JohnC

You are over-analyzing what happened here. Rex was not only a bad hire he was also a peculiar hire . You are making it out as if fizzled here because his heart was not in his job any longer. That's not the main reason he was let go. He failed mainly because he was inept and his approach to the game was outdated. What happened here is the same thing that happened in NY where he also got fired. He left the Jets in shambles and he left the Bills in shambles. When you hire incompetents with extended revealing records you get the outcome you deserve. The scheme issue is a fake issue. There are many different schemes that work on defense and also offense. Drawing up the scheme that you have been wedded to takes no brains, any fool can continue doing what he has always done. Getting the players to understand your scheme and making sure they can execute it is the essence of coaching. If a coach can't adjust his scheme to the talent that he has on hand then it isn't going to work. That is a coaching failure more than a player failure.

I'll make a deal with you. Give us one of those two prospects and we will give you back Lehner. There is no need to thank me for my generosity. As I have said on other occasions I would have rather used the first round pick for a high end prospect in the pipeline instead of dealing for the gargantuan goalie with a crazy man look when he gets mad.

Brotherly love can be hazardous to one's longevity on the job.

Bill O'Brien regrets the signing at that price; and John Elway doesn't regret letting the tall qb hit the road at the price he was asking for. There is something to be learned here!

Bogo was one on one with Asiminov (sic) in front of the net when Kane took his shot. Without a doubt Nilsson offered up a juicy rebound. But if Bogo would have done his job the scorer would have been tied up or knocked on his behind. Then the game in which the Sabres were over-matched would have been in the win column.

With respect to the highlighted area you are right that none of us knows what the outcome is going to be with respect to TT and his association with the team. But what is obvious to me is that the front office isn't impressed enough with the running qb to the point that it would firmly commit to him as their franchise qb or even next year's qb. Whaley is leaving his options open because he wants options on TT and his current contract. There is a lot of speculation going on inside and outside of the building. What is not being done amid all the swirling rumors is the organization going to the the mic and say it is committed to TT. If the organization felt that he was anything more than being a stopgap qb it would without hesitation so state its support of him. There is no doubt that a conclusive decision will not be made until the next HC is hired. But what is evident to me is that the front office, especially Whaley, is not overwhelmed with TT's talents to the extent they fear losing him.

The contract that TT has is not exorbitant as far as starting qb contracts go. But if the buyer doesn't believe there is value per $$ then that is a clear indication of what he thinks of him as a qb. That's the point that many people refuse to acknowledge. Whaley just might not think very much of him as a qb. Whaley thinks that TT is simply nothing more than a stopgap qb. And that is what he is going to pay for it.

You pay retail and not premium for qbs you put in the category of decent. Whaley is making a cost/benefit judgment on TT. He has a price in mind and is not going to go beyond it. That's the right approach to take. A lot of people believe that TT would be a highly prized free agent if he was on the market. I have no doubt that teams would have an interest in him but it would be at a certain/reasonable price. The interested GMs would be making the same value judgment that Whaley is doing. Buying at only a certain price.

Not necessarily. But I hope they do. I have cited this example a number of times so I apologize for the numbing repetition. The Raiders became a serious team when they drafted Carr at the the top of the second round. They also drafted Mack a LB at the top of the draft in the first round. He is arguably one of the top three or four defensive players in the league. Let me ask you a simple question? Who is more important to the team and which player has changed the fortunes for that franchise? The Bills can draft the best safety out of this draft in the first round. What will be the impact? What's the difference? Unless you get credible quarterbacking you get nowhere. Having good qb play makes up for a number of roster deficiencies. That's obvious to me but not to a lot of others who spend a lot of time dissecting the strengths and weaknesses of the safeties in this draft. Too much energy spent on misplaced priorities.

Whether it is with Big Ben or smaller sized qbs the GM knows the importance of the ability to see the whole field and use the whole field an essential trait for that position. What makes Big Ben great is beyond his size (which certainly is appealing) is that when the play is extended he can react to what develops down field. Go back and review most of TT's completions. What you don't often see is he throwing rhythm passes to spots before the receiver makes his moves. Many people extol the virtue of TT not throwing many interceptions. There is a negative aspect to it because he is unwilling to trust his eyes and throw into tight coverage. In my opinion Whaley has made a judgment on what TT is capable of. He would be willing to keep him but at a lower price. I'm not criticizing the GM for being appropriately analytical in coming to a decision in this case.

He certainly does. In his view winning to achieve mediocrity is not what he is aiming for. What many people fail to accept that Whaley doesn't have a high view of TT's potential as a franchise qb. From his perspective if he is going to have a limited qb then he is going to expect the going rate for that caliber of qb.

