Dibs

Me thinks he has other things on his mind....."long and hard"......teehee

Mangold may be a better football player than Whitner(opinion & time will tell) but he certainly wasn't the better prospect at the time of the draft. Using that sort of logic.......everyone would have had a better draft if they had drafted Brady in round 1 that year. Hindsight makes magnificent drafting.

Classic damned if they do, damned if they don't scenario. Either keep NC & get abused for over-spending & using too much of the cap on the position.....or let him go & get abused for drafting a replacement for him thus spending too much cap resources on the position.

.....but how would that have gotten us Mangold? We would have had the #11 then & an extra 2nd instead of the #8. Mangold went #29.....McCargo #26. We had locked in for the T2 D.....which means we still were not interested in Ngata & were still after McCargo. Unless you would have had us take Mangold at #11.....or managed to trade down yet again....how would we have ended up with Mangold & who would we have selected at #11 if we didn't.....and who would we have to play the important SS position(for the T2)? .....I guess we could have reached for Bunkley at the #11 & taken Mangold at #26.....still no SS though.

A couple of mates of mine witnessed a UFO.....never seen one myself though. I have however had many psychic type experiences(as I would think most people have). My most interesting anecdote would have to be my psychic cat. The family cat when I was a kid was IMO psychic.....though only at one specific time. We would occasionally(once every few months) have liver for dinner. Mittens(the cat) absolutely loved liver. It was her favourite food by a long shot. She would miaow incessantly when it was being prepared since she knew that she would be getting the offcuts. As time went on though, an interesting thing started to happened. She started to carry on before Mum had taken the liver out of the freezer. Mum would rarely discuss with anyone what she was thinking of for dinner on each night. She would plan things in her head(as most do) & without any perceivable difference in her vocalizations or actions Mittens would start miaowing & jumping up on the bench only on those rare days that we were going to be having liver......with the liver having not been taken out of the freezer yet. I tried to set up the situation.....discussing with Mum to have liver 'next Tuesday' & not to let on in any way......and sure enough.....next Tuesday.....half an hour before Mum goes to get the liver out of the freezer.....Mittens was up on the bench carrying on again.

???

A buddy of mine just called me(Rams fan). He's not happy I told him I that I could hear Longs agent already..... "You were intending to pay us a money amount between the 1st pick & the 3rd pick. Why change your plans now?" If the Rams can get Long to sign for less than the 1st pick then I see this as a potential good step(very small) towards fixing the ridiculous situation that exists with the high 1st round picks. At least it may change to be a little more based upon average money payed to position played.....and not strictly based upon position drafted compared to the previous year. The Dolphins actually helped by paying their Long less than last years #1 Russell.

You beat me to it......so I looked it up. Quickly, he has a preliminary test & then a formal test. These are under lab conditions & are determined by the nature of the supposed ability. Apparently nobody has ever passed the preliminary test. Interestingly there are criteria for entry: "First, he/she must have a “media presence,” which means having been published, written about, or known to the media in regard to his/her claimed abilities or powers. This can be established by producing articles, videos, books, or other published material that specifically addresses the person’s abilities." Second, he/she must produce at least one signed document from an academic who has witnessed the powers or abilities of the person, and will validate that these powers or abilities have been verified. Only claims that can be verified by evidence under proper observing conditions will be accepted. Also, JREF will NOT accept claims of the existence of deities or demons/angels, the validity of exorcism, religious claims, cloudbusting, causing the Sun to rise or the stars to move, etc. JREF will also NOT test claims that are likely to cause injury of any sort, such as those involving the withholding of air, food or water, or the use of illicit materials, drugs, or dangerous devices. Seems to me that is it certainly set up to debunk public frauds since your normal person who may have some sort of 'ability' but doesn't seek to tell the world about it cannot enter. It doesn't explain how rigorous the testing is either. I've always imagined that if there is paranormal ability(for the most of it) then it would not be a 100% type thing. Having watched some of the 'police psychic' shows, the psychics get some things spot on....some things a bit vague(but close)....and a few things totally wrong. In a laboratory test, if the criteria are set too firm....and the person giving away the $1,000,000 is setting the criteria of the test without independent assessment....it would be virtually impossible to pass the test.

