Pyrite Gal

We saw the same thing here with what I used to call the AVP effect. The other team would either physically knock out starting QB out of the game or the starter would be so bad he would get pulled and then AVP would come in and throw a TD pass or even lea a furious comeback and cries would rise on the TSW board or among Bills partisans to bring in AVP as a starter. AVP was a good player and actually a very good back-up who could deliver a team a win if his job was to help protect a lead or lead us to a single score for the win, but Ds even if he was successful against him in relief of the starter would wake up and stiffen. Once the Bills actually had to go with AVP as a starter and opponents got a good look at some tape and figured out the team's tendencies with him and the particular weakenesses of his game then AVP's production as a Bill went way down. The main reason Turner makes any sense for us would be if we went with a decision to go with an RB by committee approach as even though Turner is not a proven or credible starter at RB, right now we do not have a credible starting threat at RB on this roster. Thomas proved he could start way back when (in NFL lifetimes) but the last time he carried the rock for a 1000 yards in a season was 2003 and he was actually only able to answer the starting gun in the line-up 13 times which is the most starts in a season he ever had. Even if you believe in Thomas and prayer as your starter you still need a big time back-up for him. Turner makes a little sense with him being backed up by Thomas or Thomas being backed up Turner, but even this configuration call for one of these men to step up which cannot be counted upon in either individual case. A second as their "opening" likely means they settle for one of our thirds and if we have a third plan for a starting RB AND can sign him to an incentive laden deal i would pull the trigger.

Although there are a whole bunch of differences between their approaches to NFL team building and the draft decisions in particular there has been one similarity between the TD and the Marv regimes regarding the draft: They have pulled off completely fooling virtually all watchers about their intent. The hallmark of the TD regime during his semi-lengthy (too lengthy for many) was the 1st round pick where he chose McGahee. Even with the el foldo by WM in terms of productivity for the Bills last year, I think even TD haters should be willing to acknowledge this pick was a pretty ballsy move which in retrospect made sense to try even though it brought forth a big chunk of folks whining about the move not making any sense. However, the future Bills moves and the way things turned out revealed that first the Bills knew things that the rest of the world did not know or have faith in which made the move at least a sane one to make (specifically, the Bills docs were advising that the nature of WM's catastrophic injuries involved a series of clean tears that if he worked hard could repair his knees to the point he could start in the NFL, he likely needed a year off for rehab and there were no guarantees he would be a top 5 NFL RB but it was possible he could be a starter given a year of rehab. The Bills docs were right and the Bills surprised everyone as to their draft intent by taking WM with #23). Likewise, the Marv led Bills fooled everyone last year. It appears only 1 of the many draft pundits had the Bills taking Whitner at #8 and a wail and cry arose from several pundits about the Bills draft being one of the most senseless ever and accusations of senility and Alzheimers hitting Marv and Ralph were out there. However, in retrospect, though it takes three years to draw any serious conclusions about a draft class, certainly after the 2006 draft take produced 7 of the 9 players selected got starts last year on a team which improved its record significantly from the 05 Bills, there is a credible argument that this draft may turn out to be one of the best that they ever pulled off. Clearly, the Bills in both regimes succeeded in virtually completely fooling the pundits and draft watchers (including those of us on TSW- does anyone out there want to claim they had us picking both Whitner and McGahee with the #1s or even one of these two choices. My question is what do you see the Bills likely fooling watchers this year in terms of who they might pick at #1 or in a general approach to the draft. The main thing that seems clear is that if anyone makes a prediction and says you can take it to the bank, the prepare to be bankrupt.

Part of the reason a team may do this or word may leak about this is simply because they want to induce some team to show their hand by indicating interest in a particular player they have no intention of drafting or in fact have them spend resources on a trade up. Regarding this pick in particular, i really doubt the Bills are unfolding any pots regarding GB and their pick, but I could easily see a situation in which the Bills had decided to pass on Lynch in most or all cases if their personal interview at the Combine left them unimpressed, if they have some character issue regarding him (from the regarded minor to most legal issues against him that went away), or they have an interest in a different RB (Irons in a latter round for example or Peterson if he drops). In other words who knows.

Its interesting that John from Hemet sees it as a bad sign that TKO is not in conditioning camp (ie may be) but my sense of TKOs work and workout last offseason was that he actually worked too hard as he was committed to being in the opening line-up. TKO did work extremely hard and some of his workouts shown on the Bills Access show really struck me as amazing for a fellow who had torn his Achilles Tendon, Darn if TKO did not appear in the starting line-up in game 1 and promptly sacked Brady leading to a fumble and TD by Fletch. However, darn if he did not quickly strain his hammy and suffered an injury which he did not fully heal from all season. TKO could be sitting out conditioning camp because he is done as a Bill. However, he could be sitting out camp because of some nagging but shot-term twinge that has led him to scale back his efforts and he can comeback when camp really starts. However, he also may have gotten much smarter about his rehab after being a little too maniac last off-season and he is pursuing a reasonable approach for an athlete around 30 which is to work out judiciously and consistently during the off-season and give your body a break from maniacal conditioning which occurs in the off-season camps.

