Cash

I hope Doug Marrone was sitting down before he saw that headline.

Ah, that makes more sense. Yeah, I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Good stuff. Thanks for posting! I continue to think that non-Clay TEs will wind up playing more than either Harvin or Woods, and I'm not very psyched about that. But I'm otherwise tentatively optimistic about Roman as OC. Not much to add on the the defensive side, because 1.) we're loaded with talent, 2.) Ryan/Thurman have a long history of success, and 3.) most of our talented personnel played really well in a similar D in 2013. So not a lot to concern oneself with until the season starts.

I tend to agree somewhat with this logic. Points are a little more luck-dependent than yards (particularly yards per play rather than yards per game), and also (I think) more dependent on offense and special teams. The obvious cases are a pick 6 or special teams TD, both of which count against the D but aren't the D's fault. But in general, I would think that an offense that turns the ball over more would lead to more points scored against. With an elite D, maybe it's mostly field goals, but it's still extra points being put up. I also think that an offense with more 3 and outs would lead to more points given up as well, although that's not as clear-cut. My takeaway is that if you look at points allowed, you're sort of begging the question - the top 3 defenses in points allowed are almost guaranteed to have had "safe" QB play, if not "good" QB play. And I think the much more interesting question is: Can you make the playoffs with a great D and a not-good QB, even if that QB isn't taking care of the ball and playing the "game manager" role? From what OP posted, it looks like the answer is yes. At this point in preseason, we are in no way guaranteed "safe" QB play in 2015. I think a lot of posters would gladly take a guarantee of safe QB play even if it also guaranteed no chance of good QB play.

Great analysis - thanks! I certainly am not alone in being bummed that we appear 3(!) times on the list already, and could be headed for a fourth. But it's good to know that at least there is a realistic chance, even with all our QBs being what they are, that we could make the playoffs.

Didn't realize his ADP was as low as 17. That's actually about right, I think. I wouldn't touch him in the first round if I could help it, but mid/late second? Well worth it.

There's currently only 4 OTs on the camp roster, and one of them is a rookie UDFA, so it would be very shocking if Henderson was cut.

It used to be insanely low. Now it's just low: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/12/josh-gordon-will-be-suspended-10-games-under-new-drug-policy/ Note that in the study linked above, there were multiple positives at 20 ng/mL and one positive at 50 ng/mL. "However, positive tests are likely to be rare, limited to the hours immediately post-exposure, and occur only under environmental circumstances where exposure is obvious."

Moderately surprising, but not shocking. Good for Hunter knowing when to hang it up. The Bills almost have to sign another OT for camp. I wonder if it'll be more of the "cheap veteran" or UDFA type?

I thought about them, but I don't feel like they've existed long enough to be that high up the rankings. Plus, they had a couple decent runs of success, first with Brunell, then with Leftwich/Garrard. Besides, don't you have to have fans to be in the pain rankings? Seriously though, I could see them lower on the list, but with only #2 up for grabs, I'd be surprised. We shall see.

Watching the highlight video, it's even more galling that Marrone insisted that Henderson graded out as our best lineman last year. I'm glad to be rid of Marrone.

Painful to read. Obviously Cleveland is #1 at this point. But who's #2? I think cases could be made for the Jets, Eagles, Cardinals, or Buccaneers. I wouldn't rank any of them ahead of us, though. Eagles have generally been pretty good, even if they don't have any titles to show for it, and haven't had a ton of truly heart-breaking losses. No one cares about the Cardinals enough to feel pain when they lose. Similar for the Bucs, plus they won a Super Bowl in the last 20 years, so most of their fans got to enjoy that at least. The Jets are probably #2 based on their market/following, and they probably belong on the list, but at least they won a Super Bowl. One of the most famous ones, too. Granted, not many of their fans were around to see it.

I'm in Boston, and dealing with Tommy from Quinzee is the worst. I probably wouldn't hate the Pats nearly as much if I didn't live in this area.

