folz

Public relations or advertising in itself is not inherently bad. It can be bad, for instance when a corporation or organization are doing illegal or nefarious things and then they use public relations and supposed philanthropy to distort reality by creating a false narrative about their actions. Or another instance would be false advertising. Promising something you can't deliver or misleading the consumer (selling something that you know is a poor product, bad for the buyer, or overpriced). But, when your PR or advertising is honest and just pointing out the truthful positives of your product or organization, there is nothing wrong with that. You are just letting consumers know what they will get from what you are selling. That's just good business. I agree that McDermott and Beane are good at PR and think a lot about the image they project of themselves and the Bills organization. But, they are also very honest, down-to-earth guys. McDermott only says things when he thinks that he can actually back them up. Between the new facilities, the amount they put into player health, the family-type atmosphere of the organization and city, etc., I think he truly believes what he is saying. He couldn't say it last year because even if it were true then, he didn't have enough proof maybe to convince someone from the outside. Now he can point to player development with examples of players who have exceeded expectations, who were reclamation projects from other teams, who were cast offs or just not used properly on their last team, who have now flourished in Buffalo, having career years. He can point to the overall health of the team over the last two years. He can point to the fact that his teams have overachieved, making the playoffs 2 of the last 3 years. He can point to the Bills fan base. All of which he believes can make someone a better player and maybe a better man. It is not every NFL franchise where players and their families are cared for and supported from the top down (owners, GM, coaches, staff), no matter where they are on the roster. I mean look who those twitter response were from. It wasn't from just the Josh Allens of the team, but it was Duke Williams and LaAdrian Waddle's wife (a guy who hasn't even see the field for the team yet and could be gone in FA). If that doesn't prove McD is a man of his word, what about all of the coaches promotions that just happened. The Bills take care of their own and make sure everyone is growing and getting better at what they do. And when you do, you are rewarded for it. That is a reality-based promise if you come to Buffalo, buy in, and work hard. So, again, do McDermott and Beane put narratives out into the media to sell their product? Absolutely they do. But, it is not false advertising. When they say something, they can actually back up their claims, so really, it is just good, honest business. Not to mention, part of their job does require recruiting free agents that they think will help their team. So, not too difficult to see why he would say what he did and why he said it now.

I don't watch a lot of college football and haven't really dug in yet on the draft, so maybe some of you guys who have can speak to this... Not necessarily in relation to the OP's post, but in relation to the thread title, McBeane tends to like players who have done it for more than one year in college and who are team-first, all football all the time type of guys (no divas). So, adding that criteria, to the need for big-play-making ability (be it with speed or size), does that seem to rule any of the draftees out or push others up the board maybe?

Just a thought... I wonder how many guys on that list were considered somewhat of a "project" like Josh was coming out. I'm just thinking that if a lot of those other QBs were more "pro ready" coming out of college (played for bigger schools/better competition, had better stats, more polished), it might make sense that their biggest leap would be from year one to year two. They already know how to play QB, and they've been drilled over and over on their mechanics. The good ones just need a year or so to acclimate to the pro game (its schemes and speed, reading defense, etc.). So, maybe Josh will be an outlier and take another sizable jump between year two and year three simply because he had more to learn overall. He had farther to go. So where other guys' learning curve starts to level off, Josh's may still be on an incline.

That was the part that I found most interesting, in regards to fixing Josh's deep ball problems this year. he uses the analogy (as Aldo said) of dropping a pin in Google maps. You want to tell your receiver where to go. What he tries to get guys away from is throwing it out in front of the receiver or leading the receiver. He says you, as the QB, are the one who is looking downfield. The receiver is running full speed looking back at the QB. So, the QB is the one who sees the field clearly, so he should be the one to tell the receiver where to go (not the reverse). Find the open area of the field (which maybe the receiver himself can't see) and then drop a pin there and tell the receiver meet me right here (at the pin). Tell the receiver where to go and let him adjust his route to where you are throwing the ball, rather than letting what the receiver is doing determine where you throw it. And he says that is more of a psychological issue than a mechanics issue. So, "drop a pin" is the phrase for Josh to remind himself to do just that. I found that very interesting and as others said, he thinks Josh will improve to a top-10 deep ball passer this year just because whenever Josh focuses on fixing something, he gets better at it.

