Pyrite Gal

Possibly, but I think the key consideration here is let us simply assume that A-Train is just as good a player approaching 30 as he was when he was 26 (I know in general this defies normal reality but lets look at this optimistically) if this just as good player performs as well as he used to his line is good but not great or what we want, What folks are banking on is that: 1. A-Train will defy aging that led to him not being good enough or healthy enough to start since 03. 2. His age defying efforts will be further enhanced by an OL which will work out for us quite well and Fairchild running a productive O. 3. He not only will produce at his former level in 03 but in fact will improve his production beyond the just over 1000 yards gained, 4. He will avoid the slings and arrows of injury which can cost anybody starts. If all these items work out (and probably others I am not thinking about right now) then A-Train will be the starting RB we want and feel we need. I think that all this adds up to us likely ending up with 3 RBs on the final roster who are not there now and this likely means two RB pick-ups in this draft.

I have great faith in A-Train and really like him as a player. Last year was a wonderful year for him and he achieved real world firsts in his career which are very impressive at a stage in his career when he has actually exceeded the average career length of NFL RBs (I believe its about 6 years on average and he is entering his 7th year) and many folks had written him off as being well into the backside of his achievements. Nevertheless, the biggest of those firsts was that for the first time he was able to appear in all 16 games, but the fact is this great accomplishment was as a back-up who simply appeared and not the much more difficult task of starting and taking the pounding of going 60 minutes as a starter. In mid-season this year he will hit 30 years old which is an arbitrary dividing line which in no way guarantees a players performance and ability to survive will go down. Yet, reality is reality and if A-Train is gonna be the starter we would need him to not only hold his own and be able to appear once again in 16 games, but actually to once again accomplish a first in his career and be able to start and be our go-to guy in lugging the rock over 30 times a game a few times as starting RBs are required to do when your team is trying to pick up a critical first down late in the game to run out the clock. A-Train really did for us what we needed him to do last year. Most important when WM went out for a few games with the injuries which are not uncommon among NFL players and seem to be the rule rather than the exception for NFL RBs, Thomas played and produced the 100 yard games which one hopes for and demands from a spot back-up. He actually was a good third down back and presented the receiving threat WM never achieved consistently. He did a good job in blitz pick-up and was an adequate blocker when asked to do this. However, it simply would seem foolish from a football standpoint to expect, plan upon, and in fact reply upon a player approaching 30 to actually achieve standards of game starts, carries, and yes total yardage which he has never achieved before as a player. I mean really. His performance line from his best season in in 2003 was: G GS C Yds YPC 2003 Chicago Bears 13 13 244 1024 4.2 These are not all that different than from what WM was able to produce for the Bills on the field during his three years and because he turned out to be such an idiot regarding fatherhood and team location folks routinely interpreted these numbers as being really bad work. Are folks really saying that Thomas is going to do better than he has ever done before and has not achieved since 2003 as he approaches 30 years old? Yeah right. It theoretically could happen but the chances of it actually happening are so small as to make it really outrageous for us to expect this to happen and for the Bills to rely on it. Thomas might be a reasonable part of an RBBC set-up but no one should mistake him for being even the performance equivalent of either a McCalister or a Reggie Bush who do the RBBC thing in NO or of Mulroney or Dillon who do the RBBC thing in NE.

Last year the roster saw us have WM. A-Train and Shaud and have Shelton at FB with first Neufeld and then later Cieslak able to play FB. WM being gone makes it a virtual definite that we look for an RB and preferably an early pick to at least compete for if not almost certainly be our starting RB. The problem is though that the draft is a real crapshoot with TD offering up once that 50% of choices even in the 1st round do not work out. He does exaggerate a bit if by this he means the picks will be busts because that is not true. A player can be a contributor to the team in a significant way even if he is not starting and if a player contributes but does not start he is not a bust in my book. Ge certainly may disappoint but this probably says as much about the unreasonable expectations of fans as it does about a player. The simple foolishness which does not prove to be true in reality is that fans, our interest stoked by ESPN doing a phenomenal job of marketing the draft with wall to wall coverage and the gravitas and declarations of pseudo certainty from experts like Mel Kiper and in addition, the focus on the individual player rather than the team stoked by the popularity and participation in fantasy leagues, the conventional wisdom is an expectation that a 1st round choice should be an immediate starter. This is not the reality by a longshot. Again, an examination of the depth charts of a teams a couple of weeks ago produced results that of the 32 1st round picks, it turns out that 18 of them were listed as 1st on their team's de[tj chart at their position. Last year's draft was generally considered to be a pretty good class, but just a hair over 50% of these players were starters not immediately but fully a year after the draft. The starters were heavily weighted toward the top 10 picks and since the Bills are picking #12, we are looking at getting a player who might start at some point in 2007 but then again he well might not. Particularly if we are looking at a player like Lynch who is seen as about a #18 ranked talent in many mocks, we simply cannot count on him being good to go right from the start. This does not mean he will be a bust or even a disappointing pick. If he turns out when his career is looked back upon to be a player who produces as well as a 1st round RB choice like Larry Johnson he and everybody else would be quite pleased in retrospect. However, the reality is that in his first two years this perennial Pro Bowler gained 100 yards and change and in his second year gained 500+. Lynch could end up being a very good player and a good pick but simply suck as our #1 RB for a while. For Bills fans this was the same path of production Eric Moulds took, This does not even get into the sad possibilities known to Bills fans that a #4 choice like Mike Williams was in fact a bust and lest you want to blame the Bills for being singularly incompetent, the #3 pick before him was bust Joey Harrington by GM idiot Millen. What I think this means is, that when you look at the Bills roster, there appear to be 5 RB slots. Of these, I think you can be pretty sure that A-Train will have one this year and probably Cieslak will have one of the FB slots. Shaud Williams appears to be a player who might just as easily be cut as kept this year based on his fairly unimpressive performance as our #3 HB last year and Jackson who had a very good year in Europe last year and whom Marv mentioned by name is a possibility to make the roster, but I am sorry is simply a possibility at best who may end up following the same career trajectory of another NFLE RB star Lawrence Phillips. In essence I see the Bills needing to get some bodies in here to compete for the RB slots i order to give us a reasonable shot at finding a lead RB even at the disappointing level of McGahee achievement (a level last achieved by A-Train in terms of yardage gained in 2003 and he also had his most game starts in his career that season which was only 13 which to me means he is almost certainly at best a good #2), I think the Bills draft 2 RB candidates in this draft, Given our significant needs in other areas like LB, my sense is we would be best off using the #12 pick to take an LB and then take an RB with our 2nd or 3rd pick on the first day looking at players like Irons, Pittman or Hunt. Then on the second day we take an RB whom we judge to have the most upside from whoever is left. This likely still is not gonna be enough to have any certainty of filling the twp RB slos t go along with Ap-Train and I think this in part explains the interest in an FA like Turner. However, my sense is that we pick 2 RB candidates on draft day, not necessarily because we have confidence in any particular players, but because any level of certainty or confidence that A-Train, even a first round RB pick or anyone in this draft is going to be adequate to start is simply whistling the dark at best.

