BillsVet

One could have said the same thing early in the Jauron or Gailey eras. The point remains that merely rebuilding is no longer an excuse with teams improving during the early stages of the process. It's not unfair to expect 8 wins during the first year of a new regime. We were told a few years ago that it takes 3-4 years to rebuild. In a 21st century NFL, a strong organization doesn't need that much time. Yet, in Buffalo that somehow becomes reality. The standard seems awfully low here versus other franchises.

That amid all this change, roster building is not much different during each new regime. It seems like each time they add a player, another is removed. There's attempts to rebuild but no actual building going on. I don't see depth anywhere on this team, which is becoming increasingly obvious each week. The Bills, like every team, sustain injuries except the drop-off from starter to backup is precipitous.

Notwithstanding the 20M in cap room they possess. They finally realize, after Nix was effectively moved to GM emeritus, that they need a QB. But not before they allow their best OL out the door and thus make that rookie QB's life more difficult by plugging in NFL retreads like Colin Brown.

But why are they rebuilding every 3 years or so? Is it simply because the front office and coaching staffs are that inept, or could it be a deeper more systemic issue not solved with a new QB, HC, or even GM? After all, someone hires those guys, and rarely does anyone question those transactions. 20M under the cap and 13 years without a playoff season. The writing's on the wall with this franchise.

LT ain't all that great either today. Wouldn't be surprised if he kicks inside and Welch starts at LT. Geez.

Well, it is a rebuilding year.

Lot of organizations I'm an active member plus job stuff right now. I also choose to not get worked up until more sustained success, which you're well aware of.

I hope Austin Howard isn't starting this week for the Jets.

This will be taken wrong, but there were big wins at the beginning of the 2008 and 2011 seasons as well. At the time it was big to come from behind against Oakland at home and three years later at home over New England. Unfortunately, neither win signaled an end to the futility exhibited by this franchise, There were good signs today from players taken in the most recent draft at difficult to find positions. Hopefully they carry this the rest of the season, but it'll take more than one come from behind win to build a season.

The on-field people have changed but promotions in the front office ensure some of the same faces remain. There's a LOT of season left to begin formulating opinions on everyone. But giving someone a new title that's been a part of the organization doesn't clear them from criticism.

Thank you God!

Kirwan wrote a book a few years ago that listed the order of importance on OL as: LT, RT, LG, C, RG. Take it for what it is. However, the case can be made that pay indicates value. Contracts for LG's are far and away more numerous and higher than centers. Jahri Evans, Davin Joseph, Logan Mankins, the old Hutchinson deal in MIN, Levitre, Dockery way back when, Carl Nicks, and others. According to sportrac, 2 centers have base salaries of more than 4M per. http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/guard/'>http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/guard/ 8 guards have 4M+ base deals. http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/guard/ I realize there are bonuses and such, but the demand is clearly on guards over centers.

NO allowed Nicks to depart after they gave Jahri Evans a huge deal. Hutchinson's contract contained a poison pill such that SEA couldn't match. Vasquez got a 4 yr 23.5M deal, which isn't massive. Your argument is pure sophistry here. And so what if this was the first year guards were drafted higher? Teams have been paying more for them for years, particularly LG's who need to be mobile. Finding interior who can move and pass block is more challenging given the pass-happy offenses which have evolved. Teams aren't looking for the OLineman that Nix preferred, who needed to be 320+. I criticize the Bills for having stunk for almost a decade and a half with another rebuild staring them in the face. If criticism isn't warranted now because there are new people, then so be it. Fandom does not mean living in fantasy land. We've been down this road before.

It's more nuanced than simply saying pay the man obviously. Certainly positional value, the player himself and scheme must be factored. However, it's clear teams have re-evaluated interior lineman and placed more emphasis on the mobile types who excel at pass-blocking, which Levitre certainly was. More are being drafted and guards are getting bigger contracts. The Bills went out and spent a first round pick on a new QB and proceeded to allow their best OL to depart and replaced him with journeymen. When we talk about synergy, it's certainly not at OBD because for each talented player they add, one is removed from the equation. In this case, they did it before the QB came on board. I'd even argue that a LG is more important than a center, given the physical requirements to be good there are far less available than playing center.

