Fake-Fat Sunny

Me too. I even turned off the sound on the game and took the time to call my Mom (a true sign of flagging football faith). I'm glad I never turned the game or the team off entirely, but it was a weak moment (rivaling me turning off the game on the radio when the Bills gave up a KO return to start the second half of the greatest game ever played. Fortunartely in that case after going downstairs and crying for a moment with my wife, i came back up and turned the game on and heard the amazing comeback). That game and this season are proof positive that nobody circles the wagons like the Buffalo Bills!

Any given Sunday any team can win in the NFL and this is certainly more than basis enough for hope. If Miami can beat NE (be it a Sunday or a Monday night) the it is not a jump at all for St. L to beat the Jets at home. In fact it is not a jump to see the Colts do in the flagging Broncos. I apologize for the flagging faith I had in my team at 3-6. Against all logic I predict a 5th seed in the playoffs for us not due to logic but because i am a fan.

One of the true testimonials to how amazing this season has been is that there was every reason to logically assume that the Bills were dead, goners and done, at various points through the season. The only saving grace is that we fans are not logical at all and there was every reasonable reason for declaring us dead at several points. Though I feel I never officially gave up on the team as long as there was some mathematical possibility of making the playoffs, I do admit and apologize to the fairhful for my flagging faith, that while I never encouraged the fat lady to sing this year, I certainly suggested that she warm up her pipes after the NE debacle. Kudos to MM and the crew for not only coming up with a great plan and method for winning in the NFL, but for staying the course in the face of some pretty logical doubt, For me, after the NE ghame I was pretty resolved to starting Losman when he was ready to start and not a moment sooner or a moment later which actually would have been a true declaration that the season was done. It was easy to t ake this view as it left some wiggle room because it looked pretty doubtful he would be ready to start anytime soon, but this call expressed my sense that it was all but mathematically done and was the best I could do to present some positive view in the face of what now were clearly increasingly incorrect and non-football tirades from the anti-TD crew, ICE and others. So this is my tribute to the Bills and apologies for my faith not being abandoned but certainly flagging a bit.

My apologies, but as I have noted before i use these posts to think outloud and do the first draft of thinking these issues through so that i clarify them in my mond and can actually give a semi-coherent and shorter pitch come gametime on Sunday when i get to together with friends or talk with the family about football. I do not require folks to reply or even to read my posts as it serves the benefit for me of clarifying my thinking. However, I really do appreciate some of the replies I get even though they are not required to make this a useful process for me because there are some great football thinkers on TSW. This particular post was a bit longer than most as consideration of TD;s draft management prowess is really a central issue to assessing his work and many on this board have labeled him a draft failure over the past year with no rational argument to back this up. Thanks to the lull between Xmas and New Years (and the prescence of mind-altering substances which allowed me to stay up until near 3am) I was able to produce this screed and think through while writing some of these issues in more depth than usual. Per the request of some I have added some cliff notes to provide a short summary of the too long posts if anyone cares to plow into them. My apologies if they are too long for reading and my suggestion to folks who find them such is don't read them.

