Pyrite Gal

A lot depends on how Fairchild decides to use WM. I think TC was in error letting him sit on 3rd down, though I can see why he did this because there is some potential that even the 2 down usage led to overuse of WM in his second full year. A theory that WM's 2nd half downturn was in part due to him not being able to keep on his first half pace should at leadt be considered. I doubt this was actually the case as WM saw heavy usage his first year of plsy in the 10+ games he started and showed no signs of a similar drop-off and at the end of the season WM put up over 100 yards. One of the big issues was that as it turned out Shaud Williams appears to be an occaisional 3rd down change-up and receiver at best and not a consistent go-to 3rd down guy. I think the other big issue was that it was clear that TD had given up on this season when he handed the job to JP for training last year. When the D responded to this by giving up WM showed limited football character by giving up as well. WM is no leader. My sense is that if he runs like he did in 04 and half of 05 I do not care. He will not lead others and actually has little self-moticvation on a loser. What the Bills need to do is be more of a winner overall (or at least competitive) and I suspect the WM issues will be non-issues as motivation will be provided by this external force. Overall, I think WM will never be Marshall Faulk, but should be adequate as a recieving threat in a Fairchild O to make it work. A-Train will have a chance at a good number of carries as increased 3rd down usage is likely to mean decreased WM usage the first 2 downs as he needs more rests. If A-Train is up to the challenge it will mean more carries for him, but if he does not produce it will not. Tne uncertainties that Fairchild faces as he installs a St. L type O are: 1. Will the WRs do a reasonable imitation of the high-flying St. L crew- I think yes as Evans, PP, Parrish and even #4 Reed who has done the #3 job once before and should have good RAC as a former RB should make this work. 2. Will they be sufficient at TE- I say yes to this as well. Royal will not be an adequate or reasonable open field reciever, but who cares as he has more to contribute this O working as a 5th blocker for the OL rather than as a Tony Gonzales which he ain't. I think folks are to addicted to the typical TE model which actually many teams do not have. The Bills are gonna adopt an O strategy which essentially recognizes this reality. 3. Will the OL be adequate- Initially I think it will be as the probable 06 starters are better than the actual 05 starters. Gandy, Reyes, Fowler, Villarial, and Peters all played adequate to very good OL at their positions last year. However, outside of Reyes at RG rather than LG, none of these players played 16 games at a very good level and even Gandy as the only consistent starter at his position was even adequate for 16 games last year. As the season goes on good back-ups will be critical and outside of Preston for Villarial when this old man has to sit, I do not see the players here. 4. I have no real idea which of the three QBs will prove to be adequate, but I think we have larger worries about the O as likely one of these three will turn out to be adequate. I think it is mostly a question of how fearful of the unknown fans are as though JP is the lead candidate among the 3, its no certainty or probability he will be the one. However, if the braintrust is good at pulling the plug and not wasting precious snaps on the majority chances of failure of each QB, there actually can be a majority chance of success of one of these 3. its uncertain what the outcome will be but I am not worried about this as I suspect we will find one to work out. 5. Will WM be of good use as a rusher like the first half of last season and doing a cut rate imitation of Faulk as a pass catching threat. I like him losing a bit of weight while appparently maintaining his strength with workouts at the U this off-season. His bizarre baby-momma comments and not showing up for the voluntary practices means that one would be a fool to get pregnant with WM. However, all I really care about is on field performance and since I and my friends are passing on sleeping with him I think he will be fine as a player.

