Pyrite Gal

And JP got pulled at QB year before last so he should not have been put back in as he got better. Past performance is of course indicative of future activity but it easily can be surpassed by a player gaining experience. The argument that a player did not cut it in one game the first time he played the position as a pro simply does not in and of itself invalidate his ability to do better in the same position later. The major difference is that in the two years since Crowell has gotten experience and stacked up some accomplishments reflected in him producing tackles, sacks, and INTs which placed him in the top 3 for defenders in each of these categories each year. The opposing argument offered to this is that Willis did well in his college D at MLB which also was not a Cover 2. In terms of comparing the two approaches even if you reject my arguments as 3,000 words of drivel which does not apply it seems merely opposed with 25-40 words of drivel which do not apply. Unfortunately I think even my long drivel stands fairly uncontroverted by the shorter drivel.

I doubt they give up resources to trade up because: 1. I think people present a false dichotomy saying that a team has to choose either quantity or quality in the draft. It is obviously a balance being struck and a winning team better factor both items heavily into each choice or they will not be successful. There is ongoing scouting going on at both the college and pro levels. The raw evaluations are collected, but the first cut shaping evaluations of the collected information is based on the end of the year assessments and meetings. The team looks hard at the 2006 season and it is all about needs there in terms of identifying shortcomings and strengths, The availability of talent from the draft, FA, likely UDFAs, trades and internal development are assessed and there is a back and forth as to whether the schemes chosen fit the players and whether players can be found to fit the scheme and depending upon how it fills perhaps a new scheme is needed. 2. The major piece of BPA work is done when the team compiles its draft board. They assess all the evaluations and determine for each position who is the best player available in the draft their in order and end up boiling all this BPA assessment down into what order should they pick people in the actual draft. Again they strike a balance between BPA and need. For this season the needs of the Bills are quite concentrated. Rather than a player here or a player there, they essentially may only have two RBs on the roster (A-Train and TE Cieslak who can play FB) now who will be on the final roster. Williams is a vet now so he is in the mix, but dissatisfaction with the 3rd down threat he poses (no one feels he is a threat to go to the house on every play he is in and beyond being likely to gain 5-7 yards on a 3rd and 12 the Bills should be able to do better than SW. Fred Jackson is well regarded as the leading rusher in Europe but he is really simply the leading rusher in Europe and this can easily mean little by the time the roster comes down. We are working hard to get FA Turner but even if we are successful this still we may well see 2 RBs taken in this draft and both will probably make the team. In addition, we are not going to have 2 of the 3 LBs who started last year. We apparently hope that Ellison develops into a fulltime starter at WLB, but we will be picking at least one starter at LB in this draft and maybe two. We currently have 4 first day picks- while these first day picks are most likely to start really none are guaranteed to start. Last years draft class was judged to be relatively strong, but still of the 32 first round draft picks while over a majority of these picks were ranked first on the depth charts at their positions, it was slightly over 50% of the 32 picks with 18 listed as starters but 14 were not. The conventional wisdom is that a first round pick should be a starter (and some folks are disappointed if they are not immediate starters but the fact was even in this strong class, it was more like a crapshoot in terms of real results if your expectation is that a 1st round pick will/should start in his first year. Sometimes it works that way and sometimes it does not. Merely to have adequate starters this year, we need as many first day picks as we can get. Even then its going to be tough and we will need hard work and some luck to field a competitive team. Not only is it a false choice between quantity and quality but the actual real choice to be made is taking an adequate shot this year or choosing to make 07 a rebuilding year with an expectation of a payoff later. I am a future is now fan so I certainly vote take risks to make the team competitive taking a shot at the playoffs this year. I think Marv and co are unlikely to give up picks for a higher choice for several reasons: 1. In this business and in American society there is a regrettable but simply real impatience. Particularly after so many years of no playoffs, the Bills will have a tough time (and arguably cannot afford to invest in a long term building strategy which invites any sense that the team is giving up on the playoffs and producing this year, The Bills must work to credibly fill in key gaps at LB and RB and credibility in doing this means getting a few first day picks to fll the many slots and investment in one star at the cost of a couple of starters will probably alienate a lot of the media (its already started with ESPN, and this would be spread by a draft which focused on quality to the exclusion of quality that the bad press and actions would alienate many fans and impact attendance and then who know what happens with the franchise. 2. The Golden Boys are gonna wanna win now while their life and vitality are still here when given their age they have to wonder whether they will be around for sure even next season. They probably will but who knows what the future holds. 3. In his book, Marv remarked HCs who trade competing this year for building a team for the future were quite likely to not be around when the future came around. Marv's general inclination is to go for it now. The difference between first and last place from year to year is quite small. With a little luck looking at the schedule I think with a good draft we may be able to go for it this season. Probably not but if one gives up before even trying the product is probably going to be less entertaining to all.

Again reiterating post above that I was probably working on just as you were working on yours it is inaccurate to describe Youbouty as not dressing last season except for a spot start as baseon the NFL compiled Gamebooks he first dressed soon after the break in Game 9. It is also inaccurate in this post to say that it was ST that got Youbouty into the game against NYJ as you are aware from your posts that he started and actually got substantial gametime against NYJ as McGee was out with an injury. He was an important part of the gameplan as his surprising presence as a starter and with a lot of shuffling and changes of formation which Fewell used in that game to confuse the opportunistic and rag armed Pennington was different personnel in different formations. They suceeded in basically stopping the Jets playoff making offense. Rather than being some negative or demonstration of his failings, Youbouty's usage is easily seen as an endorsement of the relatively difficult to deny fact that his play in practice from early last season and in dressing soon after the BYE built the confidence of the coaches that he could be trusted to start one game and appear in two others. It is beyond our outside observation to say why the coaches sat him after playing him. I think the most likely reasons are: 1. Once McGee got his attitude adjusted and he was sat he was a much better player in the second half of the season and the Bills felt he was better. I think that McGee's improved play was a big part of the reason the braintrust seems to feel comfortable with him as #1 starter. He certainly will need to step up because part of his improved play in the second half is the Bills changed up their scheme so that Clements always got the better WR. He will need to step up his play as this responsibility is on him. 2. I also think that his start and play are an endorsement of Jauron/Fewell's satisfaction with Kiwaukee Thomas. Thomas announced he wanted to start this year at CB when he began entertaining FA bids. He will get a shot this year with the Bills taking on Youbouty. The fact they stuck with Thomas as the nickel after the start seems to be based more on satisfaction with Thomas than dissatisfaction with Youbouty. 3. Looking at the gamebooks against SD and TN, it is only a guess why the coaches did what they did but they seemed to have decided to go with an additional LB rather than a DB and Youbouty sat. Given the fact that both teams emphasized the run heavily it seems quite reasonable that they would be more likely to power up at LB rather than at CB. Youbouty did not take the CB job and make it his so I think one cannot judge him as getting straight As for his work. However, the fact he got a start and played to other games does reflect some trust in him from the coaches and he easily gets a passing grade IMHO. Thomas is the starter for now as it says on the depth chart, but judging from the faith they showed in Youbouty getting a start in a game which the D excelled, i think it is a very good guess that Youbouty will compete with Thomas for starting this year and the loser will likely be the nickel. The team can certainly use some competition at CB, given that there are good things to say about McGee (far better results in the second half of the season), Thomas (reliable player with a good relationship with Jauron) and Youbouty (after the difficult family issues where both parents died and he was the eldest son and obvious breadwinner for the family- one wonders whether NFL scouts had word of the impending death if it was from illness and could not say a lot in public scouting reports but he may have dropped if folks saw this coming) but he bounced back nicely IMHO to earn a start. However, I think the Bills will be reluctant to simply bring in more competition with a first day CB pick unless they get another special opportunity with a dropped player in the draft because this would be using a major resource on a player to create a situation where the Bills will have to sit a player they spent a first day draft choice on either way or one they spent in FA for.