Whenever I say I'm a lifelong Bills fan, my family always has to mockingly remind me that I was actually a Pittsburgh Steelers fan first. <sigh> It's true. I grew up in a big Bills family. I remember watching bits and pieces of O.J.'s last couple of seasons, but I was kind of too young to say I was fully paying attention or cared too much about it. Then O.J. got traded, which I remember being a big deal in the family, and as a little tyke with a short attention span, he was really the only thing that made the Bills interesting to me. The next season, 1978, I really started to pay attention to football seriously and the Steelers were the best team at the time, so I just started rooting for them. And as they marched their way to the Super Bowl that year, I went all in. That very cold winter In Rochester, I went to school every day in a Steelers winter hat, scarf, and gloves, and with a Steelers duffel bag hanging at my side. When they won the Super Bowl, I was ecstatic. Man I loved that team. But as winter turned to spring and then spring to summer, something happened. I'm not sure what, just getting a bit older, the influence of family and friends, just wanting to root for the hometown team, but somehow by the start of the 1979 season I was a Bills fan. And even when the Steelers won another Super Bowl at the end of the '79 season, I didn't really care. I'm sure I must have rooted for them over the Rams, but I just wasn't invested in that team anymore. Just like that. I was now walking to school in Bills gear. And if there were any question still remaining, it was completely answered by Joe Cribbs' 1980 rookie season. He brought so much excitement to the Bills. Yes, true confessions, for one glorious season I was a Steelers fan. But it has been all Bills ever since. I did also for a couple of years have a second team I rooted for, which wasn't something I normally did. In all sports leagues, I had always had just one team that I rooted for. But after the 1981 AFC Divisional Round Playoff Game, "The Epic in Miami" between the Chargers and the Dolphins---still to this day the greatest football game I have ever seen---I couldn't help but root for Dan Fouts' Chargers team. In an instant classic, they had beaten the Bills most hated team in an intense overtime playoff game. So, for 2 or 3 seasons after that, a San Diego Chargers pennant hung on my wall, right below my Bills pennant, and I rooted for them whenever they played. But that eventually waned. And by the time Jim Kelly joined the Bills, my fascination with San Diego had disappeared as well.

In Consideration (for me): Butch Byrd Reggie McKenzie Cornelius Bennett Steve Christie Eric Moulds Brian Moorman Fred Jackson Eric Wood Kyle Williams Kyle is a shoo-in at some point, Cornelius should finally get his due, would love to see Freddie up there, Moulds should probably make it at some point also. That would probably be my top four.

Just out of curiosity, I looked at how many teams with an 8-8 record or worse would have made the playoffs over the last 10 years if there had already been a 7th playoff spot in each conference: 2019 Pitt at 8-8 2018 Vikes at 8-8 2015 Falcons at 8-8 2014 Panthers at 7-8-1 2013 GB at 8-7-1 and either Jets, Phins, Pitt or Balt (depending on tie breaker) at 8-8 2012 Pitt at 8-8 2011 Denver at 8-8 and either Ari, Chi, Dal, or Phi (depending on tie breaker) at 8-8 So, 9 teams with records of 8-8 or worse would have made the playoffs over the last ten-year span if there had been a 7th playoff team in each conference. (Granted, 3 of those teams made it anyways, without the extra spot---due to a bad division, so 6 more teams over a ten-year span would have made it breaking even.) The other thing to note is that most years, 9-7 will get you into the playoffs now.