We want character guys? Well who has been a bigger character than Wickey?

Assuming that such a deal is contingent on us getting a long term deal done with Briggs I would trade away the #12 and one of our reserve LBs and a draft pick in a hot second. Assuming that the Bills would offer up someone like Coy Wire as the back-up LB ifI was the Bears I would feel screwed by this deal and not pull the trigger. The converse of this decision is why I would make the deal if I'm the Bills. I know many TSW folk would not make this deal, but I think that is because most fans over-value the draft. A #12 could be great but also he could be middlin or he could be a bust. Everyone tends to assume that their favorite draft choice is going to be a Pro Bowler. However, reality simply says otherwise. Of the 32 1st round choices last year (generally felt to be a pretty strong draft) a look at the depth charts of teams up a couple of weeks ago showed 18 of these 32 choices listed first on the depth charts at their positions. Folks expect a 1st round choice to start immediately, but the reality is that almost half these picks were not even starters at the end of last season or slated to start the beginning of this season (the sites had uneven updating). If this rumor is true, the Bears would demand Ellison who has at least started at WLB (the hole left by trading Briggs) and I could see why the Bills would at least turn this down the first time as it leaves them having to use the draft to shop for a starting SLB where Haggan is currently 1st on the depth chart and we need to get an LB anyway. Under this deal a second choice is the main tool we have for this and the Bears have to give up a bunch if I am going to give them my starting WLB for theirs and I am giving up a draft choice as well. However, if they will make this deal for Wire and my 1st then I am happy to do work to fill the SLB spot.

The thread is an interesting one but I draw some different conclusions from the facts and perspectives offered. A. Brandon is correct that the stats of the offense did suck, but mostly this shows me (a real stat hound who loves the numbers) that while stats can indicate a lot that they can show something which is either not relevant (or even flatout wrong in some cases) without a lot of twisting being done. The O stats do have some relevance, but simply do not reflect the most important stat which is that this team improved from 5-11 to 7-9 while wracking up these horrible stats. Actually folks can take the some real hope from the fact that this team improved by two games in the W/L column at the same time the O was producing horrendous stats which Brandon offered and also the D was getting run on all over the place. The key question is why the anomaly: and both offer some hope for the Bills: 1. There was a marked difference I believe between the way this team performed early and late with the team improving a lot as the season went on (this bodes well). I think there MAY a difference shown in the O stats in the first half of the season versus how well this unit produced in the second half of the season. 2. The HC had a good sense of the flow of games and generally was conservative when he knew were outgunned but seemed willing to have a shootout when he thought we could win it. The O performance versus Indy may have been poor, but he did run a conservative gameplan and even with bad O production we were in it. A margin of defeat or victory analysis may be the second most telling stat behind W/L. B. Lynch may be a good fit as we essentially have left ourselves without a credible #1 RB. I think Thomas had a good year for us and for the first time in his career actually even appeared in all 16 games. However, this is key as he was able to pull off this achievement for the first time in his career. The fact simply is he was last able to produce even the McGaheessque result of about 1000 yards rushing as a starting RB in 2003. He was able to start only 13 games that year (his best season). Anthony Thomas would definitely need a player like ...well Anthony Thomas behind him and this is only if we are able to roll the clock back 4 years. He might be able to be a starter, but the key word is MIGHT and it looks pretty doubtful. This being said, rolling the dice on Lynch as search for a starting RB is not unreasonable, but as it appears most pundits have him ranked at about #18 if we pick him I hope we trade down to do it. C. I agree that we should not pick Lynch, but it definitely would fulfill a need. We have a great need (an essential need if this is gonna be a winning team) to get another LB (having lost 2 of three starters at LB and one should come from shifting Crowell to MLB and developing one from the current roster with the other being drafted). I think we can most likely find the other LB in the first round (with if we pick well he will start immediately though statistically almost half of last year's #1s are not even slated as starters on the depth charts of a couple of weeks ago) and should be able to build at least an RBBC with Thomas and three acquisitions before the season begins (my guess is that we only have 2 of the 5 guys likely to be on the roster as HBs and RBs right now). I see two of these RB acquisitions coming from this draft, likely 1 on the first day and another on the second. The picks described by Lothar and H20 above look like a reasonable start.