There are a lot of questions as to whether the winner of competitions for various positions will be an adequate NFL starter or not, but certainly one of the hallmarks of the new regime with the cuts and acquisitions they made has been to increase competitions for slots between players. This is a welcome change IMHO as one of the mistakes of the old regime was to simply choose who would be starter based on their alleged football wisdom and then the team suffered badly when the guaranteed event that is going to occur amongst some of their choices did not prove adequate. These are the competitions and almosst certain starters I see. There have been numerous posts that simply took the easy route of trashing players, but the predictions which do interest me is why folks think particular players will take starting roles. #1 WR- There is question IMHO that Evans wins out as the go-to guy though there are question which confront him as to whether he is ready to be #1 though his production so far has been impressive. LT- Gandy is pretty much a lock and should be adequate but not much more as he proved last year. LG- Reyes is second on the depth chart to Preston but Reyes should win the role and be a definite upgrade over Anderson (though that may not be saying much). C- Fowler also appears to be a lock here as his back-up Geisinger would not appear to ready at all. Preston makes more sense as the #2 C and gets first shot at #1 if there are any injury or performance issues for Fowler. Foowler was fine starting for the Vikes last year during their 6 game winning streak and while questions about his durability and ability to start 16 are more than legit, the notion he is not capable of playing winning starting C in the NFL does not seem based on real events. RG- Villarial is slated as starter, but what used to be nicks he played through are now injuries which cost him a couple of starts. Preston should challenge here most of all, but Villarial probably starts until the injury bug and age knock him out. RT- Peters also appears to be a lock here and his adequate play at RT last year and the ballyhoo from his press agent JMac has some even talking LT for him. Yet, you gotta walk before your run and RT is proably it. TE- Royal seems almost certainly to be the man here as Everett is essentially a rookie since he will be playing in his first year. Folks love the pass so they are not sold at all on Royal, but our OL issues (even though they are clearly much improved over last year's starters) make a 6th lineman an essential thing for us. Royal suited up for 15 and 14 the last two years so the IR issues which ended his '03 seem to be solved and he looks like the man. #2 WR- PP has the job on the depth chart, but his failure as a #1 or to catch fire or cr catch on in Dallas raises legit questions, His performance as a #2 in 02 and objective testimonials that his speed is still there point to him winning this job. He will face real competition though from Parrish who did show signs of the open field ability which got him drafted last year. Folks badmouth him due to his size and his recent injury, but the success of the Smurfs and rule changes which have even further liberated WRs indicate this may be a fught. Still I think it is early in his already short career and I expect PP to win the competition. QB- JP is the favorite due to what he brought to the draft, but not only is Nall a wildcard, but Holcomb may bring the same vet judgment to the passing game which made Johnson a more effective QB thab Culpepper at MN last year, though Culpepper is by far a better athlete. My sense is that JP wins this battle as no one will assert themselves and the default gets the job. However, if Fairchldl and the Bills get the short passing game with RAC successfully installed, you may see enough success from KH for him to win the job. RB- WM wins the job and if we have to go with Thomas it will be a long season. I like Thomas to give WM a blow from time to time, but this is WN's job. FB- The best thing about Sheltons play after last year is that I like 3 WR sets. RDE- Schobel had some very impressive sack #s from a player who actually covered downfield a bunch in our zone blitz. This may be a break out year for him unless he needs to spend time or deal with doubles a lot helping out the DTs. RDT- Anderson has the depth chart slot, but I think the Bills will put their best players on the field and run a heavy rotation even if McCargo does not step up to command a starting job. Our DTs will be called upon to penetrate and disrupt from what little we know for sure about the Cover 2. I was neither comfortable with him in the traditional DT run stuffing role last year nor see him showing much in terms of a first step as a penetrator. I hope McCargo excels so much he demands a start, but I doubt this and see us with a less than adequate Anderson as RDT. LDT- Triplett looks like a good pick-up given his numbers last year. Folks labeling him a part timer because Indy used him extensively as a sub and only a starter in a minority of their games, actually make a good case for Triplett. You mean he produced those numbers as a part-timer? Get e'em signed and we did. LDE- I think this may actually be a tight competition between 2 platers who on the face of it may well prove to be inadequate as LDE starters unless they can do well playing some game style they have never played as a pro. I was surprised though not shocked that the resigned Denny. I think he has an unusual skill set for a DE because he is very tall (with a Ted Hendricks like wingspan) but despite some initial problems that he apparently bent his body coming out of a stance which made it difficult for him to have any strength at the POA, he imptoved to be an OK DL player. It turned out that he is actually quite agile and his ability to read plays well and also cover passes down field made him adequate at the very least in the zone blits. Yet, it is unclear to me whether he will be able to play a pass rusher role as an LDE in the Cover 2. He proved to be fairly stout against the run and was even used as an interior lineman in the zone blitz at times. How he is employed by Farell/Jauron will make a nig difference in his effectiveness. He will be in competion with Chris Kelsay who I thought showed good development his first two years. However, je along with virtually the entire Bills D imploded last year. He was good when he played well due to his constant motor. However, it remain questionable how useful this skill will be if the Bills Cover 2 calls for quick penetration and defeating the opponent with your first move if his bread and butter is never saying die. I really have no idea (as no poster does) exctly how the Bills D is going to be employed and I really do not even have a good guess as to which of these two wins out or whether that winner will be adequate in this fans\ view. WLB- TKO's recovery will tell the tale. Right now the word sounds pretty good as he is expected to be ready to practice in camp and the Bills say they will be conservative in utilizing him by choice as part of his recovery. Even assumingh this is true and not merely the hopeful attitude essential to full recovery or misdirection so opponents do not pick on the injury, accidents happen and recovery is a one step at a time process. At any rate even 80% of this multi-time Pro Bowler is better than 100% of many LBs so one must hope for the best. I felt quite pleased with Crowell stepping out of the #2 MLB role to start for TKO and if we have to do this so be it. MLB- Fletcher is the certain starter. Folks are whining about his age, but he shows no signs of age in his stats where once again he led the Bills in tackles last year by a huge amount. Complaints about him having trouble in pass coverage seem to be based solely on his being shorter than the norm for LBs. However, if one thinks age is an issue then they also have to admit that his experience will be quite helpful to him if we adopt a Tampa 2 which has him playing centerfield in the deep zone. Forther, he got credit for so many tackles because he has shown the motor to play sideline to sideline which also lends itself to centerfield duty. The final fact is that he has been employed as the KR guy on short kicks and demonstrated the ability to judge balls well in flight and to handle them well when he caught the. This skills will likely make him a formidable pass defender in the Cover 2. His back-up on the chart is Ezekial whose prime role is to make us hope Fletch is never hurt. However the acquisition of Watson likely gives us a reliable back-up that will not make us stop praying for LF's health but should comfortably give him a blow if he gets tired covering a bunch of field in a Tampa 2. SLB- Here is where we will likely see big time competition as Crowell showed that he is going to eventually be a starter for this team and Posey last year finally showed some weakeness which was detectable in the being bad and clear anecdotes of him bein a dollar short and a day late on some pass rushes. Fans complained about Posey in 03 and 04, but these complaints were reduced to seeming little more than fan whining as no one could point to bad statistical #s which would probably be the case if he was so bad (if mere fans can easily see something at least a few of the NFL idiots who are paid to analyze this would see it and pick on him and exploit him if he was so bad) or at least one should easily be able to cite examples where opponents beat him coverage or broke his tackles for TDs or long gains if he was so bad that he should have been cut. However, this evidence simply did not exist in 03 and 04 when he logged major minutes on a good D. Last year the D he played a big role in sucked and he got beat in a few anecdotes. His contract is big enough and the LB corps is deep with Haggan, Stamer, of course Crowell and now former NFL starter Watson as back-ups and Posey is probably still around due to the TKO questions. The Sam position will be an interesting watch this pre-season. LCB- McGee looks like a certain starter here. He actually may be our #1 talent CB after a disappointing year for NC last year and actually contributes more to this team as a KR guy than a CB. I like him and his game a lot. FS- Folks labeling TV as a clear candidate for being cut yesterday seem to ignore the fact that he led a team that registered far too few turnovers last year that he tied for the lead in both INTs and fumbles recovered. The switch in scheme to a cover 2 probably benefits no player more than TV as the new scheme goes toward the strength of his game as the safeties have centerfield pass coverage duty primarily and away from one of the biggest complaints folks had about him as the zone blitz required him to tackle like an LB. Even the claims the claims that he is slated to be replaced this year by the talented 3 DB we took in the first four rounds ignores the fact that Youbouty and Simpson specifically need the schooling all rookies need to become vets. When you add that the third DB will likely be an immediate starter the on field coaching provided by the "old man" will be a definite asset. Older players can hit the wall in their productivy suddenly and nicks they used to play through can lead them to be forced to sit, but I really have to laugh at some of the anti-TV tirades some launch (which often seem to be inspired by folks blaming unions for our woes or the NFLPA for ruining the most popular and profitable sports in America. SS- Whitmer almost certainly starts as even if he is not all he is cracked up to be, it is doubtful that ST whiz Bowens is up to starting and we know Coy Wire is not. RCB- NC is the almost cetain starter and actually though his tag does not bode well for his future as a Bill and the team's sudden surplus of DB talent, it probably is the best situation for the 06 squad as NC will have every inspiration to play well this year. I'm glad I did this as actually or starting line-up looks a lot clearer than I would have guessed after such a dismal season. Actually 16 or so of the 22 starting slots look pretty settled as best as I can tell. Of the questionable slots, I feel very confortable with competition producing an adequate player in 4 cases (including the QB question which I am not a slave about as many football fans and soap opera types may be) and it really is the DL which I think will determine our fate in a big way.

I thought his plan was to keep the Sabres (they appear more likely to win a Cup than the Bills appear to win an SB) but to give you ownership of the Bills as a present.