Cliff notes begin: Overall, I don't think you can call any of TD 4 drafts he has led a bust and actually the last two look extremely strong, his first pretty good and the jury remains out on the second though we had hoped for more from it by now. Cliff notes end. Of course it is too early to assess the quality of Bills drafts in 2004, 2003 and actually even 2002 somewhat as there are certainly cases of players like Moulds who produced like busts early in their careers and became legit Pro Bowl talents as well as players like Josh Reed who seemed clearly destined for stardom based on his 1st year numbers only to have his next two years disappoint in a bug way. However, the funny thing is how the declaration of TD as a bust as a drafter early this season now clearly need to be reconsidered and actually his four year record may end up being one of the best ever not simply for the Bills but in a comparison across the league. Its still too early to make firm conclusions but these are the findings and trends to date whcich I see as TDs 4th campaign as GM draws to a finish. Overall- Drafting is but a part of a GMs job and judgments about him will probably be made based on business issues such as negotiation of contracts, building deals with partners like St. John's Fisher and other elements which at most impact on the field performance and are not direct issues in this regard. The draft is fast diminishing in importance in the increasingly worst to first NFL where teams are built according to the opportunities and constraints of the cap rather than longer term development through the draft. The draft will always be important, it just is of lesser importance to the modern NFL team. Like most leaders it is a team effort and TD gets to much credit when it works and too much blame when it fails. However, the primary benefit which TF probably brings to the Bills is his recognition that the draft is just another tool rather than a driver for his work. The hallmark of his work has been that he turned a 2003 1st rounder into a 2002 benefit by replacing RJ with a Bledsoe who made the Pro Bowl in 2002. He recovered that lost 1st round pick by reading the market and using the transition tag, but again made a pick for a different year in using it to get McGahee. Once again in 2004 he traded the pick away to get Losman when it turns out the 2005 QB pool is weak and he got a year of training into the raw Losman. If TD's draft work goes into history books for being notable it will be because unlike all his peers he had shown a propensity (and i say a good ability based on Bledsoe's 2002 performance, WM's 2004 performance, and the potential of Losman) for out the box manipulation of the draft to get benefits both before and after the year of a particular pick. Specifics- 2001 Draft- TD's first as GM. The priorities were: 1. Get talent as is the case with any draft, 2. Get depth as the cap purge the Bills had to do meant players who would play was a prime need. 3. Get numbers of picks as the Bills needed to fill roster spots. This draft is long enough ago it can be assessed with more validity. Overall it was a success in my judgment. The Bills actually had 12 picks from the 7 rounds. Of these seven 5 are still on the team. However, 7 of these players played a significant starter role for the Bills at some point in their career. If you figure that a 50% batting average is fairly good for finding players who contribute to the team (I'm willing to accept a smaller or larger number is anyone can find or wants to do a numeric proof of players sticking with team that drafted them). The Bills draft squad did pretty well here with over 50% of drafted players contributing as starters at some point and being just below 50% at this point 4 seasons down the line from a draft which emphasized quantity over quality by necessity. As far as star power, this draft did not provide it, but given that they had a relatively late first round pick and traded it down to get more picks this is not surprising. Of note actually should be that even with the trade down the Bills read the market correctly as Clements was still the first CB taken. In addition, he clearly is developing into a budding star as he has achieved Pro Bowl alternate status and is a playmaker on this team with his punt returns. Second pick Schobel produced well enough to command a big contract, is not all we want as a rusher but has put up double digit sack numbers and leads the team with 8 going into the last game. Third choice Henry is in disfavor but played in a Pro Bowl. Edwards is a reasonable reserve who once started due to our weakness at DT. Jennings has played well enough as a starter he will probably command a big contract. Overall, I think this was a good draft with several stalwarts on today's Bills and even reasonable Pro Bowl accolades and semi-accolades given this was a draft more about our broad needs rather than star opportunities. Even the picks of released players like Spoon and Sullivan were what we needed at the time due to unexpected injury to Cowart and our weakness at OL. 2002 Draft- We saw a diminished but still crucial need for depth as we finished 3-13. Our strong draft position caused by our weak 2001 season position made picking stars a greater possibility and thus priority. As this was the third season for these players judgments can more reasonably be made, but as we will see in the specifics next season is likely to actually be the make or break years for our top picks. Another big factor to begin considering regarding the draft was how TD and the Bills used this resource that year. Overall, I would say this year was disappointing and the worst of the 4 TD led efforts. The team did have 10 picks in the 7th round which represented a good piece of preparatory work because of our depth needs. Also on the plus side seven of these 10 picks remain with the team today which is a pretty good batting average. They are the first 7 picks which at least seems logical in terms of confirming the selections. However, a look at the performance of the individual players undercuts the good numbers. MW- disappointing results for a player picked 4th in the draft. However, the big deal is that he seems to have turned his performance around on a squad which is now suddenly productive in that they led the charge for a 1000 yard rusher and have produced low sack numbers in pass protection. Next year will probably be judgment year for MW who finally has an adult as coach and doesn't have to carry a less experienced player next to him. Most players would write their futures by now, but MW is still an open book but the trends are good right now. Reed- He really impressed his first year, but has flat out disappointed the last two years. His opportunity may well have passed him by because Evans has left him in the dust and he will even get pushed for the #3 job by Aiken, He has also been surpassed as a return guy by McGee so his RB skills do not appear likely to save him. He looks more like the sure-handed receiver he was his first year than showing the droppsies he had last year. Though the jury is still out because of his first year production, his time may be passed as even if he is improved he will not see a lot of balls thrown his way with Evans and Moulds collecting the tries. Denney- This is probably a better pick-up than folks give TD credit for. The pick for MW was a clear need pick of a player judged by all to be talented. The pick of Reed was an unexpected opportunity which made it possible to let PP go which led to us getting WM. Moving up to get Denney represented a bid for the best DE on the board in a clear area of Bills need made necessary by our ill-fated move to a 4-3 from a 3-4 while we were losing all three DL players, Denney disappointed his first year as leverage problems made him impossible to even activate. However, fans were loss by this first disappoinment and tend to ignore the fact he was a starter the next year. Folks judge him based on the fact that we still drafted DE's both before and after him, but the case is we need at least three DEs for our rotation and Denney is a credible member of this threesome. He ain't Bruce Smith, but after 3 years I am not terribly disappointed with him as our third choice in a draft. Wire- Another disappointment, but I attribute this more to poor development and use of him as a player than a bad decision to draft a player who has shown a willingness to hit, some speed and a Stanford mind. As I have said virtually all along, this is a player who should have been trained to be an ST leader from the start and instead he was thrown into the safety position he had not played at any level of organized ball because GW/Gray screwed up completely in assigning this spot to Jenkins who was done. This is another player I think judgments are more reasonably made on in his fourth year. Bannan and Thomas are both contributors to this team and Pacillo is a former starter who is around. The other 3 were cut. Overall I think this was a middlin to poor year. The numbers are pretty good as 6 of the 10 contribute today. Yet, I think more should be expected of highly drafted players and though MW, Reed, and Wire all get another year in my book before a reasonable final judgment is made, we should have seen more from these players and as far as TD it testifies to how big a mistake he made in picking GW rather than faulting the specific drafting. Overall, i think one should actually label this year's draft as a success for TD though as he used the 2004 draft choices to acquire Bledsoe that year. Codemn or whatever Bledsoe however much you want. The facts of 2002 were that we were coming off a season where RJ and AVP were our QBs and something needed to be done. It was looking like the available possibilities were folks like Jeff Blake and Chris Chandler. Like it or not, Bledsoe made and deserved in my opinion a 2002 Pro Bowl berth for his great production as the Bills QB that year and TD not only used the potential of draft resources to get Bledsoe but used a 2003 pick to manufacture a 2002 benefit. Bledsoe flat out sucked in 2003 and his presence at least coincided with this year's run. i say kudos to TD for his handling of the draft resource in 2002. 2003 draft- This one is way to early to draw final conclusions, but so far so very very good. This draft was an immediate disappointment as the team finished 6-10 and just as the 2002 class gets credit in conjunction with these players playing a role in the improvement of the team from 3-13 to 8-8, the 2003 class did nothing to stop the Bills from falling to 6-10. However, all 8 players remain connected to the Bills and demonstrate why a reasonable party needs to wait before drawing conclusions on a draft class McGahee- A brilliant choice since over 20 teams which picked before the Bills would not take this risk and it was loudly decried by pundits who did not have the doctors perspective and info on WM and who did not understand that TH provided a reason why you could draft WM and wait rather than a reason why this pick was unecessary. The 1000 yard mark for me is a milestone where you can put this in the book as a gutsy and great choice though who knows what the future holds in terms of assessing how well this choice works for the Bills. Kelsay- Add to the pick of WM that TD read the market exceedingly well to see that we would be able to make this pick in the second round when people would not have found it to be an exptic choice in the 1st round. Add to that him breaking into the starting line-up of a very productive D and even though he will never be Bruce and it is still too early to declare this a good choice the trendlines are very good. Crowell- has turned into a notable contributor on an ST unit recognized as one of the best units in the league if not in Bills history. He never has proved himself as a back-up and I hope he never has to. McGee- We found a Pro Bolwer and starting CB in the 4th rounf nuff said. Aiken and Haggan are solid contributors on a high performance ST, Sape and Sobieski are PS players who probably will be replaced by younger players next year. Too early to tell but great so far. Kudos to TD and the crew for wonderful manipulation of the transition tag to get the 1st rounder back and then to fearlessly use it to get a #3 rated player with a pick in the 20s. 2004 draft- Again way too early to draw reasonable coclusions but the tendlines are good and again the Bills and TD use extraordinary outside boxthinking to gain benefits this year from the illusion of the next year's draft. By the time the illusion of the 2005 draft becomes a reality, it is possible the Bills will have traded unwanted players to reload this resource. We'll see. The particulars are worth noting as there were only 6 picks from the 7th round but the movement we have made from looking for depth to looking for quality is easily seen. Evans- Too early to declare him a great pick, but most wish they all produced like this. His presence has revitalized Moulds production and has become a potent target for flea flickers. Losman- Despite the whines of those who want him to play now, this rugged unfinished talent clearly needed off field work to learn the NFL game and practice to work on mechanics. The trading of a 2005 pick to get this QB who has the talent to be a franchise guy but needed a least a years worth of work anyway looks particularly brilliant given the weakness of the senior QB class the likelihood that underclassmen will be the first QBs taken (if they come out) and thus will go to high draft pick teams. This bet would be paying off differently if our QB play ended up being so bad that we had a losing record and gave up a high pick. However, we will have a winning record and might even make the playoffs with some help and the facts are this move was a great one to make, Anderson- An obvious need given some FA uncertainty and he has not played to answer these questions. Euhus- Good production til his injury. McFarland- Has proved good enough to be activated. Smith- scored a TD on punt returns and used as a position player to run reverses or pose that threat and thus has contributed. Again too early to tell but the tea leaves look extremely good as 2 of the 6 have given outstanding contributions, 2 of he 6 have merited activation and participation and 2 of the six are spending their time learning like they should. Overall, I don't think you can call any of TD 4 drafts he has led a bust and actually the last two look extremely strong, his first pretty good and the jury remains out on the second though we had hoped for more from it by now.

