Luxy312

Clowney would be the only one to trade up for. The problem with any other pick is that they're either 1 - pointless (QB) or 2 - the player could fall to you anyway at #9 (i.e. Mack). None of Bortles, Bridgewater or Manziel are a lock to be anything special and I'm not convinced that any team should ever trade up for an offensive lineman. Just a wasted trade.

If Williams can stay healthy, I don't see any reason why he couldn't fill the void. At the end of the day, Byrd gave Williams credit for his interceptions this last season based on calls that Aaron made on the field. That alone should account for something. Williams himself had 4 interceptions and a forced fumble, which consequentially was identical to Byrd's production.

Tough tough guy to say the least!

5 years, $56 million, $25.5 million guaranteed, Tampa Bay.

No question. Reports were in fact all over the place yesterday. When I heard it, it was a local Chicago radio show reporting on WGR's reporting, so not surprising that things get lost in translation. None the less, if they're offering $60+ million over 6 years and the first 3 years has $30 million, that's a lot of money to turn down. Even if the guarantee were only $25 million with incentives to make more, that's still serious coin for a safety. My take on this is that Byrd/Parker weren't taking any offer from the Bills and were planning on testing the market. It is what it is....

I'm with you 100% on QB needy teams. When you look at the teams drafting before the Bills, this is what I see: Houston - They don't have a franchise guy. Schaub isn't the answer and Keenum was downright awful last year. I could see them drafting Bortles #1 easily. St. Louis - Bradford has been injury prone. While they could draft QB, I honestly think they're getting Bradford some O-line help. Still no Mack here. Jacksonville - Absolute garbage offense last year. Bridgewater or Manziel would be easy picks for them. Cleveland - Can anyone see them going another season with Campbell/Weedon? If they don't take the remainder of Bridgewater/Manziel, Clowney is the clear pick here as the premier player available. Oakland - Same answer here as Cleveland. Are they going to roll with Terelle Pryor for another year? That would be a laugher. Atlanta - Definitely sticking with Matt Ryan, but would they honestly draft Mack before maybe the first or 2nd best O-lineman in the draft? Doubt it. Tampa/Minnesota - These two are factually unknowns to me as they have so many needs on both sides of the ball. Could both of these teams pass on Sammy Watkins, who's a consensus top-10 pick? The closer I look at it, the more I think that Mack will in fact be there for the Bills at #9. The teams above them appear much more desperate at other positions, and the draft seems to be filled with the right guys needed to fill the voids.

WGR reported yesterday that $30 million of the $62.5 million was guaranteed and payable over the first 3 years. Assuming that's accurate, I don't see Byrd getting a better deal than that.

Kudos to you for not having the typical short term Bills fan memory. People continue to try to place the blame squarely at the feet of the organization without any consideration for the remainder of the facts. The simple fact here is that he sat out 6 games last season and to me it wasn't very clear at all that it was injury related. Anyone who knows anything at all about Parker knows that he's a complete turd. I for one am glad that the Bills stepped above the fray here and simply let Byrd test the market. If I were the Bills, there is ZERO chance I would revisit the 6-year $62.5 million offer that they turned down.

You don't get better by not fielding a full team. One complete season in 11 years and that was 7 years ago. Vick is a pathetic excuse for a football player.

Terrible idea. This team has far too many needs to trade 2 first round picks.

You understand very little as it pertains to the contract game. NFL players have very little to do with any aspect of negotiation or making demands. That comes directly from agents and how they measure the market. They lead the show and not the other way around. There are agents that are easier to deal with than others and Parker is one of the worst in that regard. Track record doesn't lie. There's a huge difference as well between getting the best deal (Parker's job) and a player actually being worth the deal they got. Peters was not worth the contract he received and what Parker is asking for for Byrd is the same to me. Just not worth it.

Why would anyone be even remotely excited about this rumor? First, he's never been an accurate passer. His completion percentage has consistently hovered around 55%, which is pretty pathetic. At least with EJ, we still have the perception of potential for upside. Vick is a known commodity as a passer and not a very good one at that. Second, he's always one run away from injury. In 11 seasons in the NFL, he's been able to muster just ONE complete season. All of the rest have been cut short by injury. That's pathetic by any standard you want to apply. I'll concede that he can probably still get it done by escaping the pocket. However, that's irrelevant when that's the only thing positive that he brings to the game. Vick is garbage. He's no different than the other garbage free agents that the Bills have tried to recycle before, such as Ryan Fitzpatrick.