Naw, Ralph is in the midst of a strategy which will use the fall gubernatorial elections to stick-up NYS for using state tax dollars to seed the market funding of a state authority which will build a new stadium which the Bills get virtual total control over and keep the cash without risking the upfront building costs. Such a move (if it happened) would certainly be corporate welfare for a great money making enterprise which Ralph was smart and lucky enough to buy for a song which he is now crying poverty about. However, though there seems to be little moral justification for it, my team would benefit so I am all for steering statewide money to WNY to benefit our franchise.

Do you see or if you see do you acknowledge that there was any difference in the same fact that Anderson's team the Ravens did not want him and why the Panthers did not want Reyes? I really do not know why the Ravens were passing on Anderson. However, I do believe I know why the Panthers are willing to let Reyes go. The answer is that though Reyes is a solid starter in the NFL with a good track record and likely several years of good play in front of him, the team is higher on Mathis a highly rated draftee who in the Panther's judgment has a decade of play (good health allowing) in front of him and unlike Reyes should prove in their estimation to be more than a solid NFL starter but a great player. From what I understand, the Panthers braintrust was ready to go with Mathis last year and had plans to give him more PT and work him into the starting line-up by the end of the season. From what I hear, this plans were sidetracked because of Reyes good play at RG for the Panthers. Was the situation the same for Anderson? I do not know. However, if the situation was that the Ravens braintrust was willing to let Anderson go, because they could see he was either unmotivated or really was an inconsistent player, then I think there is a real difference between the reasons why this player was allowed to go without a competitive bid from Balt and why Reyes left Carolina without them putting forth a bid which beat the Bills offer. What seems to have happened to the Bills and JMac last year was that the got a G from the Ravens PS (whose name I forget) in JMac's first year. He had inherited poor players like Pacillo and Sullivan from Vinky and Ruel and found that neither of these players were remotely near what we wanted at LG. He was able to find someone off of the ravens PS who actually won the starting job for us at LG in 2004. He proved to be not very good at all in the redzone and oddly had more trouble run blocking than pass blocking, so we moved fist to Bannan in the redzone and then Tucker overall and we peeled off a good win streak. My guess is that JMac assumed he could work the same magic with Anderson who had been a starter for the Ravens. They failed. I think it is a perfectly viable strategy to get FAs from other teams whom we think can be viable starters but they pass on for some reason that is not true in our case. If we had a youngster of Mathis caliber as our LO in waiting I would oppose us signing Reyes. However, we do not and as such I support signing Reyes as a clear upgrade in 2005 performance over what we got at LG from Anderson. Do you think there is a difference or do you think all players passed on by other teams should automatically be passed on? I think JMac's experience was that even though the Bills were happy to cut Glenn Parker and were unwilling to give FA Dusty Ziegler a shot at being center, he was happy to have NYD sign them and Ziegler and Parker were keys to the making the SB as they blocked for Tiki Barber and Kerry Collins. Likewise, to simply reject Fowler as a Cleveland pass over is not very smart football. The Bills cut OL players like Pacillo, Sullivan and Anderson, but they cut them for very different reasons than Cleve or the Vikes let Fowler go. The Vikes case is more recent and clearer. Their center is multiple time Pro Bowler Matt Birk and he has been one of the best centers in the NFL this decade. He went on the DL last year with several nagging injuries which needed a year to heal. Gowever, it was quite likely that Birk would be back. My understanding is that Fowler was an FA from Cleveland who was let go because either his original contract ended or because it paid him a base salary for a starter. Cleveland had made a draft pick of Jeff Faine in the second round of the draft and I was bummed as I had hopes the Bills might take him. Instead Cleveland was so bad that need was no object and they made a best player available pick in Faine. His slot gave him the equivalent of starter money. My understanding was that Fowler was OK but not great with Cleveland, he did get a couple of starts and played well in them (RB Suggs pot op good numbers behind him in a maudlin Cleveland O). However, having Faine who most saw as an immediate NFL starter there was no way they were gonna pay starter money to Fowler so if the market gave him more than so be it. What happened apparently was that the Vikes wanted to go with Cory Withrow as their C as he was a longtime Vike, familar with their system whom they drafted. They paid Fowler a good chunk of money though with the full knowledge of all that this was a one year deal with Birk coming back. As it happened, it played out the way Fowler wanted. Withrow struggled and the Vikes went 1-3 with him at C. Fowler was inactive his first game (if this was due to injurt we should worry actually) but he forced his way into the line0up with his sub work and beat out Withrow. The results improved somewhat immediately witg Fowler snapping to Culpepper. The results really took off when Vrad Johnson came in to receive the snaps from Fowler and they peeled off a 6 game winning streak. Fowler unfortunately got hurt at the end of the season. Ironically this coincided with the Vikes losing some key games and missing the playoffs. My sense is that the key reason why Fowler was allowed to walk from the Vikes was that they knew the market would give him starting C money and they were committed to Birk at C, Will both of these players be great? Nope, I doubt it. Will both of these players be an upgrade over the 2005 Bills at their position? Almost certainly in Reyes case and probably in Fowler's case. Will these two be adequate players and solid NFL starters? I think the answer is almost certainly yes in Reyes case. He has been a solid starter for years at RG who anecdottaly was productive for NC last year, He is flipping from the right side to the left side but has started at LG before in the in this league so I suspect he can make the hop. I think it is a football mistake to merely consider him a reject from some team as the reason he was passed over was because NC was high on the young player behind him they are paying big bucks to. In fact, I think one of the best pro-Reyes arguments is that they seemed to really want to go with Mathis at RG sooner but coul not because Reyes and the NC OK were dinr quite fine without him. In Fiwker;s case, I actually have few doubts about this natural center's skills. The doubts I do have is that he also is an FA for the best reasons there can be as it most clearly means he is not as good as Birk (which is not indictment). However, it is vexing that he has never started 16 at any point in his career and his last season ended with injury. The best case for him would be if the Vikes decided to try to see if Withrow was worth keeping (he was not and is no longer in the NFL last I saw), but I doubt this is the case and my main doubts about Fowler are not that he is a reject but that there may be an injury issue here. However, I think your declarations of them as rejects is cavalier to say the least and that your vision of building an OL through the draft simply does not fit the timeline of the Golden Boys and is not the only way to build an SB capable OL in he NFL. You are probably right about how pricey OL players will be next year, and this may well explain why the Bills are not spending up to the cap limit at right now. Look for our next big FA purchase to be on the OL next year.

Rather than the question being how tough was this guy, the question is probably how drunk was this guy (loaded enough that his judgment was missing and not loaded enough that he was falling down drunk and unable to harm anyone but himself. That and how stupid was he that he apparently took it as a mortal threat deserving death or grievous injury that aomeone bumped into him and probably words were exchanged. Fortunately Darwin has identified a way that such bad asses usually are taken care of, one just hopes he does not take anyone with him or that he is behind the wheel of a car.

