Pyrite Gal

The two choices are insufficient for a number of reasons some of which are already stated: 1. There are other RBs besides these two who one can make as good a case a you can for these two in terms of filling our overall team needs (ex. use the #12 to buttress the OL/DL and draft someone like a Hunt lower down). 2. The Bills likely have to make the fatal choice of giving up resources to move up to get Peterson and when they do A-Train wants to start so he goes (unless he estimates he can beat out a rookie since even great rookies are a bit of a crapshoot) elsewhere and we spend a lot of time not only rooting for Peterson but praying for his health otherwise Shaud is our RB. 3, The Bills can possibly trade down a number of slots (maybe even 5+ according to some mocks) and still get Lynch. This formulation bodes well for us in that we have more resources but underscores the point that despite some on TSW frothing at the mouth for Lynch he is by the pundit consensus not an elite player who would get a top 10 pick in most drafts and this one is not overwhelming strong in terms of talent, I think NEITHER is a pretty clear good choice in this case.

A good article is a fair and balanced (to borrow Fox's phrase so clearly take this article for what it is worth) of the situation. In general, the thinking not only is a good estimation of the pluses and minuses of this deal from the Ravens standpoint but also from the Bills standpoint. We will know whether this was a good deal for the Ravens by the end of next season as they are a game away from the SB and if folks give McNair s bit more passing room to work with because opponents are more afraid of WM than Lewis (they really should have let WM play out his contract and franchised him if necessary in order to give him more financial motivation in 07 IMHO) then this is a good deal for them. We likely will be missing substantial information to assess the realities of this deal from the Bills perspective until at least the end of the 2008 season and maybe not until the end of the 2010 season. Most seem to agree that you need to give a draftee at least three years before one can make a reasonable assessment of his play for a team. The additional third round choice picked up by the Bills for WM next season is a first day pick who should contribute something significant to the team (should is the key word here). Three seasons for this player will be the end of the 2010 season. A lot in making a rational assessment of this deal depends upon how good of a job Marv and the gang do of team building using the resources acquired. Think of it for hypothetical purposes as the equivalent of whether 1 2006 McGahee is worth 1 2006 Youbouty (the 2007 third rounder acquired) + 1 2006 Kyle Williams (the 2008 third rounder but discounted because it is a future pick so it may have some value next year for trading and planning purposes) + 1 2006 Aaron Merz (the 2007 7th rounder). I think this thought experiment is a good indicator in that this case would show the Bills getting some value from this trade for the 2007 team, but a fairly inadequate value in terms of filling our needs, but it will provide some hope for the future teams in 2008 and beyond. If you are as future is now as I am then for the most part all you can do is hope for the best with this one, but the 2007 season is not looking pretty right now.

Hey, its the internet, few things are as one assumes. Most with a long TSW history remember the long sad and odd tale of Yvel Smub Barry Gal.