The Bills have several options regarding play calling should they decide to draft Willis: 1. Have him play MLB but have Crowell remaining at WLB do the playcalling. This can be done although there will be some likely and unlikely risks associated with this approach. Generally its good having the MLB do this as particularly in a noisy stadium, its easier for the MLB to call to players on both sides of the field, If Crowell has this duty on the weakside, particularly in noisy stadiums the Bills will have to workout a relay systems to assure signals get to the far side of the field from Crowell. Someone may not here a shift call but generally I think this is a low risk. As the Will, Crowell will often be a step or so closer to the LOS and certainly will not have the angle the MLB has to see all players in terms of tips off on which direction they may be blocking or moving and schemes, this also seems to be a relatively small risk though both of these are real downsides to an off LB making the calls. 2. Have Willis play OLB as apparently he has some experience doing and have Crowell at MLB making the calls. IMHO MLB is a key to making the Cover 2 work and actually requires the player to both be able to tackle like DT and pass cover like a safety, that I suspect playcalling will be the least of Willis; problems if he is a rookie starting MLB. I like the idea of drafting him and having him play OLB his first year as he learns the game and then move him to MLB later. He can certainly be our MLB as a rookie, but if he is I think he probably means the Bills are likely willing to accept a couple of losses from OC fooling our rookie MLB to step backward expecting to pass cover while the opponents run up the middle or step forward expecting a run and some fleet footed vet WR blows right by him running a post pattern and gets seven. If Willis is our starting MLB, i suspect we will be set at that position for many years, but simply prepare yourself for some painful learning experiences for him in 2007 as this rookie learns to be a vet. 3. Either Whitner ot Simpson have the mental ability to make play calls from the safety position. I have not heard anything to indicate they are ready for this, but this is a likely better option than having a rookie MLB make the playcalls.

Almost certainly not. As the signal caller last year, Fletch took responsibility for essentially being a coach on the field using his near decade of experience to analyze what the O was likely to do given the down and distance, the formation the opposing O lined in and which players they put on the field.. While this is only football and not brain surgery, a rookie calling signals would need to match wits with OC designing his plays to fool the opponent, match wits with vet QBs making changes based on what we are doing, and have a pretty clear idea of what the opposing players do well, what their vulnerabilities are and how our team matches up against them. Having all this info is possible from studying the playbook really hard and absorbing it in the mini-camp and pre-season time a rookie has before opening day. Having a real knowledge of what opposing players like and can do and the tendencies of the opposing team in particular situations also can be obtained with reading and absorbing the scouting reports and watching a boatload of film. However, even if a player could give the virtual 24/7 commitment needed to perform these mechanical tasks as well as he can, he then has to also develop the ability to think all this true quick enough in a game situation and also communicate all of this effectively to his fellow players and of course do all this while deciding whether this particular play calls for him to tackle like a DT (which we want the Cover 2 MLB to do on run plays) or pass cover like a safety (which we expect the Cover 2 MLB to do on pass plays). Most rookies are simply dealing with the fact that their opponents are a significantly faster and significantly more athletic assemblage opponents than they have ever faced. Essentially all NFL players comment on how much faster the players are in the NFL than the college game because essentially it is is like the took the best athlete in your high school conference (not just your school but the entire conference) xeroxed him 11 times and put him out on the field for you too face. Its possible I think for a rookie to do this, but incredibly really big incredibly doubtful for it to occur and even if it did, watching this is likely to be incredibly painful while we watch this rookie become a vet by learning by getting burned. It would be stupid to take this as claiming that all rookies are stupid, because all it is saying is that this involves a unique collection of actually fairly common (among the rarified world of top flight athletes) of skills in terms of athletic ability, mental smarts and leadership skills.

I think that the Bills could clearly use some more competition at CB, but what drafting a CB on the 1st day speaks would not be a good thing to do in terms of Youbouty, but would mean not devoting first day choices to bigger needs for this team at positions such as RB (no starters currently on the roster as Thomas is a very good #2 but last gained 1000 yards rushing in 2003 and hit his highest total by starting in about 13 games that season. DT where at best Triplett and Williams were OK last year and we need to find two players to step up alot from these two and McCargo and given that it is a rotation (unlike CB) we can use another near starter to replace Anderson. OG where there are some possibilities to take the other side with Dockery but more competition would be as pivotal on the O side of the trenches as the D side.

The only question I have about Greer is that during a couple of pre-seasons he has been nothing short of phenomenal jumping routes, showing some good run support and even going ho (Ultimate Frisbee talk for making a catch while being horizontal) for an INT against DET in a pre-season game a few years back. Yet he has just never translated this into regular season performance. Perhaps ultimately he knew he would never unseat NC, McGee or some of the more highly regarded folks ahead of him, but Greer has what likely will be his last chance to make room for himself with solid play. I hope it is the case but this fan will believe it when he sees it and until he proves it on the field Greer is a "dime" CB at best behind McGee, Youbouty and Thomas.

Outside of the MLB who is called upon to both tackle like a DT and pass cover like a safety its my sense is that no position deserves the term "Hybrid" more in a Cover 2 than the CB. Fundamentally on most plays the CB is as man-to-man as a player can be as he not only as specific cover duty on the WR to his side (even moreso the way the Bills switched to playing mid-season last year) the CB is running a press coverage right in the face of the WR to his side immediately. One can call this immediate press a zone to the extent he is expected to cut off this coverage 10-15 yards off the LOS and release the WR to the safeties on fly patterns and to the MLB on post patterns and to mind the inside area for receivers coming underneath, but to this extent even the switch of NC to cover the best WR of the other team regardless of which side he lined up on still had McGee playing zone even after the switch. McGee got much better at mastering the zone coverage in the second half of last season as the coaches simply reduced the distractions of multi-tasking his assignments as he did not have to devote much of his effort to simply keeping up with the best receiver. I suspect that McGee will get better at doing the Cover 2 for several reasons: 1. He has had the experience of playing in it for a season and actually doing the job with much more success in the 2nd half of last season. It would be very hard for him to get faster or to jump higher, but the repetition, success, and practice of last season should clearly make him a lot better than he was when it was his first year running the scheme. 2. His multi-tasking assignment will be made easier as he will not have to watch out for two rookie safeties as much. The plays which got McGee deservedly benched last year were TDs by the other side where he seemed to simply fail to read how badly out of position his safeties were and then also to read that there was really little coverage need for him underneath. He needed to keep running with the WR on the fly pattern and did not do this in the first half of the season, but he did learn he needed to be aware of this the second half and go deep if he had no one coming underneath and also that the safety would likely be late. Mcgee should be able to make fewer mistakes and if he does a safety should be there to cover up. 3. The pass rush must and should improve. It is not a bad assumption and in fact is quite likely that Williams will get better in his second year we just do not know how good that will be for this youngster. It is not far-fetched at all that Triplett will improve in his second year as he is around his prime age though this is not guaranteed at all. It is also not rediculous to hope McCargo proves that the Bills assessment of him was bad and the repairing surgery performed on him this off-season makes sense that it will solve his problem, though the major threat to this pick is that he proves to have a consistent injury problem. If they were to pick up Okoye I am quite confident that the pass protection will be improved a lot by the DL rotation. At any rate, there are several different options at least some of which should work out well for us in improving our pass protection even with the loss of a very good player in NC and the downgrade in talent to the unproven Youbouty or the proven second tier (or worse) CB play of Thomas. The other interesting thing which should give a Bill fan some hope is that Youbouty has shown many of the talents useful in the press scheme of the Cover 2 and that he played well in his one start last year and adequately in his two other appearances though the Bills coaches were likely correct that we offered more with vets, Clements, McGee and Thomas at nickel than we did forcing Youbouty into the line-up as a rookie.