\ I agree with Ramius that I am pretty skeptical about Whitmer"probably" being there for us at #15. Its a craapshoot so no one can no for sure (this doubt is one of the key reasons why I think using the word probably is an overstatement) Even wprse, than the possibility that the Lions or Rams may have taken Whitmer if the Bills traded down, there is also the possibility that the Felons who took safety Allen at #16 might have jumped ahead of us and taken Whitner who was ranked ahead of Allen on many boards. Once Oak took Huff it became fairly certain that we had to take Whitner or face big problems meeting what I perceive is Ralph/Marv's gpal of winning as much as they can now.

I like him better since he retired as his pre-retirement columns always seemed to have a strong whiff to me of his having the additonal agenda of balancing his editing duties as boss of a bunch of reporters like Sullivan and Carucci and also having his words influence how the entire team dealt with his beat reporters from the paper. I felt like retirement liberated him a bit and I appreciated some of the historical perpsective like that provided in this article, inside info on how the HOF Committee (which he was a member of) was making decisions. and observations which were right on target like comparing the years of experience of the OL position coaches in the last umpteen SB teams and the amount of experience of Bills hirees like Vinky. Like everybody, he has his opinions and sometimes if not often they struck me as incorrect. However, they rarely were the fact-free opinions we usually get and I respected him or that.

Why do you deem Royal as injury prone? He ended up on IR in 2003 but played in 15 games (starting 14 last year) and player in 14 (starting about 9) the year before that. Its a tough life playing an entire NFL season with no nicks that do not cost you a game here or there or reduce your effectiveness so someone else is a better starter for a game or two. However, in order for me to consider a player injury prone, he would need to have contiual bad luck where he consistently ended up on IR, or ended the season on the bench. Royal has been the starter at TE for the Skins the majority of the last two seasons and been able to perform in 15 and 14 games those seasons. He ended both seasons on a strong note as 2004 saw him catch TDs in 3 consecutive games as the season ended and last off-season saw Gibbs apparently wanting him back though Buffalo won out in the bidding. I think RJ was injury prone as he suffered season ending injuries in a few seasons and his recurring injuries were to different parts of his body. It was also a smart move on the Bills part to not make the same mistake SF made in paying him a mint as he either missed a start or went out early in a quarter of his games his final season here. It was a concussion once, a leg problem another time, and an upper body muscle boo-boo another time. it was no schock at all to me to see him end up on IR for the 9ers early last season. He probably pulled a muscle hauling money bags to the bank. Perhaos you know something about Royal those of us who did not follow the Skins closely do not know, but i see no evidence on paper of Royal being injury prone. Ifr he is, the nubmer of games played and his productivity (he set a personal record for receptiond last year even though this number was not huge as the Skins seem to use the TE as an extra Hog to blockI and whatever nicks he had he played through them.

Many thanks for the link. Great tool.

I'm not sure though what you see as the real world alternatives for this attempt. 1. I think real world analysis probably begins with an assessment as to whether the facts as they happened in the real world are an upgrade or not over reality. Do you argue that Anderson is a better player than Reyes, that Teague is better than Fowler or MW is better than Peters. I'm not sure anyone is making these cases. Even the most uncertainty about these issues is that some feel positively about Teague (which you obviously do not). 2. The next question is whether this upgarde is sufficient in quality. I think that the consensus among posters (and even the Bills braintrust which clearly is talking about and configuring the OL depth chart in a manner which says that there will be competition for slots on the OL- past starters get first shot but nothing has been promised to anyone publicly including Villarial) that the current OL set-up is not sufficient. 3. Since mpst folks agree it is an upgrade, but that upgrade is not sufficient, it simply raises the question what do you next. The Bills have chosen to try to produce a better OL by building from having better starters to see what they can get from those better starters in terms of development and synergy under JMac's guidance, produce reasonable back-ups from the accumulation of well regarded players who failed elsewhere (Gibson), developing players on the roster from the old regime (Preston, Geisinger, McFarland, Jerman etc) and draft choices (Butler, Pennington). Will this work to meet Bills fan standards? Doubttful. However, given that JMac has had success in a single year with a equally or lesser talented crew in NYG, it is possible though unlikely. What strikes me as most likely is that this crew will be much improved over last year though still inadequate. However, it is a reasonable development strategy as given the cap room we should have next year, it well may get us within acquisition of one outstanding and one OK player in FA that can truly make this OL outstanding by the 2007 season. This approach strikes me as having a far greater chance of suceeding by 2007 than the approach of using the draft to get talented but even in the best case still need some time folks like D'Brickashaw and Mangold. In fact, I think the FA based approach we seem to be taking makes a lot more sense than trying to use the draft to produce an outstanding OL by the 2007 season. I think the experience shown in the NFL with draft choices like Muike Williams, Party-boy McKinnie and Levi Jones shows that it seems to be a much more intelligent strategy to pay through the nose to buy a Levi Jones when he hits FA ratherthan pay through the nose for busts like MW or troublesome and still quite possible busts like McKinnie. I like what we are doing on OL because I am confident they will be better though not yet adequate compared to last year. I also believe this approach offers a much greater chance of success in 2007 than trying to use the draft in some Mike Williams like attempt to strike gold.

Actually, we were FORCED to draft Whitmer at #8 note merely due to the Cover 2 switch but because of an event which flows against the coventional wisdom of drafting safteties low. If folks are freaked because the Bills drafted a safety at #8, then they should really be freaked that Oakland drafted a safety as # SEVEN (when they took Huff). If folks are so committed to the CW that one does not take a safety early in the draft, then they should be complaining most bitterly about this turn of events. It was this move which likely committed the Bills to taking Whitmer when they judged him to be available if they felt their were but two safties who could fill the gap left by the Milloy cut. When Huff went off the board, it then was merely a question of when do they judge that the other safetie would be gone and how risk averse are they about playing with fire that they might be stuck with the third safety choice 9Allen) if Whitmer got nabbed. I think events indicate it was likely a good move getting Whitmer while the getting was possible. A. Rumor had it that Detroit at #9 had its eye on Huff (if true and who knows as a big part of the draft is misdirection on your needs and desires), but clearly the Bills would be running some risk that they are gonna end up with the third safety chosen potentially if the trade down. B. As Miami took Allen at #16, it seems quite doubtful that Whitmer would have lasted past this pick (even if Detroit always had their eye on Sims and was just misdirecting folks regarding Huff. I mean think about it, the alternative scenario for a trade down which still allows for picking Whitmer banks a lot on some very specific things happening. A. We can cut a deal with the Broncos giving us #15 and in exchange for this get exactly the draft value described (maybe but maybe not as a deal takes two partners and we are putting the Broncs in the drivers seat for determining whether this deal happens or not_. B. Detroit ha no interest in Whitmer once Huff is gone. C. Miami does not trade up above us to get Whitmer after we trade down. All of these wishes may come true and if so we then probably get Whitmer at #15. However, if any one of these things does not come true we do not get Whitmer and today we are probably hearing from the braintrust about how Allen's injury really looks healed. The worse case is also quite possible with this proposed deal and all three bad things happen in which case we are likely looking at the 4th best safety as our pick. You are on the right analytical track by pointing to the need we had to reinforce ourselves at safety which is the real driver on this being a need pick by us. However, blaming this on a Jauron switch to the Cover 2 as the reason for this issue ignores a certain set of realities. A. We likely have the same SS need without a switch to Cover 2- Milloy was pretty close to done anyway and actually is probably even more done without switching to Cover 2. His effectiveness appeared to be reduced last year due to a wrist injury which made wrapping up and tackling tougher for him to do. If we stuck with the zone blitz, this would be the primary duty of the SS and I doubt he would have survived long doing this. B. Even if one believed in Milloy as a player, his contract already paid him a bit more than he was worth as we needed to pay through the nose for him when he suddenly became available because Belicheck mis-read re-signing him. It likely made sense to cut him anyway. If done, then you have even more tackling pressure on the SS and you are depending on Coy Wire and Bowens to do this for you unless you get an SS in the first. Basically, it seems odd to argue that the Bills broke some well understood rule of safties go later in the draft when they were not the first team to pick a safety in this draft and the next one was taken a handful of picks later. It also seems off to blame the Cover 2 switch for this need when if we had not switched the same need would still be there and actually might be even more intense if we were sticking with our old scheme