We're back to the player being required to bow to the will of the team. When did that become so? Parker went to the team with a well-researched offer and the Bills didn't agree. Thereafter, there was little to no negotiations. Why would a player and agent take a likely large hometown discount with the entire NFL community, players, agents, team executives watching? Parker would lose major points for having his player agree to something beneath the going rate as would Byrd because it short-circuits other players from winning bigger contracts when they're up. Players go from hero to zero among the homer crowd faster that a Ferrari goes 0 to 60.

Spiller is signed through 2015. Dareus through 2014. Neither have any Pro Bowl or All-Pro selections yet, but apparently will merit new contracts down the road. There isn't a soul on this board, who, if they were in Byrd's shoes, would be happy with a 1 year guarantee. Nor would they be happy with a one year deal when fellow and sometimes lesser talented players have 4 or 5 year contracts with plenty of guaranteed money. A guy like Goldson or Weddle have a minimum of 18-20M coming their way. Byrd has his 6.9M. If only people could place themselves in the players shoes, but apparently fandom overrides that ability.

Fred Jackson: Re-signed to a 3 year 10.8M contract extension Steve Johnson: Re-signed to a 5 year 36.25M contract extension Erik Pears: Re-signed to a 4 year 9.8M contract extension Kraig Urbik: Re-signed to a 4 year 13.3M contract extension Eric Wood: Re-signed to a 4 year 25.4M contract extension Kyle Williams: Re-signed to a 6 year 33.6M contract extension Scott Chandler: Re-signed to a 2 year 5.5M contract extension Jackson, Pears, Urbik, and Chandler inked smaller contracts with little guaranteed money. Williams' deal is above average and Stevie got a decent sized contract. But none of those players are 1st or 2nd team All-Pro caliber players and Byrd is, or at least has played at that level.

Apparently the team is never wrong, especially when it involves players who won't toe the line. Few here ever place value on a player outside of their pay. Had the Bills signed Peters, they would have had a top LT as indicated by his multiple All-Pro selections, a much better OL overall, and would not have had to draft and OT in the 2nd of 2012. That's great strategy there. It succeeds in 1) reminding up and comers how the team deals with you if your agent drives a hard bargain 2) ensures free agents pass on you and no Mario contract can undo that and 3) sends a message the team is not in it to win it any more. Franchising him for 1 year is not a plan. The Bills did the same thing with Clements and never adequately replaced him, despite multiple high picks used on CB's. I would be more open to going this route if I thought guys like Searcy were better than they are. Or 4th and 5th rounders like Duke Williams and Meeks were capable. But we don't know that and neither do the Bills. So once again they'll jettison proven talent that would require financial commitment in hopes unproven types will replace them. Very unlikely given their track record.

That analytics department must be burning the midnight oil now with all this data pouring in.

Absolutely. It worked back then, so why wouldn't it work now? The Bills have frequently tried to solve their "problem" players by dealing them, or at best with short term solutions. Franchising Clements for a season, trading McGahee (post-Buffalo comments), trading Peters, it's their M.O. In the end it leaves them with one fewer proven player.

How did they end up 6-10 last season then?

Yep. Doesn't make sense that in 2010 the Bills couldn't get interviews, with numerous guys turning them down, and them having to hire their emergency guy. 3 years later after winning 1/3 of their games and with a bare cupboard of talent the team all of sudden is a great landing spot? There can be no other conclusion.

I remember during the Marv rebuild the stock response was you can't build it all in 1 year We're in the second rebuild after that one, but all have featured at one first round DB and RB. Donahoe had Clements and McGahee. Levy/Brandon/Jauron had Whitner, McKelvin, and Lynch. Gailey had Gilmore and Spiller. Multiple rebuilds with multiple GM's all allocating significant resources toward the DB and RB positions. Either it's very coincidental or something else is going on.

Hard to take tight ends when you are rebuilding every 3-4 years with runnin' backs and CB's. OP is correct and quibbling about it is pointless. Having a good offense means having a good or better receiving TE.

Where is Dick Jauron and his affinity for taking CB's in every round? Oh how the Bills have fallen.