Its interesting to see some folks advocating that we draft a CB in the 1st round and generally arguing against the concept of Youbouty being a viable option to start as a reason for doing this. I find this amusing as IMHO this continues to over-emphasis and expectations that do not correspond to reality which many avid fans have regarding the NFL draft. TD (who demonstrated that it is far from a bad idea to question what he says) once said that 50% of players drafted in the 1st round end up being busts (he actually offered this well before it was clear that Mike Williams was a bust). Though TD is certainly a questionable source, as best as I can tell this statement of the facts has essentially not been refuted with a complete statistical analysis of the past. I can see why this has not been done because though one could actually figure out a statistical analysis of drafted player success that is valid. Even using objective measurables like how many 1st rounders became starters would be a laborious process to calculate for the several years of data necessary to make this finding a depiction of trends rather than a simple snapshot of 1 year. Further, though one might assess a measurable standard like did a player start or not, when one gets into subjective standards of whether a player was a "bust" or a "disappointment" the calculation gets a bit questionable. My sense is that TD is actually exaggerating IMHO if the claim is that 50% of 1st rounders are busts. I think this claim does not hold water as many folks draw conclusions about players prematurely (I don't think that anyone can reasonably claim Whitner or even McCargo were mistaken picks at this early point in their career). Further the assessment of many fans probably is a more legitimate comment on the fan and unreasonable fan expectations than on the quality of the player. it simply strikes me as silly that anyone can declare Whitner a failed pick (first one year is way too early to declare a failure of a pick) as actually he not only started immediately for the Bills and won an NFL rookie of the month designation, but his total stats are not simply comparable to the other safeties taken but in fact are demonstrably better than the other safeties taken in the first two rounds (including Huff who was drafted higher). Overall, my sense is that simply because a player does not start immediately (or even in his first two years) or even if he disappoints some folks (they likely were disappointed in part because they had foolish expectations) it is not realistic to call such a player a bust. Afterall, if one gets bent out of shape by two years of non-productive stats, then one would have to call Eric Moulds a bust. This Pro Bowler was sometimes vexing and deserved to be jettisoned by the Bills when he was but there is no way he can be reasonably called a bust. However, though I think it is exaggerating to call 50% of 1st round choices busts, i think the sins against reality on the other side of equation are probably even larger. The conventional wisdom seems to be that a 1st round choice must be a starter after a year of play or he is a failed pick. If this is true, then folks also should acknowledge that it does approach about 50/50 that a team is going to make a failed choice with their first rounder. Though I did not make the effort to look at a decade or so worth of drafts to confirm this thought. i did take a look at the results achieved by last year's 1st round choices by taking a look at the team's current depth chart to see whether the draftee is on there as a starter. Given that last year was generally viewed as a strong year for talent, i expected to see numbers well above 50% in terms of first rounders who were now #1 on a team's depth chart at their position. Actually of the 32 1st round choices the results were 18 starters and 14 back-ups, To some extent this probably was an indicator of the depth of last year's draft as own Bills were able to find a credible starter (though inadequate in my view) at DT who was picked on the second day and this achievement balanced out the fact that one of the 14 back-ups was 1st round Bills choice McCargo. However, I think this outcome pointed to the fact that a player in some cases need not be a starter to be a good pick (the Pats Mulroney for example or even #2 pick Bush given the popularity of two RB schemes in the NFL and it probably is not simply this position as historically though Winfield was not a starter for us his rookie year no one would call his work as a nickel a failed pick by the Bills and these same opportunities likely can be found on the DL given the popularity of rotating players there). In addition, part of the depth chart results likely says more about bad luck than the quality of the pick (unless a player like McCargo proves over time to be injury prone with a detectable pre-draft injury. In general, i think folks tend to put both more emphasis on starting that they should because the important thing is to contribute rather than simply start and there are a lot of important other ways to contribute. and I think folks also put too much emphasis on the draft choices making the starting line-up quickly as many 1st round choices are good players who simply do not produce that outcome their rookie years. Do teams find starters versus not with their 1st round picks? Yes. But is this outcome such a certainty that a team or its GM are reasonably seen as football failures because their first round picks fail to make the starting line-up their rookies years. Nope. This is only true if a fan demands such perfection in judgment that the GM and braintrust must hit a homerun every time or they are simply fools. Its good to hope for and root for perfection, but in the end it is simply to harsh and setting oneself up for disappointment to require that in order to be satisfied by your team. This draft Kool-Aid is particularly seen for Bills purposes when one looks at some folks saying we desperately need a 1st round CB choice to replace Clements as they see it as unlikely or impossible that Youbouty can step into the slot. 1. This view ignores the time element that almost 50% of draft choices need before they are ready to start even if drafted in the 1st round. The fact is that the immediate starters are so heavily weighted to the top 10 picks that when your choice is #12 given that it looks like Leon Hall may be gone anyway, it simply is not a good chance that if the Bills pick up the other likely 1st rounders like Revis or Houston odds are these players will not start immediately and in fact may never start at all their rookie seasons (most of the players chosen after pick 10 did not even end the season as starters). 2. Odds are that Youbouty is more likely to be a starter than the #12 pick anyway. Folks have short memories. Youbouty was generally seen as a great get by the Bills last year as many had him going in the 1st round, He did not due to some reasons which were not direct comments on his play as an unexpected run on safties chosen in the first joined with the CBs rated a bit higher (only a small bit in the numeric rankings) than Youbouty simply left about a third of the teams already having spent a lot of draft resources on DBs which is part of why Youbouty got passed over in the second round as well as the 1st. In fact, most observers felt that Youbouty was a 1st round talent who left school a year too early and that if he stayed and played as well his senior year as his junior year he likely would be the 1st or second CB chosen, As it stands, Levy and Jauron were able to make the radical move of devoting 2 of 3 first day choices to the DBs as when one looks at what Youbouty does well (good hands and fighting ability for press coverage) his play lends itself to what we are looking for in a Cover 2 CB. Quite frankly I think he is better off having his additional year of training and finishing as a Buffalo Bill with direct training by our coaches in our style than he would have gotten playing all the time for OSU. The bottomline looks like to me that Youbouty is far more likely to be our #2 CB anyway than any rookie we could get in the 1st round would be.

