port allegany

Just a quick question about resigning Clements. I'm sure he is very, very good but is he really worth 2-3 very good players? The numbers I hear that he wants are $20M in signing bonus and $8M/year. How much is a very good OG worth? I've heard $3M thrown around. A big #2 receiver? Another solid, not great - hopefully we get that via the draft or from the $30M Cap Space- DT? I'm just suggesting that signing Clements for that amount of money - a position where players tend to get hurt and once hurt lose speed, the calling card of the position - is a real risk worth taking into consideration. In addition, for some reason, I've never been convinced that Clements is one of those "can't live without football" type of players that will play hard regardless if things are going well or poorly, in a contract year or any year, whether a little injured or not (ironically, Fletcher fits the bill - no pun intended - but I wouldn't break the bank for him because of his age). I'd be interested in your thoughts, with an acknowledgement of how much risk you are willing to take to get Nate back.

A new GM, a new head coach, new coaches everywhere, a new system on both sides, a 2nd year QB, and a depleted talent base - who didn't expect a rebuilding year?? However, with the new OL shift we may find ourselves in pretty good shape for the future. What do we really need (assuming we have a QB) - RT, LG, RG, maybe a #2 receiver, a DT (and then we'll have depth as well), a CB (if Youboty pans out this will be good depth again), and a ML. Sounds like a lot but we do have the draft and if Chris V., Fletcher, Clements, and Troy Vincent's remaining contractual obligations all are let go next year we'll have another $15M on top of our right now $10 under the cap salary structure. That's a good amount of cash to fill relatively cheap positions (RT, LG, RG, #2, ML - a stud DT will be $$$). The remaining players are pretty young across the board. I'm just praying the OL shuffle pays off. Imagine if Gandy is really a pretty good G. More importantly, imagine if Pennington can play NFL RT. It that panned out, we'd have a young OL and Preston or Reyes as depth. Things are not hopeless. But, unfortunately, we are rebuilding this year. Hppe for progress as much as victories.

It's working

I keep reading "McGee" after "Roy Williams", why is he covering Williams and not Clements? I thought Clements was our #1 corner? He's getting $7million to cover people like Roy Williams, why isn't he?

I didn't see the game but from the nfl.com site it looks like we couldn't run when we needed to. If Losman had decent time from the OL against a very good and quick defense, then that is something we can build on. This team is going to be inconsistent - they are young, especially on offense. As long as they learn, make incremental but consistent improvement, and play hard we have something to look forward to in the future. The OL has been an embarassment for the past 3-4 years so if they are moving towards mediocrity, then that's OK for a young line. Maybe a draft choice or two or a free agent will solidify the line. As long as it's improving. The next game, Detroit, is crucial for the season as we could be 3-3 and even 3-4 after NE isn't too bad. If we are 2-5, I'm worried about the team giving up and not improving.

I've been reading comments on how negative this board is and I'm now believing it. If before the season started how many of you would have thought the Bills would be 2-2 with a very good chance of winning each game? For a rebuilding team (and probably a rebuilding year) the Bills are doing quite well and exceeding my expectations. I'm impressed that 4-5 rookies are starting on defense and we're not giving up many points. Re-read that - 4 or 5 ROOKIES. Losman is playing very well, certainly well enough to have some hope that we actually have a young QB and can focus on something else in next year's draft and free agent market. This team dropped Moulds, Vincent, Milloy, Adams - how many Pro Bowls there? - Teague, Anderson, Williams, and Campbell yet we're 2-2 and could easily be 3-1 (we dominated the Jets but..) or even 4-0 (19-17 says you certainly could have won). And we don't even have Spikes playing yet. You can argue with a play call here or a decision there but the overall direction of this team is light years from the past when we were depending on old guys having one more great year in them. We're young, but mostly they seem to play hard and have room for improvement. You can't build a winner overnight but I, for one, think we're much farther along than I had hoped. You don't have to optimistic but let's at least be hopeful and see the bright side a bit.

The key point is what would the $$$ impact be if we TRADE Holcomb? He's got a big cap number right now, if fact it was wonderfully structured by his agent so the cap hit is worse if released than if retained. But if we trade him and the Colts assume his contract it would give the Bills some more $$ to throw in Clements direction to frontload his contract (thus making his future cap numbers more agreeable). I don't know how the cap structure works so can anyone fill me in?