Though some see TE as a #1 priority it appears clear that the Bills braintrust doesn't feel that way in terms of using major draft or FA resources for this need. I think they feel it is important as MM is a former TE and Bledsoe prospered so much from the prescence of Ben Coates, Its just that they show little sign of spending large resources on the position even though there were a few well respected TEs in the draft last year, but we devoted our resources to higher priorities for this O at WR and the QB of the future. Having secured these players and seemingly righted the ship of state on the OL have we finally gotten enough in place that we can entertain the TE position. I doubt this for several reasons: 1. We have some TE resources in place I doubt we will give up them on since TD/MM obviously believe in them and they did demonstrate some production. A. The Bills seemed quite pleased with Campbell prior to his injury and he had one outstanding game this year which will keep hope alive as far as his potential. I don't see the Bills giving up on him and devoting resources to find the next Ben Coates unless there is something we don't know about the severity of his injury. B. Euhus also had reasonable development for a rookie though he was not outstanding. Given that I'm sure MM has supreme confidence in his ability to develop a TE I don't see them giving up on someone they drafted as high as Euhus by spending resources on a new answer. C. Peters rep is actually as a pass catcher rather than a blocker, I think we brought him up as a tackle not because we see him there but because this was an efficent way to work on his blocking game. 2. Drafting and buying talent isn't the only way for the Bills to get talent at TE. MM's experience at the position could just as easily lead him to not draft a proven talent like a Watson because he is confident that he can get great play out of a Euhus or Peters through his teaching. I don't see us drafting or using precious FA dollars on TE. 3. We have other needs bigger than a primetime TE. The potential injury to WM last week demonstrated a desire for more RB depth particularly if we trade Henry. The Bills still have JP at #3 and despite a nice performance by Matthews in garbage timr, a back-up QB may be what we're after. The potential loss of Jennnings may make getting tackle help a bigger priority than TE. The pass rush has gotten good production thanks to use of the run blitz, but ur DEs still do not demand a double team. We do want the next Ben Coates, but I think it is pretty doubtful we will spend FA or major draft (already lessened in '05 by getting JP) resources on TE.

