Pyrite Gal

Are there many (any) Bills whether acquired through FA, UDFA, trades or whatever who you feel contributed more in 2005 than they did in 2004? I think the draft picks and the rest of the team generally sucked in performance last year (and they have the dismal record of Ws to show for it). However, if you are going to blame this failure on the failure of draft picks above other acquistions, you would need to show a comparison or great achievement by the FAs and other's compared to the performance of the draftees. In general, I do not think that is the case because there is a fairly clear record of dismal performances by FA acqusitions like Posey, Adams (who like Clements dropped from a level that got him a Pro Bowl berth). An unfortunately dismal record of injured FAs like TKO and Milloy, and even the case of draftee JPs dismal performance forcing us to us a back-up QB who performed at.. well like a back-up as our starter. Did the draftees disappoint and even suck? Yep! There were notable exceptions among draftees who improved on their 04 output for various reasons like Crowell and Schobel. However, even some FAs like Lindell and the steady Moorman improved their performance so it seems your analysis does not hold with any consistency. In addition, this labeling and attempt to classify the problem as draft or FA related seems pretty tortured. You obviously label Bledsoe as a draft failure on your list because he was traded for a draft pick. He sounds like a trade acquired failure to me. If you want to categorize him as a draft failure then rationally the analysis should look at the performance of the Bill who was drafted in that spot. WM's 2005 performance versus 2004 was huge if you compare the beginnings of the two seasons and a flop if you compare the 2 second halves (the tortured analysis moves further from reality. Likewise if we want to indict performance downturns of draftees as a big issue, McGee had such a fantastic 04 that he suffered a significant downturn in performance in 2005 by the measure of TDs. However, his yards gaomed was pretty good. Was he a mistake or wasn't he by your measure? Should TD be condemned or not for this "bad" drafting. Perhaps we want to look at another drop-off from a significant drafted player Eric Moulds. In many ways he went from being a team leader to getting dumped as a character issue. Overall, the conclusion you draw from your analysis of draft failure seems fairly meaningless in terms of understanding the Bills.

If you actually believe Guy is responsible (primairily or in large part for choosing the ill-fated direction of the O under Sheppard (I'm not sure when he arrived but it has been awhile) and then had large or primary final decision making on the players to run that ill-fated scheme he could get players for AND then did the same choosing the O scheme utilized Clements and having final say about the players to run that, and after all of this he still survives and is now making the same final call for Marv (whew thats a lot of failure he had the final call on), I do not know why you would align yourselves with the Bills unless you have some exraordinary desire to be a part of pain. If your and Rico's cut on this is true, then the fundamental question for the Bills is why after Guy has produced such a repeated record of failure participating in the selection of one failed scheme after another (and then another in reality) and has the final call on which players are gonna implement that scheme, how has he escaped accounting for these failures while Sheppard, Killdrive, GW, Clements, and MM have all been fired or let go for these failureds. I think you way over-estimate Guys role an import in choosing these three-illfated schemes and actually really over-estimate Guys role as Pro Personnel Director of doing what he is told well enogh to keep his job, but simply not deciding himself on what will be done. He may even have something as individualistic determanistic as the "final call " described in the above posts (though I think the final call is really about managing the collaboration to a final decision rather than laying out and enforcing "the Guy plan." He appears to me to do his job and keep his job because whomever is really taking the lead in making the final call on the scheme, he is a team player who work with that person to help them do what they want to do. As best as I can tell, his position as Director of Pro Personel is that he seems to adequately (or maybe even performs well) a set of functional tasks) where he can understand to his bosses satisfaction what they want to run (ex. 1. GW and his OC Sheppard decide they are gonna go west coast offense, 2. Sheppard makes clear and Guy demonstrates clear understanding of the players want, 3. Sheppard has worked with Vinky and correctly identified shoring up the OL as a major need and Guy gets the job of seeing which FAs within the budget TD set can fit that need 4. Guy comes back to Sheppard as the season goes on and says his evaluation of pro personnel indicates its gonna be hard to afford within our cap hell budget the type of players the Bills need. However, there are ways to potentially acquire the players we want from the draft, player development and FA. Guy then chooses Teague and slots him in a C based on his evaluation, thinks JJ should be LT based on his evaluation of our team, moves Sully to LG based on his evaluation, decides to keep Reuben, etc. and then assigns GW's buddy to train them because he does scheme and Vinky does training. 5. It all falls apart Vinky gets demoted by his longtime buddy and Guy keeps rolling along gaining responsibility. Everybody (Vinky, GW,Sheppard, Killdrive) gets let go but puppetaster Guy gets more. He then does the same thing with MM Clements and they get let go and he keeps right on going. This sounds so unlikely, i think it is fairly clear that your theory of how this works and who is control (and thus who gets blamed) is not the case.

This still leaves my question that if this so clearly Guys final call, wha pictures of Ralph does he have or whatever reason such that he escaped having his head roll over bad moves like the evaluation of FAs like Teague or our own personnel from promoted folks like Sullivan and Pacillo on our OL. Instead of the Teflon Guy GW demoted his longtime buddy Vinky from the OL job instead of finding fault with Guy. As time went on GW himself paid the price but MM kept his trust in Guy. Meanwhile even MM and Clements had their head roll but yet Guy gets to make the call anyway. Actually, i think its far more collaborative than 1 guy (or Guy) having the call and its about to get even more collaborative if Marv stays the same. I can easily see the definition you quote as being correct but the way you oversee things is not that your make all the decisions, but you oversee that all the decision are being made and articulated clearly so the rest of the machine that must ork together to work at all gets things done. In the end, i think Guy keeps his job because he is a good team player who helps the HC, coordinators and position coaches design a scheme and do what they want to do. I think Guy has escaped blame for the scheme debacles because he always did his job and oversaw the schemes developed by others getting implemented the way they wanted. Do you really think that this is all his fault and yet Marv amd Ralph are going to trust in this failure to now finally get it right? If what you say is true then we really have little hope.