I didn't see the game (I live in NC) and just 'watched' on NFL.com, along with reading the minute-by-minute comments but it sounds encouraging. If we got a QB out of this game, that's plenty. We can build around a solid QB but you can't hide a mediocre/bad QB in the NFL. It appears JP has shown progress and flashes of brillance - enough to take the reins and get the confidence of the team (which is most important in the long run). We'll get better, we can scheme more, etc. but we can't do anything without a QB. If we solidified that tonight (or at least made significant strides), then tonight was a successful evening

Just wondering - how is Aaron Gibson doing? I've not heard much about him so I'm assuming his performance is pedestrian at best. Given his past draft position, Jauron's knowledge of him, and a 'this is my last chance' attitude, I was hoping we might get lucky here and get a starter out of thin air. We could certainly use a gift to make up for the Mike Williams bust.

There may also be a good side to this whole "Preston...no long a center?" question. It may be that the Bills are content with Fowler as their center for the next few years and like Preston enough to want to get him on the field somewhere. If he is a legit G prospect, then next year we could have Peters (RT), Preston, Fowler, Reyes, Gandy as a young line with some playing experience and experience playing together. From there, they could cherry-pick quality additions through the draft or free agency. Putting Preston exclusively at G might just speed up his development at that position and the transition to a younger line. Let's hope there's some logic going on in Buffalo.

Just got back from the game as well. A pretty good turnout of Bills fans. Not a pretty turnout by the Bills. SCBuffFan was right on with his assessment. To no one's surprise but I'm sure everyone's disappointment, the OL and DL were man-handled. The OL stayed in longer but just couldn't stop pressure at all even against 2nd teamers, although they were better (as might be expected). There were just no running lanes either. The group has just come together so there is hope but I must admit it wasn't pretty. Holcolm did look horrible and also confused. I agree that he's our 2nd QB. Even his supporters never talked about his upside, only his stable stewardship. Tonight all you saw was downside with errant throws. I was at the game and they didn't show a reply on the INT for the touchdown but it seemed by the naked eye that he had a throwing lane, no one touching him, and he just threw it directly to the CB. I'm hoping there's a reason for that pass that I don't know about since it was a "veteran's' throw. Losman did look better but he still looked might inconsistent (throw missing open targets, into the turf) and held the ball a bit long. However, he was under almost constant pressure and did seem to take charge a bit more as the game went along. Carolina is a good time (thinking SB down here) so this may have been a difficult test for a new team, with a new coach/GM, new systems, etc. After the shaky start (even a punt was blocked - it looked like the sea parted for the guy!), they actually held their own against the Panthers. However, it was pretty much back-ups versus back-ups. If you want a silver lining, maybe the depth isn't too bac but the front line needs to develop. All in all, I like this team. I want to see Losman given a decent chance (meaning more swing passes, TE passes, quick hitters & slants, etc. to move the ball consistently). He has talent. He may not have confidence. And the team seemed to play hard all night despite almost getting blown out almost immediately. It would have been easy to 'mail it in' at that point given it was pre-season but instead they played hard and won the non-starters portion of the game (I know, we will be unlikely to convince the other team to play mostly back-ups against us in the regular season). I liked the young guys. It was only one game - there were some good things and Carolina is a Top 5 team.

I don't quite understand the "we don't have a #1" talk. If the #13 OVERALL pick is not #1 WR quality then it was a terrible pick. Everything I hear about Evans is he is fast, breaks quickly, and has excellent hands. What else do you want from a #1, other than 'big'? Marvin Harrison is not even as big as Evans. Moss was a Pro Bowler last year and he's smaller as well. I will agree Evans has been the #1 as of yet but I would hope that when you use a #1 pick on a WR the expectation is the talent level justifies the pick. I really like our WR this year: Speed, speed, speed. Losman has the arm for the deep ball and has demonstrated some chemistry with Evans on a long throw. If you get a couple of long passes, then you have Parrish flashing around, Price going deep, Evans threatening going deep. That should open up the running game a lot more than if Holcolm is throwing short outs and dump-offs. Like everyone has said, we need Losman to improve and if he does, the Bills might have a chance to be a surprise team.

I think you answered your own question. You made some excellent points and I was leaning towards your thinking until I thought of a longer term than 'this year'. Cutting those guys will not only allow younger guys to play but it also frees up $$$ for the next few years or help sign up a few younger starters now. The only one I would have tried to keep would be Mike Williams due to his age - if he came into our camp at 340 as he says he will for Jax then we would potentially have our bookends (Peters and Williams). However, I also realize he didn't perform here nor give much reason to believe he would in the future. It's just I hated giving up on that potential if someone (anyone) could reach him or if he just matures. Oh well, he's gone - water under the bridge so all in all I'm OK with the cuts and looking forward.