My proposal for a nickname for him is The supPOSitory. We can have slogans like He gets to the bottom of things.

The very small thing I was thinking about (and I heartily admit to being limited but fortunately I have a significant other who is not reluctant to correct me when I fall short) was the theory you proposed that its all about having three premier skill players. This broad supposition is most authoritatively checked by reviewing the successful teams to identify the three premier skill players. Before I jumped into this lengthy to do it authoritatively analysis, i tool a look at the most successful team this decade the Pats, and the most recent success the Colts. As neither team really fit your theory (including interestingly the Colts winning it all coincidental or perhaps because of in terms of cap allocations, made a decision to let their third premier skill player take a walk rather than them spending big cap bucks to endorse your model). I did not think it was likely to be worthwhile to do a broader analysis since the most successful recent examples from last year and this decade do not fit it. Perhaps I am wrong and I would very much enjoy reading a real and broader analysis of successful teams (my personal bias is that the 4 teams which make the conference championship game can be called successful). However, you are correct that my thinking is limited so I cannot take the time to do the broader analysis which might support your theory. In fact my brain is so little that I stated my point so poorly that I must have given you the rediculous impression that I was saying Brady did it alone, when actually I was saying the opposite that it is not all about Brady nor is it all about three premier players in fact it is all about the TEAM as a whole. I look forward to your next nugget of wisdom even thought an analysis of the most successful team last year and the most successful team this decade indicates that the three premier player theory is not correct. It must be that if a thinking person did a broader analysis it would support the theory even if immediate reality does not.

The big problem is that it appears to me that there is no big quality gain for any of the players likely available at #12 over many of the choices likely available to us with a second round pick. This appears to be true at both LB and RB. If one looks at last year's draft which most people agree was actually a pretty strong set of candidates, of the 32 players chosen in round 1, 18 of them were first on their team's depth charts at their position as of a couple of weeks ago. There seems to be a general expectation of a 1st round pick being an immediate starter, but here in the real world it worked out that almost half of them were not even slated to start in their second year. Were they busts? No, but welcome to reality and many forms of conventional wisdom regarding the draft such as the immediate start expectation and the idea that safeties should be drafted late in the first round if at all early were true in the past but this is not folks Grandmother's NFL anymore nd the reality is different from things which were statistically true in the past. Willis is the best college LB I am pretty sure, but this LB class is relatively thin in terms of their not being an AJ Hawk type who is a definite top 10 player. SF may be so enamored with Willis because some of their folks got to coach him in a post season game, but folks need to acknowledge that our scheme calls for the MLB to both play like a DT against the run and like a safety against the pass and there will be a premium on him making vet reads and a rookie is pretty unlikely to do this for a while. We need an LB badly in this draft, and if it is Willis I hope we start him at SLB because if this rookie is our MLB starter it likely will be painful. I hope we can trade down and still get him because we need the additional draft picks and SF may be sending signals they are gonna take Willis in an attempt to induce us into giving up resources for a player who in the long run I think will be good but is not gonna be the difference maker for a team which needs multiple players. Even worse if he starts in the short term things are likely to be quite painful. Likewise on RBs as it seems doubtful that the most sought after RB in this draft Peterson will fall to 12 and if he does it raises questions that we may be able to answer (he is tough to pass by at 12 given that our current option at RB starter is a good #2 but very doubtful #1. Though there seems to be general agreement that Lynch is the 2nd best back there is also general agreement that he is about the #18 player giving us plenty of room to trade down. This is a draft where by far the best option for this team is trade down and trade down twice if we can.

I think part of the problem was that he was too determined last off-season and he pursued some downright maniacal workouts building the muscles back in his torn leg that it was not surprising to me at all that he defied the odds by making it back to start in the first game and even pulled off a phenomenal sack of Brady on the first play (leading to a fumble and ballhawk Fletcher pounced on it and scored on of his two defensive TDs last year). Then he promptly strained his hammy and was out for 3 of 4 games and never really came back to anything approaching normalcy. When TKO missed the Bills conditioning workouts, I saw it as good news for his rehab because maybe he was lightening up and would do better this year. Alas he and the Bills had probably already agreed to try to trade him and and he was likely skipping it because he was done.

Reality says we all simply need to move on. Both TKO and the Bills seem quite satisfied with the move which is actually a lot more than can be said about the bad feelings surrounding the trades of folks like McGahee and Henry. It interests me that on the Iggles depth chart, TKO is currently the back-up listed for all three LBs. Not knowing their situation. it would not surprise me if they remain committed to both Trotter or Jones (or are done with either vet) and I assume that the other LB Gaither is a youngster they are committed to. TKO went to the Eagles for little as far they are concerned as apparently Walker wanted out and was not part of their plans in 07. I doubt TKO makes the Pro Bowl in 07 since it would not shock me if the Bills were willing to let him go because the injury has basically robbed us of the TKO we all knew and revered.

