JohnC

The way the OL is constructed makes it difficult for Spiller to succeed in this offense. Swing passes and outside runs are not effective if your linemen can't move. But even within the physical limitations of the linemen's makeup Spiller has not been properly utilized. If you put Spiller on a Kelly coached team in Philly he would be a sterling player who consistely makes big plays. Playing to a player's weaknesses rather than his strengths is not smart. It's a shame that one of the most talented players on this team (and in the league) is being squandered because of a dullard approach to the offense. I do believe that Whaley respects Spiller's special abilities more than Marrone does. The combination of Watkins and Spiller should spread the defense and result in a number dynamic plays. It's such a shame and so wasteful of talent.

Marrone is cautious by nature with regard to taking risks on fourth down. If he has a defense that has suffocated the opposition then the risk of not making a first down on a fourth down try is potentially less damaging. That's simply my point.

Big Apple Bill, Robey is one of my favorite players on the Bills. His football instincts are elite and he is a tough player.He is a terrific slot corner. If you put him on the outside he would be out of his element and not be a successful player. The role he is playing as an inside back suits his talents. Coupling Whitner with Spiller is an offense that you will have to do penance for. Whitner was a failed draft pick not because he was a safety but because he was over-drafted. My primary criticism of Spiller has little to do with him and more to do with the way he is used by this very unimaginative coaching staff. The staff built a large, slow and sluggish OL that is incapable of utiliizing his talents. Spiller is not primarily an inside runner; I wish the play caller will stop with that foolishness. That isn't his fault. Since Spiller has been on the team there hasn't been a player who has made more big plays than he has. I strongly believe that Whaley is going to sign him to a deal (possibly short term because of his injury) that will keep him on the team. He values big play players that are hard to find.

If you want to criticize the Bills don't do so because of the positions they draft, criticize them for their evaluations in general. Russell Wilson was bypassed for Graham. Whitner was not a draft mistake because he was a safety but because he was simply overdrafted as a player. If Earl Thomas is drafted at a high point it has little to do with the position he plays and more to do with his talent level. We have been through this argument many times over with little resolution. From my perspective Gilmore, regardless of his position, was selected where he was ranked. He is going to be a long time starter at one of the most difficult positions in the game. I have no complaints about his selection. For you it is a constant source of irritation. You and Badol are soul-mates on this topic. The Bills drafted a qb in the first round last year. Is it a hit or a miss? As it stands I am less than confident about that selection. Not because of the position which obviously is important, but because there is a good chance that they simply misjudged the talent. Now I have a greater difference with you over the importance of the CB position because of the aggravating changing of the rules of the no touching policy for CBs.. Because it is even more difficult to cover receivers there is a greater need for a higher end talent to contain (not stop) the receivers. If I really wanted to irritate you I would bring up the Spiller topic. But I won't because I am a considerate and empathetic person.

On this issue I am going to respectfully disagree with you. You and I are in accord on Watkins's talent level. I don't consider him a generational type receiver but I do consider him a talent that is going to be ranked in the top four or five players in most drafts. With a top tier qb throwing to him he would be a scintillating performer. But even after acknowledging his special abilities and his much higher ranking compared to Carr I would still take a qb who I believe could be our long term franchise qb. Would I have taken Carr at the draft position the Bills were at (prior to the trade up)? A resolute no. But trading down, getting another pick or so, and then taking Carr at a lower first round position would have been a good move for this franchise. It''s my opinion it doesn't matter how special a receiver Watkins is or is going to be if he is playing on a team that doesn't have a qualilty qb. I'm not shooting for the moon and demanding an elite qb, which there are very few available. The bottom line is that I would be very comfortable (delighted) in giving up the much higher rated receiver in the draft for the lower rated qb if that qb turned out to be the long-term franchise qb. Let me respond to your Dalton and Kaepernick assessments. In my view Dalton is simply a solid qb at best. I'll gladly accept that judgment and still want him. Although he is not an elite qb, and never will be, he is a legitimate franchise qb. If he was our starter the Bills would be in the playoffs this year. Kaepernick is a raw physical talent who still has a lot to learn. Again, I would be more than pleased to have him as our starter. There is still a lot for him to learn about playing the position but there is plenty of raw material to work with. As you well know until a quality franchise qb is identified the Bills are not going to be a serious team. Our defense this year is superlative. It's talents are wasted. When the playoffs start the defenders will be watching the games from their respective couches because of the limitations of their qbs taking the snaps.