I think you are right that this is the fundamental question. Unfortunately for my views, though I think the Bills are handling things in an intelligent way it is because based on what I think will the likely effects of our most recent moves is that they are intelligent if one does not look to win next year (make the playoffs) and in fact they are on a 3 year plan for rebuilding. I think this is unfortunate because I am a "future is now" kind of guy and I think that there are some patches we might have pursued at dealing with certain holes and devoted the resources saved by investing in patches rather than long term fixes at these positions into really improving immediately in some key positions, I think that Poetclaw may be right that we see the Bills look to draft Willis and a CB with our first picks. However, if we take this route I think the payoff in more Ws is going to come in 2008 most likely as next year is going to be quite painful to watch. Willis is a good investment for the future and if he plays as well as he can and learns as well as he seems to show the potential for our MLB slot will be solid for 2008 (or 9 at the latest) and beyond. However, the way we implement our hybrid version of the Cover 2 which essentially is like the Tampa 2 D where the MLB plays deep zone over the middle with the safeties playing outside deep zone simply requires that our MLB read plays like an NFL vet as he is required to both tackle like a DT on run plays and cover like a safety on pass plays. Opposing OCs will simply be salivating at the chance to go up against a rookie MLB knowing that if they can fool him so he takes a step backward on run plays thinking we are passing or merely takes a step forward on pass plays reading they are runs, the results for us will be a bunch of shrill voices on TSW saying he is just as bad as Fletcher initiating hits in our backfield and that he is worse than Fletch as speedy wide receivers catch passes over the middle for big gains or TDs. Folks confuse the thought that I must be saying no rookie can start (which is obviously false) with all I am really saying is that in our version of the Cover 2, the MLB is really called upon to play a diverse role which a good smart athlete (which I think Willis is) can master, but he will learn these lessons by making some big mistakes. All I am really arguing is that rookies are not NFL vets. The MLB role in our D calls for a lot of good vet reads. Fletcher pulled this off well to the tune of him leading all NFL LBs in INTs and the Bills in tackles (which were by a 2:1 margin solo tackles). Even with these results which were simply just the facts of what happened, he was not good enough for us as Marv said we want a more attacking LB play. What makes more sense to me is to switch Crowell to MLB which is the position he occupied as a back-up for two years, was shifted to SLB when it became clear Posey was not the answer and was a good enough player that it made more sense to have shift positions than to play Haggan, Stamer or some other reserve backer. When TKO went down, again it made the most sense to put our best LB over there and he filled in admirably. In fact he did so well that when TKO came back it made more sense to keep Crowell in the spot and shift TKO to the SLB looking for less running for him. Last year before he was injured Crowell was putting up some nice stats taking down 2 INTs and showing some diversity in his play with a good number of tackles and a couple of sacks as well. With the reports being he is already at 100% after his injury, shifting him to MLB and having him call signals as he originally did makes a lot more sense to me than drafting a rookie who will simply get burned as he learns. Using the draft to take an OLB like Timmons who is more highly rated by most observers than Willis even after Willis had a good combine makes far more sense to me for a Bills team that is playing to win next year. If we do draft Willis I will root and hope for the best. However, football logic tells me that such a pick will confirm for me that Marv finds it acceptable to write off next season in hopes of winning in 2008.

This why even if you got a first the Bills cannot and should not depend upon the draft for getting their starting RB. Good players tend to get drafted definitely but the key is every draftee is not gonna be a good player. The Bills are far more likely to get a good player if the acquire a proven NFL vet to start at RB than if they roll the dice and were to acquire a player in the first round at even the lofty draft levels used to acquire can't miss prospects like Ryan Leaf and Mike Williams. Folks continually confuse the point I agree with that its easier to find a good RB late in the draft with the idea that even early draft selections have a significant and huge uncertainty that comes with them. Given that Shaud Williams is the best RB under contract right now, even if one were to somehow acquire Adrian Peterson, there is still a strong possibility that Shaud Williams will be the best RB on the roster come opening day (though the Bills if they did this would still throw Peterson to the wolves and start him unless he was goshawful or there would be a lynching party fpr Marv). Even if you draft a proven stud in the first round who is equivalent in talent to a Larry Johnson, Johnson gained all of 150 yards as a rookie and a bit over 500 his second year. Imagine if Marv made a great pick with the #12 and picked the equivalent of Larry Johnson but that we are screwed for at least a year because Shaud Williams is the best RB on the roster. Folks throw around the concept that a mere draft choice (even the drafting of a great player) is equivalent to the hated Willis McGahee. Right now our roster simply sucks at RB when two days ago it was troubled but had possibilities. Today we still have possibilities (perhaps with even more possibilities as we now have a third and seventh rounder to work but the situation is even more troubled. Marv was right to end his interview by saying we are not panicking. No one can reasonably celebrate if playing good football is your goal because we just created a huge need for ourselves at RB.