I agree Hapless. I really like Knox and I am hoping he develops into a top TE. But the key word needs to be hoping, not counting on. I think one of the big issues during the drought (along with not having a good QB of course) was that we went into too many seasons counting on or expecting certain players to step up, but with no backup plan if they didn't. How many times did we say, "If this, and this, and this happens, we could be good this year." And then it wouldn't happen or not enough and we'd have another mediocre season. Beane is much better (or is becoming much better) at having contingency plans. And I think they really like Knox and expect him to develop, but they are not going to count on it. Kroft is also still a question mark with as little as he played, as are Croom and Sweeney. Smith is a blocker only. I'm sure they would much rather go into the season knowing they have a proven TE going out there week 1. So, for those that think we are set at TE, I say we need a definitive answer for this season, not question marks. So, if they snag Olsen and then the other guys develop, all the better, we're stacked. But if one or more of them don't develop or Knox's drops continue, you have Olsen to carry the load. As for those that would rather have Howard or Henry (I would lean to Henry of the two), I would say, first they have to want to come here, and we'd also have to pay them a lot more than Olsen. And in regards to Knox and his development, it would be hindered much more by bringing in Howard or Henry, because they would be here longer and probably command the ball more than Olsen. Olsen would only be here for a year or two, hopefully just in time for our young TEs to step into their prime. And part of Olsen's job would be to mentor and groom the young guys (something I don't know that Howard or Henry could or would want to do).

There is no question in my mind that that Steelers/Seattle Super Bowl was severely nudged, if not outwardly rigged. I'm a Bills fan through and through, but I also really liked the Steelers teams of the 1970s when I was a kid. So, I had a soft spot for Pittsburgh and was actually rooting for them in Super Bowl XL. But, the refs literally took two TDs away from Seattle, both on really bad calls. It was pretty obvious to most people at that time (except for Steelers fans) that the NFL marketing department had already written the story they wanted to tell of Bettis riding off into the sunset, Cowher getting his ring, and the storied Steelers franchise getting their 5th Lombardi. And they obviously didn't want to change the script. It was the first (but unfortunately not the last) time that I actually started to question the integrity of the game. But it is still probably the most egregious example. And I agree that Coryell should have been in the Hall long ago. I'm not saying that Cowher or Johnson are not worthy (although I do hate me some Jimmy Johnson), but Coryell should have gone in before either of them. And I also think Flores should get in. Two Super Bowl wins as a head coach, one as a player, one as an assistant is a pretty good resume on its own. But it is surprising to me that being the first Hispanic QB and minority head coach to win a Super Bowl doesn't put him over the top. I'm not one to hand someone something just because of race or whatever, but he actually has the credentials, and we tend to celebrate people breaking barriers for minority communities like that in America. So, I think he deserves it. It just floors me that many Bills fans don't give Marv the props he deserves. I think a lot of younger fans just see 4 Super Bowl loses and maybe only remember his failed tenure as GM (not saying you specifically Ethan as I'm not sure how old you are) and think he is overrated. I won't give my full Marv diatribe (because I've done it many times before), but just think about these two points. No other coach has ever brought his team to four consecutive Super Bowls. No one else. None. Not even Belichick in New England during their 20-year domination of the NFL (though he came close). And Marv's personality and coaching had everything to do with that team's unity and resiliency. Just ask the players. And secondly, he was two feet away from beating the combo of Bill Parcells and Bill Belichick in the Super Bowl. If that kick was just a couple of feet truer, the narrative would be completely different. But because it wasn't, because of just two feet, the narrative now is that he was a mediocre coach who got schooled by two great coaches. (btw, that same Bills team beat that same Giants team in the regular season, just 6 weeks before the Super Bowl, in another hard-fought evenly matched game.) Ok, just a little more diatribe...as to impact or innovation, well Marv did that with both special teams and with the no-huddle offense. Whatever the real story is about how the K-gun came about, Marv was the head coach who approved it and then used it exclusively as a weapon.