Yeah OK, but also suppose that the Bills had traded down with Denver to #15 but then Miami which was obviously in the market for a safety traded up #11, 12, 13 (all picks which were traded at some point) and they took Whitmer. We end up taking the 3rd best safety Allen who is recovering from a serious injury and is not likely to start or contribute immediately as Whitmer is expected to do. If you do not believe in that suppose (though this suppose strikes me as at least as likely if not more likely than your suppose), the how about if us having trded down leave Whitmer on the board where #9 pick Detroit was thought by many to be looking at Huff. Perhaps they do the same reach the Bills did and take Whitmer. An even worse possibility is that Whitmer goes to someone else like Detroit at #9 and Miami seeing 2 safties gone and the Bills now trained in on Allen jump ahead of us and we are left with the 4th safety taken as our choice. Maybe you do not mind this as you figure that we are gonna be bad this year anyway so developing the 4th safety is going to be a longer-term miission just as developing the OL from your draft choices is gonna be a longer term effort. I think the primary difference between the thinking and goals reflected in your post and the likely thinking and goals of Marv under orders from Ralph is that they have no interest in a plan that will pay off with a competitive team in 2009. 08. or even 07. The Golden Boys know life is not guaranteed for 07 for them and as business men whose team has missed the playoffs every year under their old GM, their goal is to win and compete now. They would be fools to expect that this team will make the playoffs this year, but as Marv said in his book, any HC who is preparing the team to win in a few years is simply preparing things for the next HC. I simply do not think that the Bills after cutting Adams and Milloy were going to do anything in this draft but get two players who they believed would it is to be hoped start at SS and DT (or at least contribute in a big way to the DL rotation) immediately. The thought of a 3 or 2 year plan for rebuilding the OL was wholely rejected by them. The notion of losing while developing players this year so that going 1-15 they would then have a shot at Brady Quinn who like most 1st rounders not name Roethlesberger is going to need another couple of years of training before he pays off would likely be insane from their perspective.