Woods getting single coverage and more passes thrown to him.

I'm a Watkins fan. Buf if I had the choice of trading down and selecting Carr with a lower first round pick I would do it in a heartbeat. Until the Bills get the qb position upgraded they will be a non-serious team.

I don't doubt that. My point with PTR is that you have to constantly be involved in the pursuit of a franchise qb. There is no doubt that odds are against most prospects making it except of a Luck type prospect. That makes it even more important to repeatedly try. It's easy to say in hindsight but Russell Wilson was there to be had.Taking the track receiver, Graham, was a lost opportunity. Wilson had all the required attributes other than height. For Nix that was a disqualifying attribute. It set this franchise back. Kaepernick was also a very interesting prospect. Dalton was a no frills and solid prospect who is better than what we had and now have. I'll without hesitation take Carr over EJ as my primary qb prospect.

None of us know for sure how instrumental Whaley was involved in the EJ selection. That would be intriguing to know. Joe B on WGR stated that he "suspected" that the EJ selection was a Nix pick because it was consistent with Nix's proclivity toward big players. I believe that Whaley was not only on board with the selection but he was directly involved with the qb rankings. Is EJ our long term franchise qb? I can't say for sure. I am very troubled with his level of accuracy and ability to read defenses and go through his progressions. I hope I am wrong and I don't want to too quickly make a conclusive judgment on him at this point. But I am very queasy about his prospects from what I have already seen. When the team has been floundering for a generation then there should be a great sense of urgency to get back into the hunt. Until there is a legitimate franchise qb taking the snaps the best you can hope for is being average in a parity designed system.

I'm a Russell Wilson fan. Although he is a small-statured player he knows how to play. For a young player he has the maturity of a veteran. Buddy usually preferred bigger players regardless of position when selecting players. Missing on Wilson set this franchise back. Kaepernick and Dalton would have been reasonable selections. The bottom-line is if you haven't been in the playoffs for 15 consecutive years and have had a losing record in 9 out of 10 years then you have run out of excuses. It's one thing to not hit on a prospect and it is worse not to repeatedly try to address that position in a meaningful way.

I thought he was well tuned into the flow of the game. Going for it on fourth down was more about having confidence in his defense than it was having confidence in his offense. It was the performance of the stifling defense that allowed this cautious coach to extend his boundaries of risk taking.

There were plenty of reasonable picks that would have stabilized the position compared to where it now stands. Russell Wilson, Foles, Dalton, Kaepernick, Alex Smith was on the market. If you are not in a position to get an elite prospect then go a little farther down the ladder and get someone who can still be a legitimae starter. Investing in Fitz was a losing proposition from the start because he was, and will always be, a decent backup.

If you can't come up with a legitimate franchise qb in a generatiion from the draft or from the market then your organization is a failure. Russell Wilson was available in the third round but Buddy preferred a track receiver. Just because you can't come up with an elite qb that doesn't excuse you from not coming up with a legitimate franchise qb. Excuses don't resolve problems they perpetuate them

Gilmore does have good coverage skills but he does not have high end ball skills i.e. reaction to the ball. He, like McKelvin, is usually around the ball. With your observations about his coverage of Gordon you have to remember that Gordon is a big time talent who can make big plays. If he wasn't such a knucklehead he would get more recogniztion as an elite receiver in the league. In yesterday's game Gilmore was smart in keeping him for the most part in front of him. When covering such a talented receiver you can't expect a total shutdown. If this caliber of receiver is being contained without making the dynamic big pay then the defender is doing his job.