The actual facts are that he was in fact joined the team just after the pre-season which is important because he was practicing with the team (usually as a scout player) and working directly with the coach's and also interacting directly with Troy Vincent who had been IR'ed by then but still was a member of the team until we officially cut him just after the second half of the season began. It was obvious after a couple of games when it became clear that the two rookies were holding their own at safety that he would eventually be gone but he stayed in Buffalo with the team to act essentially as an additional coach to lend his CB skills which garnered him several Pro Bowls to help Youbouty catch up since he missed training camp. The objective fact is that these and other development effort proved to be successful as he merited a start against the Jets and the D with him in this critical position performed very well against the crafty but rag-armed Chad Pennington. Rather than not dressing during the regular season being the most accurate description of his status, he in fact began dressing early in the second half of the season as he is listed in the game notebooks as being an active player in game 9 so he actually dressed for almost half the season. His practice with the team from early in the season and remedial work with Vincent (so the position coaches could focus on the significant burden of getting 2 rookies ready to play safety) was well done to make-up for the loss time. In addition to starting against the Jets he saw action in two other games including the final game and he registered a few tackles though no INTs or dramatic plays (which all most fans as casual viewers notice. My recollection though is that his play in the start was good and successful and he at least held his own in his two other starts. I think the key thing to remember when assessing Youbouty is that the consensus scouting report on him seemed to be that he needed another year of work before he came out and because the numeric scouting reports had him rated just behind players who went in the first round last year this was why he was considered a possible first round talent. I think there is a legit factual case that he did drop to the Bills who were picking quite early in the second round. First the consensus being he needed a year more training mitigated against taking him as an immediate or early starter. Second, there was a run on safeties which meant many teams has already spent heavily for the secondary which made taking another DB on the first day a tough move which it turns out the Bills were willing to do. The fact that Youbouty essentially got better training than if he had spent another year actually playing at Ohio State is why I think that it is reasonable to ask and expect a lot of him. If he had stayed in school he would have had the benefit of actually playing 12 or so games against college talent which included the best that college had to offer. However, looking at what happened, i think this training pales when compared to what he got mostly doing off field work but doing it within the Bills system, practicing against NFL players, reviewing game tapes prepared by Bills coaches with a focus on running the cover 2, and operating initially under the attention and tutelage of NFLPA President Troy Vincent. He even put this training to the test getting a start against the Jets and being active in two other games. While not scoring the straight As of making big plays (which CB play in the Cover 2 is not designed to do which can be seen in our letting "playmakeg" Clements go and the public complaints by Dre Bly that he was taking the FA route out of the Detroit Cover 2 designed for them by Jauron because of its limits on CB playmaking). It was not straight As but he easily passed IMHO. My sense is that Youbouty is quite ready to at least be our nickel and has a shot at being a reasonable starter because his strenghts in the scouting reports are perfect for the Cover 2 (very competitive player and good hand fighter who is built for press coverage, areas he needs work is a tendency to look into the backfield a bit much, but given that the Cover 2 requires the CB to cover the short zone and release WRs generally who are going more than 10-15 yards downfield he should be fine. He will compete with Kilwaukee Thomas ( who said he wanted a shot at being a starter through FA and now he will get one) with the loser of this battle getting the nickel slot. These two are backed up Greer who is a quite reasonable nickel himself so the dime responsibility is fine. I have disagreed with the thought we should take Leon Hall because using our first rounder on a CB would essentially guarantee a 1st day choice of either this year or last would sit on the bench. We have too many needs to waste this resource. In fact, there is not an unreasonable possibility that in fact Youbouty might even beat out Hall if he were picked and I for one would not be a happy fan if our first round choice were for a player who did ST for the most part or if he beat out Thomas for the nickel that we wasted the FA money on Thomas.

