JohnC

Even the very loqacious Joe Theismann can make a good point. As you noted the Bills were simply bad on both sides of the game for most of the game. But watching the game it is obvious that running a fast paced offense with the backups or even with EJ, a rookie, it is an approach that places a lot of stress on a defense that has plenty of vulnerabilities. Those liabilites become more exposed the longer they are on the field.

I have a different theory. The quick pace offense has some inherit strengths and weaknesses. The major risk with that fast paced offense is that if you don't get enough first downs, and have too many three and out series, you are putting your defense in jeopardy by having them too exhausted. I don't have the stats on hand but I'm sure that the Skins ran a lot more plays than the Bills. The major differential in plays can make a difference on performance.

What was obvious in watching this game is that the Skins were demonstrably better on both sides of the ball. Because the Skins were not playing their first or second string qbs this game showcased how much better their overall roster was compared to our roster. Mike Shanahan started at the same time that Buddy Nix did. He, as did Nix, needed to do a major over-haul of their respective inherited rosters. Both GMs (Shanahan runs the football operation) through the draft and free agency implemented their individual philosophies. One has to ask how did the Skins have such a quick turn around while the Bills continue on to their circular road to mediocrity? The answer is obvious, at least to me. Shanahan's staff has done a marvelous job in maximizing their draft picks, from top to bottom, and they have done a good job in bringing mid-level free agent pickups who contribute. They simply do a better job in evaluating players to fit their system. It's not that Shanahan makes great picks who disproportionately become stars. That is not the case. He has a high rate of success of drafting players and picking up free agents who contribute to the roster. What is most impressive with Shanahan's turnaround is that he had to assemble a roster while his franchise was being penalized with a $36 M cap hit, enforced over the past two years.In addition, he gave up a number of draft picks in order to draft RGIII. He salvaged some picks last year by trading down a couple of times and will probably do the same in order to recoup some of the lost picks. My take on the Bills situation is not dismay. It is that if you know what you are doing you can turn things around in relatively short order. I like the EJ pick and I like just as much the trading down and getting the additonal pick that resulted in Kiko. That simple smart trade down maneuver hasn't happened too often with this franchise. If EJ turns out to be a franchise qb and if this draft class turns out to be a good draft class then those are positive signs that indicate that this franchise has the capacity to build the roster the right way. It simply going to take time and patience. There is no other option.

With respect to the extension of Fitz there was nothing unreasonable with it assuming that there was a priority plan to get a legitimate qb prospect in the pipeline. The strategy for Nix should have been let's buy some time until we find a more credible franchise qb. The GM should have demonstrated a greater degree of urgency in that quest instead of being so passive in addressing an obvious critical need. What made the qb issue most frustrating is that the Nix regime passed on good prospects that were available after the first round, Kaepernick and Wilson. The Dick Jauron extension was both a comical and sad exhibitiion of how dysfunctional this ludicrous franchise was. The organization gave him an extension yet refused to officially acknowledge that they even gave it to him because the team was on one of its standard losing streaks after the signing. Why the organization prematurely gave him an extension before his contract was up is a mystery to me. As you noted it probably was due to the team's early season success that frightened the $$$ conscious organization to expedite the extension so DJ wouldn't have greater negotiating leverage if the Bills had a good season. Regardless, it was one miscalulation added on to a mountain of miscalculations that has straitjacketed this franchise. To make matters worse Jauron was given more authority on personnel matters. Crazy! Excellent post. Well thought out and stated. I don't want to quibble with you but I disagree with your Paul P comparison. Paul P is 60 times a better player. A MLB without good instincts is like a surgeon who has clunky hands.

You are as much as an "I told you so guy as I am." LOL Some of the smart posters on this board have proposed a trade with KC in which we deal Byrd for OT Branden Albert. What say you? I like Byrd a lot but if he is disgruntled and the organization is not signing him to a long term deal I would be for it.