I agree with this statement 100%. While Robinson or Matthews are both clearly top-10 talent in the draft, what do the Bills really gain by drafting them? The Bills offensive line last year wasn't outstanding, but wasn't horrible either. I have just as hard of a time suggesting that the Bills should draft a player that potentially represents a modest improvement at a position, when there are so many other positions that have significant shortcomings. Maybe I'm over simplifying here, but I don't think there's any doubt that there's 3 QB's taken before the Bills pick at #9 in Bortles, Bridgewater, and Manziel. Buffalo isn't drafting QB early, so that's a good thing. Clowney is also a consensus top-3 pick right now, with Sammy Watkins also going within the top-7. That only leaves 4 players that they need to think about and it's pretty easy for me to pick which 4 should be considered. Khalil Mack and Anthony Barr should be priorities. The single biggest weakness of the defense is OLB and both of these guys would be tremendous additions. While some might say it's early, I don't mind Eric Ebron. Big TE with play making athleticism and another target for EJ. Last and perhaps the guy that many may disagree with the most is Hasean Clinton-Dix. Byrd is all but gone and I don't personally think that Da'Norris Searcy is "the guy" for that position.

When all is said and done, the situation with Byrd can be reduced to one issue. His agent. Parker is a bottom feeding scumbag that notoriously over values players that he's working for. Remember Jason Peters? He had a grand total of one good year for the Bills before Parker wanted the coffers emptied to pay him. Peters has been a good player, but not as good as the contract he received. Byrd was offered a deal that would pay him $30 million over the first 3 years. While I don't know if there were other years on the deal or what the whole deal was worth, that type of money is in line with the highest paid safeties in the game and yet it's still not enough. Reports suggest right now that Aaron Williams will be signed for about $5 million. I ask the question of whether anyone really believes that Byrd is worth more than twice that amount and more importantly plays more than twice as well. Personally, I just don't see it. At this point, my vote would be to let him walk and let some other sucker pay him. If the rumors are in fact true, let him play for Tampa Bay and lose a couple more seasons...

I'll wade into the pool here on the subject (pun intended). I voted for O'Neil. Do I think he's currently a better DC than Wade Phillips? No. Wade has been a defensive minded guy pretty much his entire career and has made his proverbial hay in that arena. Just looking at the last 20 years in whatever capacity he's been with a team, 10 of those years the teams were top-10 in defense. So why O'Neil over Phillips? For me it comes down to continuity. Last year this team broke the all time sack record set by our Super Bowl Bills of the 90's. The team doesn't need a new system with new schemes, so much as they need better linebacker play. I seriously doubt that happens with a new DC. The Bills need to add more talented OLB's to the team. I think the current system, which O'Neil knows, will work just fine then.

Hopefully this does not go to his head. He had a fantastic year none the less. I hope the front office gets him some guys that can play.

My top-5 in order would be: Dan Marino - still had quickest release of any quarterback ever. If his defenses would have been better, there's no doubt he would have had rings (which are irrelevant for this post). Peyton Manning - Only QB I know of in the modern era that is still calling his own plays. Knows the play book as good or better than the OC's he's worked with. Joe Montana - He played for some great teams of course, but he's up their in terms of all time comebacks, QB rating, passing efficiency, etc. Steve Young - Dual threat coupled with extremely high completion percentage puts him here for me. Tom Brady - Never been on a bad team, has a great coach and good talent around him offensively and defensively. Still gets it done late in games.

It's hard to NOT put an asterisk next to the Patriots in the record books. Their defense was ranked 1st, 2nd, and 6th in the years they won the Superbowl. The years that they were caught cheating and all evidence simply destroyed by the NFL before anyone could really look at anything. That said, only an idiot would argue that Tom Brady is just an average quarterback. In the 9 years that the new and much more comprehensive QBR has been tracked, Brady has lead the league 2 times. Aaron Rodgers won it 1 time. The other 5 were all Peyton Manning. Apart from the pure numbers game, Peyton Manning is calling his own plays on the field. All the chicken and egg theory in the world won't win you arguments in terms of good WR's making QB's good and vice a versa. Did Peyton benefit from having Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison all those years? Sure. Wes Welker, Randy Moss, Rob Gronkowski, and Aaron Hernandez were no slouches either. With all of the injuries, this was still a good year for Brady. The Patriots did spread the ball around a lot more than in the past. What did Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas do before Manning? 32 and 44 receptions. 22 for Thomas the year before that with mostly Orton throwing to him. What did they do with Manning this year? 92 and 87 receptions. 3 other guys BESIDES them had 60+ receptions. Superbowls and wins are functions of teams with contributions from 55+ players and a host of coaching staff. I would none the less argue that while both of these guys will be HOF first ballet entrants, Manning is clearly the better signal caller.