Well, that would be cherry picking, if that's what the author was saying, but it wasn't. You seem like a pretty reasonable guy, so I'm guessing you either misread the article, or stopped reading after the intro, and (wrongly) assumed that the author was basing everything off the first 2 games of 2013. He actually bases it off a lot of things, but one of the most significant is that Manuel has consistently been good on first down, even when only allowed to throw 30% of the time. 2013: 2014: I've watched the same EJ Manuel as you have the last 2 years. He's shaky and inconsistent, but even though he hasn't been very good overall, he has been pretty good on first down. If he'd had competent playcalling the last 2 years, he could've still been the same shaky guy, still miss open receivers too often, but nevertheless moved the ball much more effectively. Or maybe not. 74 passes is not a very large sample size. But it's all we have so far, and at least the early returns on first-down passing are good. And frankly, it syncs up with the eye test as well - for me, anyway. Just going from impressions I've gotten while watching the games, Manuel's seemed to be most effective when the D has to respect the threat of the run, and even better on play action. When the D knows he has to pass (like on third and long), he's usually been pretty bad.

Link works for me. Good piece! I've never been a huge Woods fan, but this did a good job of showcasing his skills.

What you do in the bathroom is your own business, buddy.

Running the ball 70+% of the time on first down is insane, unless maybe you have a historically great running game. (Like maybe Dallas last year?) I noticed this just watching the games - it was incredibly frustrating to see us run the ball seemingly every first down. Obviously it wasn't literally every first down, but it seemed like it. Those first-down runs were generally unsuccessful, but we just kept on calling them over and over. I'm pleasantly surprised to see that, even during the run-dominated quagmire, Manuel's first-down passing was pretty good. His passing overall wasn't up to par, but maybe he can get up to average/passable just with improved playcalling. I.e., still be the wildly inconsistent guy we've seen through 15 games, but have more success just from being put in better positions. Of course, the big caveat is sample size - when you only pass 30% of the time on 1st down, there's not a lot of 1st down passes to draw a conclusion from. Still, better good results in a small sample than bad results in a small sample.

I voted small fine, but was sorely tempted by the nothing option. Definitely blowhard Goodell will declare that he had a meeting and that everything is fine now. Honestly, this level of cheating isn't nearly as concerning as the illegal taping or (unconfirmed) accusations of helmet radio cheating. So I haven't gotten too worked up about it. But it would be great if Goodell's ridiculous "I have to send a message via a ludicrously over-harsh punishment" mentality showed up for this. I don't expect it, because 1.) Goodell is essentially Kraft's henchman, and 2.) Brady is an overcelebrated white face of the league. Nearly all of Goodell's hammer moves serve to strengthen the league's reputation with the fox news set. This doesn't fit the bill.

Nothing is a violation if you put your mind to it! If we can draft Johnny Football after his freshman year, we should be able to figure out a way to draft Collins in the 7th round but pay him 1st round money. Here's an idea: since we didn't have a 1st-round pick on Day 1, maybe we could've used a 1st-round pick on Day 3. I.e., when we get up to announce pick #234, announce that Collins is the 33rd pick of the 1st round. Then the rookie pool gets adjusted accordingly and we're good to go. Too bad Whaley didn't have any imagination; I think this really could've been a winner.

Well, I didn't name names, because I think Woods might be more likely to get squeezed out than Harvin, but yeah, that's my concern. Not saying it'll definitely happen, but it wouldn't surprise me if we ran more 2+ TE sets than 3+ WR sets this year, or it was at least close. I think I remember reading about the 49ers still being one of, if not the, top teams in 1-WR sets last year, even though the strength of their offense should've been the 3-WR set with Boldin, Crabtree, and Stevie. Actually, I think I'm overstating things here. Let me walk it back a bit. I think most of the time in non-short-yardage situations, the Bills will have 2 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB, and another skill position. I think, based on pure talent, the extra skill player should be a WR the vast majority of the time. (I thought that last year, too.) But I also think it's pretty likely that Felton and the #2 TE, will combine to play a lot more than the #3 WR. "The #2 TE" won't necessarily be one person, and same goes for "the #3 WR" - injuries, guys winning/losing jobs midseason, etc. I apologize if I'm coming across as all doom & gloom, because that's not my intent. I'm more just apprehensive. I can definitely see a realistic scenario where we're legitimately good this year, but I can also see a (to me) realistic scenario where everything blows up in our faces. We shall see.

Welcome back, Alex! Glad to have him back in the fold; always liked him as a player. Nice depth signing.

