Dibs

Fair enough......I meant within reason. Trade down works as well

Yes, that's right.....every 1st round WR becomes a legitimate starter and every 1st round OLman becomes a bust. What difference how many O or D picks have been used......we need what we need. (BTW....last 5 drafts.....2 D 1st rounders, 4 O 1st rounders) I'll repeat again........How about the 1st round pick be used for the biggest areas of need.....or the best player available......& we use the 2nd & 3rd rounds to fill other needs?

D.Bennett. K.Curtis. I still don't understand how a #2.....that is "number 2" WR can be a bigger need than most other areas of need when we have one of the best #1 WRs in the league. If we didn't have Evans, we'd be like most other teams.....we'd be looking at the 1st round to get a WR to be our #1. Again I ask......are we that good in all other areas that we can afford to target a complimentary possition with our best resource(1st round pick)? How about the 1st round pick be used for the biggest areas of need.....or the best player available......& we use the 2nd & 3rd rounds to fill other needs?

Firstly.....the Colts obtained a top QB, OL & RB before they obtained their top #2 WR. Secondly.....the Bears use the Cover 2 which predominantly covers the deep pass. They don't blitz much regardless. Thirdly....the Colts were #2 in passing in the league in 2006......#1 in passing in 2003 when Wayne only achieved 838 yards.....#4 in passing in 1999 when they did not have Wayne. Bob Sanders makes a much greater difference to the Colts than Wayne ever could. The OL makes a much greater difference to the Colts than Wayne ever could. Surely you can't argue that it is the #2 WR that improves the run game for the Colts by any noticable level? The Colts OL with Manning & Harrison have shown great running production with whomever is at RB. In 2001, when Edge was injured, an undrafted FA rookie(Rhodes) rushed for 1100yards......same year as Wayne was drafted(virtual non-factor in rookie year). Addai was a 1st round pick. How can you possibly be arguing that one of our greatest needs is a #2 WR????? Even if one was to say that Evans was in top 12 at his possition in the league(which I believe he certainly is).....that means that 20 teams do not have a WR his equal. Are we sooooo much better in all other areas that we can afford to use our best rescource(1st round pick) for another top WR? Sure, upgrade the #2 WR.......sure, grab a WR with the 1st round pick if he is clearly the best available player.....sure, grab a WR with later a pick or in FA.....but.....target the WR possition with our 1st round pick?????? With all the areas of concern on the team, OG/DT/LB/TE/CB(NC leaving)....that makes no sense.

We still finished the season with 5 straight games with 3 sacks in each. I'm happy to give the OL 4 games to gel(& defences 4 games to catch up with the changes) & we still ended with nasty sack numbers. Considering that Peters only let through 2 sacks, that is an awful lot for the rest of the line. Our line NEEDS improving inside......& hopefully Pennington will improve(as expected) as well. Re: your last line.....I agree that it would be good to grab a big WR at some point in the draft......I'm just astounded at the school of thought that has people targeting a WR with our #1 pick.....which basically implies it is a huge priority. OG/DT/LB/TE are all bigger priority for this team(IMO).

I wasn't comparing them to the Bills!!!!!(....but.....how about 5 wins to 7 wins?) MY POINT was to rebut that having 2 top WRs will effect the running game much. 2 GREAT WRs. 1 GREAT RB. 30th in rushing!!!!!! 32nd in ypc!!!!!! If you can't run, you won't win many games. Take another look at ARIZONA. If we end up with a super passing game but can't control the clock....or convert 3rd & short, who cares?

Luckily Bills management doesn't make their decisions based on the most prolifically put forward views on the board. If they did, we'd be looking at Holcombe at QB & drafting a new one this year.......looking to cut NC/then definitely re-signing him.....cutting TKO after 3 games.....etc/etc/etc. As I found out recently.......2 in 3 RBs selected in the top 10 of the draft in the past 20 years have been total busts(in relation to the team that drafted them). It is not as easy as people believe to find a decent starting RB. IT ISN'T!!!!!!

The conceptual Timmermann would interest me. That means.....just like Timmermann was when the Rams got him.....getting one of the top FA OGs entering their 5th year in the league. Steinbach & Deilman fit perfectly in the 'Timmermann' role for us.

When it supports my argument I'm willing......when it doesn't, I look at my argument & think "hmmmm, maybe I'm not totally correct here." & I look to change my view. I certainly hope you are very, very wrong. If you are correct then that implies that JPL is the cause of all the sacks. Pre-bye week. 7 games 21 sacks....3/game 218 attempts.....1 sack every 10.4 Post-bye week. 9 games 26 sacks....2.9/game 258 attempts.....1 sack every 9.9 Post bye week would average out to 46 sacks in a season. If protection does not get much better than that......JPs fault?