It's easy in hindsight to blast TD but the Mike Williams pick was considered safe and Josh Reed had even more "value" than the DBs Marv got this year. As is often said, it's a crapshoot at some level. Having said that, I do think you can assess GMs on strategy but not actual picks. Here is where I fault TD. He pointed this team to last year (all the older vets and acquisiton - Adams, Milloy, Vincent, Moulds, etc.) for their run and then he hands over the team to a rookie QB (who never played a big game in college - by definition, he went to Tulane). That was an absurd, high risk strategy and it unfortunately blew up in his face. What Marv is doing does makes some sense - let's get the best players for the new system and hope they meet expectations. I would have preferred some quality linemen but I'm no expert either. If the DBs were the best longterm picks, then I can at least appreciate the logic. And we can still hope for a couple of linemen cut in June since teams might have drafted someone to fill in. Let's hope.

I agree it was a good post. But my money is we are going to draft Ngata. All this anti-Ngata is a smokescreen to try to make sure he isn't gone by #8. We only have 2 DTs on the team (Anderson and Trippett) and neither one is the type to hold a line to allow the linebackers to run. Bunkley isn't that type either. We've got to get a starting DT in this draft. Is Ngata a risk - sure, but isn't everyone. But the upside is enormous. He's 345lbs, strong, and quick. And appears to be pretty mature. There are OTs available in Rounds 2 & 3. My guess is the Bills are worried Ngata won't be there at #8 and we'll have a big hole in the d-line all season. Send a little signal that we're looking strongly at Bunkley or Huff to make everyone think we have some misgivings about Ngata. These guys can fly up the boards once a buzz starts (see Justice and even Bunkley) so the Bills are trying to squash any buzz. If a buzz starts on a quick, 345lb DT, he will move up.

The real benefit of trading Moulds is he won't be a cap number next year. I'm not very educated on the NFL but it would seem that if we TRADE a player and the PLAYER reworks his contract, then we should be done with him cap-wise. In Moulds' case that's $10Million or so. Plus Fletcher, who I do like, is also done next year I believe and he has a huge contract that can be released for more savings. And Vincent's contract may be droppable as well. We're talking real money here that will be freed up. If this year's draft can produce 3-4 eventual starters and we develop our young players - especially the QB, then we should be in good financial position for next year's free agency. We'd actually be a pretty young team (Lee, Parrish, Reed, Everett, Schoebel, McGee, Clements, Trippett, etc.) and be in position where another good draft of 2-3 eventual starters might make this a very good team.

"Because we'll be punting every fourth play." That is the funniest thing I've read on this site. Short, honest, and hilarious. Perfect.

I agree totally. Why do we want to sign players to long term contracts just because they're available and others are signing them. Let's get value. And maybe splurge if Marv & company see someone special - maybe the Seattle tackle, I don't know. But Pickett is considered mediocre by his own team and a semi-bust for a 1st round pick. Why is it assumed he will be a star now? By the way, in the NFL can you trade some one (like Moulds) and kick in some money to defray his salary? If you could you might make him a valuable commodity for a trade since he wouldn't break the other team's bank. We are going to take a hit with him anyway.

Moulds' contract currently extends beyond 2006, doesn't it? If it does, is there an advantage to cutting him now to save cap money next year? I'd rather take the hit this year and be clear of future dead money than be in this same position next year. I'd rather take a flyer on someone (maybe Davis will step up. maybe Parrish / Evans will get more experience without Moulds than with him) with the hopes of someone producing for the next 4 years rather than get Moulds for 1 more year. Plus, the $5 could be used on linemen where we really need help and money goes farther.

Ease up a bit. Does he play ST? He'll be familiar with Buffalo, teammates, etc. and he has some experience as a backup in case someone gets hurt during the game or has to miss a game or two. He is practically at the vet minimum (as was pointed out) so what's the harm? You need 52-53 players on the roster and not everyone is going to be a starter or can be highly paid. I'd rather Marv be selective with who he gives $$ out to since the contracts run for more than 1 year. We may need the money next year to make a run at player that fits us. No sense blowing it this year try to patch things.

I'm not projecting Parrish as a #2 but he could be an outstanding #3 so the combination of #2 and #3 might be fine. I'm not against Moulds except he's made a great deal of money from the Bills and deserved it with his performance (at least every other year). However, $10M for him right now just doesn't make sense. I'd rather take a risk on someone younger that may produce for the next 5 years. Moulds can't play more than a couple of years at any reasonable level - even Jerry Rice declined substantially in his 30's. It's just a matter of productivity and $$$.