While your assessment of the 2004 players appears to be "in theballpark", I think there is an alternative assessment of these individual players which is more charitable and also is "in the ballpark" in terms of possibilities". It is: LDE: Kelsay/Denny. A good competition to find a player who is adequate at the position and compliment a very good player in Schobel. Kelsay was poised to have a breakout season last year after good performance as a rookie in 2003 and improvement over that in 2004. Yet he was not breakout productive in 2005. The jury remains out as to whether his 2005 results were due to limitations in his play/potential or more related to him not being capable of leading but being good enough to compliment other players in a good D. The theory is that his lack of very good results last year came from the overall failure of the D to be very good as opponents caught up with our blitz a lot package and also players losses of starting DT PW, back-up DT Edwards and starting WLB TKO left an adequate player will little to compliment. The key for better performance by Kelsay is not that he is unable to play at a pro level even adequatelly, but that the Cover 2 scheme needs to work reasonably so that Kelsy can perform as an adequate (or even good compliment). In addition, though it would be a very good thing if he resumed his level of development he showed his first two years so that he was more of a leader rather than simply a good compliment as a player. This is possible. The other good news is that we are not singly reliant of Kelsay filling in well or stepping up his game but Denney was given a contract extension and qualifies in what you wrote as actually still being here. The question is whether the Bills braintrust made an error in that he really is not good enough to deserve an extension. I think the scheme will change his usage enough from the "Ted Hendricks" type coverage role he played well enough in 2003/04 in our zone blitz package to something else in in the 2006 Bills D. Our DTs in the 2006 Bills Cover 2 will need to be quick penetrators and force the opponent to make plays which our LBs will then clean-up. There is a good argument that Denny was actually a replacement for the Posey role and was more like a flexible LB than an LDE in our old zone blitz. As far as DL goes he was more likely to line up inside as a DT than as a traditional pass rushing LDE in the zone blitz package. He also ranged downfield in pass coverage in the short and even medium zone uising his long winspan and good athleticism he developed in hiw he was used last year. I actually see Kelsay as a better shot than Denny for LDE usage, but our DL usage in the Cover (or more likely Tampa) 2 scheme we are likely to use is an open question as best as I can tell. Clearly there is a plan for using Denny, but I know I and I suspect others are unable at this point (and will not be able to tell for sure until we stop running the vanilla pre-season schemes and move more toward implementation of the real D. DT: Sam Adams. Gone definitely and for good reason. He actually was a consideration for staying as his incredibly quick first step and penetrating ability made him a good candidate for the penetrating DT role in the Cover 2. However, his replacement Triplett had even better stats for sacks and tackles than Adams whike starting far fewer games. In addition, Triplett hs logged 5 years of play while Adams is on borrowed time having logged 13 years. Finally, Adams had been more productive than anyone expected as a Bill only taking 1/4 to a max of 1/3 of the plays off whie he seemed to vary from taking at least 1/3 t as many as 1/2 the plays off at his peak (he simply was so good and his first step so quick that oppoents had to play like he may embarass them on every single play). Yet, as the D fell apart last year, the me-fosrt Adams appeared a lot and his age and temperament made him a good cut for 2006. The chances he would prove to be the player he was in 2004 were remote. DT: Pat Williams. Gone. Lamentable that he is gone, but the downturn the D suffered without him last year seems to be as much to coincide with his lack of prescence as it does be caused by his not being here. In fact, the 2004 D produced it statistical results with PW sitting out a bit over 1/3 of the D snaps so the argument that he was essential to the 04 performance seems unlikely. In the new Tampa 2 mode, PW would likely have been gone this year anyway as he is more of rock-solid runstopper than the lower weight than traditionally normal for DTs we seem to want at DT and which other teams have used well. RDE: Aaron Schobel. Good, and still here. Agreed. If we are gonna produce very good to excellent results, AS will need to step up his production another notch. This is interesting: A. His 12 sacks, 54 tackles and him starting 16 gsmes each of his 5 years of play are high numbers in an unproductive D last year which if he should improve on them even margionally would lift him into the highest levels of DE performance. B. Improvement in these numbers is quite possible by him as the switch from the zone blitz to the Tampa 2 style will relieve him of some of the pass coverage duty which this athletic player showed last year and he can focus his game on making moves to pressure the QB and he will need to show good leverage to use his strength to run stop when his side is the point of attack. Schobel putting up numbers which get his a Pro Bowl nod and begin to be mentioned in the same breath with DEs like Taylor will be the measure. OLB: Jeff Posey. Not good enough. As easy statement to make right niow as Posey's play sucked in 2006 as the results for a Bills D within which he logged a lot of key minutes sucked. However, in 2003 and 04 the Bills D was good statistically and despite constants asks by me to produce some specific examples of poor play by Posey in 03/04 which resulted in him giving up big gains or TDs in pass coverage or being shredded at the point of attack by runners no one has provided any real world examples. Posey was certainly not good enough in 2005 as is seen by the poor statistically performance of the D as a whole and several plays where he came up a little short and too late in run stopping or making sacks. However, for time period your post covers in 2004, you simply provide no specific evidence in terms of overall team perormance or specific plays to support your declaration of Posey not being good enough. My sense is that uncertainty over TKO's health recovery is one of the main reason he remains penciled in as #1 of the deoth charts at the Sam LB position, buy if TKO continues on the track to recovery he seems to be on, he will get a hearty and ultimately successful challenge from Crowell as the starting strongside LB. At that point it will be a decision of whether Ralph us going to be made to pay starter money for a back-up which will be determined by whether cheaper back-ups like Stamer, the highly regarded Ellison or new acqquisition Watson are better values at #2 Sam. MLB: London Fletcher. Good player who's getting on in years- Folks put on this final proviso about his age because he is not regarded as one of the best LBs in the NFL even though the tacjkles credited to him over the last 5 years exceed all others in the NFL. 04 is notable because the stats clearly show that he was the short return guy for the Bills after McGee and that he was productive at this indicating in the real world that he tracked and handled balls in flight extremely well. Given that he has consistenly great football knowledge by holding down the D captain role even though TKO is a better performer physically, I have few doubts that Fletch will handle the additional coverage duties which would be required of him in the Tampa 2 as: 1. The same age which folks express fear about gives him a lot of experience to diagnose plays as they develop and do good coverage. 2. He has shown constant motor which has allowed him to make tackles from sideline to sideline that will help him do good coverage. 3. He fulfilling short kick return duties for the Bills shows that he teracks the ball well in flight and handles it well when it comes to him. This is weighed against him being a bit shorter than the norm for LBs, but folks have taken this individual point into claims that he is bad at coversge which have become fact-free opinions as there is little to substantiate this claim than the height issue. OLB: Takeo Spikes. Hopefully will fully recover from injury- We all hope so. The one thing to keep in mind though is that 80% of TKO is worth more on the field than 100% of other LBs and as long as he runs little risk of damaging himself more by playing. I a, quite comfortable with him playing himself back into football form. SS: Lawyer Milloy. Gone. Another for whom there seems to be good reason for his cut. His strength was as a hitter and this made him fit the zone blitz well where he often played a run stopping role as DEs like Schobel and Denney did pass coverage. His recurring nicks which he could play through as a younger man were actually limiting his effectiveness as a run stopper anyway. The theory of some that old man TV was a likely cut with Milloy or even a better cut than Milloy did not coincide with an actual read on their games in reality. TV's skillset fits the Cover 2 better than the zone blitz and Milloy's skillsets fit the zone blitz better than the Cover 2. In addition, both players have lost a step or two from their peak, but TV was faster to begin with and had more to lose than Milloy. The cap hits where the savings for a Milloy cut are higher makesthe Milloy cut a good one. He played a great role for us in 2003/04 because if we had not overpaid to get Milloy then Coy Wire likely would start. FS: Troy Vincent. Too old.- Again assesing 2004 as you set out to do I'm not sure where this comes from as it does not line up with what actually happened. Folks complain he was too old last year, but the fact is he tied for the team lead in INTs and then with several other players in tying for the team lead in fumbles recovered.. Yes, we certainly wish the team lead #s were higher, but TV simplty produced more turnovers than other Bills and if you cut him then one needs to replace them and posts simply say cut him. Even if one buys the idea that he cannot handle his role in 2006 despite his team leading turnover production in 05, to complain about his 04 performance simply ignores the fact he was a year younger then and that much better in 04. He may hit the wall suddenly as some older players do and the nicks which elevate to injuries at advanced football age may claim him, but there are few objective signs given: 1. The scheme is moving to his coverage strength from his hitter weaknesses. 2. His experience will be even more useful as a centerfielder and he already has lowered his speed need by switching to S from CB. 3. The acquisition of a bunch of talented younger players like Simpson or Yobouty who will lead to him being cut emphasizes the utility of him being a great on field coach for these players who need a year because of hi leaving school early (Yobouty) and being a second day draft pick who can reasonably be only counted upon to contribute this year to ST (Simpson). The reasonable debate here is whether the the Cover 2 extends TVs uti;ity merely one year or two rather than the fantasy he should be cut now. CB: Nate Clements. Future status/level of play uncertain- As 2004 assessment his future status was not an issue. As far as next year, the acquisiton of Yobouty makes his training more of the issue which will allow us to thank him and say goodbye rather than whether he is good enough to sign or not. CB: Terrence McGee. Good, and still here Agree. I think despite NC, he is now the #1 CB.

Enough for me to be satisfied with? No. Enough for it to be almost certainly better than last year's OL? Yes Will the difference be bridged? It depands on: A. Will they find legit back-ups when injuries occur and/or someone plays like a Bennie Anderson- It's easier to develop back-ups than starters, so as long as we do not need anyone beyond Preston to be a long-term starter when someone gets hurt (most likely Villarial) ur someone disappoints (I think he will be OK but Fowler is the biggest ? I see among the probable starters) I think we will be OK in terms of personel. B. Can JMac pull off the training and scheme job necessary to build cohesion and add value to the personnel- He did this job with turning a NYG OL with significant new FA additions into a unit which player a big role in them making the SB< I think he can do this. C. Will the installation of the St. L scheme work well enough to set the blitz back onits heels0 I think we have fast enough WRs and the addition of Roial as a 6th lineman should make this change happen. I think a key to this working however, is WM being utilized and performing well enough in the Marshall Faulk role as a pass catcher. He will not be Faulk, but I think he can do well enough at this aspect of the game to be adequate for the job.