Speed is important but isn't everything. Verticsl leap is important but isn't everything. The ability to make a good read is not everthing either but if you don't make a good read then you're running to catch up or leaping to try to stop a ball thrown over your head and this is a losing game against even an average NFL QB. The key is to have a working combination of these items and I think that the Flletcher combo of great motor, tenacity (even minus a few inches from the norm, and his experience and demonstrated applied knowledge of the game actually makes him our best LB to play the Tampa 2. What plays or exact situations lead you to a conclusion that Flercher is a oiir cover guy or are these simply fact-free opinions based on your judgment. My sense of Fletcher's footbsll intelligence is based on him repeatedly being selcte as captain of the D even with a better player TKO on the D. Its based on my observation in games that he is routinely the player making out case to the officials on controversial calls. His constant movement toward the ball and high motor is evidenced by the large number of tackles he is credited with. The year he set the Bills record for tackles credited to him in a season occured when our DL simply sucked in GWs initial start and because the D could be singled up he often made these tackles with an OL player assigned to him. The complaints voiced by folks that he made tackles 5 yards up the field rather than at the LOS seemed much more to be a rap on our DL than a rap on Fletcher. Fletcher has demonstrated a real ability to track the ball in space and the physical skills to handle the ball close in as is evidenced by his role as a returner on SY Look you said it yourself, in the cover 2 he is going to be playing zone and coverting a space and not man-to-man. Coverage in a zone is about reads as in not simply reacting when someone comes into your space but in reading the plau amd anticipating who is coming into your space. Fletcher was probably one of those pleased as punch (along with the much maligned Troy Vincent to hear we were moving to the Cover 2 because this switch plays to their strength and unless either suddenly hits the wall due to age this move really plays to their strength. Do not be surprised if he shows evidence again by leading the team in tackles in 06 that the move to a cover 2 may actually extend his time as a Bill rather than this year being his swan song.

I think the major thing needed for an LB in the cover 2 (or Tampa 2) is a good footnsll brain. More than the DL whose job is to shoot the gaps anp pressure the QB, or the safeties whose job is to play centerfield or the CBs whose job is to cover tightly in the short zone, the LBs will need to read the play and decide whether to pinch in to run stop or hold off and cover the short middle zone. I think this D was made for a player like London Fketcher who has a great football mind and a constant motor. IF TKO's wheels are OK it suits him as well because of his experience and the quick reactions he had pre-injury. Ironically, while most of us were willing to say goodbye to Posey, this D style suits him more than the zone blitz does as both he an Denny seemed to operate in the zone blitz with an emphasis on making the correct read and either drop back in coverage or pinch up to the POA for run support. I am also hopeful for Crowell as he showed a bit of goog football acumen subbing for F;etcher last pre-season. He adusted well to filling in for TKO and clearly is not physically as good, i think he made a few standout plays because he has good intellect and reads plays well.. If we are gonna depend on speed to make the Cover 3 work, Pryton Manning (andin fact most NFL QBs will have a field day picking apart our LBs who took a bad first step.

I doubt this theory. I think Fletcher is the mike backer on all plays. I think it is a mistake to think that the primary thing needed from the Mike is speed. Running is essential and you do not want Sam Adams out there. However, of there is a primary thing its being able to make good reads. If your MLB better be a speed demon because he makes incorrect or slow reads so that he better be quick to make up for his mistakes your team is gonna get killed. The concept of Crowell being the first MLB choice is possible as he was Fletcher's back-up and handled the position well in pre-season last year, but even though he did a very good job stepping in for TKO last year, if he plays any MLB this year it will be as Fletch's back-up whether it is a running or passing down and distance. The concept of Elllison starting at MLB is laughable at best. It was no coincidence or mistake that Fletcher was D captain last year. He has consistently shown he has a great football head often yelling at the ref for a call we disagree with or a mistake he made before the announcers or the rest of the team seems to know what is going on. He is a smaller guy than the LB norm, but has made up for it by having a constant motor and football smarts to get the right place with no hesitation. he has proved so resilent as a Bills that not only has he led the NFL in tackles credited to him the last five years, but he even was used as a ST hawk and generally is second to Mcgee in kicks returned because he makes the right decision handling the ball. He actually has provided some deep coverage on crossing WRs even in the zone blitz.

One of the prime mistakes folks make on TSW is that they make an assumption that there are only two choices and thats it. This may be good for arguing or if you are trying to excite your political base in a Presidential election, but that simply ain't how reality tends to work. Sure Guy is in charge of pro development, but both he and you would be investing in a foolish strategy if you froze JMac or any other position coach out of the process os evaluating and choosing pro talent. JMac has clearly laid out a vision for building the O-line and much like his recent successful work which was built with second tier FAs like Glenn Parker and Dusty Ziegler as mainstays of a unit which made the SB, so too are we getting second tier (some would argue 3rd tier FAs like Reyes and Fowler to work with. If Guy is so important, then he is overseeing cutting the Bills (and in some cases professional) throats of guys he oversaw choosing like Mike Williams, Jonas Jennings, Teague etc. Either you are decribing a world within which puppet-master and Svengali act-alike Guy has done a complete 180 and jettisoned all the guys he picked and somehow Ralph and now Marv have bought into his new vision which involves selecting 2nd tier FAs and demanding JMac train them. Actually, what i think we are seeing here is that Vinky trotted out a vision for offensive genius GW and advocated selecting players to make that vision a reality and because he collaborated with GW/Sheppard (and then Kevin Killdrive) on this vision when it failed miserably it was Vinkys head that rolled, Guy was doing his job which was being a team guy and orchestrating implementing the vision of others, but when GWs head rolled, team player Guy hung around and did the same implementation work for MM. Again heads rolled, but JMac who was not blamed for the debacle and Guy were kept aboard because they are team players, and most important JMac is a team player who succeeded in NY and Cincy with his work. I think the undeniable massive change coincides with Vinky.Ruel going and JMac taking over.

What you lay out is one of the reasons why the draft is ONE of the methods for building a team. I not only aggree with that but insist that is the case. However, some folks would have your believe that is THE way to build a team and the centerpiece of any winning strategy. This I disagree with. Even for "poor" folks like Ralph and the Bills, the draft is more important for us than it is for Dan Snyder, but even for us the number of players on the roster that year on makes the draft a small % of our team and even the accumulation of three years of drafted players is below if not significantly below half the team. The draft simply has far less import to building a winning team than some folks seem to understand who think it is the predominant way you build a team. One need only look at our OL to see the Bills going in a very different direction in terms of building this unit as likely all of our starters will be collected through other mechanism. I think this fact and the over reliance on the draft in the thinking of many fans is why they are even more fit to be tied about the state and prospects of the OL, Perhaps some fans are on the three year timeline for a draft to somehow be the centerpiece of team building (which can only happen if a team gets a whole bunch of choices right in this crapshoot we call the draft). However, one thing for certain is that Ralph would be a fool if he figured it was a deadlock cinch he will even be around in 3 years (I hope he is but probably not). Ralph and the Bills are investing in one of the few strategies on the OL for turning it around quickly which is buying second tier FAs. JMac pulled this off before buying the Dusty Zieglers and Hlenn Parkers of the world and they are trying to do it again with Reyes and Fowler.