Let's at least try to stay with reality here: 1. Crowell played MLB for the Bills in an actual game when he filled in for one of the brief periods F-B got hurt in a game in 05 against TB I think. Further, he was F-Bs, back-up at MLB his first two years for the Bills. You might be referring to Crowell never playing MLB in a Cover 2 just as Willis has never done. However, this comparison completely looks past the fact that Crowell did play LB in the Bills Cover 2 last year and even did some signal calling from the wing position. The critical factor and difference between any rookie and Crowell is seen in Bills players describing the Cover 2 as a D where you need to play in it for a year before you are consistently adequate in it and actually a couple of years before you devour and master it. Having played in it only a year Crowell may prove to be inadequate for our needs, but the only problem with the converse strategy of going with Willis in this role is that he quite likely will be much worse. The only thing which would give Willis much more than a snowball's chance in a microwave of being adequate at this task would be if he were of sufficient quality that he was the next Lawrence Taylor (or even if he was a consensus top 10 pick which he is not at all). I am not asserting Crowell is a definite adequate MLB for us just simply that he is a reasonable prospect. If you disagree I would enjoy seeing the assertion supported by more than fact-free opinions why this is the case. Overall, I think you can refer to my feelings for Crowell as man-like rather than man-love because I will happily turn on him quickly if he is not adequate to the MLB job. 2. I'm not sure who said Willis was too dumb to play football because if anyone did they are flat out wrong. I maintain that Willis is clearly the best LB in the draft but that no one really credibly has him as a top 10 pick what I asserted was a reasonable definition of an "elite player". My sense is not that it would be stupid for the Bills to draft Willis (Marv did quite well making a "reach" for Whitner last year. Again I merely maintain that it would be better for the Bills in 07 and better for Willis's development in the long run if we feel he is capable of using the skills which deservedly made him the Butkus award winner at the hole we have at SLB (a position I have seen the assertion he can play). At SLB, Willis can still do what he does well as a tackling machine. Even better, he clearly struggled a bit in pass coverage at the Senior Bowl (getting a chance to show his tremendous closing speed a couple of times after he got badly toasted in pass coverage). At SLB Willis would still get the in game reps of seeing plays develop so this rookie can be on the road to developing vet skills and actually since the way we played out cover 2 last year involved the MLB having large pass coverage duties (to the tune of F-B leading all NFL LBs in INTs) there is an argument that when Marv referred to the Bills needing more attacking LBs that he actually was more referring to TKO who went a number of games not being able to play and then we he came back had a number of games with a low number of tackles rather than F-B who in many ways I think his players deeper in our backfield than people wanted not because he was not personally aggressive but because our D had him doing alot of pass coverage. Willis at SLB may make a lot of sense for us playing better ball and also MAY help his development as he will learn to be a vet by performing well rather than struggling at MLB. 3. Safety is a far less complex position to me in the Cover 2 than the MLB position. You have far more time to act as you are further back and minimal run duty generally compared to pass duty. The hybrid we run which is similar to the Tampa 2 is even more to the advantage of lightening the load on the safety and dropping it on the MLB as what makes this D different is that the MLB actually has deep cover duty reducing the safety responsibility from 1/2 the field to the outside thirds. In fact what may make the most sense if we in fact start Willis at MLB is to actually play a more traditional cover 2 and increase the responsibilities for our second year safeties from diving the field into thirds to dividing it in half with the other safety and relieving the MLB of all deep cover duty and asking him to focus more on attacking the LOS.

I along with most of the Western World was virtually completely fooled by the Levy led pick of Whitner. I certainly would not have deemed Whitner an elite player before the draft and I certainly do not think from what I have heard or seen that Willis is an elite player. I only use the phrase because our good friend obie has used it, and the first time I used it was after he had referred to Willis as an "elite" player. I then asked him what did he define elite as and then offered up a definition I think is a good one that in this crapshoot known as the draft a top 10 selection can reasonably be called elite and asserted that few (pretty much Obie is the only one I have seen) call Willis a pick worthy of a top 10. I'm not headed anywhere with this as my cries (inspired by our other good buddy the cinnamon bun coiffed Princess Leia of please help me obie wan have either fallen on deaf ears or I missed his response because I have yet to see what he means (he mostly keeps lashing out at people calling all rookies dumb which must not be referring to my posts as I have several times made clear that I think rookies are readily capable of starting at many positions and playing consistently well (as I think Whitner generally did with a few hiccups last season). I have little idea of what he is specifically saying and hope he will have the time to enlighten us. Its become fairly common in this world of media yellers like the folks on CNN out in the open or a plethora of Fox Noise shows to take any idea you disagree with and then describe it in its most outrageous or an extreme form and then easily bat down the extreme argument and then use that to reject everything. I try not to rise (or is it fall) to that bait but it is hard to ask what do you mean without falling into the same extreme arguments. Thus again my assertion: 1. The question of whether we draft an "elite player" as I define them is actually fairly meaningless in reality as I do not see us as having an elite pick at #12. Thus it certainly is more than justifiable and may be a good strategy (it depends on what Marv's overall strategy is and right now who knows and I am quite happy for him to lie to me and fool me because fooling the opposing team in terms of the draft is far more important to me than keeping me accurately informed) for him to do the essential work of filling a large LB gap as 2 of 3 players who started last season are gone. In the big picture, i think the key issue is that in addition to needing two players to start (one looks like internally developed Ellison at WLB with an outside shot of the much reviled at S Coy Wire at WLB, I think we need to pick at least two RBs who have at least a shot at being our #! and more likely can be part of a RBBC. In addition, we need a reasonable back-up safety (Leonhard has both spots on the current depth chart), we can use a competent WR (particularly now that #5 or #6 Davis is gone), and also some more competition at CB is necessary (though I see all the above except for WR being a higher priority than a CB but some folks are so phased by losing a former Pro Bowler like Clements they want to see us pick a CB at #12 or at least on the first day though I think this is simply redundant and just guarantees that a first day CB choice this year or last sits on the bench. I guess where I am with this is that since I do not view Willis as a top 10 pick (one factor which makes this LB class not the strongest we have seen) I think it is a reasonable risk to even trade down a few spots and get additional first day competition for all the above needs and one might still be able to choose Willis who for a significant part folks have him (like Whitner going in the early 20s). if we cannot make deal, I think it will be disappointing but fine to pick Willis at 2, but pretty much only if we are comfortable with him starting at SLB. I think there is some chance (though I sense small) that the Bills would start him at MLB and he will be adequate. However, I simply think that the MLB position in the Hybrid Cover 2 we use requires vet level play reads as our MLB is called upon to tackle like a DT on run plays but also to read plays properly so that he can cover like a safety on passes. I think that the MLB position is far more difficult than the safety position in our cover 2 and that likely any rookie who plays there will not make vet level reads all the time and it likely will be quite painful to watch this player get undressed a few times. If the Bills braintrust goes with Willis, I will route like heck (and virtually pray) that it works out. Looking at something near and dear to you, i agree that using the draft is the right way to build an OL. However, I do not think we have several years to do this as TGs attempt to actually try this by spending a #4 on MW and a first day pick on Jennings failed miserably and his attempts to get guys who might have been #1 but were not due to injuries failed horribly as he was so insecure about an HC hire, he hired a guy GW he knew he could beat if the Cowher thing happened to him here and then GW hired to OL incompetents Vinky then Ruel to train and develop his late round OL picks. Because of the manner the Bills made decisions in the past, they are now forced to go with suboptimal methods now. I do not claim that Marv, MM, TD post 2002 or Ralph did the best thing for building an OL nor are they following the my preferred path for replacing lBs. However, I did defend Marv making the best of a bad situation by using the #1 to get Whitner to fill a gaping hole at safety and doing the best we could at OL. Likewise, I think we need to make the best of a bad situation at LB this year, IMHO, trying to fill the Cover 2 gap at MLB with a rookie only makes the bad situation worse. I started this thread to pose an idea which attacks some fairly vacuous beyond fact-free opinions claim that Crowell has not real chance of doing what we need at MLB. I agree that this attempt will be dicey, but he at least is a reasonable prospect for the numerous reasons cited in drudging detail in the original post. The poor thing IMHO is that if the strategy is to expect Willis to fill this gap, he may do this but it is such a longshot that this rookie will be a vet when it comes to making reads that as dicey as it is to plan on Crowell doing this it is even dicier to plan on Willis being adequate at this job. This is pretty much what I am saying and asserting.

