Luxy312

You can only compare the data you have. Sure Barry is great. No question one of the best ever. He wasn't a bread and butter runner though. 3-6 yards a carry wasn't his way. He was -3, -2, +20. People on this board want to somehow say "nevermind" to Spiller's big runs just the same. Ludicrous and asinine. THAT is the comparison. Not 300 carries a year. They have the same style. In traffic, they suck. BOTH suck in traffic. Barry is more proven at sucking in traffic than Spiller, no question as he is more proven long term on the productive side. Spiller can opt out, but he can't preclude the Bills from tagging him. The simple act of "opting out" doesn't automatically make him a free agent. Oh, and reiterating a point. Neither of these runners "ran over" anyone. Watch football people!

Confident in speculating you mean. There is no conclusion you can draw from your analogy as there is no data. Your "conclusion" wouldn't pass the smell test in small court. I have at least constructed a sound argument based on ample data points.

I.e. any personal activity off field that are irrelevant to the team.

Every player is unique, but it is useful to compare styles or running. The verdict is out on whether "he will be gone" none the less. Depends on what he does in his next 2 seasons (which he's under contract for). 6 years of hit and miss performance and injuries will not get him a lot of looks.

Same Yolo. WTF cares about this type of stuff? Do we care if E.J. gets his colon checked out? LOL.

This I agree with for a couple of reasons. First, he has a lot of upside. 2 years ago when healthy, he averaged 6 YPC. He was an explosive playmaker. Trading him before last year would have been for much bigger value than many are talking about on this board. Second, what do they have to lose by keeping him? Another sub-par year and they can re-sign him to not a good deal. Return to form and they have the option of trading him for a LOT more. There's a lot of myopic Madden-esque thinkers out there for sure. You obviously didn't watch him play that much based on that comment. Barry was never a power running back. It's the reason he WAS caught in the backfield for a loss more than any player in the history of the NFL. He NEVER got downfield because he ran people over, but because you couldn't put a measurable hit on the guy once he got into space. In terms of how many carries Sanders got, please find me a running back TODAY that is getting 300 carries a game year in and year out. A.P. is the closest and he still falls well short. You won't, because they don't exist. Different era in football. The fact is that Sanders played for a garbage team and was pretty much the only weapon that team had, unless you wanted to mention Herman Moore, Rodney Pete or Scott Mitchell. Nice try, but doesn't hold water.

Second round for RB is a huge stretch. Let's evaluate: Carlos Hyde - He's much more like Freddy than CJ. Not elusive and not very quick. Late 2nd projection or 3rd on most boards. Jerick McKinnon - Essentially a read option quarterback in college that couldn't throw. Projected as late as the 5th round. Terrance Cobb - He's not even listed on some boards and projected to be a UFA. Not sure why they had him in for visit. Jeremy Hill - Another pounder like Hyde and also an early 3rd round projection by most. Lache Seastrunk - Early 4th round projection that didn't look all that spectacular at the college level. When all is said and done, these were they guys they brought in at that position. Except for Hyde, all are later round forecasts. If they really had a plan to draft a running back in the second, I would have to ask myself why they wouldn't have swapped out Cobb, Hill, and Seastrunk for Mason, Sanky, and Williams. After all, why spend 4 of your 30 player visits when you would never reach for those players? 3rd or 4th round target makes the most sense to me if the right value is there.

Not complicated really. Sometimes what things appear to be is exactly what they are and you don't have to dig deeper to find some hidden or existential meaning. Similar expression that if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. There's no need to speculate that it might be an alien using advanced technologies to mask its appearance such that it is fooling you for some other sinister reason that you can't comprehend.

It's not obvious at all or they wouldn't be going to court, and the "right thing" is purely subjective.

They're simply pointing it out because it is true. Pointed out by many - In 4 seasons, he's averaged 5.1 YPC. Response - Yeh, because that's skewed by long runs. Further pointed out - Barry Sanders was caught more for a loss than any back in history and averaged 5.1 YPC. His average is skewed by his long runs. Response - OK, nevermind, you can't compare Spiller to anyone because he sucks. Is that REALLY all anyone has? I guess a good defense for the negative nancy's is no defense at all. LOL.

