Dibs

Best case scenario.... Peters excels, Gandy solidifies & becomes a good player at guard, Fowler improves to become at least above average & Pennington shows himself to be at least competent. Worst case scenario.... Peters doesn't cut it at LT & moves back to RT, Gandy does not improve, Fowler remains at best OK, Pennington plays like a 7th rounder, Villarial gets even older & Preston/Butler/Reyes/Merz all show mediocrity. Wow, with so many possibilities....the world is our oyster.....I just hope we aren't allergic to seafood.

Yes I can. Last year.... 29th in passing....157.2 YPG This year.... 28th in passing....162.9 YPG

...but it does show the importance the Eagles placed on the secondary......which doesn't mean that they placed no importance on the lines....just that they knew the DBs were important too.

That's a bit melodramatic I think. The OL is rehashed with 3 new players at positions (1 a rookie). I can easily see the line having trouble while the players learn & acclimatize. That could cause JP to have problems etc, etc, etc. As you said, the playoffs is irrelevant at this point so....in 3 more weeks, we might start getting it together & by end of season we might look like an up-&-coming team. A 38-0 loss this week wouldn't mean anything if that were to occur. I'm not saying I expect that....nor am I saying that I want us to lose etc....what I am saying is that this game(assuming playoffs are out of the picture) has probably only positive outcomes. If we win & or look improving(particularly the OL)....well, we'll be on the way. If we lose and look rubbish....like I said, that will be meaningless if we turn it around in 2 weeks, 3 weeks, etc. Why make the sky fall before it actually does?

Just because it's an example.... Eagles 2002... 1st round: Lito Sheppard DB 2nd round: Michael Lewis DB 3rd round: Sheldon Brown DB 3th round: Brian Westbrook RB They couldn't get to the next level without top DBs(& DB depth). In order to win a superbowl you need top talent all over the team....since Youboty & Simpson were both considered great gets where we got them it would have been dumb to take a lesser talented lineman since if you need both....& you wont win the lot without both....you get the best available guy when you believe it is that obvious they are the best available. I know you are single minded on the issue of drafting for the lines but I think you lose sight of a bigger picture. If we had drafted as the Bucs....we would have totally ignored the DL until the 5th. That would have been bad wouldn't it? I actually find it difficult to understand the thought process which basically goes.... "You didn't do what I thought you should so therefore it is terrible" What's wrong with...... "You didn't do what I thought you should but you did do some of it(DT)....it looks OK....let's see how it pans out." You deem it a disaster. If it is a disaster.....what have our previous 6 drafts been? Black/White...All/Nothing...Good/Bad That's a very limited way of looking at things.

If he does he's dreaming. How do you figure he'll (legitimately) want more than the highest amount(by far) ever paid to a OG? Steinbach is very good....Hutch is great.....there is no way Steiny will command a greater(or even similar) price.

You obviously don't realize it.....& I'd imagine most Bills fans don't because we are so used to being awful but..... we are top 15 now. That's right....with no momentum.....after playing three awful games in a row.....starting 3(4) rookies all year.....new scheme...etc,etc,etc....& we are still ranked #15 in YPG(which is the standard ranking stat for D). Link to stats A step-up by McCargopants next year & this D has the potential to be top 5.

As did every team in the NFL....which shows how easy it is to assess rookie QBs

Like I said....the first part is fine.....the OL was ignored. The second bit seems to be pretty average. I didn't pre-select teams that would compare....I picked the Cowboys due to Romo....the Patriots because they are our best divisional rival & the Dolphins because they are our worst. The picks for all four teams are quite comparable. If I had time I'd randomly grab a few more and see but I'm pretty certain most teams will have a similar number of starters from rounds 3-7 in those years. I know what you mean....but the evidence just doesn't support your theory.

Just because I find your sig. line fairly meaningless(the second bit). COWBOYS picks in rounds 3 - 7 2001 picks: no current starters 2002 picks: no current starters 2003 picks: Jason Witten (3rd round), Bradie James (4th round) 2004 picks: no current starters 2005 picks: Chris Canty (4th round) PATRIOTS picks in rounds 3 - 7 2001 picks: no current starters 2002 picks: no current starters 2003 picks: Asante Samuel (4th round), Dan Koppen (5th round) 2004 picks: no current starters 2005 picks: no current starters DOLPHINS picks in rounds 3 - 7 2001 picks: no current starters 2002 picks: no current starters 2003 picks: no current starters 2004 picks: no current starters 2005 picks: Channing Crowder (3rd round), Travis Daniels (4th round) Oh yeah, Romo......1 game & he's the new Brady. Give it 3 weeks & we'll see.....he might be great(I hope not...I hates the 'Boys)....but he might be like so many other flashes in the pan.

Pretty much every team had 6 chances to draft Brady. They all also had 5 chances in the same year to draft Bulger.