Sep 9 Denver 1:00pm win Probable and depending on how the team reacts to the tragic death of a teammate is that I think that reality will actually lead to this team stepping up but it will take time for them to get their heads and hearts around this and being at home for the opener we likely will win against this team whose last memories on the field was of choking badly and a lot of time has passed since the tragedy and it will take a few months for them to learn how each other reacted and a lot of them will simply be on different pages for a while. Sep 16 @Pittsburgh 1:00pm win Possible as we are away which is always tough, but this team also will be dealing with a new coach and a legacy of a bad loss after a great win. If the HC were back and a central core of the SB team they like the 2003 season Pats could pull it together, but in this case they will still be trying to figure out who they are and likely will not react well to the first losses. I will wait and see how they develop but it remains to be seen and I do not feel bad about this one (though I certainly do not feel confident either. Sep 23 @New England 1:00pm loss Very Probable loss (though it is notable we almost pulled one out in a similar game position in the schedule last year). Sep 30 N.Y. Jets 1:00pm win I would also say this is a probable win as I think the Jets were pretendersas a playoff team last year Oct 8 Dallas 8:30pm win Pretty possible win as I think Dallas is a troubled team at best and if we are stable and in fact have a winning record at this point we might roll 'em. Week 6 BYE Oct 21 Baltimore 1:00pm loss- Probable loss against a good team with an inspired McGahee. Folks here hate him and likely will talk a lot of trash which will further inspire McGahee and strike a lot of Bills who seem to like or at least cut some slack to WM as a teammate last year as actually a bit embarassing. Not a good combo and the Bye for us will likely be wasted, Oct 28 @N.Y. Jets 4:05pm loss- Probable loss though like last year I think we wil go .500 against the Jets so if we lose the first one I like our chances here. It all comes out in the wash though. Nov 4 Cincinnati 1:00pm win I think this may be the pivotal game of the season. I suspect that with Henry still out and really quite a few other potential felons on this team they may well implode this year as management will be doing a lot of work to enforce discipline and some will understand and take it well, but others will continue to try to get away with rebeling and dissension will be the story here. Nov 11 @Miami 1:00pm win We squish the fish at their house Nov 18 New England 1:00pm loss This will also be a statement game for the season, if we win we are on a roll after a couple of losses, but if we lose this team is one step forward and one step back on its way to ,500. Nov 25 @Jacksonville 1:00pm loss Should be a momentum game and I have no idea where the Jags will be in their season and as noted in my description of the 2nd Pats game if we beat them we can and if we lose to the Pats it looks bad again. Dec 2 @Washington 1:00pm win I have zero belief in the Skins and I think we likely beat them. Dec 9 Miami 1:00pm win We certainly beat them at home Dec 16 @Cleveland 1:00pm win Our most winnable road game Dec 23 N.Y. Giants 1:00pm win Again a big momentum game since as I doubt we will feel good about going to Philly I think we will want this one bad. Dec 30 @Philadelphia 1:00pm win Again it probably is decided by who wants it more which will be determined a lot by who needs it more. So looking for a pretty good degree of balancing in the division, 11-5 does not seem outrageous to me though we will have to draft well and if we decide to not only draft Willis but actually turn regular season into an extended training camp for him by starting him at MLB I think that we likely lose a few of the possible wins we might have.

Willis appears to be a smart football player and a very high character guy. I think folks are also right he is a tackling machine. That being said, we may well draft him but if we do and start him at MLB then it is quite likely that we simply are turning this season into an extended training camp for him to learn how to make the reads necessary to perform adequately as an MLB with the diverse responsibilities the slot requires in the hybrid Cover 2 we run. I hope (and mostly pray as I suspect divine intervention will be a useful thing here) that it works for us but there are a few things I take as almost certainly true: 1. Rookies are not necessarily dumb but they are not vets either. Opposing OCs will look forward to facing a rookie playing MLB in our hybrid because there is a strong likelihood they can pull a few tricks and make his remain static on runs or step in as we want to be aggressive anyway on a pass play and we will be at high risk. 2. Willis is the best LB in this draft but few mistake him for being a player likely to be selected in or worth a top 10 pick. As I generally define players who are top 10 picks as "elite players", Willis is almost certainly not an elite player. He is good but not that good. 3. The Bills team has multiple needs at not only the LB slot where two of the players who started the first game last year are gone but also at RB where A-Train and Cieslak are the only two of the RBs one can reasonably say will almost certainly make this roster. Particularly due to our failure (so far to sign an FA to meet any of these 5 needs, developing Ellison to fill one LB slot and acquiring 3 or possibly 4 players at the starter level (assuming an RBBC or getting a few possibilities for someone to step up and be our #1 RB makes trading down if we can and getting more first day picks the smart thing for this team to do in order to win more games. Overall, I just think Ralph and Marv are too old to see us invest in the future instead of winning right now. If we put a bunch of marbles in the Willis at MLB basket we are not only banking on him working out immediately (the statistics of last years draft already indicate the chances of him starting immediately are there but are very much against us. Marv is on record saying that the HC who works to get wins in the future is not likely to be your HC in the future. Passing on Willis to trade down and get more resources seems clearly to me to be the best option and if we cannot find a partner and are forced to take him then starting him at SLB and going with the far from guaranteed but far more likely prospect of adequate performance of Crowell at MLB and having Willis learn the game at SLB simply seems to be a far better strategy. i simply have not seen many compelling arguments from folks who argue for starting Willis at MLB. Basically, its been an argument that we sacrifice this year to build for the future, or with the admission it will be a learning year for Willis that it won't be that long (I find the observation of folks within the Bills that it takes a year of playing the Cover 2 before you can be adequate in it and actually a couple of years before you devour it and master it really well quite compelling). Willis is good but is not mistaken by any objective observers as the next Lawrence Taylor and in fact he is not even a consensus top 10 pick as AJ Hawk was. If the Bills pass on Willis at #12 and do this not trading down too far they can possibly have their cake and eat it to both increasing their resources and still having a shot at Willis who may go to SF at 11 but could easily drop into the 20s if some of the pundits are right. The good news for the Bills that we might be able to trade down a few slots and still get him or if we get unlucky and lose him the outcome is still quite doable for us as we pick up the best OLB we can between Pos or Timmons and use the extra resources to build a team rather than relying on one player to be some type of savior.