I think you are being a bit too optimistic in your RB assessments and I simply disagree with some of your prioritization. Specifically: 1. I an glad we resigned Thomas but it simply is not reasonable at all to think of him as a likely RB starter. He deserves and will get a shot at starting. However, there is simply no way to reasonably call an RB who last gained even 1000 yards rushing in 2003 and who was able to start 13 games in his best season as a starter a viable option at starting running back. I think if we go RBBC he is a contributor to this effort as for the first time in his career he was at least able to appear in all 16 games last year. However, even in a committee effort he is no where near as productive as the #2 RBs in other places such as NE and NO who have used this approach well. 2. Shaud Williams rather than being a viable back-up may not even make the roster this year and many Bills fans hope we get a more dangerous and better option as our third down back than Williams. While Thomas is a reasonable back-up RB (he has proven he can substitute well for your starter for 3 games (but given his lack of production as a starter since 2003 one would simply be playing with fire to rely on him as a 16 game productive starter) he actually is closer to what we want in our 3rd down option than Shaud is. As a rookie Williams did have one productive game as a back-up rusher, but last year saw fairly lackluster production from him when he got a chance to rush and he did not show much flair or production as a receiver that he is even a theat to take it to the house on 3rd downs. Fred Jackson accomplishments in NFL Europe are notable but amount to being about as impressive and likely indicative as his performance as an RB for Coe college back when he was in school. Its nice Marv had nice things to say about him, but its a long way away from him even being a good bet to deserve to make the roster. As far as our needs: 1. LB I agree with you that LB is our priority need right now as the plan for us was we hoped to have a former Pro Bowler Spikes at SLB and a should have been a Pro Bowler at some point F-B at MLB. This did not happen for a range reasons but we really are looking to find two equivalent LB talents and while we hope one is developed from our current roster (Crowell shifting to MLB though this creates an opening at WLB, or Ellison proving that his starting was more than a fluke or even a way outside chance that a bulked up Wire returning to his natural position are the candidates for 1 slot. The draft looks like the mostly likely resource for the other (unless some interesting deal like for Lance Briggs emerges. As far as the draft, I have said consistently that while I think (hope given that the draft is really a crapshoot where folks claim that a 1st round choice should be an immediate starter but an inspection of the depth charts I did last week showed that only 18 of the 32 1st round choices from last year where number 1 on the depth chart at their positions going into their second season. Good players get drafted and do start immediately particularly if they are top 10 choices like Whitner but there are also the Mike Williams and Harringtons of the world who were busts at #3 and #4) Willis looks like a good pro prospect who despite his struggles with pass coverage in the Senior Bowl I expect (hope/pray) he can provide an answer at MLB for years, I expect as a rookie if he is required by us to start at MLB, given the diversity and importance of doing vet reads to success in this role it will be a very long and sometimes quite ugly rookie season for him if he learns the Cover 2 MLB role on the job. I feel much better about us selecting Willis because there apparently is some thought he can also bring the talents he showed at the Combine and which won him the Butkus award to the OLB slot and we can use the vet Crowell as our MLB while Willis learns to be a vet at SLB, attacks the LOS like an injured TKO could not and learns play reads while generally covering one player rather than demanding he look over the whole field and avoid being fooled by OCs who will relish the chance to get at a rookie MLB in the Cover 2. However, Willis best chance of going high appears to be desperation for an MLB by both SF and the Bills (who may both be blowing smoke about Willis to hide their true priorities and the bet that the Bills can trade down to 20 or lower and still get Willis is at least a possibility and may even be likely if SF is simply trolling for a deal. Willis at OLB would be quite nice, but likewise if the Bills braintrust is enamored with Poz, with Timmons, or even with Buster Davis whom they may be able to get in the 2nd round I have no problem with that at all. Last year bought this team led by marv a very reasonable benefit of the doubt as far as assessment and drafting goes and if they choose to do something unexpected like taking a Poz or a Buster Davis (or even Willis at #12 though if they do I hope they do not start this rookie at MLB) I will take a second look rather than wailing. 2. CB- I think seeing this as a priority for the Bills fails to understand how they run their D and correctly evaluate the current roster. The Cover 2 is not a good scheme for a playmaking CB. It expects a CB to do press coverage for the first 10-15 yards of a WR's route and to provide outside support to turn runs inside. Some folks simply look at our loss of NC and want us to get a player with a good chance of being a future Pro Bowl talent to replace him when it simply is the case that a great CB is not called for nor does he want to be in a Cover 2. The conventional wisdom is that a 1st round choice should start immediately and a first day pick will contribute and likely start at some point in their first year. However, if we take a CB om the first day he likely is gonna sit all year behind last year first day CB choice Youbouty and recent FA resigning Thomas. The winner of a duel between these two will start at CB and the loser is the likely nickel, but though we can use the competition, if we draft a CB he likely duels with Jabari Greer to be the dime CB. I do not see us needing a 1st day choice for this duel or making either last year;s first day CB choice or the recent FA extension a waste by drafting another 1st day CB. In fact, I see our need for another safety (Lromhard has both back-up roles) as a larger DB need than another CB, 3. RB- See above but I think the key to this is that we likely need 2 RB candidates from this draft and a first day choice (though probably not the 1st rounder) AND a second day choice seems most likely to me.

