowler Henry filling this role life will be very good. 4. Whike i don't expect Nick Saban or someone high in the Fins hierarchy to deliver a gift to us like the one Blank gave the Bills actually we had the right to nothing for the FA PP and getting value for former Pro Bowler Henry with a year left on his contact is less of an extraordinary gift. I folks could suspend their fantasy league tendencies for moment and not get sidetracked into arguing about whether Henry is a top 5, top 15, or top 32 RB (his numbers were certainly worst than than that last year and even Henry acknowledges this) but instead analyze what the Bills need to rob yet another tade partner the way we robbed AT then it begins to make some sense. Who cares whether we get some fanatasy league 2nd roun picks for Henry even that level is likely garbage in my book. Deing a future is now kind of guy, if you gave me even a so-so starting TE for Henry I would be happy to get this player because I figure it is a year and a half post injury before Campbell/Euhus return to their pre-injury form after their knee blow-outs. The thing which makes me salivate after seeing Henry's perfect comments in the West Palm paper is that Miami does not have a second rounder to give and already has parted with draft resources for the failed starting RB Gordon. My own fantasy would be to get McMichael from Miami which would bridge the TE gap nicely for us. I loved Travis comments in the paper today. I think they can be used to help the Bills immensely. I hope we make it so.

Sophistry is not citing the whole quote in the same statement and actially not even citing the competion of the entire sentence. Specifically, after he says that he is a top 5 RB he completes the sentence by saying "and I would have continued to put up the same numbers." This means that he clearly knows he did not put up the numbers of a top 5 RB this year and that he views himself as an athlete who would be putting up top 5 numbers if Kevin Killdrive has used him the say way in 2003 as he did in 2002 and made the Pro Bowl and thus was arguably a top 10 RB in his second year. He said exactly what Bills fans should want him to say in a West Palm paper in the hopes that he will get the fan base all excited about moving past the Rickey Willliams era with a former Pro Bowl RB. Sophistry would be to claim or think this is an issue of judgement about where Henry ranks among RBs, when this is actually about what available RBs can Miami get that will help them at least sell their product to their fan base and it is to be hoped win games. The key for the Bills here is not to promote Henry as the greatest RB since sliced bread (even Henry says he has not produced those numbers only that he believes he can) but to meet the lofty level that Henry is a better choice for the Fins right now than the memory of Rickey Williams. I really liked what Henry had to say in the Palm Beach paper.

I disagree. I think the model of this for us is the Peerless Price situation. A combination of an expression of some interest in AT in the potential for PP to become a Falcon, PP saying he would really be interested in becoming a Fakcin, the media (and I think Vick also who wanted a reciever) jumping on the bandwagon and saying this would be the move to put them over the top and most important owner Arthur Blank essentially promising to the AT fans and Vick he would get Peerless allowed TD to tag him and hold AT up for a 1st round pick (which actually became WM). I think we now have: 1. Miami apparently expressing interest to TD in a trade through Henry's agent. 2. Henry moving his wordly possessions to FLA and publicly expressing a desire to go to the Fins. 3. The Rickey Williams fiasco which has created a huge need at RB for the Fins and a credible case can be made that just Corey Dillon (a much better player than Henry BTW) made a huge difference for NE so to can Henry make a huge difference for Mia. 4. The missing element in this equation is the Arthur Blank public statement (I doubt we will get such a gift again) but I hope Travis sucks up to the media, to any friends he has with the Fins and to Nick Saban to let him feel that Travis can be a big part of them putting the Rickey Williams episode behind them. I think he said just the right things.