This is the basic question for those interested in assessing the trade of WM for 3 draft choices. The key question for the Bills is going to be what quality of players did we get from the draft and that question will remain substantially unanswered for well over year as the third of those picks will not even be acquired until 2008. However, the Baltimore side of the equation will be substantially known by the end of this season, First off one can pretty much ignore the hype being spewed by Ravens GM Ozzie Newsome. His purpose in saying this was merely to sell tickets and raise excitement. If the weird analysis had any football effect it was merely to set a high standard for McGahee to reach which is probably not a bad idea to do. However, in terms of a football assessment, i think this likely will be a good move by Baltimore as WM brings several things to the table Lewis does not. 1. Where they are in their careers. Clearly Lewis as an older player who once suffered a substantial injury as a pro is on the downhill side of his career while McGahee has disappointed the last season and a half after suffering a substantial injury in college is still a relatively young player. One can disagree about their performance but the Ravens have gotten younger as WM MIGHT perform alot better than he has but it is doubtful Lewis will improve on where he is right now. 2. Despite all the complaints from many Bills partisans of WM's YPC being too low at 3.8, Lewis comes off and even less impressive two seasons where he registered 3.6 abd even 3.4 the year before that. 3. Lewis did amass more total yards than WM last year but did this in two more starts. This stat is probably better used as some indicator of impact of their injuries, but given that WM actually had his usual productive game against the Jets after his injury, he seems to be recovered and still capable of at least good episodes. 4. Few teams know these two players better. Clearly the Ravens have decided to go in another direction at RB than Lewis and its hard to argue with this as no one knows him better than the Ravens and how much he likely has in the tank. Interestingly, despite the many complaints of Bills fans who have watched WM all season, the Ravens actually had a good look at him and all the tape on him as we faced them in the final game of the season. They saw Willis at his worse but still were willing to give up far more value than most folks thought we would get for WM to acquire him. Obviously they saw something they liked in a very unproductive game for him. My guess is that they were quite impressed as WMs reception to open the game and a nice RAC job he did with the rock which was called back on a seemingly unrelated to the play Bills penalty. Its not like Lewis was used a great deal as a receiver by Balt, nor did Fairchild ever really try to use WM much as a receiver so they may see now downgrade hear at least. Overall, I think that the Ravens correctly view themselves as being close to making the SB, and I think merely based on rep as Ds saw they had little to fear from the Bills allowing JP to throw alot they lined up a lot of guys in the box to concentrate on stopping the run and WM. Further, the massive moves by the Bills to acquire three OL players this off-season is a pretty clear admission that the OL simply did not produce last year and the thought that part of the WM problems were rooted in poor OL performance are likely more than a convenient excuse for him. On rep alone and fear that he produce another performance like he did for us against the MYJ, WM likely improves their O. We will have a hint to answer this question once the 07 draft occurs and we also see how we do in FA finding a vet or two as we look to upgrade over Shaud Williams, However, despite the folks who hate WM's dumb attitude toward woman and parenting, this looks like a good move for the Ravens.

First things first. The best RB we have under contract is Shaud Williams. We are in no position to box up the extra draft picks we have to trade up into the top 10 where a more likely RB to start and star immediately is likely to be found (if you judge Lynch to be so good what is it that you know that none of the other pundits do not that has them ranking other RBs higher). In addition too having too many needs to trade away draft picks to move up we are also in no position to count on a rookie outside of the top 10 players immediately starting for us. This can certainly happen and a player drafted at #18 where Lynch is slotted to go should become a reliable starter at some point in his first year, but counting on him starting immediately as there will be items like picking up NFL blitzes that no rookie does well his first time out will likely be the case. The first thing for the Bills to do is to sign one and more likely two NFL vets who we hope will be good enough to start or at least give us part of the one/two NFL RB duo which is all the rage right now. Lets see what happens with signing vets and then how the draft boards look to be working out before we target a particular rookie.