One of the things I like to look at with draft picks is, "if he's good, who does he replace?" And when I say replace, I mean something along the lines of replace in terms of playing time. With Darby as an example: if he wins a starting CB job, he won't be replacing Ron Brooks or Ross Cockrell, he'll be replacing McKelvin, with Brooks and Cockrell staying at the bottom of the depth chart. Is that an upgrade? Probably not this year, but probably yes in 2016 and beyond. I didn't particularly like that pick, but (if he's good), I get it. CB is always somewhat of a need, and most rookie CBs struggle, so you're looking at him as a starter in 2016. He's part insurance against Gilmore not re-signing, but mostly an attempt to maintain McKelvin's production for a few more years at a much cheaper price. Not sure where Graham fits in, but not too worried about it. For Miller, it looks pretty good, because he was picked at a real position of need. If he's awesome, he replaces one of our mediocre starters. If he's just good, he replaces Cyril Richardson or whoever the last OG on the roster would otherwise be. If Miller develops, he could be a starter in 2016 or 2017. I like this pick! With Karlos, it's fairly murky. A lot depends on how many backs they keep. There's a strong argument for 4 even without considering Karlos. If he makes the team outright, a case could be made for any of the 3 non-Shady backs being cut instead. Boobie is probably the guy who is closest to Karlos in terms of size, running style, and special teams play, but I'm with most others as thinking Brown is probably the likeliest cut. We shall see, but regardless, if Karlos makes the team, a pretty good player gets cut. I don't like that, because there's still some pretty bad players on the team at the back end of the roster. Steward has basically no chance to start or play a significant role on defense without injuries coming in to play. And we don't have a lot of backup LBs on the offseason roster, and the ones we do are similar pedigree-wise to Steward: 7th round picks and (veteran) UDFAs. Add another guy to the mix, and hope for the best. Good pick. O'Leary has a great chance to unseat Gray or Gragg as the #2 or #3 TE, and could be in line for a lot of playing time accordingly. A definite need pick, and if it pans out, he'll be upgrading one of the weakest "guys who actually play a lot" on our team. Love it. Our 7th-rounder has basically no chance to make the team, but there's really no such thing as a bad 7th-round pick, and he could be a good practice squad addition. Presuming Harvin is gone next year, there could be a spot on the active roster for him.

So it sounds like you think McKelvin will be cut and/or Graham will be moved to safety? Both of those are definitely in play, whether Darby wins the starting job or not. I can't see McKelvin making the team as a backup without taking a huge pay cut. Overall, I'm pretty unenthused by this draft, but I don't really watch college football, so I won't kill the Bills unless/until the guys they draft turn out to stink. (These days, I do all my "scouting" after the draft, so I don't waste my time on anyone the Bills don't pick.) But I am somewhat concerned about the design/building of the team, particularly on offense. This is more of a feeling than a prediction, but I worry that, similar to last year, we're going to have a disconnect between the talent on the roster and the talent on the field. To address Kelly's question up top, I actually think Maxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Williams would've played a lot if we'd drafted him in the 2nd. (I'm glad we didn't, because I think he'll be a bust.) In fact, I kind of think that our #2 TE will play more this year than our #3 WR. I base that on 1.) Everything I've seen breaking down SF's offense under Roman says that they played the most FBs & TEs and the least WRs in the league, and 2.) Whaley has made a few comments about how much Roman likes TEs - most recently, "we have a tight end-centric offense" in one of the draft press conferences (presumably the overall recap, because Monos was the one who directly followed the O'Leary pick). If I'm right, I'm worried, because TE is one of the weakest positions on the roster. Clay is pretty good, and definitely seems to be a fit for what the Bills want, but after that we have a 6th-round rookie, a 7th-rounder from a few years back who's done nothing, and a mid-season signing who caught 2 wide-open passes and turned them into great gains. I'm not a huge fan of either Woods or Harvin, but either of them is WAY ahead of our backup TEs in terms of NFL talent. I'd say both Hogan and Goodwin are still quite a bit ahead of our backup TEs. If we wind up with Gray & Gragg & O'Leary playing more than those WRs, then that's 2 straight coaching staffs (staves?) that had a disconnect with the front office. There's not much point in amassing this super-talented roster if we're just going to keep playing crappy TEs all the time.

1. Jameis Winston - Tampa Bay Buccaneers 2. Marcus Mariota - Tennessee Titans 3. Amari Cooper - Oakland Raiders 4. Todd Gurley - Arizona Cardinals 5. Brett Hundley - New York Jets $10 Bonus - Who the Bills pick. - Laken Tomlinson

Is Sammy ever gonna get/stay healthy?