You bring up a very insightful issue regarding the role of the FS and SS. There are defenses in which there isn't much to distinguish between the roles of the safeties. And there are defenses where the positions are distincly different. What distinguishes Byrd as a player is that he is a good ballhawk who creates turnovers, regardless of how the defense is set. When he gets his hands on the ball he catches it. McKelvin, as much as any DB on the team, is usually around the ball. What he can't do well is react to the ball and catch it. Is Byrd the top FS in the league? I can't conclusively say yes. What I can comfortably say is that he is a top five FS and he is in his prime. Right now he is a more appealing player on the market than two HOF safeties, Polamalu and Ed Reed, who both are on the downside of their careers. Timing is a critical factor determining value in the market. The mere fact that the Bills are willing to use the franchise tage on Byrd is an acknowledgment that they recognize that he is a top tier player at his position. For the sake of making a point if the Bills next year put the franchise tag on him again they will demonstrate that they are willing to pay him at nearly the top of the market. In essence over two years they will have paid him at near the top of the salary range. If they would consider doing that then why not just get a deal done and solidify the position and move on to address other critical needs.. Salaries go up every year. So what you think is exorbitant this year becomes more exorbitant next year. The Bills have been bad for a solid generation. There comes a point where the perpetual cycle of having a good player--only to lose a good player---and then replace that player you had is self-defeating. How about showing some respect for the customers by being proactive in upgrading the dull product. The Bills have plenty of cap space. This troglodyte franchise has at times had an upside/down approach to running a franchise. I have seen time and time again where this ridiculous front office excessively pay for mediocre talent and ruthlessly guard the coin box when dealing with a good player. Kelsay and Fitz were over paid players. If you over pay for talent at least you are getting the services of a talented player. That certainly is better than over paying for a mediocre player that isn't going to provide much return on the investment. The Bills over paidt he market value for Mario Williams. And I am glad that they did! He can make plays. If the Bills slighly over pay for Byrd, so what! His enlarged salary still comfortably fits within the cap space and the team gets better. The organization's mind-set should be about winning; not quibbling over a lost $$$ that has no appreciable affect on the organization.

Thanks for the info. I would love to see the Statler finish their rehab job with a return to the hotel business. It is a great location and historical building. Sometimes the economics and financing are too challenging to get the deal done. Maybe as the local economy steadily turns around that Statler project can be completed.

Bill, I worry for you. Your memory is going bad. Not a good sign. The Bills drafted two safeties in this draft. I also am excited about this draft class. Regardless of the team's record if EJ turns out to be a franchise qb then this was a quality draft. The trading down and acquiring another second round pick for Kiko was a nifty maneuver. That is not the standard stolid Bills drafting approach. My major concern is the OL. It concerns me very much. The front office knew they weren't going to sign Levitre (your boy) yet they did very little to search the market for a better replacement. Also, I'm not too enamored with Pears at RT. He has slow feet and is too sluggish as an athlete. Other than your stubborn fixation on the Spiller pick you are okay by me! LOL

Are hotel rooms difficult to secure on football weekends? Or are they just filled around the airport and stadium? As an option would rooms be available around the University of Buffalo when games are being played?

Does the media establishment consider your behaviour an act of sedition? Will your football commentary become more stammering as the evening advances? If a person drinks light beer will they be thrown out of that manly tavern? Do any of your attending associates have a tendency to get more belligerant toward the room as the pitchers add up? If more people attend your proletarian event compared to the more scripted and less authentic event at the Statler will your press credentials at the Ralph be invalidated? Just curious.

I as much as anyone have railed against this franchise's business model. So there is no disagreement there. Where I differ from you is that I see it as a general practice related to finances than it does toward any particular position. Dick Jauron prized DBs more than any other position. I'm aware of that. For him it didn't relate to $$$ so much as it related to his football philosophy and positional biases. I may be wrong in interpreting your posts, so I am receptive to be corrected, but your notion that it is easier to make evaluations on CBs than it is on other positions is not something I agree with. It is just as challenging to evaluate a DB as it is with any other position with the obvious exception of the qb position.