I aggree that claiming folks credit draftees with being gold mine sure fire all pros is an exaggeration (for the most part). However, I think that probably due to an excellent marketing job by ESPN and also the popularity of fantasy leagues, folks put way too much stock in the draft as the centerpiece for how teams should be built. Again, the draft is an important tool. Good players have to come from somewhere and good players tend to be drafted. However, there is a world of difference between the universe of all players and the more select field of 8 or so players a team get on average each year from the draft. Folks routinely seem to identify the great performing NFL players and then wail that if they had only been listened to we should have picked them and never seem to take into account that the vast majority of second players are gone from the teams which selected them by the thrid season. In addition, even first round choices though reasonably expected to start their first year, really do appear to be a crapshoot as to whether they in fact are going to be worth their enormous slotted salaries. It is fascinating to me that not only was 4th pick Mike Williams a bust, but so was 3rd pick Harrington and actually the 2nd tackle taken McKinnie turned out to be a better producer than MW (as if that says much at all) but overall I think has at the very least been a disappointment on the field (he has been adequate when he finally took the field after blowing his first season as a holdout and has at least bee manageable with the vet judgment and quick release of Brad Johnson not requiring him to hold blocks as long at Culpepper did when the Vikes failed to protect him). In addition to his on field struggles, his off-field shenanigans as WM's favorite party animal seem to make him a horrible guy to root for (unless you like party boats where he faces charges or DWI charges as a form of entertainment though they have little to do -unless he gets some jail time- with on the field production). Overall, TD's observation that 50% of even 1st round choices disappoint remains uncontroverted by anything more than fact-free opinion from what I have seen. On the face of it, the draft seems like far from the lead way you build a team as it contibutes only an average of 8 or so players per year to a 53 man roster and even over 3 years that not only is slightly less than half of the 53 men on the team, but of the 24 or so players drafted the majority+ of them are no longer with the team. The draft is simply one method of player acquisition and actually far from the lead method of player acquisition on a winning team. The key is not to simply measure how many players on an SB team were drafted (my guess is almost all of them), the key is to understanding team building is to assess how many of these players were acqired by taht SB team drafting them.

The reason that I disagree with Rico's post is actually the track record. The track record in question for OL development is not Jphn Guy's as director of pro personnel but actually Jim MaNally as an assesor of OL talent and OL line coach. I think there is a marked difference between the assessment and development of OL players under JMac and under his not ready for primetime predeseccors Vinky and Ruel under GW. While JMac has not been perfect (the case so far of Bennie Anderson is the sore thumb), I think his short two years here have also seen some interesting hits. Specifically: 1. Peters- The acquisition of this UDFA who could have gone anywhere he was asked and whom several teams apparently had interest in as a TE prospect was quite good. Alot of the credit for the progress itself goes to Peters' athleic talent (demonstrated by his ST play leading to a rookie TD and his O work at TE which got folks interested in him). However, one should take into accont that it was JMac who clearly identified his potential talent as a tackle when actually it his blocking production as a TE which was in question, convinced him that tackle was the way for him to become a pro, cut him but kept him with the Bills on the PS and oversaw activating him when other teams were sniffing around this PS player. 2. Villarial has performed quite well for a semi-budget FA pick-up with his major downside being age rather than skill. 3. Gandy really surprised many of us when he proved to be at least adequate at LT last year, but JMac appears to have gotten this one right in entrusting LT duty to him and ignoring fan calls to play him at G. 4. 2004 OL- He really made something out of the disaster OL he inherited from Vinky/Ruel. He cut the garbage they had invested in like Pacillo and Sully, managed to squeeze performances which were part of the winning streak that season out of Tucker and whathisname from the Raven's PS to replace them, diagnosed and solved the redzone problems with the quick fix introduction of Bannan into the OL, and even managed the imploding MW into turning his career in record time from the meltdown he experienced when the Grammy who raised him died to him geting some note as the best OL player on the Bills squad in 2004. Ultimately, all the leftovers from the Vinky days are gone (the resistance to many calls by fans to overpay Jennings has shown itself to be a good move given JJ immediately going on the IR last year for SF) and we will see whether Reyes/Fowler end up producing more like. The other part of JMac track record is that he somehow took an OL led by former Bills Glenn Parker at LT and Dusty Ziegler at C and fashione this group into one capable of playing OL for an SB team. Prior to that he was possition coach for a couple of Bengals squads which made the SB and blocked productively for a 1000 yard rusher James Brooks and protected Kenny Anderson passing. The track record of JMac (who has always said that he also is no miracle worker so expectations should be reasonable) is actually a good reason to be hopeful about the potential of Reyes and Fowler rather than going into a funk and being skeptical about our team. trust but verify seems to be the way to go.

Cliff notes begin: Really? Cliff notes end Really?

Okay, I'll play. Whwn does signing an inadequate player make sense? It does when the player you currently have at the position on your roster is also inadequate and the player who is inadequate is better than your current inadequate player. The other caveat to add to this is when there is no adsequate player or even a better inadequate plater available to you ub your budget under the salary cap. I'd happily join you in railing against the Bills choices if they in fact did not sign an adequate player who is available, but in this particular case we are talking about signing a back-up OL player, and I think any player you get is likely to be inadequare as a potential starter because by definition we are talking about a back-up and as a practical matter the market has already given starter money to all the players who can adequately start. From what I see the popularity of fantasy leagues and also the great marketing job ESPN has done on the NFL draft has infected many fans to believe that all judgments about players should be made on some absolute scale when back here in reality teams are limited by their budgets within the salary cap where in order to pay the big bucks stars command and really inadequate players (like Ryan Leaf) get slotted to make whether they deserve it or not (in addition some GMs like Butler panic in the search for the next Jim Kelly) and give megamillions to players like RJ who do not deserve it based on their play. The bottom line here in reality is that the Bills have some weak players at back up OL positions. Do you have so much confidence in Matt Morgan that you think there are no better LTs available that we should not sign because they are inadequate players? Our back-up C is on the deoth chart as Geisinger, I think Jeff Mitchell has seen his best days and is inadquate as a player and I think Cort Rayner was never an adequate C, but I am quite interested in signing them because I think Geisinger is oribabky worse. I think Aaron Gibson was and likely still is a fat tub of goo, but I have so little confidence in Jerman that I think our OL is improved if this inadequate player works out for us and Jerman gets cut. Do you advocate also signing these inadequate players or do you know of some other player who is adequate we can sign or are you a firm believer in Morgn, Geisinger and Jerman. In adequate players? Just get her done and we will be a marginally better team.