My recollection is that there were two keys which drove the amount of efforts the Colts put into that game. First, a star defender for them got hurt badly in the first series or two and the rest of the team went into a shell rather than make a macximum effort and risk missing the playoffs. Second, the Colts needed two things to happen to improve their playoff position. They needed a win and needed an opponent to lose and by halftime it was clear that the opponent was going to win making the outcome of their game meaningless. I think these factors were the two drivers in determining their lack of effort which allowed an RJ led Bills O to walk all over them.

I think that Bledsoe will do well if Clements/MM are good enough coaches to follow the same path with coaching him which has brought him success before. A key to Parcells working with Bledsoe to create positive outcomes featured him standing behind Bledsoe in practice and any time he locked onto a favorite target and held onto the ball waiting for the receiver to break free, Parcells would yell just throw the damn ball. MM/Clements have apparently replicated this effect by using an alarm clock set to go off four seconds after the hike to help Bledsoe develop hjis internal clock to get rid of the ball. In the 2001 season, Bledsoe won a must win game for the Pats in the league championship including throwin a TD for the winning score and here he ran an offense which had been powered down for the young Brady rather than depending upon Bledsoe's golden arm to deliver a win. Bledsoe struck me as struggling a bit in that game which might have been because all his teammates had practiced in and were running a non-QB arm dependent offense and he was used to gunslinging, but he proved to be enough of a vet to step up and win with an offense practiced for Brady. I like how Clements/MM have redesigned our offense to maximize Bledsoe's strengths and minimize his weaknesses. In addition to his extraordinary arm which has made for him throwing some great deep routes to Evans. he has shown the experience he has gained through his career by running some wonderful fakes like taking the flip back from WM after the safeties are sucked in by the handoff and by faking the dive on a 4th and 1 and pitching a lateral out to WM for a TD. Clements has also grasped the fact that just because Bledsoe is definitely better standing and delivering from the the pocket, this does not mean he is incapable of throwing on the run or even running. He was rolling to his right when he hit Evans for a TD last weekend and he has recognized when he can get 5-10 on a QB draw because the LBs have gone wide on the pass rush. The braintrust has reduced the number and the types of audibles that Bledsoe can call which has given him less to sort through and simplified the whole offense for the team, It looks very much like Bledsoe will do quite well because the offensive braintrust has made a decision that Bledsoe should do less.