There are so many variables in terms of which players drop in the draft to #12, whether we can trade down from #12 and which player we would get, which team is willing to be a trade partner and for what, and the likelihood we will need at least 2 (if not 3 RBs who will get serious time next year (Thomas and FB Cieslak are the only backfield players we currently have that I think will be on the opening day roster) that I think all the stone cold lock picks of our next RB choice are simply guesses. Whomever is correct it will be more likely due to coincidence than any superior football knowledge because almost certainly someone has to be right in their guesses/estimate. However, though I do not feel it is all that worthwhile for me to join the guessing I feel a bit more certain in stating the following criteria which I feel will almost certainly describe our RB choices: I am curious what people think is likely gonna be true about RBs ans who and why they think particular players meet these definitions. Likely truisms: 1. The Bills braintrust will not pick a Willis McGahee type pain in the butt to replace a player they viewed as a pain in th butt. WM like others really defined potential. Like it or not, it took him fewer starts as a Bill than any other RB to rush for 2000 yards. He of course is no where near the achievements of complete RBs like Thurman or great episodic achievers like OJ, but his accomplishments and promise remain very good (hence him collecting big bucks in the marketplace) and are what they are. However, even though his teammates probably at worse rolled their eyes and sloughed off his idiotic comments and horrible attitude towards fathering as "thats just Willis" he was no fun for most fans to root for and for Ralph to own and away he went for not stunning but OK value but leaving a gaping hole in the roster (a hole he did not fill with his own production as he simply showed potential which means you have not done anything yet but we do not even have even potential right now as Thomas reasonably is nothing more than a good #2). College performance is gonna be important, but even the best the RBs we likely can pick (Lynch is likely Peterson is not but may drop to us) is not so great he is gonna produce more than a #16-20 1st round pick (a probable immediate starter but statistically only a little better than 50/50 chance he may even be good enough to be our starter next year). College performance will be important just to make sure a player is a possibility of contributing significantly his first year (down to around a 3rd round choice) but the key factor I think will be the interview with the Bills at the Combine, over the phone, and at individual or school try-outs. My sense is that if the Bills get even a whiff in the interviews that an RB may have the legend in his own mind tendencies which Willis M showed, they will run rather than walk the other way. Folks who are basing their love for Lynch (or for Peterson) on some impressive college highlights are not talking a lot about what I think will be the deciding factor in whether we take a player or not which is how the braintrust reacted to his character. Marv showed with the selection of Butler last year that we might still pick a guy who had a demonstrably low-class act if he accepts his guilt, is punished and independent folks speak up for him. However, I think that Willis's outlandish behavior and speech is going to put any RB choice we make on a short leash as the braintrust will not want to take on a pain in the butt after getting rid of a pain in the butt. 2. We are likely to have as many as 3 RBs on the opening day roster who are not on the roster right now. Right now we are committed to Anthony Thomas from the depth chart of HBs and FBs. Shaud Thomas may lose out in the competition because he is a vet but not so good he cannot be beaten out as our 3rd down HB. Jackson is journeyman whom Marv has mentioned but there is no guarantee he even makes the final cut. Shelton is on the depth chart at FB, but actually he is likely gone and TE Cieslak is a far more likely candidate at FB. The bottomline is that we are looking at not only picking up an FA (or two) but also we may well draft two RBs at the draft likely one the first day and another the second day. 3. Part of the reason we likely will load up at RB is the increasing use of RBBC (RBbycommittee) in the NFL. Few leagues seem to have as much imitation as the NFL. The Bills are in the forefront of this movement as Marv chose as his HC a Cover 2 guy who then chose a DC schooled in the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2. Given the Colts winning the SB last year running a Cover 2 (and like the Bills having a D which could be shredded at times by the run game) this likely will be the standard NFL D for a while. The Saints also did well running an offense which featured McCallister and even still used a premium choice to take Reggie Bush. With this tandem they moved from near worst to near first and we likely will see the Bills doing their version of the Dillon/Mulroney thing this year. The problem for us is that no one would mistake Anthony Thomas for being even the lesser player in these dual RB pairings and this likely means we are going to see this team drop some resources on RBs. Unfortunately, Chris Brown and Michael Turner appear to be about the best you can do in FA and even if we get them both are worse than the lesser back in the pairings mentioned and though draftees like Lynch or Peterson have potential, again this simply means they have not done anything yet. We will be overjoyed in retrospect if either of these players turned out to be as good of a pro as let's say a Larry Johnson. However, even Larry gained 100 and change his rookie year and a hair over 500 yards his second year and depending on the crapshoot known as the draft for the lead in our RBBC is simply a dangerous game. So come draft day look for us to pick at least 2 RBs to see us go with numbers rather than quality and see the guy we pick get significant time regardless of where they are picked and i think that this is quite likely to be the case.

I think it is more accurate to say that this COULD be JP's team but that it is not yet as though he clearly has shown a lot of potential, he defines the definition of potential simply meaning you have not done anything yet. There are a variety of models for success in the NFL and sports which range from teams like the Pats which even with Tom Brady clearly leading the charge on the field (with Belicheck leading the charge among non-players I that the seeming cause and definite effect of their success has been their ability to be a TEAM. On the other end of the team-building spectrum is the 49ers who though their clearly were a lot of the best players ever (like Jerry Rice) Joe Montana achieved so much, showed such leadership, and did this while not raising expectations as a player that it really shows the ability of an individual to be identified as embodying a team effort. However, what the teams on this spectrum share in common is that they clearly achieved something and the Bills with (and significantly prior to) JP have not even made the playoffs yet. It clearly can MAYBE be his team, but he has such a long way to go he is no where close that point yet. One could attempt to claim that this is purely a question of whether one views the same glass as being half empty or half full. However, the simple lack of even the most basic achievements of being a good team in the NFL in making the playoffs renders this more accurately being a difference in perspective between those who view the glass as 90% empty and those who view it as 10% full.