Nope. A rookie at RB is fine, as folks are correct that one can find credible starting RBs late in the draft (unlike MLB in our Cover 2 where even the best rookie MLB cannot be reasonably expected to start for us in a position which will require him to make reads like a vet or get burned a lot while he learns). However, most fans buoyed by the tremendous sales job ESPN has done with draft coverage and the popularity of fantasy leagues and Madden football simply overvalue the draft. Yes, the great finds get and deserve a lot of attention, but folks seem to forget the draft is really a crapshoot and for a team to bank on a rookie to be a definite NFL starter is too risky for most GMs that it won't happen and even if it did it is a bad football move. I m not arguing that it will not work as it often does if you are talking about a top 10 choice, but is this something one wants to count on it working and as Shaud Williams is our best RB under contract right now, you would be counting upon things with Peterson to work perfectly, if you are willing to give up other players (even the lesser ones which are 4 choices in the top 100 are) for this one stud. Its risky based on the injury factor alone. Add to this even if you make a very good pick and get a player at lets say Larry Johnson level, this stud whom we would be proud to have gained about 150 yards his rookie year and 500 as a sophomore. If we trade a way a ton of resources for Peterson we are counting on not only Peterson being extraordinary but extraordinary right away, We will have to see how this plays out but the Bills need to get one and probably two potential RB starters or platoon types in FA (Rhodes, Dillon and Brown all fit this description) then once we have them in we still likely need to get a consistent starting prospect for the future. Given that we also have huge needs elsewhere on this team (a run stuffing DT, a MLB, a CB) we have needs which we will need to fill though FA, trades which generate additional competition or solid starters and the draft. If I am going to package a few draft choices to enhance a deal I more likely give them to CHI to get them to take the tag off of Briggs to free me up to move Crowell over than invest in speculation to go after Peterson.

I disagree. First off, I think that to make this assessment it is useful for the person to define what they mean by a "bust". To me it is a question of whether a player produced at a level equivalent to where he was drafted. Since I think that the general expectation is that a player drafted in the 1st round is going to be a first year starter (with the strong hopes he will be an immediate starter) and this is a reasonable expectation, then WM was drafted with the knowledge he would be a bust his first year but with the hopes his upside was so high that he would recover to not only be a starting NFL RB but actually become the elite RB he was slated to become before his injury. He did not achieve this elite status, but it strikes me as hyperventilating to call him a bust. In fact, since a bust means that a player did not meet expectations the failure can be either because the player did not achieve anything (Ryan Leaf for example) OR because the fan did not know football or they drank the Kool-aid of the team selling their product and their expectations were way too high. It would have been rediculous for any fan to expect him to start immediately after such a huge injury which made most people squeamish to watch. However, the Bills made a medical judgment that WM would recover from the traumatic injury to such a level he could certainly be at least a credible NFL starting RB and potentially realize the potential which made him a likely top 5 choice prior to the injury. Was he a bust? I would say no in that he did become a credible NFL starting RB. He was an average NFL starting producer but virtually all agree that at worst he was an average NFL RB, given that the conventional wisdom really was that his career as an NFL starter might well be over before it began I think it is hard to really call him a bust, If one's expectations were that he is a bust unless he became an NFL elite RB, then I tend more to question a person's football judgment that this was a likely outcome after the injury. Perhaps one might say that whether he was a bust depends more on what the Bills gave up by picking him instead of someone else at #23. Even with this equation, I do not think you can call him a bust like one would call Mike Williams a bust. The Bills had to cut Mike Williams and get zero compensation for him. The Bills ate multiple years of millions of dollars in bonus money when they cut him. This made MW a bust. On the other hand, WM returned the Bills 3 draft picks including 2 first day choice for him when he stopped being a Bill. This is a long way from being a bust in my book. If one wants to rail at this choice because we already had Travis Henry on the roster, thats fine as this is another reality to contemplate However, if you want to add this factor into the mix then one should also add in that another first day draft choice that the Bills received as part of the WM situation. Even if one wants to say that this is part of giving up a 2003 1st draft choice to get Bledsoe this comes out in the wash at worse as TDs PP manueverings was part of getting the 1st for WM and in total the bottomline is that the draft choice trade not only got us a productive 2002 from out QB for one year for free but overall the choice has now morphed into 3 more picks. I think that if one draws a conclusion that this whole thing has been a bust for the Bills it says more about the person making that claim and their superficial evaluation of football than it says about the reality.