I'm truly divided on this subject and mostly based on the full disclosure of the facts and circumstances. If the expectations were laid out up front with these ladies and the rules set (in terms of "weighing in", attending practice, etc.), then they got exactly what was offered to them. Is it a great paying job? Of course not, but what service are you really providing that someone thinks is adding value to the organization? Having or not having cheerleaders adds no measurable value to the team. I could honestly take it or leave it as it pertains to them, mascots, etc. On the flip side, if there was any lack of disclosure what so ever, any hint of subterfuge by the Bills organization, then they should be paid for their time. Give or take the cheerleaders, this type of stuff is going on in the business world as well. Time Warner cable installers are suing in several states because the company took the position that their work day starts when they get to their first job and ends when they leave it. Their biggest gripe (and rightfully so) is that the first and last jobs could be an hour or more away from their home, versus some others that may be minutes.

Explain that too while they're explaining how Ebron has more drops per target than any of the other top-10 TE's in the draft. Snooze....

I honestly feel like this perspective has somehow robbed me of IQ. I'm just going to look at the last 5 years to evaluate. While every teams boards are different, I'm going to have to assume a ranking to make this point. As such, I'll take CBS Sportsline. 2013 - 16th pick is QB - E.J. Manuel. Board says they should have drafted FB - Kyle Juszczyk. That's great. Starting last season, we would have had Thad Lewis, Jeff Tuel and Kolb on the IR. For the record, Juszczyk wasn't even picked in the first round. Wonder why. 2012 - 10th pick is Stephen Gilmore. Board says they should have drafted OG - David DeCastro. He's been OK for the Steelers, but nothing really special. and was picked with the 24th pick in the draft. Riddled with injuries early in his career. On the flip side, that removes the Bills best CB from the team going into last year. 2011 - 3rd pick is DT - Marcel Dareus. Board says the same. Enough said. 2010 - 9th pick is RB - CJ Spiller. Board says Joe Haden, but he was already taken 2 picks earlier. We would have instead ended up with DE - Derrick Morgan. Essentially, we would be trading away a guy who's shown us something for a below average DE. Wonderfully done. 2009 - 11th pick is DE - Aaron Maybin. Draft board says WR - Jeremy Maclin. This is the only one that is definitive in terms of an improvement. Maybin was a head scratcher to say the least. I'll bet you money that if you went back another 15 years that this team would look like a DISASTER if you just took BPA for every first round pick, regardless of position. By definition, position MUST come into play when assigning value. The single exception to that rule IMO is if your team is already complete top to bottom and you have no real draft needs. Therein lies the problem. There is NO team in the modern NFL that doesn't have needs. Even winning the Superbowl, Seattle will be trying to pick players at positions that they perceive as NEED to them. Johnny football could fall all the way to their pick and they're NOT picking him. Your premise = failure.

Well if you eliminate all of Barry Sanders long runs, he would be pretty awful too. He was caught more than any RB in history for NEGATIVE yards. Point here is that you can't just say "ignore the positive and just count everything else". That's the ultimate in bad statistics and not reflective of the entire body of work of the player.

While I like Sammy Watkins, I think him visiting the Bills is just part of the organizations draft strategy. First, I don't see Buffalo trading up to guarantee they get him. Based on everything I've read, the chances of him falling to Buffalo at #9 are very slim. That said, we only have to look to last year. Tavon Austin wasn't supposed to make it to Buffalo at #8 and yet he did. An interested party in St. Louis made the trade with us and took him. So in my mind, Buffalo is meeting with the last of their allotment of 30 visits this week and they took an opportunity to tell the rest of the NFL "hey look, if he falls to us at #9, he's gone". At the same time, they met with Evans as the backstop to the likelihood that Watkins will already be gone.

My only problem with Murphy is that he's undersized. Kind of a tweener for DE. To boot, the Bills already have 2 guys just like that in Hughes and Lawson.