Peterson's injuries sound serious and really not worth taking a risk on, However, his numbers have been so good that I think the possibility he can heal from and old ankle injury and a collarbone break will be enough to allow somebody and some team to talk themselves into the fact that given their own superior skills and knowledge they can "fix" Peterson's problems and minimize that risk. 12 spots is simply too many teams for Peterson to have to fall through before some legend in his own mind with a big ego convinces himself and his team that choosing Peterson is the right thing to do (they may be right or they may be wrong). However, I think the Bills braintrust would have to not only have such a true believer, but actually take and give him the time to talk themselves into being secure with this pick. I think the chances of him dropping to #12 are possible but really too small for the Bills to devote a bunch of time to getting comfy picking him and if he were to actually drop to 12 I doubt we would have had the conversations necessary to get everybody comfortable with pulling the trigger.

Sure. I simply see no reason looking objectively at his stats and history, and feel there is no rational reason looking subjectively about how I feel about his game why anyone can reasonably doubt that there is reasonably a possibility (and IMHO actually a good possibility) that he can play MLB the way we want it played. A look at his stats and his history provides no guarantee that he can get the job done (there is really never a guarantee because we cannot know the future). However, there is objective evidence that indicates this may be a good bet. 1. First, the big wildcard to me is the question of injury (the major reason why the future is so uncertain in the NFL). However, the tea-leaves look very good on this front as Crowell and the Bills have already declared him at 100%. Typically coming off an injury that put a player on IR, in the off-season one can generally feel good about reports of a player "expected' to be at 100% when the pre-season starts, but already their are positive pronouncements being given about his recovery and unless the Bills and he are blowing smoke to fool the opponents(no indications of that) I think we can assume the injury issue is merely at the risk level a player always has. Given that in his relatively short career Crowell has played 15 and then all 16 games in his third year there are not any ongoing repetitive signs of injury issues and demographically he is hitting the peak of his career and a full recovery should be hoped for and expected. 2. The major issue for the MLB in our hybrid Cover 2 is that the player is required to tackle like a DT (he specifically fills the gap up the middle as our DTs are required to commit to penetration and pass rushing in our scheme) on running plays but also to cover like a safety on passing plays as he divides the deep cover responsibility into thirds with the safeties. Play reads are critical for this player as if he reads pass and either simply holds his ground or leans backward at the snap, if in fact the opposing OC has called a draw or delayed draw so the RB zips by the rushing DTs, then an MLB heading backward may well be knocked back or even danced around by an RB with full forward momentum. Even worse, our LBs are going to be asked to be even more aggressive at the LOS and if the MLB reads run and in fact it is a pass, the MLB may be left flat-footed as a speedi WR zips by him running a post pattern up the middle. Just as on the play against MN which almost cost us the game, when McGee failed to read that he should have stayed with WR Koren Robinson when he ran a fly pattern up the sideline and Whitner was in no position to get over in time unless McGee at least slowed down the WR with a good chuck, we only survived because Brad Johnson overthrew Robinson. So too unless the MLB makes a good read we are going to be left hoping for a miscue on the pass. Nevertheless, there are good reasons to hope and assume Crowell can do the job: 3. He has seen NFL plays called and develop for four years and has done this as the back-up MLB for two years behind London Fletcher. While it is true that nothing replaces playing as a teacher, this does not also mean that watching the game from the sidelines is worthless. Particularly if the task is learning play calling and adjustments, while sitting on the sideline is not the same things as playing the game physically, this role likely provided Crowell with a meaningful and useful mental exercise as it allowed him to watch each play develop for a couple of years and ask himself the question in realtime what would he call in terms of adjustments to various formations. He not only had these judgments tested in realtime as the plays developed, but he then could sit down post game and review the videotapes with D team captain and consistently quick thinker, London F-B (folks complained he was physically light in the pants but no one questioned he has a great football mind as he routinely seemed to be the one quickly dickering with the refs over some dispute and he was the MLB on some very successful Ds when LeBeau and Gray had the D cooking with gas). The complaint stated on TSW that Crowell just like the rookie Willis has never played MLB in a Cover 2 is simply a spurious argument. Even if true it argues how problematic non-play as an MLB in a Cover 2 is for Willis and Crowell, but this view simply ignore the fact that Crowell is a vet with a year of play in the Cover 2 while Willis is not. Add to this difference that Crowell, though not an MLB in a Cover 2 obviously has seen hundreds of NFL plays both on the field and on the sideline and there is little reasonable comparison of what a rookie brings to the table for this part of the game and what a vet brings. 4. Crowell has demonstrated that as a player (and likely fortified by his pro MLB duties) that he has translated that knowledge into understanding of the Bills D and the game into being the best back-up LB we had. When TKO went down last year, Haggan was next on the depth chart at WLB, yet we went to Crowell to fill-in for him as he had demonstrated he was the best back-up LB we had and also that even though he had not been at that position specifically on the depth chart he was obviously the best choice. This proved to be the case in terms of on-field production as Crowell did struggle in his first game or so to the awesome task of replacing a back-to-back Pro Bowler like TKO, but his play improved to the point that though overall the Bills run D sucked, the wails of pain from the fans and the whines of folks like Jerry Sullivan did not focus on the loss of TKO to Crowell being highlighted as a big drop-off (in fact poor DT play by Anderson and Sam Adams taking some plays off and F-B being seen as making initial hits too deep in the D were the target of criticism for the most part rather than picking on Crowell's play which was not up to TKO levels but simply was pretty good and the stats indicate that with him being credited with 125 tackles in less than a full season and him registering INTs and some sacks as well. He was good enough that when the 06 season started that it was TKO who made the switch to SLB and Crowell remained at WLB. The new braintrust of Jauron/Fewell voted with the reality of the depth chart that they were comfortable that F-B, TKO and Crowell were the best three LBs on the roster. This point was further underlined when TKO went down to injury (again) and Crowell's flexibility and understanding of all the LB positions (and actually the whole new D as the reserve signal caller behind F-B) allowed Crowell the first choice to flip again out of position and he made the start at SLB. Crowell, like it or not, has answered the call at all three LB positions. 5. Even better, his stat line in a season cut short by injury indicates a diversity of play which is exactly what we want from an MLB in our hybrid Cover 2. A. He was credited with 2 INTs (not shabby at all considering F-B led all LB in the NFL with 4 and Crowell got his two while only starting 12 games. In particular his INT against Culpepper which stopped a Fish drive when they seemed to get untracked to end the first half was a key to that game. B. Despite the shortened season he ended up 3rd on the D in total tackles he was credited with. His ratio of unassisted tackles to assisted tackles ran over 2:1 and does not show signs he usually needed help in bringing down a runner. Complaints about him taking bad angles on tackles or such may make the poster sound like they know what they are doing or watching closely, but these observations are rendered down to be mere observations or even whines without some objective showing that he had a tackling problem (such as the stats showing an inordinate amount to assisted tackles rather solo work or specific plays referenced with specific games and times within the games where Crowell either was beaten by a runner he was trying to tackle for a big gain (such as the "shifty" Chad Pennington faking Robinson out of his jock strap with a mere stutter step, or Crowell being dragged down the field for extra yards because this alleged bad angle caused him to try to arm tackle an opponent, or even him barely shoe-stringing a tackle(. These observations are simply left unsupported. The facts simply are that while this team was demonstrably bad, that even with injury Crowell posted numbers which indicate he is one of the better tacklers on the team. C. In his truncated season he equaled F-B for the team lead among LBs in sacks. To me this is an indicator that our scheme did not aggressively attack the QB. The fact that Crowell equaled F-B's small total may well be too small a sample for drawing a reasonable conclusion, but the fact he equalled him playing 4 less games to me is an indicator that he can be aggressive as we want and need. In total, I think Crowell definitely has shown performance for the Bills over his brief career which indicates notable play in a number of different roles. This is a strong indication that he has mastered the D and the play calling duties and the numbers though not a strong indication that he will be a success in these diverse roles provide a good indication that he is the best the Bills got and from some nice highlight moments (like the INT against the Fish) that it is not outrageous at all to at least hope he can do the job well. On the other hand, regarding Willis, it is simply quite unlikely that a rookie who is thought by his most ardent supporters to be worth trading into the bottom of the top 10 to take and for those most unimpressed he conceivably is worth a late 1st or even early 2nd round pick. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle and he likely is worth a pick in teens. Given the Bills multiple needs, the idea of trading down into the teens and picking Willis if he is there (certainly a reasonable possibility even though SF may be so hot for him they pick him at 11) but even if he is not the Bills really can use multiple picks and their are a couple of other probable 1st round worth OLBs in the draft if one trades down. I define an elite player in this draft as someone who merits a choice in the top 10 (as in the real world there is a strong bias to players who actually can start immediately being top 10 choices). By this definition it is quite doubtful that Willis is an elite player and I think the Bills can produce more in 07 by trading down and getting additional second and third rounders.