PFF seems to be the perfect example of the old cliché, "can't see the forest for the trees." They get so mired in stats that they create themselves that it is almost like they aren't seeing the full body of work of a player. Do they even take into account what type of defenses each team plays, who they were matched up against (caliber of player...did they always guard the #1 or not), weather conditions, whether they were playing with a lead or having to come back, the validity of their offense, how long are they on the field, were some of the receptions allowed when the team was playing prevent defense (so you're going to allow receptions underneath), etc., etc.? There is so much to take into account regarding what type of season a player had that you can't boil it down to just a couple of stats. And to that point, they also seem to cherry pick said stats to make a point or to prove they are correct. In the article they use two stats to say that Tre is not a top 101 player. TWO. Yards surrendered per snap and catches allowed, in which case Tre is ranked 26th and like 40th. Basically they are saying that you can throw out all of his other stats and just use those two to prove he isn't as good as you might think. Doesn't matter that he did not allow a TD (isn't that the main point of the game on defense, to not let the other team score? Isn't that more important than say allowing 1 yard more per reception across the season), throw out his league leading 6 interceptions and league leading 8 turnovers (Tre had two forced fumbles as well), forget that he is tied for 4th in passes defended. As the PFF article states, "the PFF grade captures all of the ways those numbers can mislead or paint an inaccurate picture." But then they don't tell you how. Apparently, it's their little secret. It also appears to me that they have quite large egos over there. Our stats/metrics know way better than any other stats or stat system, better than pro bowl voters, better than AP All Pro voters, better than the BillsMafia who have watched every snap by Tre over three seasons. They are just so full of themselves. OneBillsLive had one of the guys from PFF on recently and he was trying to explain their system. And it still sounds pretty subjective to me. He said (approximately), we watch every snap by every player. But in order to do so, we have to hire a lot of people to do this (one small group of people can't do it all). So, they basically hire freelancers to help. And then those people (whose qualifications we know not) watch the plays of a particular player and decide things like was that a catchable ball or a bad pass, etc. You can have this great system and be amazing number crunchers, but at the core of the system, it seems that it is still just people making subjective judgements. So, how they can claim that that is a more accurate judge than actual stats that matter in a game (like TDs and turnovers) is beyond me. I can understand that there is still a bit of a wait and see approach with Josh for a lot of people, especially people who were so vocally down on him during his draft, but to basically say that, "Eh, Tre White isn't really as good as he seems, bloated stats, he's maybe a top 10 corner, top 30 DB," seems crazy. As others said, it is hard to take these guys seriously and I don't think I will again even if and when they have a Buffalo Bill ranked highly (like they did with Jerry Hughes for pressures in 2018).

I know the draft value chart is just a guide, and by no means definitive, but according to the chart, Miami does have enough with just their 1st round picks this year if the Bengals were willing to trade. I guess it would depend on how much Cinci likes the other two QBs. If you don't feel it is that big of a drop off, make the trade. If you think Burrow is the guy, no trade. But if I'm Cinci and I'm going to make the trade, I'm going to want them to overpay. https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp Cinncinnati: 1st overall pick = 3,000 3rd round (65th) = 265 = 3,265 Miami: 5th overall = 1,700 18th overall = 900 26th overall = 700 = 3,300 OR Cinci 1st overall = 3,000 Miami 5th overall = 1,700 18th overall = 900 2nd round (39th) = 500 3,100

Going back to my youth and my brief interest in pro wrestling (got to shake Andre the Giant's hand at one match), I'd love to see Rex and Rob in a tag team match with The Wild Samoans.

Olsen's 2019 highlights for perspective. Not real fast anymore (if he ever was), but can still get separation, find holes in the defensive coverage, and make contested catches. The only thing I noticed is that he goes down pretty quickly/easily at first contact, but as an older guy, can't blame him, he's protecting his body. But, I don't really hold it against him, as most of his catches were in the 10-20 yard range, so he's picking up first downs. I think he and Knox would be a nice one-two at TE and as others have said, the leadership and mentorship he would bring for Knox, Sweeney, Josh, and the offense in general could be big.