These thing only really work for people who have a good understanding of themselves. Hands up who didn't respond highly to this question. "I tend to analyze things objectively and critically" There's plenty of idiots here at TSW(myself included? ) who tend to think they analyze things both objectively & critically but obvious to all but themselves....they don't. Basically, somebody who is deluded about the level of their analytical & intellectual prowess would score high in that regard....but may in fact be the more emotive type of person. There is a particular 'Ayn Rand capitalist' that I know who is a prime example. Good for a bit of fun though.

Apart from the simple concept that people like to hurl blame when they don't understand things..... You may well be right & we may be deficient in most areas.....history however typically shows that the appearance of having a totally rubbish roster is not usually the case. Teams can seemingly overnight turn from all-woes to all-pros. Again, I'm not saying that that is the case with us because we are playing like a bunch of losers at the moment but it most likely does aply to us. Examples..... The 2000 Patriots were considered one of the most talentless teams in the league. Coming into 2001, they were still regarded as having well below average talent & most predicted another 5-11 year for them. We know now that they had several veteran players who were simply under performing & they had several young players just about to 'get it'.....and Brady. The 2004(& 2005) Bears. In 2004, the Bears had the 21st ranked D(25th against the rush, 15th against the pass). There was very little about them(or many of their players) that stood out. In 2005 their D shot up to #2 in the league & we now recognize the depth of talent they have....but their offence was terrible at 29th. This year(with 20 of 22 starters from last year) their Offence has come alive....all their offensive players are now considered minimally decent....whereas last year they were mostly competent at best. Winning & performing as a team changes the perception of the individuals talent levels on a team. Again I put forward that with a few choice improvements we could all of a sudden be right up there. If the new OL alignment works improvements, we may only need 1 OLman....an improved JP......one DT.....& it might be happy days again for the Bills. Then again......

Boo to you too.

How about this though...... If you tear up the old contract.....& sign the player to a new one which includes this season. You pay(as salary) to the player this season everything that is left under the cap....this in effect is a signing bonus for the player which counts as salary instead. e.g. 5 year 30mil deal year 1...18mil year 2-5....3mil per year This would make things even better down the road as the cap rises & the mojority of the players money has already been payed & is not counting towards the cap anymore. Even if the player does not pan out(injury?)....when you cut him down the track there would be no cap hit due to there being no signing bonus initially. Is there something here that I'm missing? I'm sure this is roughly what the Vikings did with Winfield.

See....new front office.....nice draft. I suppose a lot will come back to money. Will we pay? I don't see why not....we payed for Spikes....& Clements this year. Will he come? Edge went from IND to ARI. Often it is simply the money.....and in today's NFL, players know(or should know) that teams are a champion one day....and a loser the next....& vice versa. It's pessimistic to believe we won't get him. It's optimistic to believe we will get him. It's realistic to believe we might get him.

I was mainly responding to the concept that he has already had ages to work his magic. I would think 4 full years would be a reasonable amount of time. As I pointed out in my previous post, he has not exactly been given much to work with until this year so...... How much of Peter's progression is due to McNally?

...but if those incentives are reached, not only do they come onto the following years cap....but are deemed reasonably attainable & therefore will count in the future anyway. The only real way of doing what you suggest is to cut the player from the final 2 or 3 BIG years & take the 1 year cap hit that follows.

At some point you have to do a quick google on somebody so that you not only sound like you know what's going on....but you actually know what is going on. McNally joined us in 04. That is 2.5 seasons. You make it sound like we have been waiting for EVER for some success on the OL. Peters is a success. We'll see about Pennington obviously but what do people expect? He was given Williams to use at RT & a bunch of scrubs....Jennings....his best OLman & pretty darn good when healthy was injury prone(not McNally's fault). Villarial has performed well but is simply too old. Remember.....it doesn't matter how hard you try.....you can't polish a turd.

I know what you are saying....it baffles me too why more teams(particularly the Bills) don't do this. I'm hoping(if it's still allowed) that we spend the rest of this years cap money later in the season to do exactly what you are talking about with some of our players we wish to sign up longer term.

#5 - The ones who look like they are from group #4 but in their later years.....the lights come on & they perform like champions for a few years until they get too old. Gannon is a top example.....even Testaverde fits this catagory(96 BAL, 98 NYJ).

Why do you say?

It's not like the dog was gonna mind.

Maybe the 'Boys will let him go for our 1st round pick next year. Get it done Marv!!!!

HUH???? Honestly.....do you do this on purpose to try & get reactions or do you simply not see things clearly? To put it simply for you....... Saying that one is unsure if he will develop into a good(or bad) starting QB is NOT the same as stating that he isn't going to be a good starting QB. I just realized that I was typing that reeeeaaaally slowly as if I was talking to someone who has trouble comprehending things.