I think your words are right on target not only in terms of getting the most our of Bledsoe if we decide to keep him (I think there are ways to win with him and ways to win without him so I'm more concerned with the Bills doing the correct things with whatever Bledsoe choice gets made rather than worrying about the choice itself) but most of all getting trade value for Henry. I think that folks who are caught up in the debate about whether he is worth a 2nd, a 6th or whatever, miss the point that the future is now in this league and that real value for Henry revolves aroubd getting the right current player and not some fantasy league foray into a draft choice. My sense is that it will not be surprising that following the Edgerrin James/Wills McGahee model that we are looking at a year and a half or two before even the best athletes comeback from an ACL tear. One hopes that Campbell and Euhus are not recovering from the grievous kne damage of these two, but no one ever mistook these two for being the best athletes in the NFL either. Even though a solid TE may not be judged as highly as a former Pro Bowl RB, I would be happy to see the Bills make the trade because going into next year with Ryan Neufeld as our best TE if Euhus and Campbell are still recovering their form is not a good thing at all. So I say you go Travis you go if the credible claims you made in the Palm Beach paper that if used differently than Kevin Killdrive used you last year and if you hadn't been pushed aside for WM (a far better back whom I believe you are quite easily pushed aside for) then you COULD produce the numbers of a top 5 RB. if you can get the Florida folks so excited about moving beyond the Rickey Williams fiasco with you that they are willing to give up a stud like McMicheal I say thanks. I doubt it, but hey I didn't think we would get a 1st (a first we turned into Willis McGahee) for PP either.

I suggest that everyone who wants to shoot fish in a barrel by taking Henry's comments in the worst possible context and a false light read the article. http://www.palmbeachpost.com/dolphins/cont..._fins_0118.html The important part to me are these quotes: "I have put up the numbers to prove I'm just as good as him," Henry said. "(The Bills) had a chance to have the best of both worlds. But they went in another direction. Why? I don't know. I'm one of the top five running backs in the NFL and I would have continued to put up the same numbers." Henry said he's been told that Oakland, Miami, Carolina, Tampa Bay and Arizona are among the teams that have expressed interest. "Forget this cold stuff," said Henry, who grew up in Frostproof. "It took me a while to adjust to the cold. And the turf. I mean, I grew up rooting for Buffalo. Something about their colors. And Thurman (Thomas). And (Jim) Kelly. And (Andre) Reed. But I'm ready to move on. I'm ready to blow up the league next year. And I hope it's in Miami. I want to be there. I know they need a back. I hope they want a top-five back." Folks have been dumping on him as though he said he produced like one of the top 5 backs in the NFL this year. If that is what he said, that is obviously wrong and stupid but that is not what he said if you bother to read the article. 1. He starts off by saying that he did not put up the numbers this year to be considered a top 5 back. 2. He then says that he believes that if he were used the way he should be used he would produce numbers like a top 5 back in the NFL. 3. He expresses his long-term rooting love for the Bills and says that in his first three years he felt he was improving as he got used to the cold and the turf. I think that Henry could easily be correct in these assertions which have been wailed on today on TSW by really mistating what and why he said it. Is Henry one of the top 5 backs in the game today? No. And he says he did not put up the numbers to make him a top 5 back this year. Do folks disagree with that? Has Henry arguably been one of the top 5 backs in the league at any point in his career? No. Bit he doesn't say that he was and actually given that he did make the Pro Bowl as a reserve his second year he quite arguably has produced in the top 10 early in his career. Has Henry impressed and improved his play during his brief career? Yes, at various points. He did not play great but pretty good for a rookie his first year gaining over 700 yards for a 3-13 team. He correctly acknowledged that playing in Buffalo took some getting used to for him which is reasonable given that he was rookie and used to warm weather. In his second year, Henry made the Pro Bowl and also demonstrated some pass catching ability as he not only ran for over 14 yds, but caught over 40 passes even though with Moulds, Peerless and Centers he was not anywhere near the first look on most plays. In his third year Henry fell just short of 1300 yards rushing, but actually increased his per game average and won the hearts of many Bills fans as played through a broken bone which held him to 14 starts. The recieving yardage fell off with some noticeable drops as the Bills offense totally died that year. His numbers sucked in his fourth year. Are Henry's comments in the paper credible? Yes! Fkat out I would argue they are. Given that he had production which won him a Pro Bowl appearance in his second year which easily places him in the top 10 RBs, I think that it is more than credible for him to claim that if he had an OC other than Kevin Killdrive his second year and was in an offense led by Bledsoe which tanked that year while Henrt still racked up good rushing yards that he was on a track to be a top 5 NFL rusher. HE CLEARLY DID NOT SAY HE WAS TOP 5 BECAUSE HE DID NOT PUT UP THE NUMBERS BUT THAT HE COULD BE IF USED IN THE WAY HE WANTS. I have no problem with that and in fact have problems with anyone who starts in the NFL, has made the Pro Bowl, wants to improve and does not feel this way. The other thing which I think must be taken into context and makes this a very Pro-Bills statement and exactly what we want him to say is that he said this in a FLA paper. Show confidence and get the hometown folks riled up and in his corner and it helps the Bills get the best possible trade value for this player. I'm glad Henry said what he said in this FLA paper. I think those who are raggin on his comments should reconsidet their views and look at this as a Bills's fan.

