Rubes

I'm predicting that Willis and AP will both be gone before #12, and that the Bills will not move up to get either. If one of them is available, then I'll be wrong, but I'll also be happy. 1. Marshawn Lynch 2. Move back up into the first round to grab Poz That's my prediction and I'm sticking with it.

Because as he walked so indiscreetly by the pow-wow, I'm betting Ralph, Marv, Dick, and Jim all glanced up at him at the same time with that "Can I help you?" look on their faces. My guess is he proceeded to slink away into the shadows, which he later referred to as "not waiting around to hear the reply."

Hey, if Gaughan can say this in his blog: He's cool in my book. I'll read it.

I haven't seen this mentioned before, but since Chris Brown's blogs are a welcome read in the offseason (and during the season as well), thought I'd put this out there for people who just can't get enough Bills information from the dudes at the Buff News. Feel free, of course, to either provide or withhold your opinions on those guys, I don't really care. There's a Bills Blog there, manned by Gaughan and Wilson (and apparently Sullivan, though I don't know if he's done any). Updated pretty frequently, too. And, it gives the opportunity to comment on the blogs. Here's the latest, from Gaughan: Just in case you haven't seen it and have any interest in it, the "BillBoard" can be found here. Apologies if this was already mentioned or obvious.

My head is spinning. I don't understand it, but get 'er done, Marv!

It would certainly be fun if Spragan and Haggan could line up for us at LB together.

Ugh. Another offseason hearing about how Levy "reached" for a player at #12 that he could have traded down for and picked up some more draft picks. I can't wait.

I'm now expecting to see a series of "news" stories on the TBD front page tomorrow discussing the Bills' reported interested in trading for Briggs.

Can't tell...without seeing his number, they all look alike to me.

This is what I don't get. He's going to be their #3. I'll repeat it again: He's going to be their #3. What in the world does he have to be excited about? And why are Philly fans getting so worked up about getting an expensive third-string QB? I'll take a 7th round pick over that. Much less expensive and he'll see the field about as much.

What about Turner for swapping second round picks?

Kind of interesting how Triplett and Walker are 293 and 294, while Williams and McCargo are 306 and 307. Not sure why I find that interesting, but there you have it.

Actually, that's precisely what I'd expect to see...

I still stand by my assessment that the net result of our FA gains and losses is not as bad as it might superficially appear. While it may be true that we don't currently have two LBs to replace the two we lost, you also have to take into account what we have gained so far if you want an overall assessment.

Crazy...I haven't even heard of the Puck...where's that?? I haven't been making trips to see Sabres playoff games, just catching them when they're on nationally -- mostly because I don't know if places will even show hockey games. But I think Port O'Call would probably be open to it as long as they have access to the games. I think it would be fun to watch some Sabres with other Buffalo fans -- it's hard enough to find Bills fans around here. And yes, I'm originally from Amherst...

No kidding! I didn't realize there were many other Bills fans here. My uncle and I hit Port O' Call for the games every Sunday, so you're welcome to join us unless you know of other gatherings around town. Salt Lake is definitely the 'least' Mormon part of the state, but it's still around 45% Mormon. There has been a big influx of non-Mormons in the 10 years or so that I've been here. It has been very noticeable.

Holcomb is a decent guy, no need to hate. But what really makes me chuckle is how much love he's getting from Philly, as though getting him really makes that trade a big bonus for Philly. I mean, seriously. He's going to be the 3rd string QB. If you have to go to your 3rd string QB, you have issues. And is Holcomb *really* that excited to go to a team where he will be virutally assured of holding a clipboard for the rest of his career?

Not that I would necessarily do this, but it sure would be interesting if the Bills used the two 3rd rounders they got for Willis to acquire Turner...

First, Salt Lake City elects a liberal Democratic mayor who goes on trips to Washington state and Washington D.C. promoting the impeachment of Bush. He's even scheduling a live show-down debate with Sean Hannity to debate the Iraq war and his call for Bush's impeachment. Now, we're hearing about how students and faculty at ultra-conservative BYU are petitioning to block Dick Cheney from delivering their commencement speech. They told me this place was strange, but I had no idea.

Not sure, but if they run out of space they can make Shaud and Roscoe share a locker.

