Dibs

Firstly, I was not arguing that he shouldn't sign the players.....I was responding to the concept that the TV money will cover the players contracts.....which when....as I said.....factoring in a few BIG deals in one season will certainly NOT cover the contracts. Secondly, there IS a very valid(irrefutable) argument about cash flow regarding the Large revenue teams over the small revenue teams. If we do sign NC, Steinback & one of the top LBs, there is little doubt that the Bills would be running at a loss for this financial year due to paying three very large signing bonuses needed to get these players. It all works out in the wash though.....i.e. the money paid will mean extra profit in future years(assuming no cuts/retirements). The point is.....if Ralph didn't save the money, he will have a hard time finding the $50-60mil extra needed to sign up 3 BIG names in the one season. Thirdly, don't get your knickers in a twist just yet.......he hasn't NOT signed them yet has he......in fact their not even FAs yet are they? The facts are that it is harder for small revenue clubs to sign the BIG names.....not impossible. IMO, Ralph knows his mortality & surely can see that we are positioned the best we have been in years to make a run. I believe he will find the cash. p.s. there is a HUGE difference between money made & profits realized.

Actually that's not exactly correct. Let's use NC for an example & say(just for ease of numbers) he will get a 6 year $48mil contract.....BUT.....he is given $18mil as a signing bonus & yearly salaries of $3mil, $3mil, $5mil, $5mil, $7mil & $7mil. This means his cap numbers each year will be $6mil, $6mil, $8mil, $8mil, $10mil, $10mil Only $6mil in the first year.....BUT......the team that pays him has to find $21mil....or another $15mil above his cap number. Therefore if the cap is $100mil the team would have to spend $115(minus the numbers from previous signing bonus deals) That means if we were to sign 2 or 3 BIG names in an offseason Ralph would have to find massive amounts more cash this year than the TV revenue would be generating......esp. since we do not have many(only TKO I think) existing BIG contracts out to the players. IMO....looking at things this way.....we really should have gone after a BIG name last season so as to not have so much cash needed at once. Then again, maybe Ralph saved the $7mil(or so) that was left over this season to help pay the costs of some BIG signing bonuses for next season. I still get baffled how the Skins can sign the BIG names year after year......basically using tomorrows money today......but when tomorrow comes, they seem to be able to do it again.(off-topic, I know, but I don't understand how they keep doing it.)

I don't want to come across too strong but.....what you propose sort of sucks. You'd go with the older slow Boone over the young up & comer Scott?(We need to get a stud at DT, not just a guy who can be alright) Grab a 2nd tier(at best) FA CB to replace NC? Waist time & money replacing WM when not only is he in a contract year(motivation) but you could tag him the following year & get your trade then......and you want WMs replacement to be a guy that the Colts didn't want???? They drafted Addai so as to not rely on Rhodes. You don't think we perhaps need a decent OG????? Draft none & pick up RFA Holland????......who hasn't started all season & lost his job to a 4th round pick(Evans)????? Graham might be OK but.....the guy hasn't seen a full NFL season. Did you not think that with ALL the money under the cap that we might either spend a little on re-signing NC.....or perhaps a decent FA? It's like you've gone out of your way to ignore every 'good' FA available.

HERE It doesn't seem to have the rookies proper numbers though.

Also, most players....esp. the good ones....have contracts where their salary increases each year of the contract. In essence, reducing the effect of the increase to the salary cap each year. I'd say that most teams making a 'superbowl run', bank on the cap increasing so as to sign the big names using the future dollars that they assume will occur. This is why certain teams end up over the cap even though it increases every year. In the issue of re-signing NC.....his contract is bound to increase each year. Since we have several young (potential) future stars....when it is time to re-sign them, I'd rather have the money to do it over having an over-paid NC. I believe we should keep him if the price is right.....but not at any price.

Welcome to the madhouse.

Firstly I'd say that passing yardage is not that big of a determining factor on how good the OL of a team is. Teams that get behind often throw the ball more resulting in extra passing yards. Looking at your numbers though.....apart from they are incorrect....last 7 games was 1464 net which expands to 3346yards in 16 games.....there is extremely good argument to say that the change in gameplan(free JPL to play more of 'his' game) was a major contributor to the statistical change. Also, if we give opposing defences 2 games to see the 'new' offence, we still find no running game & 3 sacks a game(averaging out to 48 in a full season....or more than what we actually had this season). I did an analisis on the stats break here. Personally I think with 1 new OG who can get the job done we can easily reach the playoffs.....but your comment that you'd like the Bills to retain 4 starters on the O-Line, I cannot fathom. We suck at rushing. We suck at short yardage. We suck at pass protection. Realistically.....if we want to win a superbowl......we need at least 2 new OGs & Pennington to keep improving. I'd be content with a nice FA OG & a draftee this off-season, but Gandy, Preston, Villarial, Reyes & Pennington(of the skill he is at the moment) are not good enough. Simply, 1 guy will not improve us to SB level.