If we had not taken Whitner when we did and DET had taken him at #9 the risk we would have taken was that either we trade down to lets say #12 and instead take the 3rd SS taken (Jason Allen was taken at #16 by the Fins and he played in a back-up role all season) as our starting safety, or alternately we end up going with the best SS on our current roster which was none other than gulp Coy Wire. My guess is that you would likely take a completely different approach than the Bills have taken to team building due to your commitment to drafting and resigning OL players (it all started with their decision to trade for RJ instead of drafting Tre Thomas) or perhaps last year you would have traded up from 8 somehow to select D'Brick and them pulled off some other Rickey Williams esque draft maneuver to get Mangold as well. However, the risk of not getting Whitner when we did after the reality that we created a hole at SS with the cut of Milloy was that if we lost him we were looking at likely having Jason Allen or Coy Wire as our starting SS. We would have lost that bet badly and wished we had finished 7-9 as we did IMHO.

I wish it was that simple (actually I do not want that because the complexity of figuring out how a team becomes a TEAM is a lot of the fun of following the NFL) but it simply isn't. A real assessment of your theory would involve the laborious process of trying to confirm it by looking at each roster for the 3 premiere skill players. This would take some time though so to start lets look at a couple of examples in the real world to decide whether it is worthwhile to spend the time on a more exhaustive look. Looking at successful teams is a good start because it should easily confirm your theory. Unfortunately in this decade that means looking at the roster of the NE Patriots which won 3 SBs in a mere 4 years. They have had a ton of good players (though in many ways this is self-defining as good means successful so care should taken in going too far with this example in terms of looking for even indications of applicability to a general case- never mind that one data point does not make a trend or even a coincidence). For premiere players though they are great so they probably stuck with a team for a number of years. The three premiere players who meet whatever criteria you want to articulate for premiere players are: Tom Brady, and, and, and, must be those crickets. They have won because in many ways their performance defines the concept of TEAM (form the introduction of the group which won the 2001 season SB which did not bring attention to individual skill players but to the fact they were a team. There certainly have been examples of good skill players because generally they are good and winning 3 SBs self defines premiere players. Yet, it is difficult to identify 3 premier players among the TEs, WRs, RBs, or whatever to go along with Brady for these three teams. In fact if one were to try to pick someone like a Corey Dillon, in the 1st SB it really was more Antowain Smith at RB, Dillon credibly could be called the premier player in two SBs, but they fit the model of going with 2 RBs mentioned above. Even if you want to expand your theory to D to find the premier players, this is a team which found a way one year to win an SB with their premier D player Rodney Harrison out with an injury. Your theory simply does not fit the singular best example from this decade. (maybe you mean Venateri as the 2nd premier player, we're still short one). It may well be the Pats are a singular team and not worth trying to imitate because most teams cannot do this. Let's look at the current SB champ Colts to try to figure out whether your theory demands or even suggests more in depth analysis. The Colts have Peyton, and Harrison so far so good with the theory. However, looking at their roster for a third premier skill player of the type you describe is a little troubling. The best case can be made that an RB like Edgerrin James clearly fits your theory for the whole three player layout. However, their SB win (finally!) just happened to coincide with this third premiere player getting a huge contract to go elswhwere. They certainly found players to play well to fit in, but i think that few would describe Joseph Addai, Dallas Clark or the seeming other skill players as being premier players. Your theory may be borne out if one inspects the other 30 teams but certainly a deeper look at the current champs or the most successful team this decade does not bear out your theory as obvious or even supportable without some bending and twisting.

I think this mostly speaks to the fact that the draft is really a crapshoot and just because you draft a player in the 1st or the consensus is he is a player reasonably taken in the 1st it not only does not guarantee that he will be the answer but actually from your stats it looks more than likely he will not be, The other fact which folks tend to downplay or flatout ignore is that it does not matter totally whether a player was drafted in the first round or not it is also important how you acquired that player. I have not computed the numbers, but the example is seen in a case like Marshall Faulk, Sure he was drafted in the 1st round, but his presence on this list and his role in helping the Rams win an SB title came because a team can acquire an RB who proved to be worthy of a 1st round choice in a trade. The Faulk example is actually an occurrence which points to not drafting a player at RB in the first round because you can acquire such a player and put together a winning SB team by trading for a proven 1st round selected RB from elsewhere. The team which would really like the article laid out to start this thread is the Baltimore Ravens, they traded some mere draft picks and acquired an RB chosen in the 1st round named Willis McGahee. They hope that the stats of the lead post are correct and that they will join the list of teams who played in an SB in part because of the contributions of an RB chosen in the 1st round.

I think the folks whose views adhere to the statistical rule of thumb are choosing that over instead adhering to reality in the NFL. Particularly with the increasing adoption of the Cover 2 and Tampa 2 scheme (run by such teams as the Bills and SB champion Colts) safety has become a much more critical and important position in the NFL and the old rule of thumb is simply going to be replaced as drafts like the last several which have seen safeties taken quite early begin to stack up. Stats and past occurrence are a great INDICATOR but they do not justify drawing a conclusion as to what the draft will actually look like. Folks who claimed that safeties simply do not get chosen early in the 1st round simply ignored the facts which led to 3 players (Huff, Whitner and Allen) all being chosen by pick 15. Some chose the increasingly distant past over the present and the future by trying to claim past early S picks like Roy Williams was simply an exception caused by one player's efforts and ignored the facts of the present that even later picks like S Polamalu in Pitt were getting recognized and were putting butts in the seats and helping their team win the SB, These stat addicts of past draft performance also seemed to simply ignore the fact that pick #9 Detroit just after us was said by many to have an opening and need for a safety in their Cover 2 and that after OAK surprised most everyone by picking Huff at #7, the Bills had no choice but to take Whitner with the #8 or they might likely lose him to the very next pick making a trade down a bad idea. The fact that Detroit did indeed take a safety with their second pick shows that we would have been taking a large risk by trading down for more picks.