I don't put Haden in the same lofty category of Revis and Peterson. What a lot of critics don't factor in when assessing CBs is that the NFL has altered the rules that shackle the defenders ' ability to cover the receivers. This year the rulings have not only handicapped the defenders but have made the game difficult to watch. The calls against incidental contact are not only ridiculous.but they kill the flow of the game. Balance and common sense are lost in the officiating of the game. The thing about Gilmore is that he was drafted almost exactly where he was ranked. And people still complain about that selection. If you get a long term starter from a little higher than a mid-first round pick you have made not only a good pick but also a good value pick.

Bill goes berserk when CBs and RBs are drafted in the first round. If you think he is biased against Gilmore then bring up his name to Badol. Make sure you are out of the way win the ferocity of his response sprays spittle all over the place. I consider Gilmore to be in the top third of the CB rankings. (My personal ranking!} If he had better ball skills he would be an elite CB. That's my opinion that obviously goes against the crowd.

Gotham Bill, Your post game analysis is my favorite topic. It draws a lot of smart responses. Just a few observations that I came away from this game. I am befuddled as to why there are so many critics of Gilmore. I consider him to be in the top third of the CBs in the league. He usually covers the best receivers and for the most part he doesn't allow them to get behind him. He is a coveted large size CB that most teams would love to have. Jackson is one of my all-time favorite Bills. Although he is a terrific pass blocker and he follows his blockers very well it is apparent to me that he has lost a step or two. There is little explosion in his runs. I would like to see Brown get more carries. The first half of the game was dreadful. I was tempted to go outside and enjoy the weather. However, I stuck it out. There is no doubt that Orton gives us a better chance to win compared to EJ. Having said that Orton is a pedestrian qb who because of his experience is going to allow your team to compete but is not going to get you anywhere. I'm mostly indifferent to having Orton back or not. If this franchise had a more talented starter this team would be a serious team. As others have noted Watkins is not the player that he was in the beginning of the season. The groin injury and the rib injury must still be bothering him. Our DL is one of the best in the game. The rookie LB Brown is a very instinctive player and Bradham is an emerging player. In general I thought Marrone called a good game. He was tuned in to the rhythm of this game and flowed with it. The fumble by Brown in the KC game when he was going in for a score is haunting this team. That heartbreaking loss still bothers me because the fans deserve a serious run for the playoffs.

Ray Rice was handled like any other first time domestic case in his jurisdiction. There is a special unit within the police departhtment and the prosecuting office that specialize in those types of offenses.. Not only was he processed within the system but his wife was also involved with the authorities and the proceedings. Ray Rice was not given special treatment that resulted in leniency compared to other similar violators. He was treated just like everyone else. And that is how it should be. The bottom line is that the court system worked the way it should work. He ended up marrying his partner, is working on his relationship with his wife and his family is together. Some people may not consider it a good outcome but I do.

You make a lot of claims. Show me an article that suggests that the owners told Goodell to lie in the second Rice hearing. As I stated in many prior postings it is understood that Goodell acts on behalf of the owners and not the players. Sometimes it is impossible to challenge and discipline the system as it is established yet that doesn't mean that individuals acting on behalf of the system shouldn't be held accountable for one's illicit behavior. Goodell clearly lied in an arbitration hearing. He should be held accountable.

It doesn't matter what the owners told him to say or do or what his legal advisors told him to say or do. It's irrelevant. His testimoney is his testimoney. His actions are his actions. His testimoney and actions were thoroughly repudiated by the arbitrator. When you are in a position of authority as he was in the disciplinary process you are the one held accountable for the process. Not the people hiding behind the curtain whispering in your ear. Your lies are your lies not the people on the sidelines sending you untraceable signals. It's understood that Goodell primarily acts on behalf of the owners, the people who pay him. That's not a new relevation.

The player and his union brought the issue to the arbitrator. The commissioner was thoroughly repudiated and Ray Rice's rights were vindicated. That is not to say that what he did was right. Roger Goodell is not representing the NFL in a very exemplary manner. He lied to save his ass in a quasi-legal setting at the expense of someone who had to appear before him for a fair hearing. The more serious issue has little to do with the Ray Rice's of the world. They can be handled with fairness. The real issue is that the disciplinary process was corrupted by a person who blatantly lied in order to save his own corrupt arse. You don't have to go to law school to recognize that Charles Goodell who has an immense amount of authority in the NFL acted on behalf of his own self-interest and in dispicable manner. He is the one who should be banned from the league because he damaged the integrity of the process which is more important than an individual case.