My take on this subject has changed a little bit. Previously, I said I would be fine with Lewan if both Robinson and Matthews are gone. I think there's pretty much zero chance of Robinson being there, so then it comes down to Matthews and Lewan. Buffalo clearly needs a RT. The offensive line couldn't move the football on 3rd and short last year. They already filled in at LG, which should only make Glenn that much better. Matthews represents an interesting problem to have. Here's a versatile guy that can play any position on the line and at a high level to boot. What's not to like? At a minimum, the offensive line is set for 4 years with him at RT AND there's a contingency option if someone suffers serious injury. Now let's talk about other options at #9 overall. I keep hearing Ebron, and that bothers me. Out of the top ten rated TE's in this draft, Ebron has more drops per target than all of the rest. I know he's an athlete, runs good routes, etc. If I'm drafting an offensive player though at #9, I want a guy that can go up and get the ball and NOT a guy that can kind of get near the ball but not catch it. I don't really mind Evans in that spot. He's taller, faster, more athletic and most importantly doesn't drop the ball. Even if you assume that not a single QB is taken before the Bills select, I can still find 9 guys that I would want. They would be (in order) Clowney, Mack, Robinson, Watkins, Evans, Matthews, Barr, Gilbert, Dennard.

It's pretty straight forward for me: Houston - QB or Clowney. I don't see any other pick being an option. St. Louis - Robinson with a slight outside chance of Watkins. The need is protection for Bradford though. Jacksonville - QB or Clowney. Cleveland - Houston seems enamored with Bortles, so Watkins should go here. Oakland - The trade for Schaub says Mack won't fall past Oakland. Tampa Bay - We just took Williams from them. Evans is the right pick. Minnesota - Bridgewater. He's meeting with them today.

LOL..A "complete" comeback would still only make him a 40 reception 500 yard tight end. Chandler has put up better numbers than that. Still don't disagree though that TE in the 1st round would make me throw up in my mouth a little bit.

Very good article and spot on with my perception of the situation. You might not know what you have after 1 or 2 years, but you will know after 3. Same reason I don't think there's a chance that this is the make or break year for EJ. I hope it's a "make" year none the less.

I've said this in other threads. There is only once scenario that would involve the Bills having to trade up to get a player of value for them. That scenario says that only one quarterback would be taken with picks 1-8. I can't fathom a single scenario where that would be the case. There are 4 teams with serious quarterback deficiencies, and you could even argue that it should be 5 given that Bradford hasn't really panned out for the Rams. OT isn't such an absolute need at this point that they need to give up draft picks or other draft position to fill the void. Matthews or Evans will be there at #9 when they pick.

I don't want Manziel or Ebron.

That part you're wrong about. He has the worst drop rate of any of the TE's rated in the top-10 in the draft and significantly more than Evans. If they draft Ebron with #9, I'll watch the Bears next year. .07 seconds in the 40 is a lot. You're apparently not a track guy. Add 5 inches higher on the vertical and 4 inches on his wingspan. Translation is that Evans has about a foot more to work with than Ebron.

It's easy and unfortunately, quite naive to believe that off the field actions of NFL players don't matter. The NFL is approaching a $10 billion a year business. They're a business of entertainment by definition. None the less in this increasingly connected world, off the field actions reflect on that business. The players and owners have a conduct policy to protect the NFL brand and ensure that that business continues and more importantly continues to grow. My company is smaller (about $1 billion in revenue), but they have employee policies just the same. Those policies cover many things that I can do off the field that would reflect poorly on their brand. If I get in front of the media and spew racist comments; if I drive under the influence and hurt or kill someone; if I write articles memorializing hatred for this or that religious organization; etc., I could get fired. There is ZERO opportunity to suggest saying that my work stands on its own and that they should ignore everything else. Aldon Smith quite frankly is just blowing it. If I'm the 49ers, I would have to take a long hard look at him as an individual and probably have a sit down conversation to figure out how HE is going to remedy his situation going forward. If the 49ers ditch him and I'm the GM of any other team, I would have serious reservations about doing anything with the right contract provisions that can void his entire deal if he doesn't toe the line. The OP got this one right none the less. Aldon Smith IS an idiot.

On occasion, I'll watch the comeback against the Oilers. Each time, I still get the feeling right after halftime that the game is all but over and to a small degree expect them to lose. Truly one of the greatest games in NFL history.