Something is definitely up in how Jauron/Fewell are going to work the DL in our Cover 2. The max weight of the 4 DTs on our depth chart is Anderson at 304. Jauron actually ran the cover 2 with Big Ted as his nose tackle so having a big guy is not anthema to the way he ran it. However, I suspect that we are going to see a very different cover 2 from the one Jauron ran in Chicago and we'll just have to see. If we signed Wilkinson it would tell us alot.

Actually as far as the Cover 2 goes I think the key thing is less speed than it is football smarts. Speed is important obviously, but more so because a player can use it as a crutch to make up for errors. However, the key to a good cover 2 (particularly with the LBs who need to make diagnostic judgments on whether the O is running or passing and if its a run pinch in to the point of attack because the DL players are shooting the gap rather stopping the run, correct LB diagnosis is key. This is the main reason i am not concerned at all about Fletcher because as D captain he has continually demonstrated an ability to know whats going on with the football game incredibly fast. In addition, he is a high motor player and should be fine both in deep pass coverage the Tampa 2 calls for and to stop the run. Specifically (since you ask) the back-ups on the depth chart are: SLB Stamer- Contract was recently exteneed by the Bills indicting the coaches judge him to be a valued player. He has shown some prowess on ST and even some atheticism as a back-up position player for the Bills with a nice INT where he blocked a pass and stayed focused on it for the INT in 2004. He has been a pro long enough and seen plays from both sidelines and on the field that I doubt one should be extremely worried about him playing the Cover or Tampa 2. Ellison- Obviously as a rookie picked late in draft one would be likely throwing him to the wolves if you depended upon him to be a key player in a complex D scheme. However, one can see why the Bills picked him because he was a player who gained a great ST rep in college. He apparently has showed very good track speed, but I think his primary use is going to be on ST until he demonstrates he has learned the game in practice. MLB- Ezekial- Probably the biggest questions about the back-ups are with him. He actually got activisted early last season after TKO got hurt and saw some ST duty with OK results, but rather than sticking and forcing his way onto the field, as we got more confidence in Crowell making the move successfully from back-up MLB to WLB, and it became clear he had left his back-up MLB role behind him then Ezekial got that job but was inactive most if not all the rest of the way. My guess is if London goes down you will see Crowell move back before Ezekial plays/ Digregorio- camp fodder as best as I can tell. Carothers- also camp fodder. WLB Crowell is 2nd on the depth chart behind TKO and will probably be at WLB until TKO proves he has recovered (all things look good right now and even 80% of TKO is better than 100% of most LBs. I expect that when TKO is officially judged as back then the recently extended Crowell takes on and challenges Posey for the Sam job. As a former MLB who competently called D signals in pre-season last year, I have few doubts he can work in a cover 2. Haggan is 3rd on the WLB depth chart and this recently extended player has shined on the #1 ST in the NFL, he has also seen a lot of plays though mostly from thje sidelines, but given his ST performance, his longevity and the team feeling good about him I think he is not a cover 2 worry. Hunter- Signed as an FA last year and hung on as a PS guy. Things may get a little crowded at LB with TKOs recovery and particularly if Posey stays he is a likely goner. Overall, i think we are very deep and good at LB. We really have 4 starters and though Posey appears to be the odd man out, we actually have the cap room that we might hang onto him (particularly if there are any questions regarding YKPs recovery. Posey got continually zapped by some of the knowledgable TSW posters over the years, but despite complaints about him turning the wrong way or taking bad angles, these complaints were never supported in 03 and 04 to pointing out specific cases where these alleged problems led to TDs or big gains by opponents. Yet, the entire D fell apart last year and Posey was one of those. He will need to show some things this pre-season in orfer to justify his staying even to supporters such as me. The strongest part of Posey's game in the zone blitz scheme has actually been his ability to correctly diagnose whether the opponent was going to run or pass. This skill will be played to in LBs duties in the cover 2 and I though I think Crowell is the better player who should beat him out for the start at SLB, i would suggest not writing him off completely yet. Moving to the cover might extend his career as a Bill a year particularly if we find a way to liberate the pass rishing chops he showed when he got 8 sacks his last year in Texas.