As others said, she is still learning her craft and yes, her voice takes a little getting used to, but she's not just there as a pretty face, she really knows her football and sports in general and she comes prepared. You can tell when she has had to interview people like Greg Cosell, that they give her some respect because she is prepared and asks intelligent questions. So, I have no problem with her. She's a big upgrade from their earlier attempts of bringing a young woman on staff to do video segments with players, etc. And apparently a big part of her job is social media, so of course they want someone young to do that job.

Congrats Coach McD on the nomination. Well deserved. I think Shanahan will likely win it, but my vote would be for Harbaugh (with McD a close second).

I guess everyone sees it with different glasses based on how they feel about Flutie. You say most of the discussion was all about him. I came away feeling like the bulk or biggest part of the discussion was about how great the Bills fans are. I have nothing against Doug. Sure he has an ego, but most professional athletes do. And he did deserve to start that playoff game. He may not have been great, but he was the leader of that team at the time and Rob Johnson sucked. I don't blame him for being bitter about that. And I can't fault him for saying he'd have a better chance in the NFL now than when he played, because it's true. He wanted nothing but to play in the NFL, but because of his size, his opportunities were limited. Now because of all of the QB protection rules and the different style of play, many smaller QBs are having success. Is the animosity towards Doug just about the old QB controversy? The idea that he divided the locker room? Or is it something deeper? I understand that fans took sides in that debate too, but don't quite understand the continuing dislike of the guy.

And this, of course, still gets me pumped up whenever I hear it. Of course in my head I hear Howard Cossell's intro to the game over the music. And one more random one. This is a song by Bill Conti (of Rocky music fame) written for the James Bond movie For Your Eyes Only, but the NFL used it in the early 80s for some highlight videos. I think it was used for a highlight film of probably the best game I ever saw, the Dolphins/Chargers epic 1981 overtime battle in the playoffs.

My Favorites (or at least most memorable) from NFL Films (Sam Spence) are (in no particular order): A New Game The Final Quest Magnificent Eleven Round Up (posted above by row_33 in the Burger King commercial) Classic Battle (posted above by vincec) The Equalizer The Lineman (posted above by 4_kidd_4) The Raiders (posted above by Major)

Wouldn't mean anything now, but back in the 90s, when the special teams were great, they used to play the Jaws theme for kickoffs and the fans would make like their arms were a shark's mouth opening and closing.

To the OP's original question, this was Tasker's last year of eligibility in the normal selection process as he retired more than 25 years ago now. He can be voted in as a senior member, but the road is much harder: HOF Selection Process "To be eligible for the nominating process, a player or coach must have been retired for at least five years. Any other contributor such as a team owner or executive can be voted in at any time.[12] Fans may nominate any player, coach or contributor by simply writing via letter or email to the Pro Football Hall of Fame. The Selection Committee is then polled three times by mail (once in March, once in September, and once in October) to eventually narrow the list to 25 semifinalists. In November, the committee then selects 15 finalists by mail balloting. A Seniors and Contributors Committee, subcommittees of the overall Selection Committee, nominate Seniors (those players who completed their careers more than 25 years ago) and Contributors (individuals who made contributions to the game in areas other than playing or coaching). The Seniors Committee and Contributors Committee add two or one finalist(s) on alternating years which makes a final ballot of 18 finalists under consideration by the full committee each year.[12] Committee members are instructed to only consider a candidate's professional football contributions and to disregard all other factors.[13] The Selection Committee then meets on "Selection Saturday," the day before each Super Bowl game to elect a new class. To be elected, a finalist must receive at least 80 percent support from the Board, with at least four, but no more than eight, candidates being elected annually." So, Tasker could still get in, but the odds are now really stacked against him since the Seniors committee only add 1 or 2 names every alternating year. So, first he would have to be picked by the seniors committee as 1 or 2 players from every player who has ever played but is not in the Hall. And if they selected him, he would then have to compete with the other 15 more recent players (whose careers ended less than 25 years ago) and get 80% of the vote. I think there will have to be an upswelling of sentiment for special teams play and/or for the Hall having overlooked special teams all these years for Tasker to get in going forward. And who knows if that will ever happen. But I would still love to see it and believe he deserves it.

