McKelvin re-signed

[Malazan]

\

Amazing after 3 years of buddy how many gaping holes this team has. LB, QB, WR. amazing. This team will never be any good. By the time these holes are filled , the lineman will have left in FA. sucks to be a Bills fan. Hope RGIII is recovered for next season. Go Redskins, or Warriors, or toothpicks, or whatever they will be called.

 

Let me point you to http://www.extremeskins.com

 

They are looking for great football minds there.

[Rob's House]

\

Amazing after 3 years of buddy how many gaping holes this team has. LB, QB, WR. amazing. This team will never be any good. By the time these holes are filled , the lineman will have left in FA. sucks to be a Bills fan. Hope RGIII is recovered for next season. Go Redskins, or Warriors, or toothpicks, or whatever they will be called.

Why would you post this in a thread about a resigning (i.e. a hole that was prevented)? I'd maybe come back after FA and the draft (or at least after FA has even f'n started) and then whine about holes. At that point your complaints might sound valid.

[Bill from NYC]

The McKelvin signing is a good signing from a talent and value standpoint. He is going to be a starting CB, outside or slot, and he is one of the best returners in the game. His trouble reacting to the ball is well catalogued. But if you factor in that he is a top tier returner his contract is very reasonable.

 

You bring up a very intreguing question regarding the structure of the football operation. Who has the most authority and ultimately who has the final say? Is Nix being phased out and Whaley phased in? I suspect that the post Nix transition is already worked out with Nix leaving the scene after this draft. (At least that is what I hope is so.)

 

John, I am going to make a loose analogy.....McKelvin is the the JP Losman of cornerbacks. It isn't a strict analogy because of LM's ability on returns.

 

I have watched games and saw McKelvin all over his man. The coverage was SO good, I would be expecting a pick, no problem. In a flash, this smothered receiver would catch the football. Please, do admit that you have witnessed this identical scenario time and again.

Just like JP in that sense. I saw him hit Evans in full stride from 50 yards away, with little air under the ball. Then, he would have an open receiver 5 yards out and throw either a ground ball, or put it 6 feet or more over his head.

 

McKelvin is one of the fastest players I have ever seen. I cannot think of a wideout who can just smoke him. But even on returns (and he is a fantastic punt returner), it looks as if he misses holes at times. If LM had football instincts, he could be better than even Mel Gray, or perhaps anybody who ever played imo. You can't catch that guy when he gets through a hole.

 

The question becomes, can you count on guys like this? I wouldn't mind the signing and don't care what they pay him. The problem I have is that Levitre is a player who is talented AND can be counted on. He plays hurt, and even switches to other spots on the line when called upon. They shoud have signed Levitre, and THEN worried about Leodis.

Edited March 11, 2013 by Bill from NYC

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Not exactly a crusade......but surely this sort of spam posting needs policing?

 

You can't police people's IQs.

[RussellDopeland]

This signing had to happen. The Bills have a dearth of play-making ability across the board. In truth, they have only about SIX real play-makers on the roster (Spiller, Jackson, Stevie J., Mario W., Byrd and McKelvin on ST). For those clamoring for this money to have been spent on Levitre instead, I ask this: In the Superbowl years would it have made sense to overspend to resign Glenn Parker or Jim Ritcher, than to have spent the cash instead on an elite special teams play-maker like Tasker? This team needs every play-maker it can get its hands on. McKelvin's loss would have created yet another play-making void.

[JohnC]

John, I am going to make a loose analogy.....McKelvin the the JP Losman of cornerbacks. It isn't a strict analogy because of LM's ability on returns.

 

I have watched games and saw McKelvin all over his man. The coverage was SO good, I would be expecting a pick, no problem. In a flash, this smothered receiver would catch the football. Please, do admit that you have witnessed this identical scenario time and again.

Just like JP in that sense. I saw him hit Evans in full stride from 50 yards away, with little air under the ball. Then, he would have an open receiver 5 yards out and throw either a ground ball, or put it 6 feet or more over his head.

 

McKelvin is one of the fastest players I have ever seen. I cannot think of a wideout who can just smoke him. But even on returns (and he is a fantastic punt returner), it looks as if he misses holes at times. If LM had football instincts, he could be better than even Mel Gray, or perhaps anybody who ever played imo. You can't catch that guy when he gets through a hole.

 

The question becomes, can you count on guys like this? I wouldn't mind the signing and don't care what they pay him. The problem I have is that Levitre is a player who is talented AND can be counted on. He plays hurt, and even switches to other spots on the line when called upon. They shoud have signed Levitre, and THEN worried about Leodis.

 

Bill, The rules in today's game give the offense a major advantage in the passing game. The receivers are at a major advantage over the DBs because they can't be bumped around. All CBs are going to be "frequently" beat.That is the nature of the game. McKelvin does have good cover skills while he also has atrocious ball skills. He often gets beat by the second and third move by the WR. I'm aware of his weaknesses. But you have to put those liabilities in the context that all CBs including the most elite DBs are vulnerable because of the rule changes inhibiting him.