Whatever the coaches think in terms of really having had the chance to talk to each player and measure them as people is fine by me actually, as we outsiders can certainly weigh the workout stats and have our unprofessional opinions about which player is better or worse. We can easily be right or wrong as we are missing the essential component of really having talked to and taken the measure of these men. We also do not have a true idea of what the plans are for team building from the braintrust and this variable of what other deals seem likely makes a huge difference in whether a draft pick is a good choice or not. While, there is no guarantee that any choices by the braintrust are gonna be correct, one thing that they clearly earned last year when virtually all the draft picks contributed to a team which improved in the only stat that really matters, W/L, has certainly earned the benefit of the doubt. We are certainly all entitled to our opinions whether fact free or informed by reams of data. If the team thinks Poz can do the job, fine by me. It seems likely that if any rookie is slated to be our starting MLB next season will likely be painful while this rookie learns to be a vet. I have a lot of confidence in a rookie who is a top 10 pick hitting the ground running immediately. However, anyone available at #12 begins to get pretty dicey as an immediate starter (it can easily happen it will just be dicey). As far as Willis, I think he is probably a reasonable choice (despite his pass coverage struggles in the Senior Bowl) but probably only if we fill he can do the job at SLB which does not call for the vet level reads and diversity of play required of an MLB in the Cover 2. SF may be enamored with him and we would have to trade up to get him, but they easily could be blowing smoke in order to scare the Bills into trading up for him. We also have too many needs for me to see us spending more resources for one player when the draft actually is still a crap shoot in reality. In fact, if SF is in fact blowing smoke, it may well be possible to trade down and still get Willis or Poz. We likely risk a lot more in trading up than in holding or trading down. The likely payoff even if he turns out to be a very good rookie is not high enough to make this a good move.

Run stop support comes from a couple of different areas of the D from what I have seen. First, on outside runs, it is useful and important for the CBs to really do some serious run support, the DTs are committed inside as the attempt to penetrate and the LBs are backing up the empty spaces left by the DTs and in the aggressive style we want our LBs to play they are filling thoes gaps hard. If the RB appears to be leaning in or headed up the middle, but it really is a play fake and he plans to bounce it outside as quick as he can the RB may get big yards if he can get around these defenders attacking inside hard. Part of the run support on this type of play comes from the CB making a good read and instead of clearing out with the WR running a 10 yard or so pattern or getting effectively blocked by the WR, our CB will need to make the read and get the ballcarrier. This is one of the reasons I think Youbouty fits our D quite well. One of the flaws in his game in draft assessments last year was the complaint that he looked into the backfield too much and sometimes did not focus enough on the WR. He of course needs to improve and simply do things right, but in general, him keeping a big focus on run support is fine IMHO as our CBs have the short zone and are expected to lean inwards rather than provide deep cover. Youbouty in particular has a rep as a very competitive person who is a good hand fighter with receivers who specializes in press coverage. His game appears built toward keeping the play and the receiver in front of him and this works well for run support. In addition, we saw the defender who benefited most in terms of recognition from the switch to the Cover 2 was Aaron Schobel. In the LeBeau/Gray zone blitz he had actually lost a few pounds to increase his speed and agility as our DEs were quite often required to peel off into short (and even medium) zone coverage as the zone blitz would bring theoretically surprising blitzes from multiple LBs. Schobel actually did quite well at this IMHO, but ended up losing what appeared to be as much as 1/4 of the sack opportunities a DE might normally get as he was pass covering rather than blitzing on a lot of passing downs. With the Cover 2, the DE was called upon to simply rush alot more and with more chances for Schobel came more sacks and had him among league sack leaders and got him a Pro Bowl start. However, the elimination for the most part of pass coverage duty does not mean that all our DE should be is a one trick pony you simply wind up and send after the passer. With the DTs focusing on penetrating so much it becomes more critical for the DEs to make good reads and pinch toward the middle if need be to shore up the run. As described aove the CB has important run support duty in the Cover 2 on outside runs, but one of the first jobs on these runs is for the DE to make sure he is not sealed off to the inside by a blocking tackle or by the TE as this will be the first determinant of whether in fact the RB successfully gets outside. A good DE is aware of the play and where folks seem to be going so that he either provide support inside at the LOS if the DT has left the spot unoccupied trying to penetrate or to make sure his rush moves straight upfield in a manner which cuts off the outside run.

Late at night checkin TSW just b4 bedtime, no prob.

Its hard for me to see any player who has led the team in tackles every year he has been here and who finished first in the NFL in INTs last year and he never has even gotten a serious sniff at the Pro Bowl as being overrated. On the contrary, there are some who feel he has not gotten the props consistent with his achievements. I can easily see how the Bills would reasonably look to move beyond the Fletcher era because despite his real world achievements, the team simply does not make the playoffs under his leadership and we clearly are a building a young team and he simply is on the wrong side of 30. However, I think you have to be rated highly to be overrated and the NFL as a whole has never seemed to give him a high enough rating that he ever made a Pro Bowl,