[/i I do not think that it is true "all the time" that rookies start at MLB all the time though obviously they are drafted all the time. I have not examined it in detail and certainly would appreciate if you or others have other examples, but I believe there was one rookies MLB starter at MLB last year and they do not run a Cover 2 or actually a hybrid like we run which is closer to the Tampa 2 where the MLB has diverse responsibilities which emphasizes the importance of making vet level play reads. If Willis is so good, then why does he need to play HIS position and nothing else to develop. I'm not saying he definitely cannot do it well, (though no one has presented any objective reason to think he can) but between his fellow players saying one needs to play the Cover 2 for a year to be consistently adequate at it and actually two years to truly master it, and given he struggled in pass coverage at times in the Senior Bowl there are some outside reason beyond fan hopes to fear he would have to learn by getting burned for a good chunk of the season. I and other rational fans did not make the game so complicated, its been the NFL itself and some fans simply choose to see reality on this issue.

I think it is right on target to focus on this. In a couple of years, it this new system which has the endorsement of both the NFL and NFLPA is in place and working then perhaps the Bills can take some chances with a questionable character guy as it will not take many more dingings of folks like Pac-Man and Henry that college guys will get the message about what is expected. However, though things look like they may get better, right now it is quite uncertain how the NFL is going to handle questionable players and exactly how badly a team will get penalized for having a bad actor player on their team. I think given the heightened uncertainty of the effects of having a dubious character player on your roster will be and players in the draft today who have not lived for several years with examples of how a Pac-Man will be dealt with there is even greater risk taking a player of dubious character right now.

If we chose Willis and he starts at MLB I hope you are right that he can quickly master it and it involves simply a few "burps" rather than being a big problem (though I really doubt it). The key here though is not that Crowell has never played MLB in s Cover 2 (just like the rookie Willis) but that unlike the rookie Willis, Crowell has seen NFL plays called and develop for several years playing the game and a rookie has only seen it on TV. The other advantage that Crowell brings to the game regarding the Cover 2 was pointed out in another thread where a player quoted as saying it takes playing the game in the Cover 2 (which all the Bills defenders have done) before a player can feel he has mastered it and it actually takes 2 years of playing the D before a player can "devour" it and really manipulate it very well. Crowell starting at MLB is likely to be adequate at best and Willis starting at MLB will almost certainly be worse and likely be that way for more than just a couple of games blip. I for one (and actually a couple of others as well judging from some of the posts on TSW) really hope that if we draft Willis that he starts and learns the game at SLB because if the braintrust takes the risk you seem quite willing to take then likely we can write off 2007 being much more than an extended pre-season for the Bills because I doubt we will have a serious chance at winning with a rookie at MLB.

The MLB is NOT the only player who can call signals and I 'm not sure who ever said that was the case because it is flat out untrue that though the Bills historically (even prior to the Cover 2) have used the MLB for this role that this is the only way to do it. Traditionally the MLB is the signal caller because: A. The MLB is in the center of the field and can see the entire offense equally from this position. Signals can be called by an OLB who is in a wing position, certainly but he has a marginally small difference in perspective looking as a player on the far side of the field (Generally. my sense is this perceptual difference is so small as to be easily ignored). B. However, where this difference in position makes a difference which can be larger is when the signal caller is yelling out adjustments to his teammates on the far side of the field. Particularly in a noisy stadium with a rowdy crowd this can be a significant difference leading to missed adjustments. Many opposing Os will actually go to a silent count when the noise is so loud and this can have an impact on the D player calling adjustments as well (I think many of us remember a play against AT the season before last where TKO was trying to point out a move made by AT was forced by crowd noise to turn all his attention to being heard and the AT snapped a ball and the player he was supposed to cover got free for a huge gain as he had to put so much effort into simply being heard across the field he did not pay attention to the snap or coverage), C, Some folks swear by reading the eyes of the opposing QB and the MLB has a birdseye view at doing this that an OLB may not have. Traditionally, when teams cannot go with an MLB as signal caller, rather than using an OLB as a second option teams often will go to the safeties as their plan B. These players also can have the center of the field advantage though it usually is not as pronounced as the MLB but usually is not as sever as the OLBs in terms of being on the outside. The ruling factor actually tends to be the players as the signal caller is usually a vet who has seen a lot of plays and understands the D. In the Bills case as both safeties are coming off their rookie years, the suspicion is that neither of these youngsters will be given the playcalling duty. In this case likely Crowell, whether he is at MLB or at WLB will likely have the playcalling responsibility for the Bills as both the other LBs will be first game of the season starters for the first time. It has been said publicly by the Bills players about signal calling in our Hybrid Cover 2 that it actually takes a year of play in this D before a player knows it and is ready to call signals and actually it takes 2 years in the D before a player devours it and masters it. Crowell has called signals in the pros before and likely is going to still be substandard to where Jauron and we want him to be. Willis would simply be worse,

Exactly!

