Dibs

Trust me Bill, there really is no need for concern over future cap issues unless we find a Franchise QB......in which case it will be a problem greeted with open arms by one and all.

Get rid of the extra point KICK.....but keep everything else the same. TD = 6 Option to take a free extra point(awarded to team, not TD scorers for historical stats comparisons) or Option to try for 2 pts from the 2.

....or is it one ell of an eye?

I don't follow cricket.....but I'm an Australian, so I want them to win.

Something like that. I learned it from Leroi. Apparently putting "Imo" at the bottom of a post enables one to back away from their post, even if they were stating an insider source as if it were fact. Though my sources say "In", if it turns around to be an "out" I want my reputation to be covered.

Unlike most of the buffoons in this thread, I could explain the game in detail to you all. Unfortunately I'm really not a fan of the sport, so I can't be bothered. I will say one thing however... Through all its tedium as a sport, at least they catch balls like real men with their bare hands, unlike baseball which apparently needs padded buckets to be able to catch the ball.

It's time to play the music.

In Imo

I've noticed that many here who list of the contenders for GOAT are missing Walter Payton. Brown, Payton, Sanders, OJ, Campbell, Sayers, Dickerson, Dorsett, even Emmitt Smith are all worthy names IMO for GOAT RB.....though I think Brown is clearly the best. I love TT and think he was a tremendously great talent and easily a worthy HOF player, but he really is not in the same league as OJ.

I think you'd find that if there were a bunch of posters who were regularly and emphatically stating that EJ was definitely going to be a top QB, that those same "lovers" would be arguing against them.

But Pears is 6'8" and played OG last year. Oh, wait a minute.......never mind.

In year 2, when EJ escaped from the pocket he was looking up field for potential receiving targets. This was one of his highlighted flaws in his rookie season where he didn't look up field when flushed out of the pocket. This is an improvement. It is not logical to think that somebody who has an immense amount of flaws, and who works extremely hard to correct said flaws, didn't improve in any way. Thinking that he didn't improve anywhere near enough is IMO totally reasonable.....but thinking he didn't improve in any way seems to be the product of one not using their noodle.

lol

I'm just messing with you. IMO both sides to the argument you are in seem locked in hyperbole and the truth likely lies somewhere inbetween.

That's why I said "some players".

Sometimes even bad coaching can't counteract the natural improvements that some players make in their first few seasons in the NFL.

With a lot of luck I think the Bills have a chance to Dilfer the Super Bowl this season.

I'm still holding out hope that the Saints cut Evans as they still need some cap relief. Calling NoSaint....any news on the Evans situation in Saints land?

The problem that we have here is the term "good". When I used it, I was not referring to the measure of number of starts/seasons in a career to determine the definition. Orton and Cassel have both had/have good careers as NFL QBs, but not many people if asked "Do the Bills have a good QB?" would answer "Yes, Orton/Cassel is a good QB". There have been quite a few QBs who have played well for multiple years, but said QBs are usually looked at as "Not good enough." and an improvement is usually always looked for. The benchmark for "good enough" is very high in the NFL in regards to QBs, and even when a QB just scrapes over that high benchmark(Matt Hasselbeck for example), they still do not provide the desired result that one wishes from the QB position. Essentially it is the magical Franchise guys(P.Manning, Rogers, Brees, Brady) and the tier just below(Rivers, Roethisberger, etc) that are what is wanted at QB. Anything below that, for the most part, is simply not good enough. In the last 20 years there have been 190 QBs drafted after pick #36. Brady and Wilson are clearly franchise guys.....so the odds of obtaining the QB one really wants is 1 in 95. We also have the following QBs(listed in order of number of starts).... Hasselbeck(152) Plummer(136) Bulger(95) Schaub(90) Brooks(90) Fitzpatrick(89) Stewart(87) Griese(83) Orton(82) Banks(78) Garrard(76) Cassel(71) Batch(55) 176 other QBs How many on that list would people consider "good enough"? Even if one stretches things to saying Hasselbeck and Plummer are good enough, that means that the odds become 1 in 47.5 of drafting a QB after pick #36 who is good enough. In real terms that means that if we were to "take a flyer" every year we could reasonable expect to find one guy every 47.5 years. Don't get me wrong here.....I don't believe that one should not take flyers on QBs(one can't get lucky unless one rolls the dice). One should not however think in any realistic way that taking an individual flyer on a QB is anything more than the long shot stab in the dark that it is. For interest sake.... There were 55 QBs selected in picks #1-36 through those 20 years. There were 26 non top 10 QBs selected in that set. Some of the names in that 26 are: Culpepper, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Rogers, Brees, Dalton, Kaepernick. (With of course top 10 picks of Manning, Vick, Palmer, Manning, Smith, Newton, Luck, McNabb, McNair, Rivers, Tannehill)

They did just make McCorty the 2nd highest paid safety in the league, so there's that.....

My point was that we have many decent possibilies which could mean that the OL does hold up. If we had the same coaches, mid-career vets instead of 2nd year players, no Incognito or C.Williams, then we really could only hope that a rookie steps up. As it stands, we have a whole lot of possibilies for potential improvement.

Like most, I too am disappointed that we could not sure up the OL via FA. Unlike some however, I can see that there is a good chance that we will hit the field come September with at least a reasonable OL. As I see it, we have an unusually high number of reasonable "maybes" this year with regards to the OL. Maybe Glenn and Wood will rebound(Glenn getting a full injury free pre-season & Wood having better than Pears next to him). Maybe the coaching was in fact hindering the ability of the players and a new coaching methodology and system will improve them across the board. Maybe the play calling hindered the performance on the field. Maybe Chris Williams stays healthy and performs to a reasonable level. Maybe Incognito is unaffected by his year out of the NFL and returns to ProBowl level. Maybe CK, Richardson &/or Henderson will improve or "get it" in their 2nd year(which happens quite regularly). Maybe a rookie will step right in at a position and sure it up(assuming we draft somebody). Maybe the influx of new offensive skills talent(including non-OL blocking talent) will enable the OL to play above their ability. As Bills fans, we are used to seeing our team buck the odds for the worst.....but unless one believes that there is something supernatural involved, the odds are that at least a couple of the maybes we have this year in regards to the OL will come off. Personally, I am hoping that we buck the odds in the opposite of what we normally experience and that several of the maybes become realities......and we field a good-great OL this year. That said, it sure would have been nice to sign a good FA or two for the OL so that we wouldn't have to rely on maybes.

I don't disagree with you in any way in regards to restructuring players to fit others.....but the KW contract restructure did not do this, and in fact was the opposite. The KW deal added to his cap hit in all years as well as adding the highest pay and cap hit for the additional year.

It was lifted directly from the linked article in the OP.

If you change your "literally" to "vitually", you could say the same thing for QBs selected after the #36 pick......in the last 25 years or so.