I agree with you Brandon that Hemry has little leverage with the Bills. Push comes to shove he is under contract. If the Bills chose to not to deal him they can. The presence of Willis and a good display by Williams playing against a bad team allows the Bills to refuse to negotiate should he refuse to report and they still will own him for another year as he gets no credit for not reporting. The other answer for him which many on this board think his agent will tell him to do is to simply become a cancer to this team and force them to trade or cut him. It would be stupid to give this advice to Travis and stupid for him to take it. Travis and the Bills have the same goal, they are not competitors. This goes beyong the shared goal of getting to the SB, if you assume that both he and the Bills are done with each other, their shared goal is to get the maximum value for Henry from some other team. This maximum value gives the Bills something in return for this first day draft pick and this maximum value gives Henry the leverage to negotiate a bg payday. This is going to be a tough task to get a lot for him because of the same faults people find with Henry: 1. His production this year while he played was way down. Is the real Henry the one who made the Pro Bowl or the one we saw early this year? 2. He is an injured players who orginally was diagnosed with a broken bone. Does anyone seriously think any agent or Henry will add to these kocks the concept that he is a cancer to deal with? If I'm Henry I'm pretty much feeling like my best option to sign a big contract is to remain a Bill. I get to work with the team docs in the off-season rehabbiny myself. Next year, I spell WM and try to use the fact that I'm not called upon much to start when I'm in. I enter FA next year as a former Pro Bowl RB who has demonstrated he is a teamer and if I play like I believe I am capable of playing rip off a few that gets someone to sign me to a big FA deal and this is worse comes to worse. In a good personal wolrd for me, WM goes down like he did last week, and I come in as a healthy player and play like I believe I can and star. In a perfect and fair world, i would have gotten traded this year and signed a big contract to bind me to my new team. However, life ain't fair. Ny far the best deal for me as a person is to bide by time and like Bledesoe even if my play sucks I can make the big payday by keeping my mouth shut and biding my time.

I do remember that, but I also remember that WM showed a lot of promise in this game because he actually gained some good yardage playing the majority of the game for us at RB after Henry was benched ostensibly because he was slowed by injury. WM started slow in this game but picked it up as a runner as he payed more. He showed little that game as a receiver and struggled in blitz pick-up as Bledsoe ran for his life and was sacked at least 4 times in that game by a ravenous Balt D. This was a good start for WM on his trek toward a great season but no one should mistake his play for being much more than that of an extremely talented rookie RB.

Bledsoe seems to me to be playing at about the same level he has always played at. I think that he is employed better by MM than he was by Killdrive and GW and that has made all the difference, but he is pretty much the same as he always has been. I think many TSW posters were simply fooling themselves when they made false claims like the myth that he could not win anywhere. Bledsoe had won big games and for entire seasons before. It took an HC and team leadership like Parcells provided when he took a team QB'ed by Bledsoe to the SB (the team won a few big games getting there) and like BB when he had Bledsoe run an offense powered down for Brady when Bledsoe played QB in the majority of a must-win game during their SB run. Bledsor's play has improved this year, but a lot of it seems to me because the Bills braintrust has: 1. Not relied on him to win games with his arm and instead used his extraoridinary arm a threat and change-up. 2. Used abilities he has gained from years of play to pull off some effective play fakes and flea flickers. 3. Greatly simplified the offense and reduced reliance on his brain by limiting the types and number of audibles he can call (by Bledsoe's own admission last week this is true). 4. Gone back to employing him as a runner and passing on the run. The Bills had gotten away from this probably due to fear from Bledsoe's grievous hit at the hands of Mo Lewis and mistaking the fact that he throws better from the pocket as meaning he is incapable of throwing on the move. He is a much better thrower when he stands still, but as he showed on the rollout TD to Evans yesterday he can make that throw sometimes. As long as we have him throw on the run when there is still a down to work with if he misses and he/we emphasize him missing this pass outside rather than inside where it cannot be intercepted, this pass is no problem. The big myth is that Bledsoe's game or skills has changed that much they haven't. He is still a player with extraordinary strengths (his arm, years of experience) and extraordinary weaknesses (mobility, occaisional brain farts), The key is to simply use him well and MM/Clements have done this.

I think you either underestimate the cost of a solid FA pick-up or over-estimate the cap value of Bledsoe. Sam Adams for example is considered a steal by TD at his 2004 cap hit of $2.5 million and 2 players at this level would equal the cap hit of Bledsoe so unless TD is going to swing some deal even better than his Adams negotiation getting three solid players for Bledsoe's cap hit seems quite unlikely. In addition, at the point you sign Big Ben, I doubt we're clairvoyant and know for sure that he is going to be ready to start and win for us immediately. You probably spend a chunk of any Bledsoe savings on a QB to man the post until the rookie is ready to go.

Did I miss something? I think it has been clear tbat Henry was disappointed to get passed by by Willis great play and that he was disappointed by getting injured and the inital injury assessments which had him badly hurt enough that he was going on IR. However, I haven't heard much from Henry that I would classify as him having his head up his butt or anything at all of a repitious nature that would qualify has cancerous behavior for the team. Unlike an earlier poster in this thread, i have certainly heard players say that there is no chance that an injury is going to allow them to play the next game (particularly if it is an injury that has kept them from practicing for several games). Clearly to me Henry has not contributed at all to the Bills since a few hopeful performances in the first few games, but outside of the occaisional word which might just as easily be someone from the media selecting a quote to create a fight to help them sell ads, I haven't heard much from TH I would deem problematic. In fact, I think he has handled the situation of being pushed aside by WMs drafting and play pretty well since his initial questions which many folks had when WM was picked. Are there some specific quotes that engendered any bad feelings you have about him?