You are the first person that has ever accused me of being less than scathing toward Jauron/Levy/Wilson. Whenever I mention the owner I immediately come under assault for being unfair. I don't know if the owner had any influence on the Spiller pick. There were rumors that the owner influenced the Lynch pick but I can't say for sure. I was under the impression that Gailey pushed for the Spiller pick, but again I can''t say for sure. Regardless of who influenced the Spiller selecton and regardless of the reasonable reasoning for not selecting him I don't understand how people can be so staunchly against a particular selection after that selection has turned out to be so stunningly good. Spiller is not only one of the best players on the Bills he is also one of the best players in the league. Our agreements on players and how the franchise is operated far outweigh our disagreements. On the Spiller selection we simply sit on the opposite side of the table. The chasm is a result that some people want to immerse themselves in the overarching philosophy of strategic drafting, while in this case I am taking the simple minded approach of a good pick is simply a good pick. It should be relished, not sneered at, especially when it is done in an ocean of bad picks. Bill, just savor what is good. It won'thurt you; it will make you more happy. Bill, trust me on Gilmore. He is a stud CB who is going to be one of the best CBs in the league. The struggles you think he had were more attributable to a defense that was incapable of putting any pressure on the offense. Even playing with a lackluster supporting cast he still shined.

You are right that Dareus was a pedestrian player last year. Were family and emotional issues factors for his ineffectiveness? Probably so. It is going to be interesting to watch how Dareus plays this year. If he bounces back as an interior anchor for the DL then he is going to be an important player for the defense. If he plays at the level that he did last year then the bust designation could be fairly attached to him, especially considering how high he was drafted. I suspect that Pettine is not the type of coach to be patient with non-performing players and won't be hesitant to replace struggling players.

Thanks for the info. That's interesting.

I'm not sure if you are directing your comment to me or offering it up to the general population. My view on the Dareus selection is that it was a terrific selection. He is the type of player whose impact can't be measured by stats. He is a big player who bulked up the center of the line and frees up others on the defense to make plays because the OL is using extra players to contend with him. In addition, my point regarding needing a few years to make a better evaluation on a draft pick is illustrated with the Dareus/Miller selections. Miller may have impressive stats but he also is now sitting on the sidelines because he is an irresponsible and undiscipline dope.

The hits that were made with Winfield, Clements, Lynch etc were let go for contract and other reasons. In essence it is like filling a hole, make another hole and go back and fill the same hole again. That cycle of futility has been very damaging to this franchise. The point being that instead of adding talent they were replacing the talent that they had. A lot of attention is given to first round picks without giving the required attention to the other rounds. The body of work for this laggard franchise was unimpressive. Over time that sub-par drafting performance in general has anchored this franchise to the bottom of the rankings. Your view that this team took the easy way out by making the easier selections over the higher risk/reward is perplexing to me because this staff had way too many misses to conclude that they made the easy selections. I still hold to my position that if an organization drafts well in general, regardless of the position, over time (maybe three years) it will be successful. The selection of Gilmoure, a CB, in my view was a superb selection. He is a stud player and a major asset although he plays a position that you and NYC Bill place less value on. Spiller is a halfback who I consider to be one of the best and most dynamic offensive players in the league. Baltimore and Green Bay, both in general, have a drafting philosophy of selecting the best players on the board. No franchise can absolutely hold to that philosophy but in general the approach they take is to value talent over position. If that draft strategy is executed properly it works well. Two of the best GMs in the game, Ted Thompson and Ozzie Newsome, subscribe to that approach. Ralph's main problem was hiring mediocre staff to make mediocre personnel decisions on his behalf. He got what he got because he selected who he selected. The problem wasn't drafting strategy; it was the caliber of the talent evaluators he hired.

The fairest way to judge draft picks is not when they are made but after a few years when they have been given a reasonable opportunity to develop and perform. There are a number of people who criticized the Spiller pick when it was made for a variety of reasons. But many of the critics of that pick (not all) now acknowledge that it was a very good pick. Those instant draft scores given by the analysts immediately after the draft are very frequently way off the mark. It is much fairer to grade a draft three years after the selections than shortly after when the selections were made.

If someone is a season ticket holder is the Toronto game an optional buy or is it included in the season ticket package? Whether optional or not how is it priced compared to the Ralph games? Just curious.