This may be a very ignorant question.....but isn't the role of the SS & FS very similar when utilizing the Tampa-2 style defense? If I'm way off base with this Q, please be kind to me people.

It's a little worrying actually. I've gotten used to us having one of the best(if not the best) ST in the league and losing all of those very good seasoned ST contributors is something that I'm not expecting us to overcome this year. Even if the players we drafted can come in and perform respectably it is hard to imagine that there isn't some dropoff in production due to inexperience. I'm hoping otherwise though.

I think MCKelvin was a very, very good pick......though personally I would have preferred Albert.

You dead right......I would love to get the stats for all of the playoff teams rushing attempts in the 1st half(the whole league for that matter) but I can't find it in anywhere......and even for me that would be waaay too much time spent to figure out just to see if a theory is correct or not. Logic states that good teams get ahead in games & therefore would emphasize the run in the second half(the opposite true of bad teams) thus effecting the overall rushing stats.......but the overall stats was the only thing I had to work with. It still seems overly simplistic to draw the conclusion he did from those 5 teams when 3 of them have future HOF QBs & a fourth has one of the better QBs in the league......thus promoting a much higher emphasis on the passing game over the running game. All 5 of the QBs ranked in the top 10 in pass attempts. At a guess I would imagine that the rest of the playoff teams (JAX, PIT, TEN, NYG, SD, WASH & TB) all ranked fairly highly in the 'runs in the 1st half' category.......with no real coincidence that only 1 of them ranked in the top 10 in pass attempts. Seems to me that not only did he ignore the whole 'top QB' factor but 'selectively chose' the information he gave in order to back up his point.

I'd say it was narrow minded & totally misrepresentative myself. What I mean by that is it seems he has latched onto one piece of information & formulated an opinion without considering the many other factors which may well counter that opinion. He also takes a commonly used saying & attacks the literal meaning of the saying rather than the common meaning. 1. The running game. He mainly bases his premise upon the "eye opening" stats of the 5 playoff teams'(SEA, GB, IND, DAL, NE) ranked for runs in the first half(31st, 29th, 28th, 27th, 26th). Does he factor into the situation that amongst those 5 teams there are the top 2 QBs in the league......and another 2 which would be considered in the top 6. Simply looked at, if you have a STAR QB who has the ability to perform at a much greater level than the norm......it would just make logical sense that you would endeavour to use their skills at a higher rate than the norm, thus maximizing your asset. Also, he does not mention where the other playoff teams ranked which IMO is necessary to establish a true comparison. For instance......and I can't quickly get the first half stats alone, but...... Playoff teams JAX, PIT, NYG, TEN & SD were ranked 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th & 7th in rushing yards per game. Playoff teams TEN, JAX, PIT, WASH, SD, NYG & NE were ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th & 9th in rushing attempts per game. 2. Shut down corner. Here he is turning the saying of 'shut down corner' into an extreme & then saying....."Ha, that extreme cannot be achieved." He is just being semantic about the term. The term shutdown corner does not generally mean that the corner isn't fallible....or doesn't have off days. What it means is having a CB good enough to take solo coverage responsibilities for the opposition #1 receiver thus freeing up the rest of the secondary. Most CBs are not good enough to be able to attempt this on a regular basis. Those that are good enough to be used in this capacity have become known as 'shut down corners' even though they do not legitimately shut down their opposing WR for the entire game. 3. Turnover battle is key.....FGs are just like turnovers. This is complete bollocks(the FG thing). Whether the TO battle is a key factor in causing the end result of a game.....or whether it is the natural product caused by other factors is a different argument to what he puts forward. In fact, he does not put up any argument to debunk the theory except for his FG thing and TOs at the end of a half. Quickly.....just a few he could have used.....struggling teams will likely turn the ball over more frequently due to the extra pressure of needing to get things done.....they may well have lesser players who are prone to cause more turnovers due to lack of skill.....obviously the reverse will count for good teams/players......long bombs on 3rd/4th downs which are intercepted and not returned are not that detrimental......neither are fumbles on 4th down when attempting a run when in OK field position. His focus however was on missed FGs.....that they should be counted as TOs. The term turnover has a literal meaning. If one wanted to add(or subtract) things to alter that meaning, there would be many more situations to focus upon which are far more detrimental than missing a FG(which is often a calculated risk weighing up the potential 3 points scored against the loss of yards). To compare a missed 45 FG attempt on 4th down where the only real alternative is to punt(likely resulting in a touchback....totaling 15 yards field position difference) to throwing an interception on 1st/2nd/3rd down is ridiculous.