Cliff notes begin: Ralph knows he ain't gonna last forever and after 5 non-playoff years under TD the future is now regarding the Bills. A 2 two year rebuilding plan may be the best we can do and a 3 year plan more realistic but thhis team is going to roll the dice and go for it choosing best chance to win now vets over developing younger players even if the long-term is the more priudent choice. In particular this means that being a slave to assessing the absolute value of a player is not the way to go and instead one should ask whether a potential player is better than what we got on our roster even if the potential player is inadquate. The future is now. Cliff notes end. I know this will make some folks brain hurt so I apologize in advance for this line of thinking if it does trouble some folks, However this is a really good time for folks to understand why the idea of assessing player value (which is central to assessing the draft) and building a winning team though intensely related are really two different things. ESPN doing a great job marketing the draft so they cann attract eyeballs and thus make money selling commercials and the advent of fantasy leagues have really helped create a never before seen interest in assessing and arguing about the absolute quality of players. However, this is a different exercise than the reality of building a winning teams which the Bills braintrust is paid big bucks for doing. This debate is seen in arguments over the approach of going after the Best Player Available (BAP. or drafting for Need. In a perfect world, there is no question you would simply go for BAP and develop him into all he can be over time to reload your team (even this simple task ain't easy as the BAP based on collegiate performance is not always going to produce a good player in the pros. From workout warriors like Mike Mamula, to head cases like Ryan Leaf to folks who suffer bad breaks (literally) with injuries the history of the NFL is littered with players selected by folks who chose a BAP (and also who stretched to fill a need) because draft value and team building are different things. As I judge it, the Bills did have a bad draft in terms of selecting for value as the consensus was that both Whitner and McCargo were taken above where most folks assessed their value. However, I think it is also true that all signs point to this having been a very good draft for the Bills getting the players that they wanted (It appears they had Whitner rated above Huff and McCargo easily as the 3rd best DT both well above the 4th rated DT amd potentially ahead of Ngota OR Bunkley OR both. When n throws in them going BAP getting a perceived by many 1st round talent with 3rd round experience in Yobouty in the 3rd, it was a very good Bills draft. This issue of absolute value versus relative worth really can be seen now that pre-season is drawing ever closer. There are tons of comments from folks looking at the available FAs and correctly assessing them or labeling them as bad or inadequate players. Fine and I agree generally. However, we are moving into the final stages of team building and I really advocate the Bills signing bad or inadequate players IF THE PLAYERS WE HAVE ON OUR CURRENT ROSTER ARE WORSE. This is a sport but the Bills are a business so one also strongly has to factor costs and contracts into this equation. However, I couldn't care less if a player is reasonably judged to be bad or inadequate if he is a cost-effective upgrade over what we have on the roster. A past real world example of this happened when the Bills acquired Sam Adams. Some wailed about this move and argued quite correctly that he had shown real condidtioning issues in the past and was well into the backside of his career. They cirrectly judged him to be a player in decline (this point was made clear from a decline in his output as a player) and legitimately voiced complaints of many observers that he seemed to go on vacation and take about 1/3 of plays off. They did not want such a player to be a Bill. I however, argued that his absolute quality as a player did not matter so much to me as that relatively he was even playing badly a clear upgrde over our current starter at DT Ron Edwards. Folks get focused on their absolute assessment of the value of a player and lose sight that it is his relative comparison to what we got which is the key to building a winning team. There is a time element of import here and there is a legitimate argument that our team will be better off next season or in 2008 if we play a young inadequate player now to train him rather than getting a better but still inadequate vet to play. Howeve, I think this argument is actually settled by the general trend in the NFL that the future is now because the business is selling tickets this year bnot for a team a year or two from now. Even moreso, after 5 years of no playoffs under TD, and given that Ralph ain't getting any younger, I think it ignores reality to think that Marv and the Bills are not trying hard to win now and though they have to think about the future rationally, they put more focus on winning now even if this is unlikely to happen. If folks want to be accurate, then they need to stop worrying totally about the legitimate failings of a player on an absolute basis and instead focus on comparing his failings to those of the players we have. In this light, I think the Bills actually should not be making many roster moves now and actually, the good news is that there was little need to rely on the draft to get players who could help now after the first day and as it turned out after the first round in what was a deeper draft than usual. I am not saying that the current players are good (or even adequate) in all cases, just that even this deep draft offered more than a couple of opportunities to get players who could help this team immediately or even this year. The Bills showed good command and control by focusing their areas of need in two areas by cutting high contract declining guys Adams and Milloy and doing what was necessary to acquire two players they felt could contribute immediately or certainly this year on the first day. Likewise today, there pickings are limited, but I feel we can be at least adequate in most areas of the roster. I even feel that our likely starting OL in 06 is a big improvement over what we had in 05 (the key queston is whether you feel better about MW, Teague and Anderson than you do about Peters, Fowler and Reyes- I suspect their are few folks regardless of their concerns about these three who want to argue for MW, Teague and Anderson as better choices). Though I feel better about out OL starters, i have huge questions about our OL back-ups. I think Jeff Michell has seen his better days and i think Cory Rayner is not a great C, but i feel alot better about them than I do about Geisinger and we have the cap room to sign them. At T I am hopeful that fat tub of goo Aaron Gibson will prove to be better than Greg Jerman, but I expect nothing from Matt Morgan behind Gandy and do not think that Butler is ready for primetime yet as I have heard he needs footwork improvement. Thus even though Orlando Brown and Victor Reiley are not good enough players to start and even though Brad Hopkins may well retire, I like them better than what we got so I say sign 'em. The one big element and all the other TSW posters who state things with dead lock certainty are missing actually is that we neither get a chance for our docs to poke, prod and MRI these players and we never get a chance to really look them in the eye and see where their head and heart may be. We saw this shown very well in the Sam Adams case where even though I advocated signing him because a fat tub of goo in decline was better than what we had, I did not realize what TD has seen that Fat Sam had really matured somewhat as a person and realized he could not rely on the speed which gave him one o the quickest first steps of all DTs forever. Adams qualified for the Pro Bowl and played well for the Bills because even announcers noticed that rather than taking 1/3 to 1/2 the game off that he reduced himself to going on vacation a 1/4 of the game or less (he even got into a "put-me-in coach argument with the Billa when they rotated him out on 3rd downs in favor of Edwards who is an inadequate starter but an effective part-timer at DT likely because it reduces tiredness and any need to pace himself). Folks make lofty pronouncements based on what we actually can see in the past, but let me clue you in, none of us knows what the future holds and in the rarified world of the NFL a player OCCAISIONALLY can mature and squeeze a couple of productive years out when there is not much in their past to indicate they will do this. So I for one look forward to the Bills signing some players I judge to be inadequate to play back-up OL positions. I do not see the ciurrent #2s at most OL positions being likely up to job.

Yes, they are a sad lot, but I think the issue for us is are these inadequate players better than the inadequate players we already have on our roster? The good news for us is that I think for the most part the answer is no. For examplw, I think more highly of whoever the winner is of the JP/Holcomb/Nall duel than I do of Kerry Collins or Fiedler). However, though I do feel better about our OL than many posters (to me the 5 likely starters are better than an OL which featured Teague, MW and likely Anderson) I still have grave questions about the quality of the OL back-ups. Most folks get so caught up in the ESPN overhype on the draft that they get focused on simple determinations of a players atheletic value when the real deal is not comparison to some objective standard buy instead on whether a player is better than what you got at a cap hit you can afford and still build a total team. This was shown when some folks argued a few years back when we had a shot at acquiing Sam Adams that he was a fat tub of goo on the backside of his career. I agreed with this assessment, but still argued we should acquire Adams because even a fat tub of goo was better than our current starter Edwards. The question is not simply one of whether Jeff Mitchell or Cory Raymer are good players at C. The question is whether either of these two are better back-ups than our current #2 at C Geisinger. Signing an inadequate player may be exactly the right thing for the Bills to do right now at certain positions.

