JohnC

Bucky Brooks was on John Murphy's WGR show talking about the draft. This is about an eleven minute segment. Interesting stuff. He concluded that he felt the best player in the draft was LSU's safety. http://www.wgr550.com/media/audio-channel/04-14-nfl-analyst-bucky-brooks-john-murphy-showmp3

Wentz was a rookie last year. So the comparisons are not fair to make. Regardless what stats you want to use in comparison what is revealing is that our GM didn't have much interest in retaining him. The contract that was reworked indicated that he was at best a bridge qb who is working on a very short term and cheap contract. There is a good reason why the Bills are putting in a lot of effort in evaluating this draft class. It's indisputable that one of the reasons is that the organization doesn't see much long term potential in TT. This is my opinion but there is no team in the league that would take TT over Wentz, assuming of course that the decision-makers are sober.

I don't disagree with anything you said. Whether the Bills draft a qb or not I would love to see him get better and compete for the backup or even a starter position. Even as a backup that doesn't mean that he won't play due to injuries or faltering play.

What trade value and with whom? At least at this point. Projects are usually long shots. That's why so much energy is being expended in scouting this year's crop. If he turns out to be a good player down the line who is going to complain? I certainly won't. Having too many good players is not Buffalo's current problem. As I said in the prior post the coaching staff has an inkling of what they have in him. That's why they are keeping their eyes open for better options at the qb position.

The result of Wentz being drafted by the Eagles in an expensive deal is that they now have a franchise qb. He started off well and then struggled. What's so surprising about that? The inevitable and inescapable learning process took place. What the Eagles now have is a legitimate franchise qb taking the snaps and their rebuilding process accelerated because the qb position is secured. Now compare that to the Cleveland franchise that received a boatload of picks for the trade with the Eagles. They still don't have a franchise qb and they are still in pursuit of that critical acquisition. Sure they have a surplus of picks but the value of those picks and potential players doesn't come close to the value of having a franchise qb anchored to the team. The people (not you) who clamor for value when discussing the draft don't understand that there is an altogether different metric when discussing the qb position compared to all the other positions. A team that doesn't have a franchise qb and selects a franchise qb prospect who is rated in the 25-50 range potentially has more value and impact on a team than a top five ranked player who is a DB. A player who turns out to be an all pro safety doesn't come close to matching the value of acquiring a qb such as Dalton or little better caliber qb. That's how important the position is. The Bills have passed on a number of reasonable good qb prospects that have gone on to elevate other teams because of their stupid patchwork mentality towards roster building. If more than a generation of futility isn't enough of a demonstration of the foolishness of their method of acquiring players then they are irredeemably obtuse. Too many people have grown comfortable with this environment of mediocrity that has lasted more than a generation. Not I!

Let's wait for another generation to pass by for the pick of the litter that still doesn't come. Russell Wilson didn't possess a prototypical size. So let's pass. Derek Carr's brother miserably failed. So his bloodlines must be contaminated. Let's pass. Why draft Prescott when we can draft a mountain man from Ohio State who can throw a football through a brick wall and has the touch of a bricklayer. Let's pass. Why hurry to select Cousins in the fourth round when we can move up and get a track receiver who was great in track in college but was unimpressive on the football field. Let's pass. If you can't learn through your more than generation of experience that dithering is not winning approach then you are an irredeemable dope.

Do you really believe that if the organization was high on Cardale's prospects they would be putting so much effort and resources in scouting this year's qb prospects? The organization has seen him up close on the practice field and in the classroom for a year. At this point they know him fairly well as a player and person. Based on how they seem to be aggressively assessing qb prospects it appears that they are not going to solely count on him. That is not to say they are giving up on him but they are not placing their bets on him. That to me seems like a prudent approach to take.

Fans who think that the Bills are a playoff contending team are deluding themselves. This team not only wasted two years on the Rex era and it was set back by another year or two by the Rex fiasco. The Bills are in a moderately rebuilding mode that is now establishing a foundation as to the type of player and environment they want to establish. The quickest way to becoming competitive is getting a good qb. With a quality qb you can have a flawed roster and still compete. With a good roster and an inadequate qb you are not going anywhere.

Most rookie qbs are not ready to play right away. That is the norm. If it takes a season or two to prepare a qb prospect then by waiting another year to select a qb you will again be stretching out the time before you can get a better return on your investment. Without a doubt getting a credible prospect in the pipeline sooner rather than later is the better approach to take. I made the following comment in another post so I apologize for the repetition. The Bills are built to be at best an 8-8 team. So even if there were better prospects in the draft that doesn't mean that the team will be in a position to get one. Dithering is not a solution---it is the problem.This backwater franchise that hasn't had a legitimate qb in over twenty years. Isn't it time to demonstrate some urgency on this issue?