IMO to make the playoffs might not take that much change. It could be one of many, many factors.....or a combination thereof. Even a lucky break in a few games could make the difference......Brady getting injured for the season in week 1 could be all it takes in the AFC East. Just making the playoffs is not exactly a difficult thing to do......it only seems like it is because we haven't made them for sooooo long. If the question is "If the Bills make the conference final or better....?" I would have to say Trent Edwards.

This is starting to remind me of the old Barry/Emmit/Thurman RB discussions. Hopefully after 2008/9 there will be legitimate argument to be made for both AP & ML on which is the better superstar RB.

I went to a psychic just the other day. I knocked on the door and when I heard "Who is it?" in response to my knock, I left.

You said something in a previous thread which I let slide because all of the hullabaloo about 'the OL' was dying down & honestly I was getting tired of it. Your incessant irrational bitching about it however compels me to bring it up. In response to me calling out people on them not claiming they wanted Albert in the 1st round prior to the draft, you responded.... You would have been happy for us to draft a LB when we already have 3 legit starters instead of Albert. How can you possibly keep berating the FO for the draft in regards to OL when you yourself would have happily ignored the situation had we drafted Rivers in the 1st? As I have pointed out previously, unless you would have changed your mind about the 3rd round pick there were no legitimate OLmen(Centers) available in the 4th when we picked......and what is the point of reaching for a lesser rated talent for the OL when there is a very high percentage chance that the player would never be good enough to supplant Fowler? If we get a legit C then we already would have a very good backup in Fowler. It is hypocritical of you to knock the situation regarding the OL because we chose a CB in the 1st.....yet obviously you would have been content with the situation had we drafted a LB in the 1st. How can you put forward the concept of wanting another legit starter caliber LB when we needed a legit starting caliber C & CB? Please desist in your constant vitriolic attacks on the situation.

How did I make that mistake? 3 of them made the playoffs last year

For the record, I always wanted Bryant McKinnie instead of Mike Williams. Do I get a prize or something?

And what do you think that plan should have been????? I don't recall you calling for Albert in the first round.....so which player was going to come in & be an improvement on Fowler? Gee, if only we had drafted Josh Sitton(drafted #135) at the #114 slot instead of Corner.....that would have fixed our problem at C wouldn't it?