Branch's reactions to the Krumries wrestlemania test is actually a good one for someone considering Branch. Not because the test itself is anything more than the equivalent of juvenile sophomoric idiocy but because it will be interesting to see if he has an adult reaction to this stupidity or whether he makes excuses which buys into this that it is come kind of real test of football skills or even character. A GM needs to also gauge his own team and how they react to new players and rookies. If your team has an us against them and "we are family type attitude as evidenced most effectively by the Pats then one can take in a player who reacts like an adult to coming out on the short end of the Krumrie mill and now that the stupidity of juvenile standards have been demonstrated to him by the bad press from this episode, your team can rebuild this talented player into a good football player. However, if indications are that Branch reacts to being beaten up by over-reacting or pouting then avoid him. If a GM sees his own team leadership as being composed of a lot of "men" who would take a wounded or chastened player as Branch probably is and glory in taunting him some more rather than building him into a better player and person, then your team may not be the right situation for a Branch even if he has more adult reaction to this juvenalia.

I think that this point gets to one of the big questions where an explanation for our feebleness in stopping the run is to be found. Was the problem here: 1. Simply poor play by F-B and his failure to attack the LOS and if we get better more attacking play from the MLB our ability to stop the run will improve. 2. Poor DT play as Triplett did not set the world on fire with his performance and one would hope an FA acquisition would and as unexpectedly nice as Williams DT play was in the end he was adequate at best as one would expect a second day picked rookie to be and whether it was because McCargo simply did not play well or he had just began to turn the corner when injury struck him down, the DT performance was poor. 3. The D scheme designed for Jauron by Fewell was not as productive as would want due to poor design or implementation. 4. Some combination of the above. Put me down as a strong advocated for the view expressed in #4, I don not think that one can find a solution to our poor run D merely by getting a more talented MLB, or only by upgrading DT performance, or by getting better performance by Fewell. I think we need to improve significantly in all three of these aspects for our D to be as productive in stopping the run as we want it to be. The bad news is that pulling off this multi-pronged simultaneous improvement will be quite difficult, but the good news is that there are ways that each of these things can be done and actually occur with resources already on hand. 1. Statistically, there seem to be few indicators that the problem with this D is seen in F-Bs play. If anyone expected him to be Lawrence Taylor, well sorry folks he was not and actually though it seems to be an oversight that he never has made the Pro Bowl despite him year and year out having been the leading tackler for the Bills (breaking Spielman's team record in his best year) and him pulling off objectively demonstrated accomplishments like leading NFL LBs in INTs last year. Still even though F-B seemed IMHO opinion to do pretty much what he was asked to do in his career and last year for the Bills, I can see where the complaints come from that he initiates too many tackles deep in our backfield rather than at the LOS. The facts are what the facts are and we did not stop the run last year and this was one of the expectations we have for an MLB. I think Fletcher might be more reasonably faulted for his play if he did not historically lead the Bills year in and year out in tackles to his credit. I think he could be be reasonably faulted if thos tackle numbers actually showed a lot of assisted tackles (as this would be a good indicator of the complaints of him being light in the pants being true as indication would be he could not tackle by himself). However, by a bout a 2:1 margin the credits he gets are for solo tackles so he brings folks down on his own, The stats do not even seem to support the idea that he he is a non-attacking shrinking violet as he has shown indications of being a ballhawk with 2 TDs to his credit last year, and a number of sacks to his credit as well as leading all NFL LBs in INTs. Fletch has been team captain for too long on a team which just has not gotten the job done, so moving on to something else makes sense if one's goal is to win. However, the stats seem to indicate pretty clearly that if one is saying that merely by getting rid of him we improve, maybe but probably not as there is an awful lot of performance here that will have to be replaced if we truly are to be improved. For example, those who seem to feel that we are upgrading merely by drafting Willis are they really saying that they expect this rookie to lead all NFL LBs in INTs, they expect him to lead the team comfortably in tackles, and they expect him to both tackle with the effectiveness of a DT while covering passes with the effectiveness of a safety? I hope he does, but I do not think anyone sees him as being even a top 10 player in the draft (and some folks have even offered credible opinions that we may even be able to trade down ad still get him). I'm not sure what plan folks have who badmouth Crowell as being just another F-B (my sense if he leads the Bills in tackles to credit in 07 and leads LBs in INTs in 07 and scores a couple of TDs for the team he likely will call 07 a pretty good year. Their plan seems to be some certainty that a rookie Willis is going to have real world production which is better than this. The experience for draft watchers who lived through the Mike Williams and Joey Harrington debates is simply that Willis will not turn out to be a bust. The good news for Bills fans is that Crowell has shown an ability to play call at MLB for the Bills as 2nd on the depth chart behind F-B and as long as he recovers from the injury which landed him on IR, the well over 100 tackles he was credited with when he filled in for TKO and the 90+ tackles he got last year before injury ended his season, the couple of nice pics he had last year and the couple of sacks he had are all indicators that he has the ball sense and the diverse skills needed for immediate production at MLB but he needs to step up. 2. Our DT was inadequate last year, but not only are we gonna see second Bill seasons from Triplett and Williams where we reasonably demand and expect improvement, but McCargo MAY have been just turning around his play when injury struck him down. It is possible that even from the current roster along we should see some DL improvement which may do a lot to answer the concern (which gets reduced to a mere whine if all one does is blame LB play for this problem) the complaint that F-B initiated hits to deep in our backfield. 3.There is clearly analysis of the run stopping problems here, as this factor was sited by Marv in his summary press event. I do not think we should fall though for this analysis simply getting folks to blame the LB play as sure they were not the reincarnation of Butkus or Taylor, but if they is what is required to make the Jauron/Fewell Cover 2 work, we are going to be waiting a long time for this to happen. Fewell is simply going to have to make things work well with what he got if this is simply Crowell at MLB. If he cannot do it, the GM has the responsibility to get someone who can or if no MLB is available then the HC and DC net to implement the best scheme they can for the players we have. If they choose to depend upon the rookie Willis to either produce results such that he leads the Bills in tackles AND leads all NFL LBs in INTS AND chips in with some sacks to his credit and a couple of TDS thats great. However, if all this draft pick means is a painful 07 in preparation for glory later on them one of Marv's dictums may be right, the HC who prepares for the future is likely not to be the HC in the future.