I think folks routinely make the mistake of forgetting that NFL football is ultimately a team game and they focus too much on simple comparisons of this player to that player when the key is a decision about which player fits best into the format developed for your team to become a TEAM. From what I've seen from too many years of paying attention to this game is that the key to the best teams is when the whole is far better than the sum of the individual parts. The main interest I have in Big Ben is because of the failings we had at the beginning of the season with out over-orientation to the importance of the QB position. If getting Big Ben had the same resulting dimunition of the importance of the QB role which it had for Pitts I would have been all for him being our choice. Yet, if we had spent a 1st rounder on him I think our team actually would be the weaker for it because Evans has meant a lot for Moulds game returning to something like the performance with Peerless of the old days in terms of our offense as a whole being effective.

I think it just produces an incorrect answer to look for one thing (better blitz pick-up, better running by WM, better play by Bledsoe, facing lousy teams, etc.) that explains all of our turnaround or even is the one key factor. Like it or not for us simple minds, the turnaround is happening because of a number of factors being improved (some large some fairly small) which have coincided to create what none can deny is outstanding performance which has us winning big week after week. We see this in that essentially any element which people point to as a key has been missing at some point and has no effect beyond us startng a bit slowly, but rather quickly in the games we have put the pedal to the metal and won going away. For example: 1. The idea that WM is simply much better at blitz pick-up is shown to be untrue as WM really sucked at blitz pick-up as most rookies do at the beginning of the season. His blitz pick-ups have improved as most rookies do, but as he began to see significant time in the first Jets game Abraham beat Jennings like a drum and the RB position did not pick up the slack. Likewise WM saw significant time against the Ravens but Bledsoe had to run for his life and was sacked numerous times and the blitz pick-up was lackluster. Certainly fewer sacks and better blitz pick-ups coincided with our more productive performance as we moved into the streak, but these event coinciding rather than there being some cause and effect relationship seems to me to be a better description of what happened. 2. Again there is certainly clearly production of WM getting yards and us winning, but it is a jump to say that one causes the other rather than both coinciding with a lot of things happening. WMs habit is not to run all over the opposition from the start, but actually to pick up few yards initially, but as we have success with the passing game and flea flickers and the opponents get worn down he then springs free for big yardage in the end. making a claim of causation is like choosing between the chicken and the egg at best. However, the great performance by Shaud Williams yesterday does point to better blocking and play calling being central to our production rather than giving sole credit to WM. 3. Bledsoe has certainly performed well and has shown a lot of new stuff in his game like our growing usage of him as a runner and him doing some great fakes which have made the flea-flickers work. However, there have been numerous games where rather than being great he performed simply by making few errors and in fact he has had a couple of error prone games (his 3 INT effort stands out) and we won going away anyway. 4. Sure we have wracked up our streak against some bad teams, but A. we don't make up the schedule and have to play our opponents and B. we have beat these bad opponents like a drum rather than edging them. The Miami/NE game shows that even the best can be be beaten by the worst and we have won consecutively and by huge margins. I think the same is true for any factor that anyone wants to claim is the sole factor or even the lead factor in a TEAM whose true strength has become that they can beat an opponent, offensively, defensively, with special teams, at home. on the road or whatever it takes.

I thnk the current alignment may suck from out standpoint where we want to see the best teams in post-season play and see them rewarded with the playoffs. However, I doubt it will change because it is just what the NFL wants in order to make big bucks for them. They want as many teams as possible to have a shot at post-season play as late as they possibly can to maximize sales. Thus rather than lamenting that a 10-6 team well may not make the playoffs in the AFC this year, their focus (correct if ones goal is to make money) they are overjoyed with an 8-8 team making the playoffs in the NFC and thus even a 6-8 squad having a fighting chance two weeks before the season ends. This strikes me as rediculous because I have a tendency toward traditionalism. However, I will be among the second to admit that I spat at the idea of a wildcard making the MLB playoffs but wildly acknowledge this was a great move for enhancing competition and improving the game. This case is not the same as the NFL because thr MLB was so heavily weighted toward the pennant winners that good teams got denied an in, but the dynamic is the same.