Though I'm pretty sure that I understand what your actual point is in this.....to be fair I should point out a few things.... Saying that teams that ignore the secondary early on draft day have bad secondaries is unsubstantiated....In fact many of them rank in the top 5 over the years. Suffice it to say that teams can fill their secondary talent by means other than the 1st round(or even 1st 3 rounds). Interestingly though there is a correlation to your last point of shortage of victories and playoff success. Over the past 5 seasons none of the 4 teams who picked fewest number of DBs in the first 3 rounds(Texans (2), Dolphins (2), Buccs (3), and 49ers (3)) have made the playoffs. Over the past 5 seasons half of the 6 teams who picked no DBs in the 1st round made the playoffs....Bears twice, Chiefs twice & Saints once. I would say that there is a definite correlation for those teams that generally ignored selecting DBs(in the 1st-3rd) but not a good correlation for those that ignored 1st round selections. For interest sake....let's use the exact same criteria you did but with the DL.... The average team in the NFL has drafted 4.53 DLmen in the first 3 rounds since 2001. The Bills have drafted 7 DLmen in this same span. The most DL picks spent are by the Chiefs (8), Eagles (8), Bills (7), Lions (7), Rams (7) and Cardinal (7) The fewest DL picks spent are by the Redskins (0), Browns (1), Chargers (2), and Bucs (2) The average NFL team has spent 1.91 first rounders on DLmen in that 8 year span. The Bills have spent 1 first. The most firsts spent are the Rams (5), and the Texans (4) with 9 temas spending (3) Jets, Patriots, Jaguars, Chiefs, Eagles, Cowboys, Vikings, Saints and Seahawks. Only 2 teams have NOT spent a 1st rounder on a DLmen in that span, the Dolphins, and Lions.....with 11 teams spending 1 first rounder. Over the past 5 seasons half of the 4 teams who picked fewest number of DLmen in the first 3 rounds have made the playoffs. Over the past 5 seasons neither of the 2 teams who picked no DL in the 1st round made the playoffs.....though 7 of the 11 teams that only selected 1 have made the playoffs. What does all this combined with Ramius' post tell us??? Nothing really.....that no real conclusions can be drawn from analysing draft patterns(probably because it is only a very small facet of how players are obtained/retained)......which I think is what Ramius was pointing at in the first place.

No worries....enjoyable for me too. I like your posts because you put forward your views and opinions on how you see things could be without dogmatically insisting that that is how things are. It'd be nice if more posters followed your example.

But your study was skewed. Over the past 5 seasons Super Bowl Teams, 4 of the 10 teams were the Patriots who support the 'must draft DL to succeed' premise. You'll find if you look at teams who have had regular success on the field......I'll cut & paste a previous post of mine..... The Pats & Eagles support it.....but the Colts & Steelers disprove it. Over the past 6 seasons the top 10 teams(based upon wins) are.....Pats & Colts being obviously the best over that span. NE 75 IND 73 PHI 61 PIT 60 DEN 59 S.D. 58 SEA 58 GB 57 DAL 52 TEN 52 If we count skills players as DB/WR/RB......and you are obviously comparing them to Linemen......the percentage of Skills players to Linemen over the past 10 years of 1st rounders is as follows.....Bills being 70%..... NE 29% IND 83% PHI 29% PIT 72% DEN 50% S.D. 86% SEA 40% GB 60% DAL 50% TEN 80% How can anyone realistically narrow everything down to DRAFTING POSITION 'X' = SUCCESS???

You may well be correct in your assessment of CB depth etc and it could well be a mistake made by the FO(though honestly, 1 player from a 4th round pick is never going to be a big mistake). The way I see it though is that if it seems sooooo obvious to fans.....why would our experts do the opposite? To assume an irrational bias towards CBs is unfair since for 3 offseasons our FO has pumped all the money into contracts for the lines(not at any other position). There has to be other factors.....perhaps the biggest being that they (probably) had Corner rated well above any OLman in terms of potential.....especially when you consider that no OLman was selected within half a round after we selected Corner. Perhaps us fans are over-rating the incumbent CBs......and under-rating the incumbent OLmen. All I'm saying is that before we as fans go crying over "such a stupid pick" we should actually give things time to prove the situation. I relate this sort of thing back to Youboty & Whitner. Whitner was a "bad" pick in part because he was a 'reach'. Youboty was a "good" pick because he was a 'steal'. As it turned out Whitner has been minimally a good solid performer(dispelling the 'reach' title) while Youboty has yet to do anything(dispelling the 'steal' title). (Also that a 4th rounder has soooo little chance of making a difference this year that the whole discussion is relatively moot.)

Suuuuure, you say that now.....and I say to that "Did I?" You may like what it was before it was what it was like, but was it really all that likable? I'm telling me. So once said, it is always saying things as if I didn't know the answer.