The linchpin team with how the qbs fall is San Fran. I don't think they are going to take a qb but if they decide to select Trubinsky then the qb selection process will be accelerated. I was listening to WGR yesterday and Sal Cappacio was talking about how the Bills view their qb situation and how they will attack the draft. He seems to haven taken a dramatically different stance where originally he said that the Bills had too many holes to fill before addressing the qb position. Now he is saying that the organization's line of thinking is that they don't expect to be one of the lower drafting teams in the upcoming years. So if they see a qb they like in the first round they will respond this year. He also pointed out that by the way the team structured TT's contract it is a clear indication of how they feel about him. My feeling (also brought out in the Gabriel interview) is that because there are so many teams with downside veteran qbs such as San Diego, Pitts, Giants and Cardinals and throwing in the mix the at least half dozen teams that have desperate qb needs waiting until the next round or later is going to result in the fridge being empty type situation. The Bills are built to be at best an 8-8 team. The waiting until next year recommending crowd doesn't understand the futility of waiting for the next class of prospects. We won't be in a better position to select a credible qb prospect next year as we are this year. You would think that an organization and fan base would exhibit more urgency after twenty years of second rate qbing. It makes no sense to me.

The attached link is a WGR interview with Greg Garbrial. He talks about the qb class and his belief that the class is better than many non NFL analysts indicate. He pointed out that the top part of the class is going to be drafted in a rather short order. http://www.wgr550.com/media/audio-channel/4-13-greg-gabriel-pro-football-weekly-talking-nfl-draft-mike-schoppmp3

You know my position from my tiresome posts on this issue. What I find surprising is so many people have gleefully bought into the Bills way of roster building. You would think that following the same path to futility for more than a generation might stimulate some options to the usual staid way of doing business. I find it not only befuddling but also somewhat sad. H2, Terrific work. Much to my chagrin well thought out and plausible.

Because this draft is so rich with talent on the defensive side more teams will desire trading down than moving up. That will result in the value of the return to trade down to be less. The so-called value chart will be devalued. You make an excellent observation that pivot points will come quickly in this draft, starting with San Fran. Do they go for a qb or do they play it cautiously and go with the best player? If they take a qb then the the fallout for the other qbs is going to happen sooner in this draft than later. As I have often stated to the point of belaboring the point the Bills will be making a big mistake if they don't select a qb with their first pick, including trading down to still do so.

It certainly wasn't easy working for Ralph. However, when Donahoe worked in Pittsburgh he created such internal strife that Bill Cowher gave the organization an ultimatum that either Donahoe got the boot or he was leaving. The ownership preferred keeping the coach with the chin over the man with the unlikable personality.

With Donahoe I always got the sense that he worked hard to prove to everyone that he was the smartest and most innovative person in the room. He preferred outside of the box action rather than the conventional approach because he wanted to demonstrate that he was better than the other pedestrian thinkers in his business. Donahoe was the type of person who was so insufferable that the building he worked in would gladly participate (surreptitiously of course) in sabotaging him. He was the type of boss that would create a climate of fear and oppression that makes being at work miserable. When he left I'm sure there was plenty of joyous snickering seeing him walk out the door on his last day on the job with his head hanging low. I agree with you that his first draft was superb. After that it was mediocre.

Didn't he do most of his work from his home in Jacksonville? Which is somewhat odd. Whaley is an immensely more accomplished pro scout than John Guy. With Guy's job poor performance his longevity with the organization indicates how archaic and frozen this franchise was. I have recently been critical of Whaley. But in my mind he represented the line of demarcation from the old world to the modern era. Marv Levy was a wonderful person with a distinguished coaching career. Wilson's hiring of Levy was an irrational act that set this franchise back. I say this respectfully because of his recently passing but Modrak's work with the Bills wasn't very impressive. Some of the downturn in his performance had to do with the backwater franchise he worked with. I can say the same thing about Tom Donahoe who I was very disappointed in. Working in Buffalo was a challenge for anyone to maximize one's talents.

There is no excuse for the Bills not to come out of this draft with a good qb prospect. There are three or four high end prospects with different traits but overall ability to become good franchise qbs. None of these players will be ready to start right away. That is the norm. The Bills are in a good position this year to address an issue that has plagued this mediocre franchise for over a generation. If they don't stand tall and act decisively when the opportunity presents itself they should be ashamed of themselves. The notion that selecting a talented DB or LB would do anything substantial to alter the dynamics of this sluggish franchise makes absolutely no sense to me. Gilmore was a top of the draft player a few years ago. He played well yet how much did his presence influence the outcome. He's now on a SB team's roster. If more than a generation of failure and irrelevance isn't going to alter the thinking of people who are misguidedly calling for following the same path to nowhere then nothing will.

When Russell Wilson was drafted in the third round by Seattle Polian unequivocally stated that it must be understood that they are drafting him as a backup and that there is little chance that he will be a starter in this league.

This is the NHL. Coaches are dispatched on a regular basis sometimes simply to jolt the team. Boston is an example of that this season. So guarantees on job security usually are non-existent except for a few elite coaches such as Bobcock and Quenneville. There is no doubt that after there is a review of the season the coach and players will have to make adjustments to get better output from their talents. Other than the onerous trap coaching systems and its influences on success is over-rated. There is a similar fundamental aspect to each system with different emphasis. Some coaches run a tighter system and others run a looser system. That has as much to do with roster makeup as it does to being wedding to a system. Bylsma may fall in the category of being a stubborn coach. But if Torterella can change from being an obnoxious tyrant to being a more lenient and let the players figure it out for themselves (to an extent) then Bylsma certainly has the ability to be a tad more flexible as a coach. In the end talent usually prevails. A long and grinding season exposes weaknesses that can't be covered up. In this league if you want success you can't do it by hiding the problem, you do it by fixing the problem.