Let's assume for argument sake that Whaley has a very dim view of TT. If that is the case then his willingness to dispatch TT makes a lot of sense. The biggest issue Whaley probably has with the fleet footed qb is that he doesn't see the whole field. When Whaley watches the tape he sees receivers get open but the qb doesn't properly respond. Whaley repeatedly sees plays develop and the qb's timing to react to the play is just too late to make the connection. This is what the GM sees time and time again. If that is the GM's assessment then in his mind wouldn't it be better to bring in a qb such as McCarron or Glennon who can run a pro offense at a cheaper price? You often cite statistics to strengthen your case. That is a tribute to you. But statistics don't often apply to plays that are not made that could be made. Whaley invested a lot of resources in both Watkins and Clay. You don't think that the GM gets highly aggravated when he sees these receivers get open and the ball isn't thrown to the spot where it should be thrown? I have strong suspicions that Whaley doesn't see the cost $$$$ benefit with TT. He has probably made a judgment that unless this running qb adjusts his contract downward then he is not worth the cost. You may think his approach is injudicious and a tad reckless but I don't.

The general criticisms of Nilsson giving up juicy rebounds is valid. But it isn't in this game. Without him as a backstop the Sabres would have been overwhelmed. He was our best player and our MVP in this game. This game was a measuring stick game. We were fortunate to get a point out of it. For that I'm satisfied. The Hawks simply have an immensely better lineup. It seemed throughout the game the Sabres were desperately trying to hang on while holding off the constant onslaught of shots and good scoring chances. Putting aside the scoring potency of the Blackhawks what they do very well is get the puck out of their end quickly and clearnly. The Sabres struggle at efficiently getting the puck out of their zone and as a unit moving out into the offensive zone. The Sabres were over-matched from talent standpoint. That was evident. However, I give them credit for being gritty and hanging in there while they were being pummeled. In this game I give Nilsson and star and I increase my admiration for O'Reilly as a player and leader. He's doesn't lead with his mouth (compared to Rex), he leads by example.

I never considered this roster a 11-5 roster. Maybe 10-6 at best. But the issue isn't the record so much as what did he do with the players he had. One of my primary criticisms of Rex is that he had players on defense that were not particularly adaptable to what he wanted to do on defense. Instead of adjusting to their talents and especially their limitations he acted with determination to fit his out-dated scheme. It clearly didn't work. I never liked the hire. So be it. That doesn't mean that I was rooting for him to fail. What irritates me to no end is that he set this franchise back. That is so sad because progress was being made with this team. In support of Rex players and draft picks were brought in to suit him and make his system work. It didn't work and wasn't going to work for this coach who was too undisciplined to instill discipline in the team he was supposed to lead. The bottom line in a bottom line business that under Rex this team was regressing. What happened in NY, a place where he got fired from, was happening here but with greater negative momentum. I don't feel sorry for Rex because he sought the job, got the job and with great fanfare he took to the podium with his outlandish bravado. His mouth didn't match his performance. He simply failed. That's how this cruel business works. Although he got fired he is still cashing in. More power to him. As far as I'm considered this is addition by subtraction.

I agree with your conclusion that is highlighted. I don't think that Whaley and the football scouts considered Cardale to be a one or two year project. He was always considered to be a three to four year project. With these type of projection players what the front office wants to see is a consistent upward trajectory in development. With EJ it became apparent in-house that he lacked the mechanics (foot work), vision and accuracy required to be a franchise qb. So now the organization is moving on. Take Belichick in New England. He regularly drafts qbs, not always high. He sees what he has and after a period of time he makes a determination about the players' prospects. Then usually he dispatches the prospect and then moves on with another prospect. In another season or so based on how CJ develops a determination will be made whether he has the makings of a franchise qb. With these more raw talents it takes time and patience.

I don't know of a coaching candidate who has opted out of being a candidate because of the portrayal that this organization is in chaos. If you know of one then I would like to know. If a candidate is reluctant to pursue a job here because of the perception of internal conflicts then the candidate shouldn't apply. The harsh reality in the world of the NFL is that at the end of every season coaches get fired from teams that have failed or underachieved. Are these types of lagging franchises usually less stable than consistently good teams? Absolutely. There is a lot of noise about instability in Buffalo. It is exaggerated and doesn't reflect the real state of our franchise. The Bills are owned by owners who care and without hesitation will provide abundant amount of resources for the staff to work with. That certainly is a positive. Who would want to work for the type of owner such as the fool owner in Indianapolis or San Francisco? The Pegulas made a mistake in hiring a huckster buffoon who in short order has decimated two franchises. Rex was dispatched for cause by owners who badly want to succeed. Anyone who gets hired will be working for owners who are going to be supportive. Anyone who gets hired will be working for owners who are committed to winning. When all is said and done and all the openings are evaluated and compared Buffalo should be at the top or near the top of the list as an attractive place to work. What would make this job even more enticing is for the GM to take bold action and acquire a franchise qb!

One way to tell how the organization views Cardale's prospects is to watch what it does in the draft. If the GM doesn't draft a qb in the first two rounds (I don't believe Whaley will) it will be an indication that they think he can eventually be a starter. There is no doubt that Cardale has exceptional physical skills. That's never been the question about this mountain of a man. The issue comes down to him mastering the mechanics and fundamentals associated with the position. Much of it to do with footwork. Many of us were premature in our assessment of Kujo at tackle. (I'm indicting myself here.) It's taken him some time to mature physically and start to get comfortable in the position. Hopefully. that will be the case with Cardale who is playing one of the toughest and most complicated positions in sports. As with you I'm not against keeping TT as a bridge qb with the realization that he has limitations. Is he the long term answer at qb? I doubt it because I take the position that you either have the field vision or you don't. From him I don't see it. But maybe again I will be proven wrong as I am very often.