Great if we take him, but it likely only makes us better if we play him at SLB.

It seems like a fairly reasonable assessment regarding our two main needs of LB (Willis likely the best player available at 12) and RB (Lynch likely the best player available at 12. As he has a fairly significant drop off in talent to the second most pickable players at these two positions I think the counsel for us if he is right about the Bills as he was last year (he is the only pundit that I know of that had us taking Whitner at #8) then it seems we should trade down a little if we can get extra value and still get one of these two, or alternately trade down a lot as it will take a few spots to make taking the second tier guy worthwhile.

Given what Marv said in his end of the season presser about needing LBs who attack more, it's hard for me to see the Bills coaching any LB to be less aggressive.

He likely won't make it in on the first ballot because he is going out on a low note after getting beaten out of the job by Romo, but I think he get in the HOF if only because in 5 years when he is eligible we will be going through a lengthy streak of no QBs having been elected to the Hall as players (if you disagree then name who those folks who will get in will be Vinny Testaverde?). The HoF like it or not is simply a popularity contest which is based in but not controlled by stats. It also is a competitive popularity contest and most likely one of the big factors for him will be that voters will be almost certain to end any QB drought a year after Bledsoe's 1st year of eligibility as it is likely the Brett Favre will be eligible a year after Bledsoe. If anyone wants to seriously gauge whether he gets in then a key thing to do is think about what other players retired after last season and they will be the primary competition Bledsoe will face for selection (election) to the Hall.

Hemlines go up and hem lines go down. Deion is locked into the old days when the NFL and the NFLPA used to do battle and the union and its players reflexively opposed anything the owners did and defended the players regardless of how stupid the players acts were. Today however, the NFL and the NFLPA are partners (and arguably the players are the majority partners after the new CBA gave them 60.5% of the total gross receipts). One of the big keys to the PacMan and Henry suspensions was a year long campaign by Gene Upshaw and other NFLPA leaders like Troy Vincent who have been taking the message to camp after camp and player after player that the few who are idiots are giving a bad name to all the players and now that they are getting unprecedented money from the NFL cashcow they need to join their junior partners in disciplining the minority of players who are felon or they threaten to upset the cashcow for all of them. This crusade gave Goodell the leverage he needed to lower the boom on the two and send a message to the players who are close to the line. Interestingly, the new rule say flat out that Team employees are going to be held to an even higher standard than the players and the teams can be fined heavily when individual players get out of line. The next step is some poor idiot who works for a team will step out of line and he will get publicly nailed as well. Deion as far as the NFL goes is simply a product of the old way of acting and thinking and simply will be ignored with a shake of the head by the players. Except he can forget any honors coming from the NFL or in the future old timers committees. As far as his personal habit, arrest him if breaks the law otherwise ignore him.

On TSW we heard that alot. Prior to the draft there were at least a couple of posters who insisted that the Bills not take Huff with the #8 because one could find a good safety later on the first day of the draft. They were badmouthing Huff because he seemed like the only safety the Bills might even possibly take with the #8. They were among the folks who were pretty incensed when the Bills took Whitner and would point to past levels where safeties were picked to try to prove their arguments. Its hard to remember who insisted on this view, but perhaps they would be brave enough now to step up and say this was (is?) there view. They were generally right about the past stats, but failed to realize that the game had changed the old stats were simply just that old. Thanks to better conditioning, diet, steroids, HGH and who knows what this league is working to a place where DL players are still big but better athletes and LBs are hitting the weights that used to be reserved for DL players and now the safeties are bulking up to hit like LBs. The game has changed the advent of high drafting for safeties is merely a sign of the times.

Fine with me if we draft him as long the coaches feel he can play SLB, and then let him spend his 2-3 years learning the D there. However, if there is any doubt about that or someone offers us a trade down that gives us a fair shot at either having several RB candidates who can take the starter job, or give us multiple RBs to join A-Train in a RBBC then pull the trigger on that deal.

I would think if you were interested in impact you would have looked hard at FA for an MLB or would be more interested in Crowell than Willis. Willis is a very good prospect and easily the best of this LB crew. However, I would think even a big Willis backer would have to acknowledge that his ability to have a big impact as a rookie is going to be very difficult to pull off as the MLB in the Hybrid Cover 2 we run. Our D which is much like the Tampa 2 in that the MLB has deep coverage responsibility dividing the field into thirds with the safeties puts a large premium on the MLB making vet level reads on plays as he must cover like a safety on passes but fill the gap at the LOS like a DT on run plays. I do not think anyone doubts that Willis is a bright high character guy, that as the Butkus award winner he is the best of this LB crew, or that based on his Combine showings he has the speed to do the deep cover. However, in the same breath even a half rational person would need to acknowledge that a rookie is not gonna be able to make vet reads. If we pick Willis and he starts, certainly I and all Bill fans will hope for the best, but opposing OCs will be licking their chops to face a rookie who is MLB in the Cover 2. I see no objective evidence that says otherwise. If anything, the evidence out there is that folks were rightly impressed with the closing speed Willis showed in the Senior Bowl, but this often came after he struggled in pass coverage and would not give up as he chased down a man who had torched him. Few folks if any objective analysts have Willis as meriting a top 10 pick which is what I mean when I refer to a collegian as an elite player. Crowell on the other hand would also not be mistaken for an elite player as a pro (what I mean by that is someone who merits a Pro Bowl berth or at least a top 5 player in his conference. However, Crowell has generate stats in the real world of NFL play that has always boasted some INTs (including one pivotal to us registering a win against the Fins last year), some sacks (a sign of aggressiveness which Bills LBs have lacked according to Marv), and also despite a season which truncated by injury he still finished 4th on the team in tackles to his credit. Crowell will have to step up his game a notch or two in order to be the MLB we want, and it would be very nice if Willis were able to start and be the MLB we want, but I have few doubts that Crowell will be more of an impact player in 07 than Willis would be even despite Crowell's limitations. If Willis were to start for us at MLB there are two other big limitation he/we will have to confront even if he gets the nod at MLB over Crowell. 1. Crowell almost certainly will do the playcalling and the audible adjustments for the Bills even if Willis is MLB. Sure collegians today come to the NFL having received top level coaching with an eye toward preparing the best players for the NFL. However, F-B was our signal caller in part because had a ton of NFL play experience and the film study that he and even rookie like Willis would do was a supplement to his having seen hundreds and even thousands of NFL plays develop and be run. It would simply be a sharp step back if we were to turn the reigns of adjusting to the set the other team adopts and then adjust to the audibles to a player who has little and initially no experience seeing NFL plays develop except on TV. Crowell can do play calls from his wing position if necessary (he has done that before) but the disadvantage that comes with this is that he does not have the best view of the entire field and even more difficult in some rowdy stadiums it is difficult for his changes to be heard on the far side of the field when he makes the call. As both Simpson and Whitner are second year players, the likely fall back if Willis is occupying the middle will be the suboptimal but doable practice of having Crowell do the playcalling and adjustments from his wing position. 2. Like it or not, the conventional wisdom that first round draftees should start is just wrong. A review I did a couple of weeks ago revealed that of the 32 1st round picks from last year's draft (generally thought by most to be a very strong class) while 18 were first at their positions on their team's depth charts, 14 were not. There is a strong bias to the top 10 picks actually being starters (8 or 9 of the 10 if memory works) but since we are #12 and some analysts have Willis going much later there is simply a valid statistical question of whether he will be adequate enough to start. Those who have seen him play and the Butkus voters feel strongly he will be one of the ones who does start, but reality simply says that one can be hopeful and positive about this but pretty far from certain this will be the case. These two issues kick in for me only after I definitely see Crowell as a more likely option to more productive initially than Willis. I understand Willis also has shown the ability to play SLB as well. Given that I think this LB class is fairly weak with no definite top 10 pick, I would be happy to see us take the Butkus winner but start him at SLB where this rookie can play a position that emphasizes his tackling ability while he sees plays, learns the signal calling and adjustment game in practice and becomes our MLB for awhile in a year or two.