While I don't have a problem with either premise that the team needs to improve against the run and improve on the offensive line, I disagree with the premise on defense that it starts with the DT's or DE's. They did their job. However, aside from Alonso, the guys playing LB were atrocious. Give me 5 average to above average lineman plus a chipping TE or RB, and there's not 4 D-linemen in the game that are going to hold opposing RB's to 4 or less YPC. Linebackers have to be stout at the point of attack to stop the run and the Bills were just not that good in that part of the game. So what does that mean to me draft wise? I previously suggested that RT, LG should be on the table, but am rethinking that position, especially that early. This year, the offensive line was decent on pass plays, but not so much on running plays. I think I could live with that until a later round pick. Getting good linebackers may put a defense that was top of the league in pass rushing and top of the league in interceptions over the top. When I seriously break it down, I imagine an offense that's only slightly better with a better offensive line, but a defense that could be truly dominant.

One season doesn't make a head coach. Worst case scenario for me is that the front office ignores the glaring needs at LG, RT, and OLB and drafts a QB or WR early. Talk about a nightmare.

I don't agree that the DL "routinely gets moved". There's a reason that they finished 2nd in the NFL in sacks. They're aggressive in getting in the backfield. The problem with that is if you don't have strong linebacker play, then you open yourself to opposing teams running games. There's a direct correlation as well between when the Bills were getting a lot of sacks and at the same time getting gashed in the running game. Just do the math and it becomes painfully obvious.

It's not the front-4 that are the problem, but our OLB's. They're just plain weak at the point of attack and get overwhelmed by opposing blockers. This should be one of the primary areas of concern for the 2014 draft.

I don't have a problem with what he said. Simply winning the turnover battle by ONE is not a telling stat in a game. Teams win about 70% of the time when they're +1 in the turnover battle. Go +2 and historically teams win 90% of games. Go +3 and it's over 95%. Neither of those are 100%, but turnovers are the absolute #1 predictor of success in the NFL. Should we really be surprised that 7 of the 12 playoff teams are in the top-10 in net turnovers? Statistically speaking when you start doing odds ratios, it's a fairly telling measure of a teams success. Buffalo ranked 19th in the NFL in giveaways and were essentially below average. It doesn't matter that they were 9th in takeaways when they balance it out by giving the ball back.

I would trade the pick or pick the top LG or RT on my board. All the talk of cutting bait with Manuel now is just plain stupid. The kid has a grand total of 10 starts to his career thus far. His completion percentage of 58.8%, TD/INT ratio of 11/9, and QBR or 77.7 were all better than Peyton Mannings were in his rookie campaign. (56.7%, 26/28, and 71.2). Drafting a QB is about as stupid as drafting the top DE that plays Mario Williams position or drafting the top LT "just because he's there". Manziel is no sure thing and isn't even the top QB prospect on most boards at this point. I would take top prospects at positions of known need before I would take ANOTHER QB. How many guys does this team need to start? They're not going to have instant success with ANY quarterback until they fix the offensive line and get linebackers that can actually help stop the running game.

My observations on this years draft: Say what you want about Scott Chandler, but he's the second leading receiver on the team with 50 receptions; behind only Stevie Johnson with 52. The Bills simply don't use the position like the Saints or some other teams that feature the position in the offense. He's about average in the NFL as well from a stats perspective. He's not pulling a big contract and should be easy to re-sign. TE should not be a position of focus for early draft selections. It would be a wasted pick. For those talking about a WR, Stevie Johnson is going nowhere. Goodwin and Woods were just rookies this season and will be the other starters. I don't see the need for this type of reach when there's so many other positions of need. Getting down to positions of need, the offensive line has been OK in pass blocking. Not so much so as far as it pertains to the running game. I would contend that every position except center and LT could use replacement. I'll be the first to admit that Levitre was much more important than I would have thought. For me, I would consider LG early. I would also look at OLB. Bills have given up too many long runs and their YPC allowed isn't all that good.