 

McKelvin isn't getting paid as if he is an elite CB. He is getting paid a very reasonable and fair contract for his performance level. I'll take him over Aaron Williams any day of the week. In addition, McKelvin is a threat in the return game giving him added value to the roster.

 

Let's not mix the Levitre situation with the McKelvin situation. Levitre is a good player with a lot $$$$ value on the free market. His value on the market makes it very difficult for the Bills to keep him. That is the nature of the system. If the Bills can't work out a deal that makes sense within their cap structure then they "must" let him walk. All teams are subjected to the same required cold blooded cost/benefit analysis of their players. No team is immune from losing good players because of cap considerations.

 

While you are critical of the organization for "probably" losing Levitre to the market I am encouraged by the more analytical approach it seems to be taking. Look at the operation of the Pats, Steelers and Ravens. These are all superb organizations that allow good players to leave and rebound with good value replacements. You can't fight nature---you have to work within its confines. You have no option other than to work within the complex system that applies to everyone. Infatuation is not a trait that works well in a business set up for cold blooded behavior.

Edited March 10, 2013 by JohnC

[mannc]

Absolutely correct.

I thought you would support this signing; it most likely means they will not take a corner in the first two rounds of the draft. I'm in favor of it for that reason alone. And I don't think McKelvin is that bad.

[Kelly the Dog]

I thought you would support this signing; it most likely means they will not take a corner in the first two rounds of the draft. I'm in favor of it for that reason alone. And I don't think McKelvin is that bad.

Bill doesn't want any running backs or defensive backs on the roster.

[Buffaloed in Pa]

Good now sign Andy. Young PROVEN vet. Porkchop Womack is unproven in the NFL. We need a impact player at eight.

[NoSaint]

Interesting note from Joe B: @JoeBuscaglia - "For what it's worth, Leodis McKelvin has the same agent as Dannell Ellerbe. Talk amongst yourselves."

 

 

Means nothing really.

[The Big Cat]

 

 

John, I am going to make a loose analogy.....McKelvin the the JP Losman of cornerbacks. It isn't a strict analogy because of LM's ability on returns.

 

I have watched games and saw McKelvin all over his man. The coverage was SO good, I would be expecting a pick, no problem. In a flash, this smothered receiver would catch the football. Please, do admit that you have witnessed this identical scenario time and again.

Just like JP in that sense. I saw him hit Evans in full stride from 50 yards away, with little air under the ball. Then, he would have an open receiver 5 yards out and throw either a ground ball, or put it 6 feet or more over his head.

 

McKelvin is one of the fastest players I have ever seen. I cannot think of a wideout who can just smoke him. But even on returns (and he is a fantastic punt returner), it looks as if he misses holes at times. If LM had football instincts, he could be better than even Mel Gray, or perhaps anybody who ever played imo. You can't catch that guy when he gets through a hole.

 

The question becomes, can you count on guys like this? I wouldn't mind the signing and don't care what they pay him. The problem I have is that Levitre is a player who is talented AND can be counted on. He plays hurt, and even switches to other spots on the line when called upon. They shoud have signed Levitre, and THEN worried about Leodis.

 

Well, you were wrong about Spiller, too.

[BADOLBILZ]

Well, you were wrong about Spiller, too.

 

Yeah....sure. The guy they traded to make room for him.......who they had just expended the same type of first round pick on....has averaged 1400 yards per in the two seasons since he was subsequently traded for a day 3 pick to make room for the new toy.

 

By that logic......let's draft Eddy Lacy 8th overall and trade Spiller for a third to make room for him.

 

Or just sign Reggie Bush for cheap?

 

Spiller is a good player but drafting him was an organizational mistake. Thankfully he is not a complete bust, that would have only made watching Lynch go off on NFC defenses even more difficult for Bills fans to watch.

 

And what happened to your Dwayne Bowe to the Bills proclamation? I think your sources need to be re-evaluated.

Edited March 10, 2013 by BADOLBEELZ

[QCity]

Yeah....sure. The guy they traded to make room for him.......who they had just expended the same type of first round pick on....has averaged 1400 yards per in the two seasons since he was subsequently traded for a day 3 pick to make room for the new toy.

 

Spiller is a good player but drafting him was an organizational mistake.

 

Is that the same guy who was running over people downtown, stealing money out of wallets, down to his last strike and flirting with a league suspension, and who's contract was coming up? Yeah, I felt real good about re-signing him to a new deal....

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Yeah it seems those who want to use Marshawn Lynch as a criticism of the Bills completely omit any mention of the numerous problems he had in Buffalo.

 

There's no question he had to go elsewhere.

 

The only possible criticism of the Bills is whether they could have gotten more for him.

[BADOLBILZ]

Yeah it seems those who want to use Marshawn Lynch as a criticism of the Bills completely omit any mention of the numerous problems he had in Buffalo.

 

There's no question he had to go elsewhere.

 

The only possible criticism of the Bills is whether they could have gotten more for him.