Just to understand what you are saying, what do you mean by "elite player". For example, when WM claimed to be an elite running back, this struck me as unlikely true because I think of an elite player as a top 5 back in the conference. Some have a tighter definition and limit to the Pro Bowlers and thus two or three players at a position from each conference. As far as the draft goes its a different animal because all the teams do not have the same position needs so I can understand while many player rankings are done for the most part comparing how good they think the players are virtually regardless of position and then as the draft draws closer they use the mock draft format to rank them. Overall, I then count players who get selected in the top 10 as "elite players" What do you mean when you accord that status to a player. While Willis is certainly climbing up the board, in general I think most observers seem to feel this is a somewhat weak LB crew with no definite top 10 pick as AJ Hawk was for the LBs last year.

Its not that I think that no rookie LB can play MLB, it's that I think the Hybrid Cover 2 which we play is different than what is called for of most MLBs. Specifically the differences called for are: 1. In the Hybrid Cover 2 we play which is more like the D called the Tampa 2, the MLB has both the normal sideline to sideline tackling responsibility called for of an MLB on run plays, but also the MLB divides the field into thirds with the two safeties and he has responsibility for deep plays over the middle such as post patterns. 2. Given these responsibilities, an additional burden is place on the MLB for making good play reads. If the down and distance makes the play a likely pass, it is the MLB who must be careful not to get duped into taking a step back or remaining static to see what the pass routes are developing only to have the RB run a draw or delayed draw up the middle (a quite doable thing as the DTs are looking to penetrate in the Cover 2). Even worse, if the MLB is playing aggressive as we seem to be looking to do (though I think Marv may have had TKO in mind more than F-B with this indictment) and attacks the LOS, but it actually is a pass play and some fleet WR is running a post pattern up the middle then it may be 6 for the other team. I am not saying that Willis cannot play the position, all I am saying is that it likely would involve some painful miscues when he got torched by an enterprising OC who used the fact he has simply not been watching NFL plays develop for year or two to make him make a false step that he can exploit. I GUESS (just like everyone else on TSW) that we maysee the learning MLB starting as a rookie likely get burned a number of times as he sees enough to become a vet. If this comes at the worst times (which most OCs will try to do) it may even cost us a game or two with Willis starting and learning to be a vet at MLB. I am not saying AT ALL that a rookie cannot start (a bunch did last year and numerous Bills), cannot start at LB (a few did last year such as AJ Hawk) or even that you cannot start a rookie who even plays well at MLB (I think Seattle started a rookie MLB last year and they even made the playoffs. However, I am saying that if we start a rookie as OUR MLB in OUR Hybrid Cover 2 this player Willis or otherwise is likely to get exposed several times and our best hope may be to simply hope it does not happen at a critical time or that the opposing QB misfires. We already are dealing with a bad situation at LB in that we are going to have to break in two starters who did not start last season for us. The situation will be made even more difficult since my guess is that wherever he plays, it is gonna be Crowell who does the play calling and makes the adjustments when the QB audibles or the O shifts. It can be done (he did it a few times in he past), however, it is not the norm to have these plays called from a wing position as a player not in the middle of the field simply tends to be off center and cannot see the entire field equally from his focal point. Even tougher in some rowdy stadiums, it simply is that much harder for his teammates to hear him yell signals to the far side of the field and teams sometime have to work out relay systems to make sure the signal gets to everyone. Usually a team will have the MLB or either safety call the signals and alignment changes but given that both safeties are beginning their second season and with assumption that Willis would start at MLB this means the duty falls to Crowell wherever he plays. As I said this can be done it just is not optimal. The final concern I would raise regarding plans to start Willis at MLB as a rookie is simply that though folks stoked by the ESPN end to end coverage and intensely focused on the individual player due to the interest in fantasy leagues simply over-emphasize the importance of the draft. THE DRAFT IS IMPORTANT. However, the conventional wisdom is that a 1st round choice should be a starter and the reality simply is he may be but he also well may not be in the real world. The factual outcome of last year's draft speaks volumes of the limitation of assuming a 1st round pick will almost certainly be a starter as again, a review I did a couple of weeks ago of every team's depth chart showed that of the 32 players drafted in the 1st round 18 of them were in fact starters (some ended the season there and others were expected to start this year) but 14 did not. This was from a draft class viewed to be pretty strong. Even worse there was a strong tilt in finding these 18 starters in the first 10 picks (meaning of the other 22 picks less than 50% were starters. Will Willis be one of the ones who are capable of starting at some point in their first year? Probably, but easily maybe not. Will Willis be one of the ones who can start immediately? Maybe, and easily probably not. These are reasons why I wave the slow down flag to those who seem ready to anoint him an HOF player. He even is being called elite. Given that I define elite as meriting a pick in the top 10 I think there are few others who would call him elite if they use my definition. I think most should raise serious questions if the expectation is that a rookie is going to man the starting MLB role in a Cover 2 and do it well.