Folks seem to be pouring it on the relatively easy pickings of Henry apparently making a claim he is a top 5 back. I think these posts are dumb in that not only is this like catching fish in a barrel to try to combat this claim, but one can only hope that no one who makes real decisions on this reads or is influenced by TSW because raggin on Henry's value actually hurts the Bills efforts to maximiz trade value for him. I actually thank the mighty one that my and the other comments in TSW have little or no effect on the real world. It is clear that many media types read this board and you did see comments in articles which reference hometown fans taking a certain position that seems based in the media's review of TSW. It is clear that while many GMs follow their own minds on decisions regardless of what the media says (thank you TD for ignoring the puindits regarding Willis and thank you for ignoring the many comments on TSW which referred to Sam Adams as a far tub of goo when you were signing him) that there can be come pundit impact on moves if only to scare off a potential trade partner. One of the great things about TSW is that if really is a community where there is some good football debate. However, the pouring on that is occuring on the top 5 comment is a long way from debate, takes this comment in the light of football analysis where it is easy pickings rather than taking it in the perspective of it bein negotiating hyperbole which is par for the course or an expression of where Henry thinks his talents lie if he is used the way he wants rather than a statistically true statement after he gained 300 yards this year. At least if you are going to comment on this then do so in at least some semi-rational light or perspective for this comment. In the end, I usually hope that somebody out there important is making use of TSW. This episode of shooting fish in a barrel actually makes me hope nobody who does anything real with the trade issue is paying the least bit of attention to what we say.

Thanks for the aggreement on pieces of my analysis. The one piece in you work would raise a flag about is the contention that the strak was against weak opponent. Clearly given the Bills 0-3 record against the two best teams in the AFC we were not capable this year of beating the strongest opponents in the league even at home. However, the idea that though the streak was not pulled off against the strongest opponents that our opposition represented the weakest opponents needs to be cahllenged The streak included wins against 2 playoff teams (SEA and StL) in the 6 wins and won of those was on a trip to their house on the left coast. The weak schedule concept has to be little more than a note and not an indictment because you play the schedule you are given and producing a winning record against that schedule is producing a winning record. In addition to wracking up a 1/3 of the streak against playoff teams, life in the NFL revolves around any given Sunday. If the Pats can find a way to lose to Maimi then seriously no game should be devalued completely. In addition to the playoff teams, i think any win on the road is darn good work, particularly when it clearly separates us from another non-playoff team with rising aspirations Cincinnati. I think you even take pride in an SF game against the weakest competition but on the road. The final item is the one you mentioned that in prety much every game in the streak we won comfortably and in fact going away. The Cleveland game is not something to be ignored in assessing this team because of the competition, but the total domination of this team makes it one other fineast hours for any team in the NFL this season. I think it is intelligent and good football to look at the games we lost and the first task is to figure out how to play and beat the Steelers and Pats (and the Jets even more consistently this being another playoff team we defeated this year). However, any claim that the streak happened because of facing weak opponents is simply an incorrect analysis of why it happened and its meaning for our prospects.

I fail to see why you and others wouldget your panties all up in a wad because a player or a even a GM would make an obvously false claim of being the greatest thing since sliced bread when they are trying to get top trade value and a good contract. Everyone with half a brain no regardless of Henry or anyone's claims that they are both a floor wax and a dessert topping that its not true. I hope you don't get pissed when you hear drug company ads, the coffee companies claim that coffee perks you up and it calms you down or that you don't buy cigarette company claims. Such negotiating tactics are commonplace and actually expected or demanded of today's athlete who if he doesn't feel supreme confidence in himself and his play he hits the hole with a fear of being hit. I see the spurious claims by an athlete who is going to be negotiated for when it comes down to TD and someone talking rather than be the principle for an actual deal to be negotiated with over his trade value as exactly the thing we want him to be saying right now so that the Bills can get the maximum possible trade value.