 

 

If your belief is that the Bills are just a terrible, hopeless organization whose only possible success could be pandering to fans, then yes, he had to go.

 

Sometimes you gotta' ride it out for the good of the franchise. Time heals all wounds.....and in the NFL a year 12 months is an eternity to change the fans opinion....and that of a player.

 

When the Bills had a PI following Bruce Smith because they knew he had been using cocaine, they didn't cut bait. When Thurman was a complete d-bag to the fans and media for the first 5 years of his career, they stuck it out. I agree, Lynch was an idiot, but he was a young player and a sunk cost........and at a position where.....when he was drafted.... they really shouldn't have used a first round pick to start with. RB's are a dime-a-dozen and their individual impact has been decreasing for 2 decades. Drafting Spiller only compounded the situation.

 

I mean, would you be OK with Marrone coming in......saying he just wants to run the ball between the tackles and trading Spiller for a third round pick so he could make way for Eddy Lacy? That's how stupid it was then.....and is now. Spiller is a good player, but it was a bad move by a bad organization. When you give up a guy that you drafted high in the first round for a fourth round pick and then he performs at the same or better level than the guy you used a subsequent high first round pick on.......you are the loser in that deal.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Well I was addressing Lynch's departure from Buffalo.

 

While you bring up some good case studies in supporting the idea that the Bills should have kept him, I still think Lynch had to go. He was not the player Bruce or Thurman were and in fact, Lynch is a one-trick pony. He's a power back. Very one-dimensional, IMO. Also his off-the-field problems were worse than Bruce or Thurman's.

 

As far as the decision to draft Spiller, I think he's the best player on the Bills so I can't bring myself to view drafting him as a mistake.

 

At the time, the only other player on the board who had his credentials as a talent was Dez Bryant who had a lot of concerns.

 

I wanted the Bills to draft Brandon Graham at the time. JPP has turned out well but no one thought it would be a good idea to draft him at #10.

 

Spiller was the best player at the time and offered the Bills some elements (home run hitter, return man, slot receiver) that Lynch couldn't provide.

 

Now if you made the case that drafting Lynch was a bad decision I could agree with that.

[DrDawkinstein]

The Bills were never in a position where the decision was "Spiller or Lynch". From even before Spiller was drafted, they were faced with "Lynch or Jackson".

 

Both Lynch and Jackson are the bruising workhorse type backs. The Bills wanted a Thunder and Lightning backfield with a workhorse and a flash-bang guy.

 

If you want to argue about the choice to trade Lynch, you also have to keep Jackson in the conversation. So between Lynch and Jackson, who would you have kept? Which do you think had more trade value at the time?

[first_and_ten]

Let me point you to http://www.extremeskins.com

 

They are looking for great football minds there.

 

 

Hahahaha

[BADOLBILZ]

Well I was addressing Lynch's departure from Buffalo.

 

While you bring up some good case studies in supporting the idea that the Bills should have kept him, I still think Lynch had to go. He was not the player Bruce or Thurman were and in fact, Lynch is a one-trick pony. He's a power back. Very one-dimensional, IMO. Also his off-the-field problems were worse than Bruce or Thurman's.

 

As far as the decision to draft Spiller, I think he's the best player on the Bills so I can't bring myself to view drafting him as a mistake.

 

At the time, the only other player on the board who had his credentials as a talent was Dez Bryant who had a lot of concerns.

 

I wanted the Bills to draft Brandon Graham at the time. JPP has turned out well but no one thought it would be a good idea to draft him at #10.

 

Spiller was the best player at the time and offered the Bills some elements (home run hitter, return man, slot receiver) that Lynch couldn't provide.

 

Now if you made the case that drafting Lynch was a bad decision I could agree with that.

 

As I have said many times over the years, the draft should be treated as an ongoing process, not a series of isolated events. The Bills have drafted with their hearts instead of their heads for a long time. That's how you manage to use a first round pick on McGahee when you already have a 1,000 yard rusher in Travis Henry and then trade McGahee when he is entering his walk year then draft Lynch with a high first round pick to replace him. All this while the successful teams were incorporating RB's by committee. That's why I am actually on board with overpaying a bit for Leodis McKelvin. It actually helps protect the Bills from their own tendency to fall in love with those easy evaluations on draft day. You simply can't get ahead by playing that game when you don't have the requisite talent at more premium positions.

[ny33]

The Bills were never in a position where the decision was "Spiller or Lynch". From even before Spiller was drafted, they were faced with "Lynch or Jackson".

 

Both Lynch and Jackson are the bruising workhorse type backs. The Bills wanted a Thunder and Lightning backfield with a workhorse and a flash-bang guy.

 

If you want to argue about the choice to trade Lynch, you also have to keep Jackson in the conversation. So between Lynch and Jackson, who would you have kept? Which do you think had more trade value at the time?

 

Fred never had more than 237 carries in a season. I don't think he comes close to qualifying as a "workhorse," but rather a "prototype" (not perfect) RB.