Who knows for sure and who will ever know actually. I doubt WM would have held out because it offered such greater financial benefit for him to play and his leverage was so poor coming off of an unproductive season that he likely would have damaged himself even further financially if he added the rep of a bad teammate and demonstrably poor employee to his resume. Rosenidiot is a loud mouth but he is no fool when it comes to contracts (as seen by him developing a rep for his his clients not holding out. I really doubt McGahee would have been foolish enough to cost himself a better shot at a big contract by being so stupid as to hold out. He is a nut about his relationships with women, fatherhood and team location, but he demonstrated with his recovery from injury he will do what Rosenfart tells him to do even if it involves a lot of hard work in order to make some bucks.

The summary above of his talk is a great one, but i think a key for Bills fans in reacting to this is where said something like we have a lot of work to do but we are not panicked. I think this is key because while some folks seem ecstatic about this because they wanted WM gone so badly (I guess they were tempted to sleep with him and now their fears of becoming Baby Mommas are relieved) they are singing today. However, the key here is that simply removing WM is not even addition by subtraction as there are not indications (yet possibly since perhaps people may speak more freely if team members were holding back while he was on the team. However, the key for the Bills is that right now the starting RB we have under contract is Shaud Williams and no matter how much you hate WM for his off-field comments, this is a diminishment for the Bills in terms of our current 1st string RB.

This sounds more like they were asleep at the switch or in the potty when the deal went down and they are now offering excuses and trying to do some reporting to pretend their word adds some value for their readers.

I can see why the are excited as they are looking at this in the same way many Bills fans are. its not necessarily that they are excited by what they got they are simply excited to get rid of Lewis. Their numbers last year are fairly comparable except that Lewis had two more games than WM to produce his totals and a D which gave them the ball such that the RB was set-up to get a bunch of TDs. While Newsome obviously is doing some hyperventilating making claims he hopes rather than are definitely true, they are not totally crazy as WM when motivated has proven to be quite the force. This extends to pass blocking where at best he has been inconsistent, but there have been plays like the one last year where he blocked two rushers effectively on the same play while doing blitz pick-up. Is he a very good blocker? I would say no. Can he be a very good blocker? I would say yes he has shown he can be in episodes. The same is true of his explosive ability. Does he show this ability consistently? No. Does he have this ability? Yes, he does and has demonstrated it episodically on the field. WM drove folks here nuts because of his inconsistency the last season and a half. Further, his off field activities which ranged from antics (his comments about Toronto) to pathetic (his attitudes toward women and his children) caused some Bills partisans to go off their football moorings and claim he can do nothing. I will miss the days of his first year and his fearsome stiff arm. If we play him I hope we break (figuratively) his arm but it is a reality. JL 2006 Baltimore Ravens 16 16 314 1132 3.6 52 9 WM 2006 Buffalo Bills 14 14 259 990 3.8 57 6

This looks like a good deal for the Ravens and potentially a good deal for the Bills. For the Ravens this is simple to figure as they needed a starting RB and they got one. WM has shown the ability to carry the rock as an NFL starter with average accomplishments for the season at worst and occaisionally burst forward to be outstanding games if he is playing the Jets and individual plays from time to time. In exchange for this, they merely gave up draft choices which can turn into real players but is a speculative piece that can be fixed if you need them. As they are close to playing for it all this year behind an outstanding D, they will make or break this deal with their negotiations on an extension and like the Bills they are in the drivers' seat with WM as they can franchise him next year if necessary and though it is preferable to make a long-term deal now, they need not be bulldozed into making a bad deal. More important for the Bills, this potentially a good deal with multiple opportunities to make this a good deal with three choices to find the franchise guy they took a flyer in getting with the PP deal returns of 2003. While it is unlikely the 7th rounder will yield more than a role player or good back-up, they do have 2 shots at starter quality players with the first day picks this year and next. The other key for them is to find at least 2 candidates to start at RB from FA and the draft. I do not view Anthony Thomas as more than a possible but very unlikely starter as he has never played 16 games in a season in his career and last broke 1000 yards in 2003. We have work to do as we left a big gap in our O (though some would argue we had a big gap with WM here).