Whoi?

The plans to produce something like the high-flying St. L O make a lot more sense hen one considers that the 3WR Bills set will feature speed merchant Evans, speed merchant Price and open field runner Parrish. Opposing DCs usually have at one extremely fast DB and one outstanding cover guy. One of these men is going to end up with a mismatch and if Evans proves to be a capable #1 qho develops the athleticism to make circus catches along with his speed, there is little choice for a DC but to zone up. If this happens on empty backfield sets with Reed added in as a 4th WR, the recent word s of Tyke Tolbert extoling his football saavy pointt to him really picking on zones.

I think there is good reason to feel good about JMac. My sense is that the OL he last put together with NYG had FAs Glenn Parker and Dusty Zielger as mainstays. Though Parker was a lot better than that ol blowhard the Coach gave him credit for (the Coach's crack expertise in OL assessment was seen in how well his designate choice to repace Parker Corey Louchiey did) and Dusty was more talented than I gave him credit for initially or the Bills braintrust ever gave him credit for, no one would mistake these two for SB talented players. Yet, JMac built an Ol which made it to the SB and oerhaps he can also get good production out of an OL which has Fowler and Reyes as key parts. I think the key will be him developing quality back-up talent as the 5 guys likely to start are a clear step up for the 5 guys who started last year. The really good news for us is that while it would be a moracle to find a player capable of starting on the reject wire, it strikes me as a lot more possible for him to develop back-ups who can fill in for the starters for a short time when they need a blow.

This is my guesstimate of their chances of working out. It tries to reflect that if you put a player like JP through a reasonably long development process, my senmse is that 4 times out of 10 it will turn out he does the job adequately for you and ends up after retiring being considered a good (and in a less than 1 out of 10 cases) a very good QB. This occurs (in my estimate) 2.5 out of 10 times with development effort being devoted to KH (the 2.5 probably emds up with the epitaph on his career being he was a goood back-up with episodes of success over 10 years but then he was given a starting job by the Bills and in two years or so he ran their new St. L style well throwin short passes which produced RAC yardage. Nall I guesstimate this never done anything but be good at mopping up episodes at proving to be an adequate starter once out of every ten times. The key to this math working since only one player can get the minutes in games at a time is for the Bills braintrust be efficient at allocating those precious game minutes to the player they judge worthy of them. My sense is that Jauron and Fairchild havw enough experience with several teams, several QBs (from folks who had adequate seasonns and games to failures) in St. L, Buf,, Chi, Det. and other places that they will be able to make efficient judgments about which of these three deserves precious game time, If they can decide that JP, KH, or Nall cannot make it and they waste little of the time of our ultimate QB on the 9 out of 10 cases if the decide Nall is the loser, the 7.5 of 10 that KH is the loser or the 6 of 19 that JP wouldn;t work out, they can devote that time to developing an adequate QB. The first thing I am most interested in is not which QB the Bills belief in but which QB they give up on so there is more time for the other two.

I think he is talking about paying a large payout to NC which would count in the first year of his new contract so that you would not owe any additional payments beyond the NFL minimum to NC from here on out. This savings in low cap hit for Clements here on out could then be allocated to Steinbach, Jones or whomever you want. I think the way the dates for the new cap kicking in and how payments are allocated from current contracts makes this idea not really work. The 2006 contract year is already set and all payments (even a balloon to NC made just before this cap season ends) would go into the 2007 cap # which you want to use in talent like a Jones or Steinbach. In theory you could use the out savings from an upfront balloon payment to NC to allow you to distribute more cao $ to new acquisitions, but you gotta pay sometime and under this formulation crunch time probably comes up front and offers little marginal value.

The NC situation is a good one for us. The possibilities seem to be: 1. We agree to a long term deal with him before the season Advantages: A. we lock up a starting CB long term B. we lower our cap hit and manage it better by distributing his signing bonus in a manner which fits our cap plans. 2. Disadvantage: A. We probably overpay a bit for his current value based on his disappoitning results last year (but as he knows our team and he had vvery good development prior to that overpaying is reasonable). B. We have the happy problem of a bit of a logjam of talent at CB. 2. He plays out his contract Advantages: A. He has huge incentives to be productive this year for us, B. We still have a shot at signing him when he becomes an FA as we have agreed not to tag him (I have seen no distinction between franchise or transition, I think we do not tag him at all next of-season and if we do our name will be mud for any FAs we want to sigh in the future as it will be clear the Bills word means little). Disadvantages: He may walk after next season- but if he does then so be it as those are the rules. Players from TKO to Fletch came to Bills with no compensation being given up by us. Sometimes you lose a Winfield, but sometimes you gain a TKO. It will be unfortunate if we lose him for nada but I so not have a big problem with this. 3. The sub-issue is how well he plays this year. If he plays well I see no problem with us paying a lot of $ to keep him. Our cap room is up and we have to and should spend it somewhere. IF NC has another Pro Bowl year I consider 2006 a bargain for us and do not mind paying him what the market says he is worth. On the other hand if he has a second consecutive disappointing year his market value is hurt a lot and we can sign him to a very reasonable contract to lock him up instead of overpaying him a bit as we likely would need to do now. This is only if we choose to resign him if he has a second bad year. Youbouty has not an unreasonable shot at being a reasonable #2 next year as he generally was assessed as being a 1st rounder in terms of physical talent this year, but he needed another year of college to get the mental side of his game up to first round levels. Ny spending this year in the Bills system rather than in college he should be at a high level next year. King has an outside shot at being good enough to be a #2 and even though he is more likelya nickel, Greer is already good enough to hold down this position for us for a couple of years. I see no reason why we shouldn't play this one out for quite a while as while having him walk without compensation is not good, but this is what the rules are and we are prepared for it if that is the worst thing which happens.

I doubt this is that reliable given its one person overhearing half a conversation and then telling a friend who tells the internet blah blah blah, but the thing that interests me about this is that I always felt that Bledsoe would have been more effective here if he and theOC did not rely on his cannon arm so much and called a more diverse game where the OC (Kevin Killdrive for us) did not so pass happu and Bledsoe would not keep audibling out of the runs he did call/ I felt the Bills O was more effective under TC in part because the limited the amount of audibles Bledsoe could call and because they ran the statute enough that blitzers could not sell out for rushing the passer because they needed to hesistate even a moment to watch the middle in case Bledsoe was running the QB draw. Bledsoe was never going to be mistaken for John Elway and scamper for a TD, but Ds did not want to give up even 5-10 yards to Bledsoe falling forward in a wide open middle of the field.