Mythical OL? I simply want a decent interior to the OL. A big #2 WR won't help the running game much. Please.....EVERYONE LOOK AT ARIZONA 2 Great WRs.....Great RB.....Garbage OL Their running game was 30th in yards & 32nd ypc. It's a bit of a stretch using a resources argument. WRs of last 5 drafts(4th round or better) 2005 2nd round 2004 1st round 2003 4th round 2002 2nd round Entire OL of last 5 drafts(4th round or better) 2005 4th round 2002 1st round It makes no difference re: resources used regardless. If a draft pick is a success....or the position is filled by other means, no more resources need be spent on it......if the possition is in need, resources need to be spent.

I totally agree. Signing the young guys now makes great sense(to me). You lock them up early.....they are very happy with the pay increase.....& down the track you actually save some money if they become better than their contracts(again). Even more reason though that we don't commit the resources to NC. I feel sorry for Denver. They have an entire team.....but no QB. By the time(more than likely) that Cutler can(if he ever can) become a top QB, thier stars will be old or gone via FA. A bit like we were with Johnson/Flutie.....talented team, not good enough at QB. I covered all of this in earlier posts.

Neither. I won't be happy.....but I'll wait & see how the decision pans out(I'm not one to think that there is only ever one solution). I'd never think something is a smart move because Marv did it. I think Marv is great but he's human & quite falable(& luck plays a HUGE role in the draft). I wonder why you assume that if people like Marv.....& like what he did in his first draft.....that they only did so due to their personal biases towards the man & not due to the results. I think you are totally wrong here. I see many serious Bills Fan that disagree.....not myself....I agree wholeheartedly but.....there are many good fans, good football brains, etc, etc who just don't(for whatever reasons) see things the same way. You say 1st day corner......I'd have no problem with a 3rd round pick on a CB. A 1st round pick I'd be unhappy with. My reasons for this is that.....based on historical averages.....I really don't expect any of the draftees to 'make it'. If they do it's a bonus, but I don't count on our....say....2nd rounder helping in a position of need(even a few years after drafting). The position our 3rd rounder is used on makes no difference in 70%+(???) cases since the player will bust. I'm actually looking at things opposite to you now(in regards to NC)......that is, I'm feeling we'll have more chance to make the playoffs without him, than with him. I see that the signing bonus he will demand will equal the signing bonus needed for both an OG & LB. Also, I don't believe that we will be spending our 1st round pick on a CB to replace NC. I really don't see why this is the natural progression. Many, many teams don't follow that path after losing their STAR CB.....& many, many teams simply do without a STAR CB(cover 2 style especially). Simply, it makes more sense to me that the resources be spent on OGs, LBs, DT, TE rather than NC.

In addressing the previous bunch of posts...... The $4mil that was bandied around means the potential difference between a star LB & a run-of-the-mill LB. Consider that $4mil went to London last season.....& now is happy cap space. I would not be surprised at all if we target one of the better LBs in FA. The actual cap numbers may not be so much the issue......consider signing NC. Even though we could structure his contract to count say....$4mil under this years cap, we may well be up for a $12mil-$18mil signing bonus. We need to replace London(or even if re-signing) who will have a decent signing bonus.....I'm personally expecting a top FA OG who will also command a goodly sized bonus. There will be an immense amount of cash to find & if faced with the option of giving a big up front bonus to NC or to an OG, I feel the OG will win. ....also.....one of the reasons we have such a large amount of cap space is that we don't actually have many star player & those with potential are still in their rookie contracts. JPL, LE, WM(assuming we keep him) are all cheap. Peters looks probable to improve well beyond his contract level within a couple of years.....as does Schobel. If there is a disproportionate amount of money secured in the secondary(Whitner has a decent sized contract & McGee is well recompensed), we may well have to lose a future STAR who is more important to the team than a top cover corner is. In the end, this is the FA era. Top player leave teams every single year.....teams that have lots of cap room which then use the money for different FAs. It is simply how things work now. When a player becomes a FA.....he often moves on due to some team who has been without a top CB/LB/QB/RBetc/etc/etc overvaluing the importance of the player for their team....or subsequently.....the existing team undervaluing it due to having not had to do without. Finally, CBs are one of the BIG team changing positions for some reason. Every year there is one or two elite CBs hitting the market & getting massive contracts. I cannot see NC not being offered a ludicrous amount for his services. Not too much longer to wait now to find out what actually will happen.