Trading up seems to be not a good idea unless you are after a specific player to fill a particular need. I do not see any outstanding players in the draft that would justify weakening our selves to get that player.

I think the ones who are presuming a lot are those who assume that any draft choice will step right in and be even a credible starting RB when he might quite easily not even be as productive as the much maligned WM. I agree that RB is the easiest position to fill from the draft, but folks seem to make the jump that just because it is easiest relative to other positions that this will be easily done. These are two different things. These are the reasons for not to make the presumptions folks are making about a rookie pick starting. 1. Let's say that Lynch or whomever you pick actually turns out to be a player of the quality of a Larry Johnson from KC. Picking someone as good as this stud would be a great choice by the Bills in the big picture, but even a player of Johnson's quality ran for about a buck-fifty in first year yardage and magnified that to 500 yards his second year. Even worse, this even assumes that the player we choose is not a bust (it happens) not to mention all rookies are boldly going where they have never been before after they play about 12 games. It simply is a huge risk to count on a rookie being your #1 RB. 2. OK let's assume that this runner is the new Thurman or OJ (or actually the next Willis McGahee since he got to 2,000 yards rushing faster than either of these two). Still the issue of blitz pickup is simply huge when we have invested so much of our hopes and dreams in JP Losman, If I am him I am really pissed if the Bills draft a rookie as our starting RB because even if he is a great runner I know I am going to have to run for my life on 3rd down a few times this season. 3. McGahee may have to go because head fan Ralph is pissed at him for his stupid attitude toward women and his kids and his dumb speeched on franchise location, but Ralph would be a fool to ignore the other factors which were a part of our lousy running attack. Fortunately, Marv realizes that merely replacing Willis does not make this a good running team. He has done a major upgrade on the OL as quite likely we will see the next #1 RB fail to gain a yard on a 3rd and short play when the OL gets zero push. Unfortunately, there still remains the issue that IMHO Fairchild did not successfully call upon or use WM in the passing game. WM showed some potential in college for greater receiver usage and even showed on plays like the first one in the Ravens game where he started us off with a major gain on a reception only to see the play called back on a dumb shifting penalty which seemed to give the Bills no advantage on the play. The Fairchild problem is that he never went back to this approach at all and seemed to let Ds dictate his games too much last year. WM appears likely to go because Ralph does not like him, but from a football standpoint, WM still has the potential he has shown with the Bills in his first season and a half of play and in the MYJ games last year. Further, for those who judge him unmotivated he will play with maximum financial motivation this season. Further, WM would likely damage himself a ton financially if he were to hold out after a horrible season last year and historically Rosenidiot does tend to bring his clients to camp. Finally, even if WM does well this year, the Bills still hold the initiative as they can franchise him or simply pay him a new deal if they chose. It may work to trade WM (I hope it works if they do) but if they plan to replace him with a draft choice is does not look good for us. It can work its just that the odds are against this working out bigtime.

Actually, I am quite positive about this season as I do not think that Marv will be so brazen and stupid as to put our fate into the hands of a rookie starter at MLB, waste resources on acquiring a CB in the first round, or roll the dice by counting upon a rookie to be our starting RB. I simply think Marv is too risk averse and intelligent to actual condemn us to the moves that some are advocating.