I agree on Marino being the best pure passer in league history though Manning get that accolade is probab,y more than arguable when he retires, but the sense he was not even the best QB in the division is the same type of line of thinking which has Manning and Marino anchoring the bottom of the list of the question I asked. Manning is a great great passer but I think it is difficult if not impossible to win pr even get a shot at the SB with his cap hit which makes him not the QB I would want if I were trying to build a team to win it all.

Manning's current cap hit according to the NFLPA (and thus the NFL) is $15.7 million for 2004. Even though your $20 million figure is not accurate, the point you make is which if the main thing Manning wants is the $ he scores. However, my question was more about the sports career rather than the business career and ultimately if Manning is interested in sports achievements he will probably have to do the same thing Elway and Manning did to forgo what the deserve and can get from the market so their teams can afford the players they need to help them win a championship.

I think we have several options for replacing him: 1. Teague's time in Denver did not impress them enough to invest in him at LT, but this was in a season coming off an injury and I think his play at C has improved his understanding of the whole OL and blocking duties. The worries I have about him are actually similar to the injury fears I have about Jennings, butI like his growth at C and actually think his body size, good brain and athleticism lend themselves more to him being an LT than the concerns generated at C where he can be bullrushed and DTs are getting bigger. As far as replacing him at C, I think Tucker did a good job in the spot in relief of Jennings and gets a look there. Also, I'd much rather shop on the FA market for a center than for an LT. 2. MW is playing much better at RT and I think the general thinking was to move him and his contract to LT anyway. He guarded the QBs blindside in college because TX had a left-hander so this duty will not be new to him so I would give him a try in miicamp as well if we are looking for a replacement. 3. The move of MW is attractive because I think we would resign Price to fill the lower responsibility RT slot, but given that he has played adequately at both LT and RT, the question for him being part of the replace Jennings equation is more whether McNally thinks he can do 16. 4. Also, part of the mix for the replacement equation is that if MW or Price are capable of replacing him I think it is unlikely but certainly possible that eitherTucker who actually came into this league and drew attention due to his tackle play and Peters who is on our roster as a tackle are posibilities to fill reserve gaps or RT gaps if we move the players who currently fill them. 5. As I have said in a couple of posts, the LT position has clearly attracted big contracts for many players which gives rise to the real fear that the only way to keep Jennings is to pay alot for him. However, I think one of the side-effects of this LT bidding war is that well over half the leagues have bidded and paid for LTs which I think will reduce the market for Jennings. Add to that the cap constraints which other contracts (like Vick's and Price's) will put on teams bidding big for Jennings. The available FAs (potentially Pace, Jone, Thomas who all made the Pro Bowl and may draw the few teams able to pay big for an LT). I will not be surprised if the market allows a savvy and tough guy like TD to give Jennings more money than he ever had before but still give him a low-ball contract. I simply see the LT question as being difficult for us not because we have so few options but because we have so many.

You are right on target in terms of the market determining Jennings value and the LT market isn;t set righ now until there is FA clarity. However, all that Jennings needs is one suitor and he can get a good contract (if he and his agent don't bollicks the offer so I thinking waiting will be tough for him to do). Yet, even before the FAs the market looks pretty tight for him to find that suitor. The siuation is: 8 teams have committed long-term contracts to LTs FA on the franchise and transaction list (if anynoe knows th details pleas let us know if any of these players are gone and the cap hits are mere deadspace). I believe about 8 teams (at least) are committed to long term contracts to LTs below the top ten average but too large for them to be easily cut such as the contracts to folks like Clifton and Petitgout which ae at the 5 year/5 million level. Some additional number of teams like AT appear to have openings and needs for an LT (and Jennings want to go there) but in terms of cap room these teams have done things like sign Vick to $100 million+ contracts and signed PP as an FA a couple of years ago which i think will make it hard for them to spend big for an FA. If FAs like Thomas, Jones or Pace hit the market they not only push Jennings down the list but teams like NYG who apparently will have cap room to spend will likely spend big bucks on better players than Jennings. Until, i see some ,arkett analysis which demonstrates there is much of a market for Jennings, i will not be surprised if the low-ball offer he got from TD this off-season is the best he can do and I think the FA results likely make it worse for him. He apparently wants to be an agent and is a smart guy, the Bills may get him for a low amount for us which is still more money than he has ever seen before.