The idiotic drafts, as you put it, are more attributable to bad player evaluatiions in general than on positional selections. I never thought that I would ever say this but I agree with PTR on the Spiller selection. A good/bad selection is a good/bad selection regardless of position. In my view not only is Spiller one of the bast players on the Bills but he is also one of the best players in the league. Not only was Spiller a terrific pick based on post draft performance but the Gilmore pick, a CB, was also an exceptionlly good pick. He is going to be one of the best CBs in the league. I didn't start out the day intending to rankle you on the draft issues. It just worked out that way. LOL

Your thesis is well thought out and makes a lot of sense. My thesis on the Bills drafting is slightly different. The problem with their drafting over the last dozen years or so is more attributal to their poor drafting in general and, too often, letting go of good players entering their contract years, thus again needing to revisit a position already adequately addressed. The drafting of Spiller was a good pick based on talent alone. Time has demonstrated that the judgment on him was correct. The mistakes made were not in drafting him but in making sizeable draft mistakes after taking him. If a qb prospect would have been taken after the Spiller pick, the Spiller pick becomes less questionable. It seems you have problems with the sequences in which the positons are drafted. My position is that good drafting in general over a period of time will take care of that issue. In addition, good drafting teams get hits with lower round picks. That hasn't happened too often with this franchise. There is no doubt that the LT is considered a high priority position and most often requires a high round pick to fill that need. A number of years ago that critical position was filled by an UDFA, Peters. That hasn't happened too often for this franchise. Getting a franchise qb usually requires a first round pick. The Bills had multiple opportunities to fill that critical position without even using a first round pick when Kaepernick, Wilson, Dalton were available after the first round. The bottom line for me is that teams that draft well in general and make more of their picks count succeed. Teams that don't draft well in general will not be very successful. I agree with much of what you are saying but the core problem for this lagging franchise has more to do with its mediocre talent evaluations than its ranking of positions.

Whenever I read Pollard I often think of Larry Felzer. They both have an old school clear headed thinking and writing style. They both can be sharply critical but do it in a straight forward way without making it a personal attack. I read a while back that Pollard did have opportunities to go to a bigger pond but he enjoyed the area and environment where he was at. So he stayed and carved out his own niche.

I always appreciate your training camp reports and also your draft commentary. Your reporting is well done and very insightful as to how some players are perceived by the coaching staff. I hope that the issue with the site monitors is resolved. Sometimes misunderstandings need to be addressed and hashed out before it gets to the walk away stage. I'm not sure what the heart of the problem was but in general the site monitors do a good job in keeping order on the board and their intentions are for the general good. I'm not going to comment on the conflicting issue because I don't know what it is. But I want you to know that I appreciate your participatiion on this board and the contribution you make.

There is no doubt that I would prefer Snyder over Wilson as a team owner. Why would you think otherwise? Snyder certainly has flaws but as time has gone by he has learned how to be a good owner. He no longer treats the franchise as his own personal fantasy game. Since he hired Shanahan he has not involved himself in the operation. It is reflected on the field.

The nanny dispute related to labor law pay issues. It wasn't a question of cheating anyone as it was an issue of how does one calculate billable hours for a particular type of job. It related to whether a live-in nanny is working while she is sleeping in-house. The issue revolved around whether those hours should not only be paid for but be added to the overtime calculation. From a legal standpoint it was an interesting case. I made the point that Shanahan never intended to work for Wilson and the Bills for a variety of reasons. You then went into your reflexive response that I was unfairly attacking the owner. The issue of ownership was without a doubt a major contributing factor for him not having an interest in the job. There is nothing inaccurate or unfair about that.

I understand what he is getting at. What I am saying is that even given the valid argument that there could have been a better team building approach to their drafting strategy I am not going to be too critical of selecting a player who turns out to be one of the better players in the league, regardless of position. In addition, if Nix would have come up with a franchise qb pick after CJ's selection when they were available (not necessarily in that draft year) the Spiller pick would have been even a better pick from a team building and competitive standpoint. Correct me if I am wrong but I have read accounts where there were teams offering a third round pick for Lynch when later on Nix traded Lynch to Seattle for a fourth round pick?