Actually, quite a few. I can only assume that either you are too young to remember watching the 90s team live, or if you are old enough, then somehow your memory is failing you. Tasker made a huge number of momentum-changing and game-changing plays that helped the team win games. Just watch his highlights videos on youtube. Just as Bruce always seemed to be able to come up with a big sack in crunch time (to get the ball back for his offense or to seal a game), Tasker's plays often happened at critical junctures in games too---opening kickoffs that set the tone of the game, late in games when the team just needed someone to make a big play and he blocks a punt or makes a punt returner fumble the ball, etc. Also, many fans underestimate the value of field position in football, but it is a HUGE part of the game and Tasker was as important to that as say a great punter (Guy) or a great returner. His open-field tackles on All-Pro returners (like Deion Sanders, etc.) wouldn't just hurt the opponents field position, but they would fire up the crowd and his teammates. And he blocked punts (some which resulted in TDs or at least set the offense up on short fields), he created turnovers and at least one safety, he returned kicks and punts (when they needed him too), and was pretty good at WR when given a chance. In one week's time, in 1993, he blocked a punt in the Super Bowl and then a field goal in the Pro Bowl. The great players from that 90s team, the Hall of Famers, have a tight circle of friendship. Why do you think Tasker is in that select group with Bruce, Thurman, Jim, Andre, etc. It is because they thought of him on the same level as themselves, as far as greatness and importance to that team. They all believe he deserves to be in the Hall. He made 7 Pro Bowls and 12 times was 1st team ALL Pro. The only special teamer to ever win the MVP in a Pro Bowl (1993). To dismiss his Hall-of-Fame worthiness so cavalierly, without even a debate, seems a bit short-sighted, if not disrespectful to what Tasker gave and meant to this team.

That is exactly what I was going to say. Just can't root for Tennessee (because of the Homerun forward lateral still), I could care less about the Niners, and for some reason, I just don't like Rodgers that much. However, I would be happy to see Reid finally win a Super Bowl and KC is an old AFL team with a great fan base, who haven't appeared in a SB since they beat Minnesota in Super Bowl IV, way back in 1970.