It's a fun thread though.

:blink: Oh...I've got tears in my eyes. This is fantastic. Honestly, the only thing dampening my amusement it that you sound so convinced by your answers that there is a tiny part of me that thinks "perhaps he's not just good at spinning words & he actually believes this". Anybody out there know the answer to that one? Anyway.....back to the mental math. Using your same....ahem.....logic...... The AFC not only lost more within the AFC but at a HIGHER rate than the NFC teams lost within the NFC. Thus again using your backwards logic.....the AFC is better (You do realize that going back to the higher/lower rate argument is heading back into the realms of 'normal' math again.)

OK....I'll play mental math with you. Of AFC teams NONE lost more games to NFC teams than to AFC teams. NONE lost equally to AFC & NFC either. EVERY team lost more games to AFC opposition. Even using crayonz type logic the AFC is better. Don't mistake this crayonz.......it's your example but mirrored(AFC to NFC & vice verse).

Shhhhh.....crayonz is on a roll. BTW ( I love this thread)

I love this thread.....I don't believe people are actually arguing the things that they are arguing. Just to keep you honest.......but it is funny watching the reactions you get. There were 96 games played by NFC teams against NFC teams which resulted in 96 wins & 96 losses. That is exactly at (not under) 500. There were 96 games played by AFC teams against AFC teams which resulted in 96 wins & 96 losses. That is exactly at (not over) 500. Keep up the good work.

I just thought it might help if people read this(meaning what Kelly said) more than once in a thread about 'predicting' how good a 'can't miss' QB will be. 1. Vinny Testaverde 1. Jeff George 1. Tim Couch 1. David Carr 2. Rick Mirer 2. Ryan Leaf 3. Heath Shuler 3. Akili Smith 3. Joey Harrington But hey....can't miss with Quinn....he's special.

I'm thinking we draft a RB at highest 3rd round.....probably 2nd day. Conceptually...... we strengthen both OGs(FA & 1st day pick) thus having actual holes that WM can run through & produce 'numbers'...... WM is motivated for his contract year($$$$$$)....... and we tag him..... then trade him for a 1st(not top 10) round pick...... which we use on a RB(with fingers crossed)..... or we re-sign him but I'd think looking at BIG bucks for Evans & JPL with a young budding defence Marv. & Co. would rather spend rookie $$$ at the RB possition. Simply.....we don't spend a 1st nor a 2nd pick on a RB this season unless it's a FB

Anderson, Tim DT RFA GONE Clements, Nate CB UFA GONE Davis, Andre WR UFA Will depend on other WR acquisitions Fletcher-Baker, London LB UFA GONE Gandy, Mike OL UFA GONE Greer, Jabari CB RFA Will depend on other CB acquisitions Hargrove, Anthony DE RFA STAYS Cheaper alternative than Kelsay Kelsay, Chris DE UFA GONE Lindell, Rian PK UFA Already re-signed Preston, Duke OL ERFA STAYS for experienced cheap depth Shelton, Daimon FB UFA GONE Thomas, Anthony RB UFA STAYSa very good value #2 RB Thomas, Kiwaukee CB UFA STAYS Even if we keep NC, this guy proved he can help the team Williams, Shaud RB RFA Will depend on other RB acquisitions Wire, Coy S UFA STAYS just to annoy people

Good post....you should post more(if you post like this all the time).

Really? WOW. That's a lot more important than the scoring stat IMO.....it implies that we are actually a disciplined well coached team. IIRC no non-disciplined poorly coached team has ever won a superbowl. Things are coming together.