Thanks for your very comprehensive response. Paul Hamilton, WGR's hockey man who follows the team, has often made the same point that you made with respect to buy in. He has frequently stated that what is coached in practice is not always followed in the game by a faction of the players. The problem as I see it from a coaching standpoint is that being too rigid can be just as damaging as being too loose. This is a case where the coaches have to bend just as the players have to adjust to the system. In analyzing the Sabres and the season the core problem isn't the system as it is the lack of talent, especially on the blue line. Although coaches and organizations have different styles of play the basics are the same for all team. More often than not when analysts talk about not consistently executing properly what they are really saying is that the players on the ice aren't capable of consistently executing the plays. My take is that the main problem isn't coaching and outsmarting the opposition. It is a talent void in certain areas that over time become magnified and becomes the difference between winning and losing.

As a consequence from such a disappointing season it will be intriguing to observe how Murray attacks this offseason with the draft, trades, expansion maneuvers etc. The GM didn't have a balanced roster. (Captain Obvious!) The blue line deficiencies spilled over and created a hole that couldn't be compensated for. So how that unit is rebuild will be interesting to follow. I'm hoping that players such as Kane and Reinhart don't get dealt to add a defenseman. Does anyone know much about the Russian from the KHL who supposedly is going to be added to the roster? Is that a done deal? It would be interesting to see what happens with Kulikov? I consider him to be a third pairing defenseman.

How did you come to the conclusion that I am primarily blaming a young player for the failure of the team, although to an extent he and all the players share blame for their play? You are responding to anything written by anyone with your same reflexive responses. My point was simple and clear. The young talented player was being coached to harness his abundant talents to play within a more discipline system. An approach he was not used to until he got into the pro ranks. The adjustment that Eichel is making is the same adjustment that all young players experience. That's the basic point! It's gotten to the point that if it rains you blame the GM for the clouds. If you fart you blame the GM for your excessive gas. You need to widen your horizon because the GM and the coach are not the cause for all the ills in the world.

It's very understanding why a player such as Eichel isn't enamored with the system. All his hockey life he was the best player on the ice who roamed and played his own individual game. That worked in the prior pro setting but it doesn't work out well in the NHL. Also, before going to the pros he always played a free styled game that was outside of the unit. That doesn't work well in the NHL. The HC is requiring the young star to play a more disciplined and structured game on offense and defense. The coach is doing the right thing in coaching Eichel hard to stay within the boundaries of the structure. So it is understandable why the player would be resistant to such a dramatic change being forced on him. Bylsma is not a fool. He has coached stars such as Crosby when he worked in Pittsburgh and earned a cup. He is not going to restrict such a grand talent by repressing his game but he is not going to allow his game to be so undisciplined that it will hurt his hockey growth and hurt the team. Let me use Kane as an example that the coach knows what he is doing when handling individual players. No one can deny that Kane's style of lone ranger play was not in the long run going to work. It has taken time but by the last third part of the season Kane was playing a much more integrated and disciplined style of game. That's an example of good coaching.

I understand why the passenger was upset. Airlines overbook because a percentage of the customers don't show up for a variety of reasons. So their business model has to adjust for that variable. When there is an overbooking usually there is some accommodation where the airline will offer incentives for voluntary removals. It didn't work out here. So a lottery was used to take some passengers off the flight. I don't know what better approach there was to take. I would be interested to know when the first flight out was for the next day, with the same carrier or other. Although it would still inconvenience the passenger it would have been a reasonable settlement. I still believe that the agitated passenger acted inappropriately, to the point of illegally, when he refused to comply with the orders of the security staff. They had the authority to remove the passenger. The only criticism that I have of the security people is that instead of dragging the resisting customer they should have picked him up by the arms and legs. They had more than enough people to do that. Flying on time is not a guarantee. There are too many contingencies that can't be controlled such as weather, breakdowns and medical emergencies that affect the flight. It happens. Responding to these frustrations is part of life. If you can't handle such a small irritation then that is one's own problem.

You bring up another interesting issue. Assuming it was TSA people when they entered the plane and told the individual that he had to leave that is where his resistance should have ended. Refusing to accept their orders and resisting to the point where he had to be dragged out of the plane is a criminal violation. The TSA authorities weren't being unreasonable. They took the only action that they could have taken because this fool wouldn't comply with their lawful orders. There comes a point whenever there is a dispute on any issue like this that someone in authority has to make a determination. Whether one agrees with the determination or not the person in authority has the final say. That is not to say that the aggrieved party doesn't have the ability after complying with the order to challenge the issue. But at the point of dispute the authorities have to have the authority to render a decision. From a legal standpoint this bratty doctor broke the law when he refused to comply with the orders of the security staff.