Part of this is simply that some folks once burned are just pretty negative about the current huge question marks surrounding the Bills. However, beyond this simple explanation which applies to some folks, it is interesting to see where many other Bills fans actually are in agreement about the challenges which confront our prospects, and even pretty much agree on the strengths and weaknesses of the Bills braintrust which is running the show. Still despite this generally shared assessment of these challenges you have these folks making predictions which are dismatrically opposed in terms of the outcomes for our team. One often sees phrases like whether the glass is half-empty or half-full to describe these disagreements. They agree about the details but draw very different conclusions about the likely outcome. I think the difference is to some extent founded upon whether the poster approaches this problem as a whole or approaches it in a one problem at a time way. If one looks at it one problem at a time and takes on each problem as an individual issue, there actually are some fairly reasonable solutions with a reasonable chance of things working out for each of these problems. For example, if you look at the QB battle of JP v. KH v. Nall, my sense is none of these three is likely to be the QB that we need to lead us through a whole winning season. JP is the most highly regarded of the lot based on where he was drafted, but the facts are he simply sucked last year. The debate is whether you give up on huim now or not. KH looked and player better than JP last year (which is not saying much acutally) but in 10 seasons he has never produced consistenly over a whole season despite having some good episodesof success. Nall also had a good QB rating in his brief appearances mopping up for Favre, but there is simply a big difference between mopping up and playing real starting football. Individually, none of these QBs is likely (has a majority chance) of being the starter we want and need this year. However, when you look at this as a whole rather than individually. a 40% chance of JP success, a 25% chance of KH success and a mere 10% chance of Nall success adds up to a majority chance of the Bills finding an adequate QB from these three. This math working out assumes that the Bill's braintrust is reasonably efficient (if not they will get major grief baased on pre-season performance rather than the usual fact-free whining they always get) at making judgments about which olayer peforms best in camp and chooses the player whose on field production in pre-season is most likely to result production of Ws come regular season (no mean feat actually but it is hard to hide bad on field performance or use it to resist good of on-field production in this personnel testing time. However, in this case if you make your judgments mostly based on individual assessment pessimism is rational, However, if your judgment is based on looking at the whole optimism can be rational. Interestingly, this step-by-step judging vs. making a more holistic judgment has the opposite effect when done on another basis. One can see a way that the QB problem can be solved if you take a broader view than looking for a favorite among individual players. One can also see a method for addressing the complaint that TV is getting old and that the back-ups DBs are too inexperienced by combining these two issues to propose that TV is well placed to train the youngsters and that we can easily get by with him playing since afterall the fact is he tied for the team lead last year in both IMTs with McGee and fumbles recovered with several players. Again if one takes an individual player assessment then pessimism is warranted but if one takes a broader view then optimism is reasonable. The issue has also be cited that it will take the Bills awhile to learn and adjust too their new schemes and this is a problem, The broader view flipside of this issue however is that there won't be much tape for opponents to study of us running the offense until several games into the next season and there will not be much of a play log to identify Bills tendencies at certain down and distances for quite a while. Early in the season the Bills will be well ahead of the opponents in terms of understanding what we are doing. As lomg as tjere os some modicum of success in learning and implementing the new schemes while we learn them this situation should actually work to the Bills advantage early in the season. Overall, I think that the most optimistic of Bills fans are those who take a moderate view of the situation. If one is so into the personalities and the soap opera aspects of the game (oh gosh Willis isn't at the voluntary workout, JP does not have a QB temperament and other off-season Entertainment Momently type trrash) then one can easily get focused on individual issues which lead to pessimism. On the other hand, though I think a moderate view leads to taking a problem at a time approach to problems in the off and pre-season. It's easy to see how one can rationally be pessimistic when one assesses there is an OL problem, AND, there is a starting QB problem, AND there is a back-up RB issue (and WM's production outage in the second half of last season), AND there is a unproven TE issue, AND etc. etc. etc. Its easy to see how one can take a holistic view and say that though the OL, RB. QB or whatever problems may be solved individually well, it is quote unlikely that ALL of these problems will be solved and the result is going to be 5-11 agaion if we are lucky. However, though I understand the rationality of pessimism when you look at this as a whole, my sense is why adopt this holistic assessment right now. Training camp before the third pre-season game and the period after the draft is not the sa,e as tje regular season because it is a time where rather than the key to winning a game is integration and making all the units on the team work as a TEAM. There is an ability unlike the regular season with 80+ guys on the roster and the ability to divide up into units with incredible individual attention to work on these issues separately or in essence one at a time (but a bunch of issues at the same time). My sense is that optimism and viewing each glass as half full rather than half empty (or even 1 quarter full rather than 3/4 empty is the thing to do. Once the real games are near or have started then we will be forced to view things holistically and the measure will be all about what have you done for me lately and what will you do next game. I'm optomistic now because later I will have no choice but to be realistic whatever the regular season brings.

Rico- Interesting, but TKO's recovery would have to fail big time as a TKO at 75% is probsbly equal to a Stamer at 100%. I think you are right that Villarial eventually gets hit with old age as dings which used to be nicks he could play through become injuries which force him to the bench, but my guess is tha CV is the RG on opening day. Anderson is the lead candidate for RDT, but my guerss is that the Bills will want to put the best players on the field. If McCargo is not the starter soon in the '06 season I think we wasted resources trading up to get him. Your judgment that TV will not start at FS is certainly consistent with your past declarations that he is done as a Bill. However, I think this prediction will be as correct as those which wrote off TV as gone either with or instead of Milloy. He is long in the the tooth so the injury gremline may force him to the bench sooner than he or the Bills plan. However, I think the scary thing for things who have prepared TV's obits as a Bill is that the debate may well be over whether our switch to a D scheme (Cover or likely Tampa 2)which suits his cover skills more than the LB style play of an S in our old zone blitz scheme will extend his time as a Billf for simply this year or maybe even two years,

The creep has begun as the habit has been for teams to sign the last picks first and then as higher and higher rounds get signed the market is set. In the past things have gone right down to the wire as camp opens for 1st round picks (particularly those in the top 10 choices) to get signed. I do not expect the Bills to sign Whitmer until just before camp starts (even though this seems early that teams are getting going signing seveth rounders like Pennington). This year may result in signings happening a little quicker than normal as last year there was a lot of uncertainty and contracts were complicated by uncertainty as to whether a new CBA would be signed. Since the parameters of the new deal is set and the cap has gone up so there is plenty of money around things should flow easier. As Whitmer is slotted for a contract earlier than he thought seriously about pre-draft, he has no rep as a low character guy who will hold out for the last dollar, and because the Bills are interested in having a good feeling of peace and harmoney, my guess is that he signs with little muss, but still the market will not be set for a #8 until just prior (the last week) to cvamp opsning in August.