I've quickly done some basic stats for the 1st 7 games & the next 9 games(before & after bye). Pre bye JPL.....197 attempts, 21 sacks......sacked 1 in 10.4 attempts(not including scrambles) Post bye JPL....232 attempts, 26 sacks......sacked 1 in 9.9 attempts(not including scrambles) Pre bye JPL.....19 rushes(2.7/game) Post bye JPL....19 rushes(2.1/game)(should have more rushes due to knee-downs at end of winning games) As you can see, splitting at the bye actually shows that the pass protection became worse.....not better. I'm going to stop the analysis here though.......and split it pre & post HOU game where the OL had had a couple of games to adjust & more importantly, JPL was given more freedom to play 'his' game. Here are some quickly done some basic stats for the 1st 9 games & the next 7 games(before & after HOU). Pre HOU JPL.....224 attempts, 30 sacks......sacked 1 in 8.5 attempts(not including scrambles) Post HOU JPL....205 attempts, 17 sacks......sacked 1 in 13.1 attempts(not including scrambles)(note:-3 sacks taken in each of the last 5 games....that would average to 27 over 9 games.....or only marginally better than pre HOU. I feel it valid to mention this due to opposing teams having a few weeks to figure out the 'new' JPL & 'new' offence) Pre HOU JPL.....23 rushes(2.6/game) Post HOU JPL....15 rushes(2.1/game)(should have more rushes due to knee-downs at end of winning games) I think the stats clearly show an improvement in pass protection from the HOU game onwards. IMO it was a combination of better OL play(repositioning after bye), better QB play(freeing up of JPL to play 'his' game) & better play calling for the personnel at hand(less 7 step drops, more shotgun, etc) OK......the running game......this will require a bit more effort to figure the stats.....I'll just do pre/post HOU. *note* I'm compiling from individual game 'net yards rushing' & 'rushes' Pre HOU .....259 rushes 968 yards(107.6 yards/game)(3.74 yards/carry) Post HOU ....177 rushes 635 yards(90.7 yards/game)(3.59 yards/carry)(should have more rushes & therefore lower average due to knee-downs at end of winning games & running the ball at end of winning games) It should be noted that our best RB actually missed 2(pretty much) games from the 1st 9 games & only 1 from HOU onwards. It should also be noted that the opposing run defences were of similar caliber pre/post HOU..... Opposition Run D rankings by week. Pre HOU.....5, 8, 24, 1, 6, 21, 5, 13, 32.....5 out of 9(56%) were top 10 Run Defences.....1 was terrible Post HOU....20, 4, 7, 24, 8, 30, 2.....4 out of 7(57%) were top 10 Run Defences.....1 was terrible If anything I'd say it looks like the OL performance in run production has gotten worse since the adjustment......I can't be bothered looking through all the play-by-play but I'd be certain the short yardage rushing has not improved, meaning it is still terrible. In summary of the stats I'd say that if not for the freeing up of JPL & the changes to the play-calling there was only minor improvement on the OL after the change & that the running game in fact regressed. .....which means we need better OGs Sorry for the length of post.

WOW.....normally I don't care too much where we pick in the draft but the concept that 1 win/loss would have dropped us from 12th(which is still up there in the 'potential' area) aaaaall the way down to 20(which is pretty ho-hum regarding talent). That's massive.

I'm against this idea. I tend not to like the big long threads & structuring topics is bound to end with multiple ones. Long threads are fine if you are one of the people who has been following from the start & have seen how discussion has progressed and changed in regards to updated events & information. If you happen to miss a few days(particularly the start) they become very difficult to follow. You have to read all the pages involved but on long threads most of the early posts will be out of date & honestly a bore to read.....and if one jumps in without reading all posts, there is bound to be repetition daily. I much prefer a new thread for a new thought or occurrence......even though there may well be threads covering the same topic. Also with the circular nature of long threads, it is IMO fine for a thought not already greatly covered to be put in a new thread.....it can so easily get lost in a long one. The threads that people gravitate towards stay at the top anyway & the others fall off page 1. I wouldn't mind a few pinned threads for people to put links to resource material sites....i.e. draft analysis/FA lists/salary cap pages/player profiles/etc. Just my thoughts.....

I second this.....great post.

Sorry for busting your balls earlier in the thread. To me it seemed your original post was surely typed with agenda attached.....looks like I was wrong. It certainly can't be said that Whitner has been an "impact" rookie.....not enough big plays.....but as others have pointed out, he has been pretty much the most reliable of all the 1st round picks in terms of consistency & minimization of errors. I've noted that as fans we assume our picks should succeed and be instant impacts(esp. when drafting at #8). The reality is that half of the 1st round don't ever succeed & most of the rest will achieve success after their rookie season(with varying degrees). IMO any 1st round pick that solidifies a position has justified the pick(argument over money aside).....regardless of where in the 1st they were picked. What does it matter if the #1 pick(Williams) only becomes an occasional probowler if their 2nd rounder(Ryans) becomes an all-pro? In four years time they will have an all-pro LB and a very good DE.....the salaries will adjust accordingly. We place too much emphasis on the top draft gambles & not enough on the concept that it's a team sport....in all aspects. If the rookies that have looked decent improve rather than regress next season, this would have to be one of the best drafts in Bills history.....regardless of McCargo & Youboty. Pennington, Williams, Ellison, Simpson, Whitner. Whitner may not be "impact"(yet).....& McCargo might be an injury bust(we'll see).....but what does it matter when looking at a bigger picture?

Is it just coincidence for me(& my computer) or does it take a fair bit longer for each page to load than it did before the upgrade? Anybody else experiencing slow loading times?

Thanks Bill. Same to you & yours, & that was a first class "A Few Thought About The Game...." post for you to finish on.

I would think it very doubtful we go after an OT at this point as well. Peters has locked the left side & I would think that Pennington has shown enough that we'd be comfortable waiting to see how he progresses next season before we spend a first on the possition.