The point here is not to ask "will the Bills be better next year over last year", but rather, "are the Bills better or worse at this point than last year?" Certainly, what happens in the draft and in the rest of FA will have an impact on the team's performance next year. But the point is, with a number of people seeming to think that the Bills are really taking huge steps backwards so far, I want to ask the question, "Is that really the case?" You can certainly argue that our LB group is worse off than last year's group. But look at it this way: Last year's outside LBs were Crowell and Spikes. This year, we have Crowell and Ellison. Is Ellison a step back from Spikes? Based on last year's performance, I think the answer is 0/-. We lose leadership, but Spikes' on-field performance and production should not be hard to replace with Ellison, really -- especially with what he may learn in his second year. That means the big difference, to me, is the loss of Fletcher. I think we can expect to replace a fraction of that production next year, so I don't look at this as a huge drop off -- just a step back (-). As far as running back is concerned, I really don't think we have lost as much as people think. Right now, the way things are: do you think that the combination of A-Train, Shaud, and Jackson would have a tough time running for 900-some yards and a handful of TDs? Personally, I don't think so. When you add another runner into that mix (draft or FA), it's crazy to think they can't. The big losses, to me, are Fletcher and Clements. Spikes and McGahee are washes if you ask me. Add Dockery and the two Walkers to the equation, and I'd say it's fairly even.

There has been a lot of talk going on about this, here and in the media. Sal at the D&C thinks we're worse off, Mortensen at ESPN (sorry I brought him up) thinks we're an embarrassment. Then there are a lot of homers thinking we're just shedding dead weight and we should be thinking playoffs at this point. I don't think we're playoff bound this year (to me, 2008 is looking like the year we start kicking tail), but I thought I'd try to look as objectively as possible at the important moves so far this offseason and the overall effect on the team. So, better or worse than last year, personnel-wise? Additions Dockery -- nice upgrade over Gandy. Veteran presence. (++) Whittle -- hard to say how much he will see the field, but a good backup at the very least. (0) L. Walker -- still not sure how good he is, but at the very least he should be as good as a rookie Pennington from last year. (0/+) D. Walker -- pushes Anderson out of the rotation, adds veteran presence with playoff experience. (+) Subtractions Clements -- no way we would pay that much, but fact remains he was our best corner. Yobouty is a question mark. (--) Fletcher -- leader, warrior, solid player who should have made the Pro Bowl. Crowell should be able to replace him admirably if he plays the middle; if it's a rookie, it will take some time. (-) Spikes -- was a big question mark entering this season. It could be argued that we got the same production from Ellison as a rookie as a recovering Spikes. Leadership will be missed. Could be a big loss if he comes back to old form, but at this point it's impossible to know. (0/-) McGahee -- This one is tough. Are we better with him or without him? With the upgrades to the offensive line, you could argue that he would have had the chance to really show something this coming year. However, we're comparing next year's team with last year's, and his production last year was pedestrian. Really should not be difficult to match or improve on that with A-Train/Shaud/3rd runner (rookie or vet FA). (0) Holcomb -- Please. (0) Shelton -- A good blocker at times, but his performance last year was not inspiring and should be replaceable. (0) Bowen, Reyes, Villarial -- nothing much lost there. (0) So with my highly objective and unbiased analysis, I get about the same in terms of + and -. It's obviously hard to quantify the intangibles -- things like the loss of leadership (or leadership gained, for that matter) or the improvement we might expect to see from players being more comfortable in the system or coming into their second year (like Whitner, Simpson, and Williams), but right now, the way I see it, I think we've done a fairly good job shedding some expensive players and potentially improving our lines while not really losing as much as some might make it seem. But then again, I'm a homer.

Look, what it really comes down to is this: fans find all the things wrong with the player who left, and play up the upside of the guy who just arrived. Philly fans are stoked at getting a LB of the caliber of Spikes. They see the upside if he returns to form. They play up the fact that he improved as the year went on. At worst, they see themselves getting a good LB who brings a lot of fire to the table. They also see themselves getting a solid backup QB. And all they gave up was an average DT and a worthless 7th round pick. On the flip side, we're stoked at getting a veteran DT who will fit our system perfectly, potentially fixing our defensive line problems and striking DT off the list of need positions in the draft. We love his sack stats and play up the positive reports we can find from people who have seen him play. We had to give up a great teammate but a guy who is really expensive and who has missed as much playing time as he's seen the last two years, appears to be a shell of his old self, and probably will never reach his old form. That and an expensive guy who will likely be their 3rd string QB -- big deal. Who won this deal? Who got robbed? Nobody did, certainly not yet. If Spikes returns to his Pro Bowl form, then the Eagles did well. If Walker solidifes our defensive line, then we did well. Holcomb is barely even part of the equation, to be honest. But certainly nobody could honestly proclaim, with a straight face, that either team made out better than the other at this point in time.

Funny, I could have sworn most of the media saying that Holcomb was probably going to be their 3rd stringer. That's a coup?

Nah, I'm guessing it just has to do with how they are remembered. Chandler was no more a Raider than OJ was a 49er, Thurman a phin, or Bruce and Andre a Skin.