My sense of where the LBs would likely rank in effectiveness in 07 taking into account, their athletic talent, their assignments in the Cover 2, and their experience are: 1?: TKO- The big question mark. Obviously the best producer historically among all the LBs by far, but whether he is the same player anymore post-injury is known only to some supreme being, TKO, the coaches and what happens. If all he has left on the wrong side of 30 he what he showed last year when IMHO he worked too hard and beyond his body's ability to stay healthy he is done, but if he was more judicious this off-season and comes back at 90% of his past Pro Bowl level he is the best we got. 1b: Crowell- Also a recovery question but being on the positive side of 39 and reportedly already at 100% even as last season ended he would almost certainly be the most productive Bill at the MLB spot which requires the ability to make NFL level reads and greatly benefits the ability to call signals which it is quite doubtful a rookie can do. 2a,b, and c: A draftee (Willis, Poluszny or Timmons):- This is probably more of an expression of doubts about Ellison than the positives of these players. In terms of quality of performance, these three seem to fall out in this order. It was good news dfrom the pundits to hear that Willis should be able to translate his award winning performance at MLB in college to the SLB position because if we break him in at OLB he can pretty quickly become the second best (or third if TKO recovers) on this team, but if we throw him to the wolves by asking him to master the tackling machine needs of MLB (he can do this, but then so could F-B and folks found his performance substandard behind substandard DT play in terms of where he made initial hits) as well as the safety like pass coverage responsibilities our our MLB (it is both the case that Willis was a workout warrior at the Combine with great numbers, but he struggled in pass protection at the Senior Bowl and F-B got more INTs than any other LB in the NFL and produced 2 TDs because he is very good and very smart abut making the NFL vet reads very useful in pass protection, Willis looks to be and has been judged to be a better player than either Poluszny or Timmons, but he will be playing a new position that lessens the production gap between these players and how the coaches feel upon meeting them and their judgment which none of us has (unless we have met them) of how they would fit into this team is the prime determinant IMHO of which is the better choice for us. It likely is Willis since in addition to good workout numbers all reports are of him being a very special person who has made it through some very rough times in part due to his personal qualities, but how he would do with his "marriage" to his 10 colleagues on D is more than a measure of his raw qualities but how these qualities would mesh with the other starters is going to be key. If Willis were chosen and actually is asked to start at MLB then he easily drops IMHO behind Ellison in terms of productivity as he would likely spend a lot of energy his freshman year learning (and often by being fooled by NFL vets and OCs) to make vet reads. The Bills would also likely need to find some manner for having play signals called by second year players like Whitner or Simpson or an OLB out of position to see the entire field like Crowell or maybe TKO unless we are also willing to subject this team to Willis learning the D and making substandard adjustments as a rookie at MLB. I think he easily drops behind Ellison is he is asked to be MLB and their remains the potential that Poluszny or Timmons may be better performers at their natural OLB positions that Willis would initially at SLB. 3. Ellison: A very good surprise for us last year as he stepped up to play adequately after the IR injury to Crowell and the struggles of TKO. I assume he will add a few more pounds this off-season and if he can do this without losing any speed or athleticism he can be very good though at last year's performance level he is a valuable good back-up but clearly a back-up. 4?- Wire- A longtime -vet now who is far better cast as an LB rather than a SS. It will be very interesting to see how he responds to putting on a bit more weight as he kept it low to give himself more speed in order to not be a very good safety. He does have the potential to surprise us all by actually being a very good LB (I will really be pissed at GW and Gray if this turns out to be the case that we wasted getting production from Wire for years because he simply was miscast) but it remains to be seem whether he is more than simply a good ST guy who is better to have as a reserve LB than as a reserve SS. 5. Haggan- An ST phenom who if we rely on him as a position player it means we have hit a bad injury spate 6?. Stamer- He still is on the roster though oddly is not on the depth chart. he showed some athleticism as a back-up position player in his time but recovery from his injury will tell the tale. 7?- DiGrigorio- One assumes that the Bills plan if F-B had gone down was to slide Crowell over to MLB and look to Ellison or Wire, but DiGregorio remained #2 on the depth chart as fortunately F-B never missed a game or a substantial part of one. However, it simply remains a ? whether he remained a Bill because the coaches see something in practice we cannot see or maybe his Dad has pictures of Marv or Ralph in Vegas. 8?.- Manning- This former starter at GB also was acquired for some reason. if it was because of all the question marks above then he is simply camp fodder. if it was because the coaches see something then we will see. ? is the reigning LB story for the Bills