I think we actually could use some back-up OL help at every OL position on the roster besides LG (my hope would be that their is credible -but not great as we did not budget for a starter quality player at back-uo- plan B and if plab B has failings even a plan C at each position. Despite some folks being upset about LG, with Reyes, Anderson and Preston on the depth chart at LG, I think we can meet this model. As far as other positions: RT: Aaron Gibson and Greg Jerman backing up Peterd. Gibson is intiguing but he is a fat tub of goo, but the thing is even a fat tub of good looks like an upgade over Jerman. One of these two plan C level players needs to step it up to plan B levels. RG: I aee huge need for a back-up here as though I like Villarisl as a player, he has expienced nicks that have caused him to miss games at an acelerated level the couple of years. I actually like Preston as a plan B here but he is on the depth at #2 on LG so this is a question and he also seens a better candidate than Geisinger at back-up C, C: See above LG: Set for the competition. LT: Morgan looks like a reach to me here. Overall, we need the competition in OTAs and camp to sort out who stays and who goes as I think we will need to do some FA shopping for back-up quality players like Jeff Mitchell and Raymer and/Brown, Hopkins or Riley (T rather than G mpost likely IMHO to fill out the line. The problem may actually be having a traffic-jam of not good but back-up quality players at OL.

Many Bills fans do not seem to realize that if you are Mel Kiper or work for ESPN then some assessment of how a player is compared to good play is critical. However, if you are part of the team's briantrust, the comparison for a player is first whether he is better than what you got and then whether there is someone else better than this player who can be obtained at a salary cap hit that fits your budget. Aaron Gibson is certainly a fat tub of goo from the descriptions of his and the course of his career (a fat tub of goo that has a vertical leap far higher than most of who post on TSW actually), However, the question whether this fat tub of goo is an upgrade over Greg Jerman who is just below him on the depth chart. Being better than Greg Jerman is not a horrendously difficult thing for a pro athlete to achieve and I suspect he makes the team as a back-up to Peters.

I think there is desire or need to try him at LG because this does not fit the plan JMac and the Bills seem to have for OL improvement. As best as I csn tell the plan is: 1. Improve the situation at each OL starting position. Given the sad state of the 2005 Bills OL improving each position may not be saying much. However, you have to start somewhere and for the most part this seems like a real possibility. RT- Peters is thought extemely highly of by JMac and this will be his first full season so there is a reaspnable chance at improvement (perhaps large as he is hoped to be able to even flip to the higher responsiblity LT position with more experience. RG- This is the one position for which I see little chance of improvement and a likely backslide as I doubt Villarial will last the season. The number of games he has missed due to injury has picked up the last few years and I suspect nicks he would have played through before now cost him playing time. He is showing more nastiness recently which either is him trying to assert leadership or some frustration on his part as he is well into the backside of his career. Still I would not be surprised to see him try to occupy the Kemt Hull leadership role. C- Fowler looks like a definite upgrade over Teague as he is a more natural C who always has this role. he has filled in adequately from the scuttlebutt I hear for the more highly regarded but oft injured Jeff Faine. My understanding is he left his old team not because he was booted as inadequate, but because he played well enough in the sub role that he clearly woul command starter money and his old team already had that locked up. He is a ? mark as he has never started 16 before, but hiben he was wll-regarded coming out of college and has stepped up nicely as a sub, he may well be ready to start. LG- Anderson deeoly disappointed last year, but with the Bills having given him a good size bonus get him he gets one more shot to start, but JMac is both making noises and the Bills have made moves that he looks like a goner. Reyes looks like a definite candidate to start and should be able to do so as he held down the RG position for a productive Carolina OL last year. Like Fowler, he left his old haunts not because he played badly but because Carolina had already budgeted cap room for a younster drafted last year to play RG. In fact it is a tribute to Reyes productivity that he held the job all of last year. He was an RG last year but has played LG before as a pro and should make the shift. LT- Gandy surprised most of us last year by being pretty adequate at LT last year. In his second year in this system and not being that old there seems a reasonable chance of marginal improvement. I think we have upgraded significantly among starterswith Teague, and MW gone and likelt Anderson gone if he does not improve alot. However, i think the key to improving the OL will be our back-ups stepping up and providing competition and depth as some critical nick almost always occur. As far as this situation: LG is actually the most relevant issue for this post and actually rather than making an attempt to move Ginson (it is already gonna be a big jump for him to make this team at RT and attempting to pull this off while also learning a new position seems pretty much to be a pipedream. Neverthelss, the Bills have two not unreasonable plan Bs at LG where they moved the well-regarded Preston to #2 on the depth chart and the loser of the reyes/Anderson competition can be a credible back0up. C strikes me as a big question as I have little confidence in Geisinger who is the current #2 on the deph chart. Preston makes more sense as a back-up here IMHO. RG- However is probably even a bigger back-up issue IMHO. Preston actually filled in nicely when CB went down last year, but I cannot see him backing up both spots. LT/RT seemed to be big ? also and I think Gibson fills a bigger role here than moving him to LG where we currently have 3 live options. We also are lacking a definite back-up for Handy and there seems to be some thought that Jerman and one of the folks I view more as camp fodder are gpmma do it. I think the good news for the Bills is that though there are no starter qualty FAs left, there are still a few guys out there who can fill a back-up role and most of them are actually tackles. We will see.