I think good diverse MLB play is going to be a key to getting this done (which is why i think we will likely struggle a bit if we go with a rookie as MLB starter) buy like it or not though the LBs attacking would be great (I think TKO not being able to attack like he can when he was healthy was a bigger problem than Fletch's play as I think the MLB was simply required in our D to pass cover a lot. I think the run issue starts with the DL like it or not and no LB switch is going to make the difference better DL play would make in stopping the run. The good news is I think there is hope there. I think that the DL roles will be: DL: DTs generally are penetrators more than run stuffers, with in general the LDT (Triplett and Walker in rotation) having a big penetration focus and it is to be hoped drawing alot of doubles and with the RDT (Williams and McCargo) also being used to penetrate alot but having a first call of holding the line and occupying the center of the field on run plays. The RDTs and LDTs will likely rotate responsibility as who penetrates and who holds the line (and even flip flop player positions) so as to confuse the opposing OL, but this appears to be the general approach. I think folks are over concentrating on how a player tends to play or likes to play (for example use of 3- technique approaches). Miller appears to be a perfect 3-technique player, but though he will use this generally if this is all he does he will be easily nullified. A player must change up strategies a bit and even positions a bit or he will get killed in the NFL. In term of categorizing players, it seems more reasonable to me to label a player as a specific technique type as though he does that all the time (he does not or he would be ineffective), but to recognize he may do something a lot but not exclusively at all. An example of this is that a lot of folks rended their gowns last year complaining that the Triplett McCargo pick was dumb as both were three technique players doing the same thing. Generally true but not dumb at all as the way we tend to operate is using such a rotation effort at DT that everybody plays alot making the "who start" question less meaningful and also that every DT is expected to be good at doing 3 technique. 2 gap play, or whatever as the way a player performs is going to have to be rotated and difficult to predict or he will get killed. One can see this in the depth chart where alleged same as Triplett because he was a 3 technique player McCargo is now 2nd on the depth chart at the RDT position behind Williams rather than the LDT position. Our DTs are of a similar weight because though they may be better at a particular style they are required to play different styles well enough to be plugged in at either DT position. Our DEs are expected to be the high motor types which the Bills love as they are generally expected to be pass rush guys (as opposed to what was expected of them in the Gray/LeBeau zone blitz which called upon the DEs to be athletic enough to sometimes drop back into short zone pass coverage as the LBs would then unexpectedly (at least we hoped) pass rush like he was a DE. In the Cover 2 the DEs are not required to do the pass coverage they often did in the zone blitz (Schobel increased his sack numbers not because he suddenly learned how to pass rush better but because he increased the number of pass rushes he made as he was no longer required to zone pass protect). However, since the DTs are now called upon in the Cover 2 to sometimes abandon the middle holding the line in order to penetrate, our DEs are called upon to sometimes mover laterally along the line rather than pass rush to lend support to the run stopping effort. Overall in terms of the DL, I expect them to do a better job this season in terms of stopping the run. It will not improve so much because of better personnel (Walker is far more of a sack guy rather than a run stopper, but I expect both McCargo and Williams will improve at DT and playing the Cover 2 in their second year. McCargo has had a different surgical technique used on his damaged leg and we will find out whether this has solved his injury issue or whether Bills not only spent a lot to move up in the draft for a player who contributed little his rookie year, but also whether he is simply damaged goods. In addition, 07 should provide a direct challenge to Triplett to see if the Bills simply made a poor assessment of this FA, or whether he steps up this year. The DE situation should be pretty good as I think Schobel is the real deal and he may noticeably improve on a Pro Bowl year as this will be his second year in the Cover 2, I think the Bills spent a lot more than he showed so far in his career, but under the new CBA all salaries are going up like crazy. Denney and Hargrove are both most interesting because both of these players have shown they can actually play DT in a pinch. We should be fine at DT, but if Fewell can get a bit more run support from these players when they are in at DE that will help.

Breathe deeply Tip-man (or Tip-person). Marv has until the very end of April to make a deal before the draft and as a Bills fan I care more about him making the best deal he can make than about him making deals immediately. Its been interesting to watch the slow but steady progression of activities (the decisions to let various FAs go like NC and F-B, the OL trades, the trade of WM, resigning of our own like the Thomases, and now the trading of TKO). Its nice because the amount of activity has been consistent and targeted at particular areas of need even though it demands some patience from Bills partisans because the Bills are keeping their own schedule. Its fine with me as it is fine with me if they flat out lie to me about their needs and intents if that is what it takes to fool enemy teams.

There is an approach to getting press coverage which really does not care what the article says about you but requires that the reporter "just spell the name right." While this approach does not make sense for something like a political candidate as ultimately you are going to have the public vote for you or not, it does make some sense for an entertainment figure like an athlete as simply getting more attention nationally (particularly if the negative press you are receiving is going to be centered in a very small market like Buffalo and you can very credibly defend yourself in other markets and on ESPN by depicting their reaction as mere sour grapes) may help you get attention and sell yourself at football card signing opportunities. For the most part I think folks who really dislike Willis can actually do him the most harm by simply ignoring him. With his public comments in national outlets such as his "baby momma" comments and his attempts (mission accomplished by him) to get folks talking about him from his irrelevant comments about the Bills moving to Toronto, this appears to be his strategy. If you love Willis then by all means write posts to rag on him because this seems to be exactly what he wants. Doing an interview with 97 Rock serves their interests because they and outlets like WGR simply love getting ears from WNY so they can make more money selling soap, so it is easy for me see and unholy triumvirate of WNY radio ranters (looking to increase listeners so facilitating WM rants is great for them), of pissed off Bill fans (who supply the required public anger), and WM who may well love to incite folks in Buffalo to get a line in the various draft coverage that folks in WNY are pissed after losing him. WM can easily spin this whole thing as few national reporters will hear any 97 Rock interview but will call WM who will happily give them a quote saying that some are simply sorry to see him go for so little compensation. Its not true, but his attitude is probably just spell the name right. If you love WM then rant about him being a jerk. If you hate WM then the best thing to be done is just to ignore him. i see myself as in the middle on him but ultimately I care very little about him cause he ain't a Bill anymore.