It may seem that I am contradicting myself by saying I disagree with your stance that Guhle should spend time in Rochester in order to develop more. In the case with Guhle you have to factor in more than just the standard approach to handling prospects. With Guhle he was in this year's training camp. From a talent and performance standpoint he earned a spot. However, the organization had a tough decision to make to send him back down because they were concerned with his long term development. The on the ground reality is while observing him in training camp and watching him play in the emergency call-up he played well. It never seemed that he was out of place playing with tough grizzled men. Not only was he not out of place one could fairly make the assessment that he was one of our better defensemen. He played as if he was a top two pairing. This team has a tremendous need for more accomplished defensemen. In my estimation this terrific prospect will be ready by the start of next season. Nylander on the other hand probably needs another year or two before being ready to play in the NHL. Guhle is in a different and more accelerated category. Get him on the big boy ice sooner rather than later!

What the acquisition of Nilsson and to a certain extent even Lehner demonstrates is that quality goalies are attainable. What is difficult to do is build up the defensive corps and find top two line forwards. I like the play of Nilsson. Is he better than Lehner? Probably not, but he is comparable or nearly so. We had Chad Johnson on our team. Is Lehner appreciably better than him? I would say no. As posters here acknowledge the biggest hole/deficit on this team is at the blue line. Next year Guhle should make the roster, and that should help. Many people believe that he should have made the roster this year. From a talent standpoint it's easy to say yes. But I'm not going to be critical of the GM wanting to give his young players a little more time to physically mature.

I'm not as negative on the personnel on the defensive side of the ball as you seem to be. What Whaley does well is bring in mid-level free agents who can shore up some weaknesses and he can dedicate some of the draft to buttress this unit that is in disarray. Gilmore will probably be gone but (as you said) but Dareus's performance should dramatically improve with a new coach and a fresh start. As far as Hughes I'm counting on this hyper player to regain his game with better coaching and scheme. There have been others who have a jaundiced view of Shaq and Ragland. I think you are being premature in your assessment. Just because a player is not an elite player that doesn't mean that he can't be a good player. My recommendation is to be a little more patient with these two high picks. You can have a unit that is not loaded with talent and still play reasonably well. Better coaching with a more appropriate scheme to match the talent on hand should upgrade the production compared to this past season.

I'm not sure we disagree as much as you think. On the issue of Rex we are in accord at the damage he did to this team and especially to the defense. Enough said about him. I get nauseous even thinking about this fool. The obvious impediment that this team has in getting over the hump of being a middle of the pack team ( that includes probably half the teams in the league) is the level of play at qb. If the Bills would have had a Kirk Cousins type qb on this roster there is a good probability that this year's team with a competent HC would have gotten this team into the playoffs. Where I disagree with you is that I am not as negative on Shaq and Rags as you are, assuming there is a defensive coach who knows what he is doing.

In general I think that Whaley has done a good job. I'm glad to be wrong on my bust assessment on Kujo. With a little time passing by allowing him to mature physically he has showed to play ably at LT. If the next coach switches Cody Glenn to RT or Kujo shows he can play there then the Kujo pick has proved to be a successful pick. What ultimately defines a GM is the ability to find a qb. That overrides everything else. So far Whaley has not adequately addressed the most important issue that determines success and failure in this league.

After watching a number of games I've come to the conclusion that Lehner is not better than Nilsson or Chad Johnson to the extent that he was worth a first round pick. That first rounder could have been used for a good young prospect on the blue or forward line, even if that meant that particular draft prospect would have been a pipeline player who wouldn't be ready for the NHL in a few years. Goalies are a unique brand of athletes. More often than not it takes a while to develop so making quick judgments is risky. Also, it's not unusual for goalies to go into season long slumps that get them traded where they end up playing exceptionally well to then go into another slump that gets them traded again. The point that I'm making is because of the cycle of performance for that position was it wise to give up a first round pick for the gargantuan goalie for Ottawa? Would re-signing Chad Johnson made more sense and then use the pick for a good prospect?

I'm dead set against trading Kane. He is one of our best scorers on a team that lacks scorers. Kane is coming around and playing a much smarter game. Why deal him for a number of players, none of whom can match his scoring ability? Stay the course and don't panic over this one year bump. Steadily this team is getting built. Getting rid of an asset to fill an asset is like digging a hole and then refilling it. Let's not do it!

I don't doubt that he is a respected and serious candidate for our job and other jobs. But it would be foolish for Whaley to limit his search with the in-house candidate and not open up the interview process to a wide range of candidates. If we lose Lynn because another team is quicker, then so be it. That often happens in the job search process. Whaley needs to interview a wide range of candidates and then select the one he feels is best. Selecting someone out of fear of losing that candidate to another team at the expense of precluding all other options is not the right approach to take.