It's not a matter of less talent but value for talent. A super man-cover CB costs a lot of money. If we run a style of D that asks for that ability fewer times a game than....for example our previous D(which left the CBs on islands regularly), the value for money is not as good. We basically will be paying top dollar for a skill that we under-utilize(compared to many other teams). IIRC, McGee got picked on a lot early....when he was acclimatizing to the new D. I don't recall in the last 6 or so games that he was considered a liability in our D. Since we ended at #9 against the pass, I'd think McGee finished quite competently. Your point on the DEs......I'd hope that there will be an improvement at LB/DL due to us spending money on a FA or 2 in those areas with the money saved at CB. I personally won't be unhappy if we keep NC.....he's a top player......I just see that there is more logical reasons to let him walk.

....big name FA, Redskins would fit.....regardless of their cap room. In the end, cap space won't really matter to most teams. The first year cap hit will be structured to minimize the effect so that pretty much any team could target him. How about #32 against the pass Bengals #31 Vikings #30 Cardinals etc, etc, etc In response to DrDankenstein, it's not really a matter of who else will get him......there are 31 other teams & NC is in the top 5 FAs this off-season....plenty of teams will want him. It's not a matter of why we can't.......but why we won't(or will) spend the money on him. See post #8 for reasons why we won't keep him.

I found this site about a week ago....well.....my friends did. If you like Risk, join up & play. However.....the dice are rigged & everyone always attacks me!!!!!!!......just like in the real board game.

Surely it's more to do with talent rather than size. We need good DTs that can do what the scheme asks of them......the key word is good. Ian Scott 302lbs Tommie Harris 300lbs Anthony McFarland 300lbs Warren Sapp 300lbs Tank Johnson 300lbs Talent......not size.

You don't perhaps think that a couple of big talented OGs who can open up holes on third & short and generally improve the running game will greatly effect the 3rd down conversions....& the red zone performance? Actually.....if you take our last 6 games(which will realistically be closer to how we will be next season), you will see we were running at a 36.8% 3rd down percentage. The Cardinals(who surely have the best 1/2 WR combo in the league) had 39.2% 3rd down percentage last season. Surely the last piece of the puzzle should be the #2 WR. What's the point in having 2 STAR WRs if you can't stop the run.....can't run on 3rd & short.....can't run consistently......can't consistently protect the QB? IMO, upgrading the interior of both lines will mean we can win NOW. Improving the #2 WR means we can have a more exciting offence to watch now.

You have your numbers a little skewed. If you don't include the #1 pick you'd be pushing to get over 25% success in the top 10 at the QB position.....even with the #1s(who are just over 50%), the success rate is about 1 in 3. At RB.....there has been a success rate of less than 1 in 3 selected in the top 10(over the past 20 years).....I can provide the list if you wish. Drafting star RBs is not as easy as most on this board think. I'd say that over 50% of all top ten picks are busts(for the team that selected them).....though I haven't crunched the numbers on that one. Top 10 QBs & RBs have a similar success rate over the past 20 years....1 in 3 succeeds......2 in 3 busts(for the team selecting them).

Do you people actually read the threads before attacking? Max997 was responding to a statement from VABills that McCargo was going to get bigger, stronger, better etc. He wasn't saying that he wont.....he was merely asking how anyone can so categorically say that it will be the case. Facts are that over 50% of all 1st round picks are busts. This means that there has to be a decent chance that McCargo simply wont make it. Considering that we use a lot of rotation at DT & we need another decent DT since letting Anderson go will create a void.....why is it a stretch that we pick another DT this year in the draft? IMO, apart from Londons replacement, I can't think of a more important need on this this team. If McCargo does not make it, we are stuck with Tripplett(who might excel with better support) & Williams(who surely can't be counted on to become a star DT). We have a STAR WR......adding another when we are so weak against the run on D is a sure way to never win anything in the near future. If we end up with 2 STAR DTs & 1 STAR WR, that would be fantastic wouldn't it? If we end up with 1 STAR DT & 1 STAR WR, that would be pretty good wouldn't it? If we end up with 0 STAR DTs & 2 STAR WRs, that would be fun to watch....but ultimately a disappointment, season after season after season....wouldn't it?

Considering that members of the Bills organization(Marv.) have publicly stated that there was a verbal agreement, if we reneged on the deal then NC could certainly sue for breach of contract(verbal) & loss of potential income due to the breach........I'm assuming here but it sounds correct to me.

Sure....how about post #17 You are clearly claiming he was not 'even good', but he was better than the rest of the tards on the line.

Actually.....the only reason the Buffalo Bills still exist is revenue sharing. The salary cap was introduced to help all the teams counteract Free Agency. It is designed to limit the level of money that goes to the players. Before FA, the only reason the smaller markets thrived(survived) was due to revenue sharing.

Totally incorrect. The most worthless sport on Earth is cricket.......closely followed by baseball. .....then again......after watching the Olympics I discovered there were an awful lot of what I thought were 'recreational activities' which are apparently 'sports'.