Huh? This makes little sense to me in terms of logic. If the Bills waive Travis he goes onto the waiver wire first and teams will get to claim him in reverse order of their record. If he is not claimed in 24 hours then he becomes a UFA. If I'm Miami. Cleveland, AZ or one of the teams that has supposedly expressed interest in acquiring Henry by trade, I would love this instead of trading for him, but actually SF which would have first shot at acquiring the remaining year on his contract even if they have no interest in him would probably grab hm anyway. Is this what you mean by calling Maimi's bluff? It certinly would be dumb for the Bills to give him away for nothng.

Actually, every game during the streak was a must-win game for the Bills and struck me as big games where Mularkey showed some good positive efforts including: 1. Clearly he kept his head and stayed with his general view of the game when we were at out worse at 3-5. It is clear that the players liked this and responded to it in a big way. 2. He made the move to employ defensive players on the offense to address the redzone issues and did this successfully and even treated/demanded of his athletes that they be football players first and position players somewhere down the line even before BB really popularized this notion with his use of Brown to fill in for Poole and Law. This actually reminds me of an even earlier gutsy move different from the GW approach that he has been quite willing to aggressively employ starters like Fletcher, Clements and then McGee both starting and on ST. 3. As best as I can tell he made the move to release Shaw to send a message to every Bill that jobs are on the line if they do not perform in the W/L column. This move was interesting because it was not easy as Shaw was not a poison, but un terms of how we used him he contributed little to the W/L and actually we saved no money (and thus money will not save your job if you do no contribute) as his full season salary was already guranteed at the point he was cut. 4. We had a bigtime rep for losing road games and MM distilled a difference in the team which ended up in us winning in a laugher in Seattle against a playoff team. This ranged from the cheeseburgers to the attitude and message he consistently sent out. 5. There were a number of games deemed obvious trap games for us ranging from going cross-country to play a bad team in SF, to being comfortable at home but looking ahead to Cincy against Cleveland, to going on the road against Cincy. In each must-win game the team won going away. I agree that a coaching faliure seemed to be a big part of us not doing the job as a team against Pitt. but this game would not have been a big game unless we has won 6 other must-wins before this one. MM needs to improve but your analysis seems fairly selective to me. It is to be hoped it is no more reliable than your gurantee of an Indy win as their offense would obvioudly shred NE without Law and Poole.

I was disappointed also in this "story" which semed to add no reporting to the initial credible but unconfirmed Mort report.

Because they knew that Dennis Erickson would produce far better results than the likes of someone like a Herm Edwards or Tony Dungy. It is pretty rediculous that someone who failed previously like Ericson (I think he was 8-8 once in his previous round as an HC) gets the job while other HCs with a record of achieving the playoffs like Art Shell can't get hired. Its hard to label some owner a racist (unless they Marge Schott who not only has a clear record of saying the wrong thing, but appaently had various swastika patches and "momentos" among her goods at home). However, given the huge pool of African-American former players , the sad history of theBFL refusing for years to give A-As the job at QB, the record of winning and making theplayoffs achieved by the relatively few A-A coaches, and the even sorrier record at the Division 1A level in college there clearly i somethingrotten in Denmark with hiring AA HCs by the NFL.

Because a player is no Vick (and nobody was last I checked) does this mean you would never ever never ever never ever run the QB sneak or draw? Again, you need to run the sneak or the draw on occaision exactly because your QB is considered less mobile. Running it not only throws off the other team, but backs them off from making an all out commitment to the blitz. Bledsoe should never be mistaked for a runner at all, but the hidebound declarations that he is a statue ignore the fact that he is very big physically and can reasonably be expected to take the hits on the sneak (heck he gets hit even harder at the initiative of the defender getting sacked). Doing reads in the NFL can be a difficult thing, but reading whether the safeties are dropping back in a two deep to deal with Evans and Moulds and whether the LBs are going wide in their pass rush or whether the A gap or the B gap is the open one on a quick hitting QB run are among the easier reads to make. Killdrive was a bad OC for falling into the pass-happy Drew is a statue trap of never using him to run the ball.