This post is actually a vague attempt to talk about the football team rather than complaining about the complainers (or is it complaining about folks complaining about the complainers- of fuggaboutit). First things first as we are still in the hunt for the playoffs, but building this team for the future looks very interesting right now. The issues which you raise are real ones (find a starting LG, deal with the LT issue, are our back-up LBs good enuf?) However, I think that these issues are going to be determined by other factors than simply identifying the best athletes available in FA or the draft to fill these positions. In my mind anmong the lead factors are: 1. The salary cap determines alot: It would be great to simply get the best players at a position, but the brilliance of the salary cap is that all teams are on an equal footing of resources to be devoted to the team and their are large allocation issues involving timing and balance that play out in the cap. TD has shown his value in that his cap management has evidenced wonderful timing and balance such that we have now moved from cap hell (SF shows that even this task is not a no-brainer) to a point where we have reasonable problems of a manageable number of players hitting the market this year and next. We have a team in place which has great players and performer in all three aspects of the game (O, D, ST) who are among the best in the league. However, we have this within the constraints of the reality of the cap and good luck with injuries or players stepping up when injuries occur is key. There is a huge dropoff in talent at LB after Spikes/Fletcher, but I'm not sure what we can do about this and still stay within the reality of the cap. Our third LB Posey is quite affordable and shows only flashes of brilliance which actually allows us to maintain keeping and paying all three. The back-ups are a huge drop-off but each actually has contributed bigtime to the team on ST. The key is that if we get unlucky with an injury to a frontliner can one of them step up. I don't know but I see this as a particular problem where if you have a specific player solution folks can make a judgement, but overall the framework is good. I think our LT/RT situation is actually quite manageable. I don't think the market for Jennings is actually going to command a top 10 OL cap hit for him which we should not pay because he is not worth that much. I think that the Bills would and should pay him more money than he has ever seen before, but it needs to be an amount at the levels LTs like Petitgout and Clifton have gotten (2nd tier LT money) rather than Ogden type dollars. It only takes one offer so he may well be a goner, but the Bills will have 4 or 5 other otptions at LT other than paying Jennings too much. 2. Coaching is also key: One of the biggest upgrades for the Bills moving from the GW error to the MM era is that OL coaches Vinky and Ruel were simply not ready for primetime with their single years of experience at the position. OL play unlike any other unit is about the whole being greater than the sum of the parts. Having JMac and his 15-20 years (whatever it is) of OL coaching experience really makes it a real possibility that he can improve the units play with a Tucker, Smith or some affordable FA in the LG spot without us having to break the bank paying for a Ruben Brown. Add to this the upgrade to Clements running a balanced O attack with creative play calling rather than Kevin Killdrive and his predictability and I'm also less worried on this front. 3. This a team: A big key to our improvement has been that rather than players operating as individuals and specialists, they really are operating more as a TEAM under MM and which I think has been a key to the winning ways off BB and NE. This is seem in several things: A. Athletes are football players rather than individual specialists- Troy Brown filling the gaps caused by injury at CB is the example of this for NE. Adams, Bannan, and Denney are examples of this for us. B. We don't rely on one star- We have been able to put up record breaking number of points with folks continuing to whine and B word about Bledsoe. We were fooled by the great play of Jim Kelly into over-focusing on a need for our QB to win the game for us. We now see how effective it can be when the TEAM wins the game for you and one can even have your QB fail to perform well as long as he does not kill you with mistakes (and in his three INT game we can even win going away even when the QB makes some big mistakes). C. ST is central to the game- Perhaps the biggest difference in the Bills of old from the losing Bills of the last few years to the current Bills has been the ST performance of the team. From assigning more talented players to this unit (we use starters there now) to having better schemes (April versus Smith) we dominate in this area of play and thus we dominate games. I'm not worried about the off-season at all as all I see there is opportunity for us.

I doubt they will lay down but if things go badly for them early, I doubt that folks will put their bodies on the line to try to win this one. I think human nature dictates this game in several ways: 1. Pro athetes perform at the awesome levels they do in part because they psych themselves up to play at another level. Athletes and teams have generally not shown an ability to turn this factor on and off at will or to titrate this factor to play really hard or a little really hard. I think that the Colts and Dungy will psych themselves up as normal and show up to play. To not do this runs the risk that they will not be able to turn it on in their next game and runs the risk of even greater injury to themselves or their teammates if they attempt to lollygag through this game. 2. They are only human and when the going gets tough, people will recognize that they key for them is to live and fight another day. I think how this game starts will be a key. If the ball and the wind bounces and blows the right way, Indy will start off in a groove and actually be able to put up a lead. If the Broncs panic in the face of being behind, the game could turn very ugly for them. If on the other hand, the Broncs get off to a good start, i think that it is unlikely that the Colts will risk their lives and health to win the game and we will be done. If the game is tight, the Broncs will want it more because they will need it more in general, but the way the ball bounces and events will have its impact. In the end, the game meaning nothing to the Colts and everything to the Broncs is a big advantage for the Broncs, but while this advantage will indicate a lot it does not determine the outcome and any given Sunday and the way this odd-shaped ball decides to bounce will ultimately decide the game.