Before we throw in the proverbial towel, let's give Marv a little room. Exactly what have we lost? An non-productive #4 pick. Older players (Adams, Milloy, & assuming Moulds) who have been disruptive forces in the locker room. are seriously overpaid relative to their performance, and have lowering anticipative performances given their age. And we are also setting the stage for Losman in that the Holcobm (?) supporters are being exited (Moulds, Campbell). It looks like Marv is trying to set a different culture in the locker room. What do we get? We maximize our Salary Cap possibilities. If we get a LT or RT in free agency, we can move Gandy to G and put Preston at Center. The line is improved without any other moves via FA or the draft. Everett or Euhus can take over TE (Everett is a 3rd round pick, Preston a4th rounder - these rounds are the backbone of most teams so we should expect them to be able to play. They're not a 5th, 6th, or 7th round reach). Obviously we need a #2 receiver but let's not forget Parrish was pretty highly regarded before the injury. We're not THAT far away at receiver. On defense, we still have a 1st rounder, a second rounder, and freed up cap money. Is this enough for the playoffs next year? Probably not but the chances of going are not that great since Losman will only be a 2nd year starter. We need to use 2006 to set the tone for 2007. Who knows we may get lucky in 2006. But keeping the old, big contracts aren't getting us to the Super Bowl with a QB in his second year starting anyway (don't even bother with the Big Ben/Steelers analogy - that logic put us where we are right now).

I wish there would be some evidence giving why someone would say it's a 3rd rate coaching group. Who knows assistant coaches, especially up and comers. And how do you know how much discretion an assistant was given in a situation? Too many variables to just pronounce it 3rd rate. I am cautiously optimistic over the recent happenings at One Bills Drive. As a Texas alum and avid Bills fan, I hoped Mike Williams would work out but I also see the upside of the release from a signal-sending perspective (as well as the obvious financial implications). With the fluid nature of today's NFL a team can make great strides almost overnight. The Bills aren't that far away if Spikes & Warren come back OK and we use Free Agency & the draft well. Talent-wise we'll be fine. The key will be the QB and, therefore, Losman. I'm actually excited about him for next year. He gets a new start, has tasted a little success and a lot of growing pains failure, and his talent level has never been questioned. I may even be willing to just let Moulds go as he may be a distraction for Losman (I'd rather them find a way to co-exist after Moulds takes a huge salary cut). Keep sending signals Marv!

I recall feeling quite frustrated during the last drive because it seemed we were putting all the pressure on a field goal kicker to kick a 40+ yarder. You see this all the time when coaches go conservative and set up a long field goal. They remark later how they didn't want to risk a sack or an interception. How about risking a loss? I've got to believe the odds of a 40+ yard FG is 50% or less, then add the pressure of a game winning (in this case, a Super Bowl winning) FG, the odds must go down even more. There might be articles out there saying differently, but most writers/analyst blame the kicker ("he choked") and never questioning the coach's decision not to try to get into chip shot range. I think Paterno actually did this in the bowl game. Bowden has done it in the past and suffered enormously (yet, it's always the 'lousy kicker'). At the college level, it is even more maddening since the pressure is being placed on a 20 year old. I'm sure Levy would have been criticized if Kelly was sacked or threw an interception. No doubt. But no one criticizes him for the 6 and 4 yard passes or an 11 yard run to set up a 47 yarder on grass. And don't tell me about it "being the kicker's only job" either. Coaches are suppose to put players in positions to succeed, not place them at their limit with the world on their shoulders.

Not Culpepper. First of all, he has a huge contract. Second, give Losman a chance behind a decent line before you all crucify him. Did you see the game Brady, Manning, and Plummer put up in the playoffs under pressure? Brady and Manning are considered top drawer and Plummer had his best season but all looked shaken by having people in their face or at their feet. Well, Losman (or pick any Buffalo QB, including Bledsoe) faced pressure on just about every snap behind that line. Build the line and then judge Losman. And maybe McGehee also for that matter. It just may turn out that a couple of OL could actually make a huge difference. Say what you will about TD (and I agree he totally neglected the line) but he didn't leave the cupboard bare regarding young skilled positioned players (Losman, McGehee, Evans, Parrish, Everett, Reed). Now get a line and see if they have the talent to justify their draft position.