On the contrary, I think that Crowell has shown field instincts which have been honed with him being originally trained as the back-up signal caller for F-B which not only will facilitate him returning to this position but also gave him the ability to move to back the fallen TKO at Will last year. While some folks seem to never be satisfied by any Bills performance short of an SB appearance (not a bad thing actually in terms of demanding the best) many were impressed with how he filled in for TKO last year. Folks can badmouth stats if they wish but if they are gonna trot out commentary about his failings with nothing to back it up but their fact-free opinions then they shouldn't be surprised if their comments are merely taken as whines. At a playing weight of 235 while this is well below the 268 of Willie McGinest it is also clearly above the weight cited for folks like Cato June and Zack Thomas and is exactly the same as Peterson's. He was credited with well over 100 tackles filling in for TKO and ended up high on the Bills list in a truncated season last year. One of his INTs last year played a pivotal role in winning the game for us, and the fact that he not only pulled down 2 INTs in his short season and also garnered 2 sacks indicates that he was making plays both downfield and behind the line of scrimmage. Crowell is actually heavier than most of LBs on the Bills roster and while nothing is guaranteed in the NFL he certainly has better prospects for success at the diverse MLB slot of the cover 2 than any of the rookies in the draft. Between taking the stats as something to be hopeful about or being doubtful based on some fact-free opinions I think the choice is relatively clear.

As long as we move Crowell to MLB and play Willis at an OLB position which some folks feel he can play this looks like a goo move for the Bills, If we however use him at his natural MLB position, then I fear it is a sign that the Bills are playing to go for the playoffs in 08 as it likely will be a sometimes painful learning experience for any rookie learning to read plays like a vet in a Cover 2 which demands that you not only are a tackling machine on runs but that you cover passes like a safety. Between the struggles he had covering passes in the Senior Bowl and the likelihood that every OC he faces will be salivating at the chance to try to fool a rookie who has not seen a lot of NFL plays take a step back on running plays and take a step up on passing plays, his first year will almost certainly have some very painful moments if he starts at MLB even though he sounds good enough to solidify the position for the forseeable future for us.

I think McGee got burned playing man to man in the first half of the season when he would incorrectly chop off playing man when he would reach whereever Fewell had set the point 10-15 yards down the field when he was to turn a WR going further over to the safety playing deep routes in the Cover 2. McGee's mistakes were it seemed to me that he would cut off his coverage when it should have been clear to this vet that the rookie safety was not going to be there in time to make the cover and even worse when it should have been obvious to McGee that there was really no receiver who was likely to come into the short zone. In the second half, Mcgee made better reads not of only where the opposing receiver was going but how his DB colleagues were doing and where he needed to be to make the pass coverage most effective. I think it is a mistake (and it was a mistake McGee was making) to get too caught up in whether this was a zone coverage or a man-to-man coverage because the Cover 2 when run correctly is both for the CB. The CB is expected to launch tight press coverage on the WR which can be mistaken for man-to-man, but he is also supposed to turn this WR over to the safeties and MLB who are doing the deep coverage in our cover 2. One can call this a zone if you want as the deep 3 really are covering the deep zone and the CBs are covering the short zone. However, as this coverage is supposed to be a pretty tight coverage (particularly in the press coverage called for of the CBs it can be considered a man-to-man coverage as well as it does not involve the sitting back and picking your spots the way the Bills traditionally ran their pass coverage and that actually is the type of coverage where Nate plays his best and the CBs tend to have more shots at INTs (hence the public complaints by Dre Bly of Detroit that he wanted out of there because he hated being a CB in their Cover 2 scheme which Jauron designed. The change which the Bills made did not involve a switch where McGee played zone in the first half of the season and then switched to man-to-man for the second half (IMHO opinion and please correct me as specifically as you can if I am wrong), its that the Bills D switched from NC always lining up on one side of the field and McGee lining up on the other without regard to how the offense lined up, but instead, NC lined up on the side of the field generally where the opposing team's most talented WR lined up so he and McGee flip-flopped sides also. However, both players were doing generally the same type of coverage in both the first and second half of the season which was press coverage in the short zone. These harsh distinctions are somewhat illusory however since a defense needs to change of its coverage scheme a bit from time to time within a game and clearly will change it up from game to game depending upon the qualities and skills of their opponents other wise they will simply get burned as soon as the opposing OCs figures out their patterns and calls plays to exploit it.