Part of the reason that it is gambling is that the line is determined not simply by which team is better, but by an effort to create a middle for bookies where half the bets are for one team and half the bets are for the other team. By getting two or more heads rather than one involved in setting the line it becomes a better approximation than you or I might come up with individually. However, the lines are at their worse setting the spread for a single big event (like the SB) than they are for recurring events like weekly football games where any particular import folks prescribe to how they bet is not skewed by some one time factor. In general, my sense is that the Jets line is almost always has more of a bump than it deserves in the line because so many New Yorkers want to bet on their team regardless of reality that the other team must be given a premium to attract action. I think this weeks Jets line is going to be more off than usual because given it is the last week of the regular season and playoff implications have a strong possibility on impacting results that the line is simply going to be skewed.

Great post! I particularly liked your point #2 where I think a truer football based reading of the team's offensive resurgence must look beyond the importance of McGahee's contribution (his better production than TH is ONE of the keys, but only ONE) to point out the numerous factors (many of which are based in better coaching) that allowed it to happen. I know there is a tendency for us fans to have trouble with attributing a result to more than one thing and thus giving WM all the credit is something folks want to do. However, while WM deserves a hea;thy portion of the credit, a real explanation is much broader than attributing the turnaround to any single player or factor.

Naaah, the result would end up with decisions which smack of the BCS in college. The current result is bad as match-ups happen which do not reflect the current reality of the game, but almost certainly any fixes will create a series of controversies which will be worse. I'm comfortable with everyone being aware of the rules at the start and dealing with the result good and bad. If someone has another proposal then they have taken on the responsibility of demonstrating that their new proposal is better than the current bad situation.

The thing which has had me thinking about Howard recently was that I'm pretty sure that his pre-season prediction was for the team to go 10-6 and probably make the playoffs with that record. Ironically, this prediction seems likely to be right on target as far as results, but since even he had given up hope when the team was 0-4 or 1-5 the result has been achieved in a way that no one imagined. I'm sure he acknowledges this reality but since I don't run across the morning show I regret not hearing his cut on these events.

There are some folks who will find something to complain about regardless of the reality of the football situation which ultimately revolves around Ws and Ls. In fact it began as early as soon after the game with a longtime poster who ran and hid as the streak reached 4 wins actually came back yesterday to apparently whine about the "Matthews/Losman controversy" as to who the Bills should have brought in for mop-up duty. How low the low have fallen.

I think that looking for one single reason or even one game is going to be wrong. It was the whole, it was organic, and it was a progression of events rather than looking for one person or one answer. I think there were a number of key events worth noting and many of them are mentioned in posts above. I would add these particulars to the list: 1. Red zone improvement- One of the examples of MM/Clements work which I found of particular importance was when in the face of a lack of solid redzone performance in early games, the team went to a set-up which made use of Bannan and Adams as part of the redzone offense, I think this move did several things: A. He took a page from the BB/NE workbook which saw them emply WR Truy Brown for use as a DB. It added fun back to the game, rewarded individual players for their efforts, and reminded players they are football players on a team and not specialists out for themselves. B. It worked to improve redzone production 2. Campbell's big game signaled a turn- It was not so much better play by the TE, but the coaches noticed a way to exploit and opposing D and successfully implemented it. Confidence in the team working together soared and though there were other players or approaches which were the focus in other weeks and Campbell or the TE spot never produced as they had in that game it marked a turn for me in us making offensive adjustments. 3. Vincent's performance was not a turning point but his success upon return at a new position which he himself chose to do rather than the coaches telling him to do it kept the ball rolling and helped make this a team which could not be denied. The turnaround is so complete that it is simply impossible to highlight one thing as the thing.

The implications of a particular outcome will likely be clear to all NFL players and for some players a desire to face a particular opponent probably will make a marginal difference to some particular player whether he stretches an extra inch for a pass or gives up his body completely on a particular play. However, I think it is the height of conspiracy thinking and sillness to think that a team in terms of direction from the HC or their shared thinking is going to throw a particular game to create some particular outcome. The concept that Indy is going to work for an outcome of their game that will get them a game against the Broncs rather than a game against the Bills simply strikes me as silly. I think this is true for a number of reasons: 1. The problem with most athletes is actually that their egos and assessment of themselves and their play is overblown. My sense is that the Colts will be fairly certain that they can handle and will beat either the Broncos or the Bills so losing to create a desired outcome will make no sense to them. 2. The successful athlete is competitive and when the game starts they will psychotically work to beat the other team. 3. Momentum and confidence are huge parts of this game and the idea that any coach is going to tell his team to lose or take actions to lose which will be perceived by the players as the coach lacking confidence in them is silly. While I do doubt that the Indy players will risk injury to win this game since they know it is not a must-win for them, I think the idea that the players can turn the effort off and on at will to create particular outcomes does not strike me as realistic.