I'm sure most of this has already been said, but the thing is no one can say with certainty right now whether Rosen can or can't develop into a starting QB in this league. Let me state first, I wanted Darnold or Allen in the draft and I would have been happy with Mayfield too. The only two I didn't want were Rosen and Jackson. Rosen based on the personality/likability issues raised at draft time (not his play) and Jackson because I was worried that he wasn't a good enough passer. I am thrilled the Bills went with Allen. I think he was the perfect fit for Buffalo and wouldn't trade him for any of the other guys. But there is no way that anyone, except for maybe the Miami staff, can properly evaluate Josh Rosen at this point. He gets drafted by a stripped-down Arizona team with a historically bad offensive line and a first-year head coach (who wouldn't even get a second year). There was no stability at all in the team or the organization and no weapons (except an aging Fitzgerald). That was not a good situation for developing a QB. The whole team was not just devoid of talent, but was also learning a new playbook, getting used to new coaches, etc, like Josh. Then he (a top 10 draft pick) is traded away after just one season. An unprecedented move in the league. That couldn't have helped his confidence. And the team he is traded to is in the midst of an historic purge of talent and full-on rebuild mode. And he has to once again get to know an entirely different playbook, teammates, coaches, and city. None of the other four QBs drafted with Rosen had to do all four of those things. Darnold is the only other one that had to do even two of those things. And Rosen, who apparently doesn't have the warmest of personalities, has to try to win a team over against one of the most loved QBs (personality-wise) in the league in Fitz? And he only had 3 starts in Miami. That may be because he wasn't ready, but under his circumstances, it isn't surprising that he wasn't ready. Plus, you can't extract his long-term potential from those three games. It is absolutely ridiculous to think a QB could develop and be good under those circumstances. Josh Allen, under much better circumstances (except for the O-line and WR talent of last year), has played 28 games and people still say he needs more time before a complete evaluation can be made on him (which is true). Well Rosen has only had 16 starts with two really bad teams having to start all over from scratch in year two. How can anyone give him a fair evaluation right now. I'll just add one stat into the conversation (as far as offensive line play is concerned---understanding that some sacks are on the QB, not the O-line, but...), Rosen has been sacked once every 8.2 attempts. In comparison, Josh Allen had been sacked once every 11.8 attempts, Darnold has been sacked once every 13.5 attempts, and Mayfield has been sacked once every 15.7 attempts. I don't know if Rosen could have or still can become a good QB or not in the right situation, but to evaluate him as terrible at this point seems unfair to me. As to the OP's original question, I would say it comes down to how the Miami staff feels about him. The hiring of Chan Gailey makes me think that they plan to at least start next season with Fitz at QB. Meaning they still don't think Rosen will be ready at the start of next season or don't believe in him at all. The next thought is will Miami draft a QB in the first round this year. It looks like Tua will be available to them at 5. He seems to be the guy they have wanted all along. So, I say Miami does draft Tua, but plans to start Fitz until Tua is healthy and has developed enough to take over the reigns (be that in year one or year two). If they thought somewhat highly of Rosen (even if they think he needs a lot of work still) maybe you keep him as a third developmental project. Wouldn't be bad having two top-10 drafted QBs to develop, to hedge your bets. But the way NFL rosters are now, it is tough to keep three QBs. So, ultimately, I think Miami will look to trade Rosen again (unless they can't secure a QB they want in the draft, in which case he probably would get one more year in Miami). And just as Arizona did not get a return on their investment, I don't think Miami gets as much as they traded for him. I don't think Rosen finds a starting spot next year, as most teams right now either have their QB, are grooming one, or will draft one. But I could see a team pick him up just to take a looksie, to see if they think they could develop him and hope in the meantime that he might be good enough as their number two. I could see teams like New England, Pittsburgh, Indy, or the Chargers taking a look. Teams that have an older QB, who will be in the QB market soon, so why not take a look and see if you can basically get a guy for pennies on the dollar (that is if any of them liked him coming out of the draft). Or maybe Indy if they aren't completely sold on Jacoby as their starter. Bring Rosen in as competition. I bet Frank could get the best out of him. No doubt someone will take a look, but Rosen will probably have to prove that he can at least be a decent backup right now, in order to eventually get another shot at being a starter. I think if he goes to a stable organization and can win a backup job, he'll get another shot some day and at worst will be able to hang around the league for a while as a backup. But if he goes to another bad situation, I could see him being out of the league by the end of his rookie deal.

I would also add Milano (3rd year), Wallace (2nd year), and Neal (2nd year) to your very solid and young list. A number of times this year I felt that this season (although it looked quite different) mirrored the 1988 Bills season. Remember Scott Norwood was the NFL league leader in points that year. Why? Because the offense had most of the pieces in place, but they weren't quite there yet. They had a lot of field goals and a lot of close games that went the Bills way. Seven of their wins were single-digit margins. It's not an exact comparison because I think that '88 team was at least a half-a-step or half-a-season ahead of this team in terms of experience (specifically at the QB position, where Jim was in his 5th year of professional ball, and Josh is only in year 2), but then this team is ahead of that '88 team in culture/chemistry (as that '88 team still needed to go through the bickering Bills in '89). Who knows if this current team will or won't reach the heights of the 90s Bills, but it is exciting to see our team being built the right way again, through the draft and built for sustained success. And my money says that these kids will grow up over the next year or two and become an excellent team.