I don't think he will if he has another alternative which is more likely to be more productive. He does have a better alternative at MLB if he does what he said they were looking at in his end o the season press conference which is to move Crowell back to his original MLB spot. I am nor arguing that Willis would not likely become our MLB answer for years to come. What I do argue is that 07 (and potentially 08 depending upon how fast Willis learns to play the pass as well as F-B) have a high enough value to Marv and the Bills that they would not likely condemn the year to being yet another development year (which I think playing a rookie in the diverse role required in the Hybrid Cover 2 we run). I think this is true given out long playoff drought and given that the Golden Boys simply cannot guarantee how long they are going to be on this planet. The safety position is critical and I think this is why Marv devoted our 1st rounder to an SS who he planned to start immediately rather than pursuing his first inclination which is to run and stop the run by building in the trenches. Also remember that the gameplan last year was to start Whitner and Troy Vincent and they and others were fortunately surprised that Simpson started so quickly. If anything Marv likely feels that having caught lightening in a bottle once, that he cannot expect to get lucky again rather than assume this is now his plan.

This likely would be a major disaster for 2007 if they do: 1. If we play a rookie as the starting MLB running the hybrid Cover 2 we run where the MLB must be able to read plays like a vet as our MLB must play run plays like a DT but pass plays like a safety, it simply is likely to be quite painful watching this rookie learn to become a vet by likely getting burned time and again as he takes a false step forward and gets dusted by a speedy WR running a post pattern or takes a false step back leading to the same howl of complaints from folks of making initial hits deep in our backfield. 2. Certainly if the Bills chose a good player a rookie might be a quality #1 RB for us, but also the Bills might pick a very good player in the Larry Johnson mode who simply was unproductive his first two seasons and even worse we could pick a player who sucks given the crapshoot that the draft basically is. 3. Picking and paying the 1st round slotted salary of a CB would be a real waste of resources in a Cover 2 as the CB generally releases the WR 10-15 yards downfield and the skillsets of a very good CB (this is why the Bills knew even last year that NC was not worth it to the Bills to pay him what the market would give him). If we go with any of these three picks and usage, it likely is going to be a very long 07.

Even in retrospect, I think trading for Bledsoe was a wash as on the field he deserved the Pro Bowl reserve slot he got in 2002 as he led the the Bills to scoring the 2nd largest increase in Ws in NFL history to that point. This was true even though Belicheck knew his weaknesses like a book and exploited him to the tune of two Pats wins that season and his Bills still finished 8-8 (ironically the loss of Bledsoe was a big contributor to the Pats missing the playoffs that year as the accelerated cap hit the Pats took was a major factor in them being unable to sign the FAs they wanted and repetitively use to forge champions. Clearly keeping Brady and losing Bledsoe was the correct move in the big picture, but this move clearly cost the Pats big time in 2002). He matched his very good year in 2002 with an incredibly stinky effort in 2003. The mistake the Bills made was TD's decision to extend his contract in 2004 and he even worsened the effect of this idiocy by then turning around and cutting Bledsoe and adding the insult of another accelerated cap hit to the injury of extending his contract in 04.

Winfield I think was easily a more consistent tackler and a bigger hitter (certainly pound for pound and probably on an absolute basis as well. I still remember we he seemed to almost single handedly destroy the offensive gameplan of Jacksonville by pinching up when they attempted to throw short swing passes to the TE in the backfield and AW took down this much bigger man twice well behind the LOS. Aslo, there was a great game against KC where the Bills crossed them up by having AW ignore their adequate at best WRs and instead simply take Tony Gonzalez out of the game with great coverage and vicious hits if he brought the ball in. AW was such a solid tackler the Bills had no fear assigning him a TE and I do not remember NC getting this type of responsibility as a consistent assignment. In terms of raw athleticism, I don;t think any Bills compared to Eric Moulds in his prime and several years before and after. It was often acknowledged by his teammates not to bet against Moulds when he offered to take on his teammates in sports ranging from basketball to bowling because he routinely won these battles.