The Ralph is an antiquated facilty whose days are numbered. Putting any more $$$ into it for upkeep is a waste. I can't say for sure but I suspect that the next facility that will be built will be a covered facility. There is no doubt that it will alter how you experience the games. Where I respectfully but strenuously disagree with you is that I believe the majority of customers will prefer an indoor facility. We disagree on that issue but most of the studies associated with a new stadium favor a closed facility. The model that I favor is the Lucas Oil stadium in Indianapolis.

No one has suggested otherwise. He clearly has the authority to make judgments on disciplinary issues. What he doesn't have the authority to do as the all powerful sheriff on discipline proceedings is blatantly lie at the expense of a player so that he could rebound from his own poor judgment. My understanding is that he is a lawyer. Lawyers are officers of the court. He should have his law license suspended for corrupt behavior in a semi-legal proceedings. What he should have done is acknowledge that he used poor judgment and then changed the policy for domestic cases making it more severe. Another option is he could have placed Rice on a paid status like he did with the Peterson case. What he shouldn't have done as the arbitrator determined is lie in order to cover his corrupt ass. No one told him to lie. That is not factual. He lied on his own volution to save his ass from the torrent of public outrage that he deserved. He should have simply acknowledged his poor judgment and then work on a more responsible formal response to domestic issues. I don't give a dam what the owners think. It is clear that the face of the NFL, their representiave, is a self-serving fraud and is corrupt. Because of his corrupt behavior there will probably be a change on how disciplinary matters will be handled. To be honest I don't give a dam about Rice. I am a strong believer that the integrity of the process is more important than the outcome of any individual case. When the process is corrupt and the person making the discipline determination is exposed to be a craven then I have problems with the system. You may not believe in fairness but I do. You are stating the obvious.

It's interesting to note how many people are upset that a person involved in a criminal act who acknowledges his transgression, changes his behavior for the good and works to recapture the family unit are upset that he will be allowed to go back to work if given the opportunity. It seems few people are bothered by the corrupt process that changed his punishment and kept him from going back to work. The legal system worked marvelously well in this case. Someone involved in a crime was punished and held accountable. Then the person worked to redeem himself. Still many people (the moralists) believe that the system didn't work. It's ridiculous!

I appreciate your well thought out and expressed point of view. I'll only respond to a small fraction of your comments and good points. One of your main themes is that tailgating is the central focus of your attraction to the team. That is sad. It should be more focused on the product on the field. It is almost as if you have conceded that this franchise is incapable of being a seriously competeing franchise. It is evident that you have substituted the communal experience of tailgating to the actual game as the primary reason for your attendance. When the team has been out of the playoffs for 15 consecutive years and they have had a losing season in 9 out of 10 seasons it is understandable why the ancillary activity is taken more seriously than watching the most often frustrating product. In my view that balance and dynamic has to change. Under new ownership there has to be a committment to building a winner and a product worthy of watching. If a new stadium (especially a roof facility) is built odds are that tailgating will be scaled down. The Ralph Wilson era of milking the product of its resources in order to maintain the business model at the expense of the product on the field has changed with the installation of the new owner. Make no mistake that if a covered stadium is built your primary reason why you attend games will be very much affected. For you personally it might be a lesser experience but for me it won't. I want this franchise to build a facility that one can be proud of. The Ralph is an outdated corroding facility that no more public money should be used/wasted to maintain. Times change and environments change. The old days are fine to reminisce over but clinging to them and not adapting to the new reality is one of the main reasons why for so long this franchise has been an irrelevant franchise. Looking back or maintaining the status quo is a losing proposition when dealing with institutional failure. Don't fear change, embrace it. Under new ownership the future should be brighter than the dim past. I'm confident that you will be pleasantly surprised with a new approach to operating the franchise compared to the way it was done in the past.