Why? Jennings is a good player, but clearly not in the top 10 OL (thus LT) cap hit range ($7 million average cap hit for the top 5 OL players, $6 million average for the top 10). The Pro Bowl voting obviously has it limitations, but as it includes coaches and player assessments it cannot be disregarded and Jones, Pace and Thomas are all FAs who made it and Jennings didn't. I think this reflects reaity that they are all better and more consistent performers than Jennings. The relative expense of these highly regarded players may be your answer, but this introduces lower paid players into the equation, getting Jennings for near Walter Jones money seems like a less bang for the buck deal than moving Try Teague to LT for Trey Teague money which is far less than Jones or Jennings are likely to receive. So again why?

I think that Dillon's outstanding perfornmance this year and in yesterday's game will actually help the Bill's get a 2nd and perhaps even more for a trade for Henry. Advocates in AZ, Cleveland, Miami or one of the several teams which apparently have interest in him will be able to summarize their case for acquiring Henry by claiming (probably falsely in my view) that former Pro Bowler and around 1400 yd per season rusher Henry will do the same thing for them that Dillon did for NE. If anything, the NFL is a me-too lead that loves to imitate success. The difference that malcontent Dillon has made for NE will make for a stronger case for anyone who wants to advocate that they can get the same payoff from Henry. I'm not arguing that this will happen. Even putting Henry aside, one would have to be foolish or quite hopeful to draw any analogies between AZ, Cleveland, or Miami and NE. One could also credibly (and correctly in my opinion) argue that Dillon is a far better rusher than Henry. This does not matter. The important thing for the Bills is to find one team to be a trade partner who is stupid enough to give them more than Henry is worth and for TD to be smart enough to read the market, manufacture. and take the deal. One thing we know from how he played the Peerless situation and from his acquisition and negotiations with a plethora of FAs like Adams. Spikes, Fletcher, et al. is that TD does a great job at reading the market and manipulating trade partners. Another thing we know clearly is that among AZ, Cleveland, Miami and other NFL teams there are some stone-cold idiots just waiting out there willing to make trades.

I think the Bills got away from using the QB sneak (and run for that matter) under Kevin Killdrive and GW because they made the false assumption that because Bledsoe is a his best throwing in the pocket that he cannot roll out or run at all. One of the best things for me to watch with Tom Clements running the O his year, is that he has utilized effectively running and QB sneaking with Bledsoe on occaision because it not only can work, but actually helps him and the OL out a lot in terms of dealing with blitz. Some folks may be laughing at this, but stop for a minute and remember reality. NO ONE shiould make the mistake of operating or thinking like Bledsoe is some re-incarnation of John Elway as a runner. He ain't. However, those who live their lives in the easy but false world of calling him a statue incapable of running the sneak or the draw limit themselves and the Bills O is you ran it like Kildrive. In reality we had plays this season where: 1. Bledsoe rolled out right and hit Evans for a TD against SF and also rolled out and launched and hit several other passes (do you not remember his rolling out and completing this pass for a TD or do you simply deny reality). 2. Bledsoe ran several QB draw plays for 5+ yard pick-ups, particularly later in the season during the streak when we developed more control over implementation of our O (again do you not remember this or do you simply deny reality). 3. Bledsoe actually did a wonderful job faking the QB sneak when out TO took 3 Lindell points of the board (on a shockingly long FG for him actually) and when we ran the 4th and 1 play and the defenders were sucked to the OL to stop the QB sneak, Bledsoe pulled off a pretty neat turn and pitch to WM who sprinted the 30+ yards and dove for an made the endzone (you must remember this and I doubt anyone can deny it happened or deny that the Bledsoe had a key role in this successful play). The answer to you question is that actually Bledsoe and Clements made very effective use of Bledsoe's limited mobility, the threat of the sneak and even use of the QB draw for positive yardage when Bledsoe made a pretty clear cut read on whether the safeties and/or LBs were commiting themselves to wide rushes to run the draw effectively. Even with Bledsoe who is not at his best on the move, Clements has pretty clearly realized that this play can be used effectively (particularly on 2nd down with the rollout with firm order to Bledsoe that if the pass is covered at all then throw it OB rather than trying to use his extraordinary arm to wait and thread it in there and then we'll take another shot on 3rd down. I think he Bills used the QB sneak and Bledsoe's limited mobility well during the winning streak.