I actually reach the same conclusion, that the draft is not the ONLY way to build an OL that you do from the other way around. Clearly there are real world examples like Pace and the NE Pats that show the great (and for the most part dominating) importance of drafting good, very good, and occasionally great OL players and signing your own to long term deals. However, what I think has happened is that folks get so caught up in advocating a position, that their posts are sometimes easily read (or flat out claim in some internet moments of maintaining a doctrine though little in life and nothing in the NFL) is always absolutely true. Reality simply does not work that way. Some folks seem to want to make the claim that TD's big fault is that he did not value the OL and the draft highly enough, but ignore the fact named Mike Williams. Or make a sharp claim that our problem is that we did not resign our own and thus ignore little facts like Jonas Jennings or OL being a position that TD drafted every single year he was here and sometimes two in a draft. Not wasting a bunch of money on the injury prone Jennings (as SF did) and not throwing more money after Mike Williams were among the smart things TD led the team to doing after making bad choices in picking them. These arguments about what is the"best" way to build an OL simply devolved into meaninglessness because of reality that the TD led Bills had simply lost the ability to use the draft as a base mechanism for building the OL because: 1. TD hired an HC in GW who had no real offensive chops or ability. He primarily valued having an HC he could be certain would not run him out of town like Cowher did so he hired a man with great D abilities, and wonderful lists which made him a good Administrative Asst. but if push came to shove TD could beat him. 2. Even worse, GW was insecure about this and was willing to hire an incompetent OL guy he could trust, Vinky as the position coach and then when he was so bad he had to can him (just as he had to can the still learning not ready for OCdom, Kragthorpe). These two factors meant that as seen by our poor OL draft choices the Bills were simply incapable under the GW regime of picking good OL players. By the time JMac arrived and the Bills were able to pick at least reasonable OL players in the draft (though the jury is still out on Preston and the rest) we are at least capable of training players up (as seen in Peters and perhaps Pennington). the die was cast and the Bills were well on their way to 7 years without a playoff appearance and the needed a win quickly and had multiple needs so that the FA approach is really the only realistic option for this team despite the fact that drafting. developing and then extending OL players is the way to do this in a more perfect world. Your arguments for drafting are great theory, they just have little to do with the current Bills reality.

Which game are you referring to? In the last 4 games before he was injured, Crowell put up some good numbers and more important the D performed well enough to win 3 of these 4 games with the losing one being a game where Crowell was credited with a dozen tackles and he forced a fumble in a great D performance in a losing cause at Indy. His 82 tackles in under 12 complete games, his 2 INTs (F-B led the team with 4), 2 sacks and 7 passes defended were a pretty good performance for an OLB. The fact he has produced good numbers in the diverse roles of pass protection, tackling and getting sacks is a good indication that he does have the diverse skills needed of our MLB and the fact that he was able to step in and impress many observers speaks to his understanding other roles besides his own which is critical for a signal caller. In terms of his career, this performance not only took place in his first full year as a WLB, but he actually switched out of his natural position last year simply because he was the best back-up LB the Bills had even though he was not TKO's back-up on the depth chart. As a back-up for Fletch he only saw action in pre-season but performed well in this role in the few performances he had. Of course there is no guarantee that he is what we will want, but question marks raised by his injury would seem to be a much larger issue than the quality of his play judging by objective standards.

If someone makes us an offer we can't refuse then make a deal. If not. fine. Play WM this year and it is not hard to imagine that in his contract year with the additional motivation he performs well. If he does and we want him then tag him or show him the money, and if he does not let him go.

The reason why this is a big deal is because if there is a difference between the definition of a word as it is used in the normal world or printed in a dictionary and how it is defined or used in the CBA, then the CBA rules and normal usage or how its defined in the dictionary is thrown out. If the definitions you cite are from the CBA then folks should pay attention, however if they are from the dictionary or merely reality as you and I know it in the real world, then they can be ignored for this discussion as any convergence with the pseudo reality of the NFL may simply be coincidental.