My sense is that the Bills situation is like a glass which is partially filled. Some look at a randomly chosen amount )rather than me choosing an amount to state where I think the Bills are) and say the glass is half full while others look at the exact same amount and state the glass is half empty. Both are right about the amount and it says more about whether the viewer is an optimist or a pessimist in terms of how they choose to look at the situation. There is legitimate debate about whether the glass is either 3/4 ful or 1/4 full and I personally like posts which try to substantiate their point of view by pointing out objective facts rather than folks simply spouting the fact-free opinions which are all too prevalent on TSW. However, it strikes me as pretty clear whether you think the new regime is 25% of the way there or 75% of the way there, that the 2006 Bills team is substantially short of being a team which has a likely shot at the playoffs this year. Still the neat thing about the new competitive balance which the salary cap under the CBA provides is that like never before a team can move from worst to first in one season. As collective and downright socialistic as the new CBA is, it actually is lot closer to being a free market than the old moribund NFL ways. Even though this business is based on the collectivism inherent in unionized approach (the NFLPA is pretty clearly the majority partner in their collaboration with owners to get nickels from you and I with their receiving 59.5% of the total revenues). The NFLPA has moved the NFL much closer to a free-market approach where workers after roughly 4 years get to sell their services and get what the market will give them as unrestricted free agents. The irony here it strikes me is that if this actually were a total free market where a person could sell their services to he highest bidder, it actually would totally destroy this product (hence the team owners ran screaming to agree to the CBA when the NFLPA threated to go out of business after the owners kicked their butt in the mid-80s lockout). With the NFLPA and the team owners agreeing to restraints on free trade known as the draft, the restriction in underage players signing pro contracts (this restraint of trade runs counter to how the NBA, MLB, golf, tennis, etc operate) and other agreements reflected in the CBA it provides an interesting example of how the best outcome is neither found in implementation of either the extremes of communistic approaches or in free market approaches, but instead moderation which gets agreed to by these two economic forces. As far as football goes, i think you are too pessimistic in your assessment of whether the Bills glass is partially empty or partially full 1. WR- Moulds was supplanted as the #1 WR last year in the second Miami game and proved it by throwing a hissyfit after Evans scored 3 TDs with Moulds (historically a Fish burner) used as a mere decoy. It seems to me that few Bills stepped out to support him (including NFLPA pres Vincent) because likely his teammates thought it was out of line for a player to melt down in mid game because another player has supplanted him as the go-to guy. Perhaps it would have been different if Moulds were not on the backside of his career (he is good but is bear the point where if you are not Jerry Rice you need to look at other occupations or if Evans didn't produce well. Evans might turnout to be not #WR material, but it would seem quite difficult to be an advocate for Moulds still being #1quality WR fir us and ignore how few of his teammates came o his defense last year and when you compare Evans first two years of output to Moulds, one can be quite confident that Evans can do the job. As far as Reed I know of no one who sees him as our #2 in 06. Price's failure as #1 in AT makes it pretty certain it would be a bad move to slot him at #1 here. But this is not the plan here at all since the hope is that he will return 04 form he already had in accomplishing #2 prodcutoon. There are two big wildcards in whether this will happen iMHO and they are: A. Health- Here I trust the Bills docs as they have shown with their diagnosis of WMs injury that ran counter to the convetional wisdom and their management of numberous Bills nicks they are on their game. The Bills laying out some substantial bonus bucks indicates a pretty good degree of medical confidence. B. Scheme- I think folks who complaik pf PP being a wimp and whiner when he was here are simply stating an opinion which is unsupported by the facts when he was here. PP built on his number of catches, yards and TDs each year he was here. If you diagree simply check the stats and if you have a negative opinion of him then state why the facts of production do not count. In addition, anedotally, my recollection is that the fumbles he had consistently occured when he was struggling for a couple of meaningless extra yards when the first hit slowed but did not bring him down. I wished he had been more of a wimp because of he went down more easily we might have kept the ball. Overall, the scheme issue is that he got 96 recepts as a number 2 in signiificant part because Moulds drew a double which forced opponent to deal with his speed one on one. In addition, Centers was a great safety valve which made it hard for LBs to cheat toward him. However, the Bills decision to apparently relicate the St. Louis O style helps out a lot because though Evans does not have the athleticism of Moulds, Evans, PP, and Parrish present scary scary speed that will make Bills 3 WR sets difficult to defense and will give PP similar scheme benefits that playing opposite Moulds provided. Our WR alignment has many unknows, but in addition the proven speed of these three, Reed will actually need to be a credible #4 along with Aiken and the unknown Davis who some talk of as being a credible #2 even (though I doubt it). While there certainly are no guarantees, it seems to me to be a small but equa;;u possible chance that this crew will be excellent as likely be a total flameout. I do not expect them to in fact be great but likewise I do not worry that they will totally flameout though both things are possible. 2. TE- Folks got all in a lather about the potential of Vernon Davis showed at the Combine, but though I hope he is great I did not see us building around a TE anyway and I though having a great receiver at TE is great I do not see it as essemtial at all as most teams do not have a stud catch guy at TE anyway and seem to survive nicely, I did not see Royal at the Skins last year so accepting your judgement of him being mediocre is not something I would rail against. However, I did see Campbell for the Bills last year and with exception of a couple of very good games on his part, I also can see how getting a mediocre player may well be an upgrade for the Bills at TE. The one thing which gives me pause about your indictment or disdain for Royal is that all signs seem to point toward Joe Gibbs and the Skins wanting him back. Perhaps you are right and he is mediocre, but if you are right and given what the market led by assessments by Gibbs and Bills indicate then mediocre will probably be adequate for us in the O scheme we are running. It would be dumb to expect Everett to be a stud, but it also seems dumb to write him off. Yes he is always been injured as a pro, but given that his pro career has consisted all of one season even with a nick which held him out of some practices at the voluntary minicamp it seems silly to use the word "always" with any meaning. Euhus is also a 4 rounder who did not recover to his original form after a surgey requiring injury ended his rookie season, He is not someone you count on but not someone you inelligenly write off either. You must have some positive feeling about Cieslak I do not have because rather than considering him a serious option I considered him camp fodder. Perhaps you are right that the Bills consider him to be part of our plans as he is second on the depth chart, but if we do keep 4 TEs (I hope we do not, I see Neufeld with his flexibility as an H-back and ST chops as our back-up long snapper to be a better choice than Cieslak. I think TE can be important to a particular O scheme, but with our apparent O scheme I think we are helped more by a good blocker than a good cathcer (in the Remeirsma mold since having a multi0dimensional guy like a Gonzalez is a pipe dream with the salary cap). 3. On D there are in fact big questions about the DL, but it seems the braintrusts answer is going to be some scheme thing where I suspect the Bills D is going to do something a bit different than the norm since we are loaded up with undersizedand three technique DTs (the top four DTs on the depth chart have a top listed weight of 304 lbs) and we cannot play as best as I can tell a traditional running stopping D which relies on a big prescence like Big Ted or Phat Pat. If the braintrust can come up with something workable then it will be good, but if they can it will be bad. Given that Jauron is a D soecialist HC whi ince got NFL Coacg if the Year honors for his work, Levy has always emphasized run and stop the run and Fewell has experience making a Cover 2 work, I think that a bias toward figuring this will work is intelligent. I think Bills fans have reasonable reasons to be optimistic and I think that some Bills fans will complain virtually regardless of what is happening. I think one can be optimistic about this situation without being nuts.