I think that folks can easily accept the scouting reports of what Crowell could offer and what he needed to work on when he was drafted back in 2003 and then use these as only mere indicators which have little value compared to what they actually have seen in his performance as an NFL player. The simple facts remain that his college scouting is a mere faint indicator compared to the facts that: 1. He began his career as a Bills on the depth charts as an MLB learning the position and the signal calling behind London Fletcher. 2. He did see some substantial time in pre-season for the Bills at the MLB position. 3. When TKO went down, the Bills went off the depth chart and moved Crowell into his slot to start because the coaches viewed him as our best LB. He did not disappoint Bills fans who generally felt though he was no TKO he filled in admirably. 4. This was demonstrated last season as when TKO came back, Crowell kept the WLB position. 5. His stats and accomplishments the last two season as a starter have demonstrated that he can be one the leading tacklers on the Bills, but also one of the team leaders in getting INTs and also he has recorded a significant number of sacks from the LB position. His 3 sacks as a fill-in starter in 05 and 2 sacks before he was IR'ed last year compare favorably with what Fletcher produced for the whole season at MLB and provide some indication that he may have the attacking style the Bills want. His 2 INTs in last year's truncated season show he may well have the pass coverage skills we need from our MLB as well. If this was easy and obvious then it would not be worth talking about. However, there are far more indications that Marv was correct to talk about Crowell being able to occupy the MLB spot than the hope and dream that rookie Wills can do it.

My sense of the big problem McGee had last year was not one of his physical ability to cover, but his mental ability to adjust to the requirements of the Cover 2. I think we saw this with a significant improvement in the pass coverage and McGee's play in the second half of the season compared to a first half implosion which led to his benching. This improvement also coincided with the Bills shifting from their traditional scheme which saw the CB always cover a particular side of the field regardless of which receiver lined up there to one where NC covered the other team's strongest receiver where ever he lined up. However, my sense is that the primary benefit this provided to McGee was not that he was overmatched less often, but that he simply had one less thing to worry about in each game and he finally got his head around what he was supposed to do in the Cover 2. Thus, I think the primary thing which will improve McGee's actions this season is likely to be Whitner and Simpson needing a bit less help as McGee's greatest failings in the first half of last season IMHO was that it was clear on several plays that our safety's were not lined up properly to provide the deep zone coverage that the Hybrid Cover 2 we ran called for, and even worse, one should have been able to see that it was doubtful that any receiver was going to come into the short zone which McGee was assigned to cover. Rather than shifting his coverage on a fly pattern being run by the WR and covering this player deep, he instead set up for press coverage or cut off his coverage after 10-15 yards and as in play like the fly pattern where MN's Johnson fortunately over-threw the streaking WR (I think it was Robinson) but on a couple of other plays it led to TDs by the opponent as McGee was not able to make even the most fundamental mental adjustment early in the season. Credit should go where credit is due and NC was clearly the best CB last year after he had a pretty horrible 2005 season where McGee actually even presented more of a threat than Clements did (McGee tied for the team lead in INTs in 2005 and it was Clements who in fact was picked on). However, lest anyone hyperventilate about how good NC was, please remember that no CB is perfect and a top notch WR like Detroit's Williams not only embarrassed McGee last year, but when the Bills shifted NC to cover him he tore NC a new one as well. I think the Bills improvement with the D in the second half of last season was in strong part because this rookie laden unit finally got the hang of how to run the Cover 2. Unless folks want to explain the second half improvement in McGee's production as being because he suddenly got faster or more physically adept, the answer IMHO was that sitting down was good for him because it gave him a chance to sit back and understand what was going on. The is no guarantee that he can in fact step up or continue his development so that he is certain to be an adequate #1 CB in 07, but the thing to remember is that the Bills do not need to find a CB as good as NC to have a productive D this year, Instead, they need to find 3 CBs adequate to the limited and specific tasks generally called upon from CBs in the Cover 2 and this can work, The Bills have a need for 2 starting CBs who specialize in press coverage and only occaisionally van run deep with the WR because the down and distance and the way opposing patterns are run calls for it. I think that devoting the resources which would have been necessary to sign NC (or would have been required to franchise him) was simply too much of our cap resources to be assigned to a position which has an important, but not generally a playmaking role in our D. I still think we could use a second tier CB to strengthen the competition for the 4-5 CB slots on this team. However, we would likely be looking for a CB of Nick Harper quality at the most (a starter at CB in the Cover 2 run by last season's SB champ the Colts) and no where near the quality and likely cost of a CB of NC skills (or the better CB skills of a Champ Bailey or Assante Samuel type). As it stands right now, McGee, Youbouty, and Kiwaukee Thomas will compete for the two starting slots, with the lose of this fight competing with Jabari Greer for the 3rd CB slot of a nickel back. The 4th best of these 4 will be our backup and our dime guy. Kiwaukee envisions himself as a starter and will get a shot at that role though I have my doubts he is even a second tier CB in this league. I am comfortable with him playing nickel but doubt he is good enough to start. Greer is a player who I have found to be impressive in pre-season but he never has extended this performance into the regular season and seeing him as a viable nickel is about all I think we should reasonably expect. McGee strikes me as a player we can expect to be a reasonable starter. I think he showed signs of being a better player than NC back in '05 as he seemed to have greater confidence after making the Pro Bowl due to his kick return ability and his sheer athleticism and open field ability which makes him a good return guy. Unfortunately, he had real trouble mastering a different D system as we went away from the soft coverage model used in the LeBeau/Gray zone-blitz t really having different CB requirements in the Cover 2. To a great extent it is simpler as the CB only has responsibility for the WR 10-15 yards downfield and then he turns him over to the safeties and MLB for deep coverage. The problem I felt with McGee was that he seemed to take on the new scheme without adjusting well to how he needed to alter his coverage based on what plays the other team seemed to be running and what his fellow DBs were doing. He simply failed to make relatively simple reads that the opponent was going to send the WR deep on a fly pattern and since it seemed unlikely that a receiver was even going to come underneath (or if they did the OLB would need to come with them if they were not blitzing on a pass play). McGee got caught several time either cutting off his coverage when he should have gone deeper because our safety was going to be late and there was no one coming underneath anyway or he was looking into the backfield to provide run support on what turned out to be a pass play. However, he seemed to get the hang of the running the Cover 2 and learned enough to not be so doctrinaire in its application and I am comfortable with him being one of our two starting CBs and there is a slight (and far from guaranteed) chance his play will resume the position player trajectory he was showing at the end of the 05 season so he can be a real #1 CB (not as good as NC but that is not required to be an adequate #1CB in a Cover 2). Youbouty is clearly the interesting wildcard. It amuses me that many seem so hot-to-trot for us to get a CB in the 1st round. It would seem quite likely that if we do, then this 1st round choice is going to sit on the bench at least initially for the Bills behind McGee and Youbouty or Thomas. Youbouty was seen by many pundits as a possible (if not probable) based on his rankings by scouts of CB talent as a 1st round quality choice last year. I would guess teams seemed to pass on picking him for two reasons: 1. Pundits agreed he needed another year of experience before he would definitely be a #1 talent 2. The surprising number of safeties picked among the top 15 players (3 in Huff, Whitner. Allen) meant teams had already devoted significant resources to DBs. This pushed Youbouty down until someone labeled him the best player available and this was the Bills. Anyone who advocates that we need to devote a 1st rounder to CB simply needs to note that we already have done that in acquiring Youbouty. Almost all draft choices (and all of them if one looks at top 10 picks like Harrington, Mike Williams or Ryan Leaf) are simply a crapshoot. Youbouty could easily fail (though the coaches had enough confidence in him to give him a start against NYJ last year and the D with him starting was good enough to beat the tar out of this Pennington led team on the road. While no one can guarantee Youbouty will start his chances of being good enough to do this are clearly hire than those of Hall or Revis or any of the CBs deemed 1st round worthy this year. It would be nice IMHO if we picked up another CB to compete with McGee, Youbouty and Thomas for the 2 CBs spots, but FA would seem a more likely option for doing this than spending draft resources.

Way back when the Bills received compensation for FA losses the year we lost Friggin Lonnie Johnson and in the black box world of compensation this pick was depicted as compensation for 'ol LJ. Given that almost all TSW denizens felt the team was improved simply because he left, we atill remain ahead of the curve as far as compensation goes.

Jeepers, one goes offline for a day or so and stuff happens. I'm glad this distraction was quickly resolved.

The pool each club has dedicated to sign its draft picks is an amount of the total salary cap which the teams cannot exceed. This amount is set jointly by and NFL/NFLPA committee just prior to the actual draft (and I believe adjusted for any last second trades so that teams either have more or fewer draftees to sign), The the NFL is striking a balance between wanting to minimize the money set aside for draftees so that it can go to its current members. However, it is also in the interest of the current members to have significant salary allocations to rookies as this also raises the amount of value needed to sign current NFL vets and also lays in a growing base salary which means it will take enormous expenditures of salary in the future to give these players a raise. There is no limit by rule of the number of draft choices a team may have.

Thanks for the info re Wilkerson. Jauron/Fewell definitely like swing guys who can play both DE and DT such as Hargrove.

MLB and calling signals is not a new position for Crowell at all since he was trained in college as am MLB and in his first two years as a Bills was second on the depth chart at MLB. Playing MLB as a rookie would be a new experience for Davis as it is a very different thing being a college player and being an NFL vet and all the players say this. In addition, the Cover 2 offers particular challenges for any player because it demands you both tackle like a demon on the LOS on run plays and also that you cover fleet receivers running post patterns. Its good to hear that Davis has played well at other LB positions (as it was very good to hear that Willis has played a lot of SLB) as it strikes me as far more disruptive to require a rookie to start as the MLB in our Cover 2 than to have Crowell return to his natural position and call signals for us,

Nope the approach of never drafting an LB is stupid and I would never advocate it. However, not recognizing that the MLB role in the Tampa 2 is something that any rookie would likely struggle with and is very different than expecting someone to step right in at OLB would be somewhat less stupid but almost certainly would be a bad football move.

I say again that folks are really underestimating what our MLB is required to do in the Hybrid Cover 2 we run to really expect a rookie (any rookie including Willis) to take over the starting job at MLB right out of the draft. On paper, the MLB is required to both tackle like a DT on running plays and cover like a safety on passing plays as the MLB has deep middle coverage responsibility in our Cover 2. Opposing OCs will simply be salivating at the chance to face a rookie MLB in our Cover 2 since all they need to do is show pass and then run to get the player to hold in place or even better take a step backwards and the running play has a shot at getting first down yardage up the middle or even worse, if they show run by sending the blocking up the middle or running play action, all the rookie needs to do is get fooled into stepping in and a fleet-footed WR get to run free on a post pattern with our MLB struggling to catch up. Did the Cover 2 the way we ran it tend toward MLB pass coverage? You bet as F-B not only led all LBs in the NFL in INTs but his four outpaced CBs Clements who had three and McGee who had none. If we go to the draft for LB help (a likelihood now that most FAs are gone) then it seems far more likely and far more intelligent football for us to pick an OLB and sh-- Crowell over to MLB. In addition to getting better production out of LB than F-B produced we also will have t replace his playcalling and I do not see a rookie doing that unless we do a crash course with a very bright MLB and still this rookie will simply not be a vet able to shift his team around to meet whatever the O is trying to do. Crowell has called signals before and knows this D so drafting an OLB makes far more football sense to me,