Note to Bills fans, do not have sex with or allow yourself to be impregnated by an idiot like Willis. Gowever, as his low moral character shows no sign of maling itself apparent on the field and endanger his football character (these are two different things from discussion on TSW and the latter mostly based on putting team first is the likely sum total of what Marv meant looking for high character guys. If a Bills fan somehow can avoid having Willis baby then his dumb comments about Baby Mommas (and even worse the implicatios it seems of how he views his responsibliies toward raising his own children) then I think most Bills fan should be willing to simply shake their heads and ignore these comments.

This version is not new as it is one which takes into account the new draft and most recent FA additions. It does not appear to be one which describes the likely outcome of battles as for example Anderson is listed as the starting LG (which JMac said in a post draft interview for the most part last year's starters will get the first shot at starting, but as this has acquistion Reyes as 3rd string at LG it is doubtful that this FA was paid a hefty salary to be third string or that Preston is going to beat this vet former started for Carolina out). As far as Holcomb at starting QB this seems to reflect more that he ended the season there with JP being sat, but given: 1. Holcomb is a team guy who has vocalized tolerating being a back-up. 2. Nall was well regarded enough by us we signed him, and 3. Ralph has big bucks deveoted to JP and has already demonstrated an ability to interfere and exert his owner's perogative and endorse a start by a big buck player (RJ) over the coaches previous choice to start (Flutie) indicates this will likely correctly be determined on the field of play and let the best athlete win.

I think Youbouty was a best player available pick and not a need pick and I do not expect him to play to fill an immediate need for us, and form what I here what HE needs (as opposed to the Bills needs) in order to develop as a player is another year of training. The rap on him (and I suspect why this talented player who some had rated as having 1st round skills) was that he left school a year to early and needs some more development. Apparently he does make some great plays but is too undisciplined and inconsistent to be relied upon as a starting CB or more likely as a nickel. Greer seems good enough to handle the nickel (where he too showed flashed of brilliance playmaking ability last pre-season and even better will actually be challenged for nickel duty by last year CB draftee King. Instead of havinf his final year of "finishing school" in college, I suspect he will actually get better teaching and some more sereious reps in oractice against pro receivers or a 16 game season that he would get playing real games against college level opponents over a 10 or 11 game season, Even better IF he learns and is capable of getting the discipline and consistency this year to make him a vet CB next year with first round talent, the Bills have greatly increased their leverage to let Clements walk if the cap dictates next yearand we might see a three way competition between Greer, King and Yobouty to line up across from McGee at starting CB, with the loser of this battle getting the nickel slot.

It was a lousy draft if one is focusing on draft value (which is decided based on a rough consnesus of draft pundits who are at work developing a product to market and sell to TV watching masses and fantasy league addicts) but appears to be a good draft if your focus is on team building (which is determined by the plan of the braintrust of a particular team and whose success is ultimately determined by getting Ws rather than being saddled with Ls). Draft vallue determination and team building though obviously linked are two different things. Ultimately success in team building will be determined by multiple factors including the other facets of team building like FAs acquired and fit into a working team system,, UDFAs acquired and developed, trades and other factord. Though ESPN (and many fans) would fail to admit (or oft times even see it), the draft is a great source for talented players, but is only part of a team building strategy and not even the lead factor in the building of most winning teams. It makes perfect sense that Salisbury would judge our draft a failure because he is really in the business of selling his personality and creating controversy as the worst thing to get in his business is to be ignored (having folks trash him as an idiot is far better than being ignored). His focus is merely on draft value and the focus of this effort for many fans is first day or simply first round picks. On the other hand, I much prefer the Bills braintrust focus on filling particular gaps to win as they can because who knows when Ralph will kick the bucket. When your team has huge gaps at positions like SS and DT because no one on your roster is a credible starter, the goal of the draft is to get at least two players who can start there immediately. As indicated by no DT going at all in the 2nd round and the next SS taken was Allen who most do not view as a goo shot at starting right away (due to his rehabbing leg and potentially talent level) the Bills seem to have done quite well getting the second of 2 players who appeared ready to start immediately at SS and they got the player they judged to be at worst the 3rd best DT and someone who at least will contibute immediately to the DL rotation. These test is whether the Bills braintrust assessments are correct and judging by the seeming consensus , Whitner looks like an immediate starter and McCargo may have been a reach but may even be better than Ngots snd Bunkley. We will see.

While I am also skeptical (what even semi-logical person wouldn't be given the goshawful record of the Bills on the OL since the Kent Hull glory days), I think there is actual good reason to think that the starters on the OL will be better than last year's starters (which given how bad last year's starters were is not hard to do actually). Most important, though certainly any player who has not played a full NFL season in his career is a ??? (Jonas Jennings for example) or any new player is legitimately considered a ??? in a new system with new teammates, all ??? are not created equal. In fact, though I think both Fowler and Reyes are legitimately question marks, I think based on their play, age, seemimg market rate, etc, they both a question marks one should feel good about based on their records. Fowler- He impressed me a lot coming out of college and I had hoped the Bills would take him when he came out. He has actually started a few games becaue more highly regarded starting center Jeff Faine was hurt and word is he played well from what I here. He apparently was not resigned by his former team not because he was bad, but because as an FA the market was likely to reward him with starter money and a starter's role and his former team had other plans at C. I think he is a definite upgrade over Teague in quality of play. Having never started 16 at C before he is a ??? but he is one that more makes me question the concept of Gesinger as our back-up C rather than worry about whether Fowler is good enough. Reyes- Actually he has had a good track record for Carolina in a productive O. In fact, he also was pushed out not because of bad play but because Carolina has a RG behind him they wanted to play, but actually the OL with Reyes playing was so effective he kept a younger highly respected 2nd round pick slotted pay player on the bench. He also was available because the market would give this FA starter money and Carolina already had the locked up. He is headed into the backside of his career but is young enough that he should play for us for years if he plays as well as he did last year. I in fact think Villarial is a bigger ??? than Reyes because he has already begun to show that he will miss a few games with injuries that were formerly nicks he could play through. The main reason he is a ??? is that he was an RG we will ask to play LG, but he has played the position before as a pro and this is a small? In general, I have fewer quesrions about these two than I do about Peters and Villarial and I feel fine about Peters and think CV will be good for half a seaso. I think you grade Gandy too harshly as he was in fact average and not below average as you claim.