Buffalo one of the 5 weakest rosters

[CardinalScotts]

Did either of them contribute to this team being a success? No. That is why they are gone.

yes id say Chan taking an offense with few play makers and put up alot of points, Quarterbacks are only as good as the players around them- see Drew Brees (Chargers .vs Saints)

[San Jose Bills Fan]

The Colts had the worst roster in the NFL last year. Redskins were also probably on this list as well. Amazing how one player can change how teams are viewed.

 

People on both sides of this debate have done a good job. Those making the case that the Bills roster is epically weak have stated their case very well.

 

And yet I'm with Biscuit, Voice of Truth and Triple Threat to a very large degree. Here's why.

 

Having a legitimate upper-echelon QB would have a huge positive effect on the team in terms of actual play as well as the confidence and the belief needed for success.

 

In terms of the perceived talent level on the Bills, the other factor which I believe no one has mentioned is coaching.

 

There's a popular fallacy that winning and losing is all about the level of player talent and yet after nearly a half decade of watching sports, it's clear to me that one good coach has way more effect than any player.

 

Moreover, when you see the annual "worst to first" stories, they are almost invariably caused by a coaching change.

 

I think that everyone's perceptions about the talent level on the Bills would be very different if they had a good quarterback and a good head coach.

 

Suddenly the players have a belief that they can win. They fight harder. They don't lay down like they did in several games last year. They find themselves with a chance to win at the end of games and they learn how to win.

 

Suddenly the team is more often playing with the lead. The defense can be aggressive and rush the passer. The offense can be aggressive and take shots downfield. The 3-4% uptick in performance might as well be 30-40%.

 

People tend to view improvement from winning to losing as a linear curve and nothing could be further from the truth.

 

The difference between winning and losing in sports is razor thin.

 

A good head coach and quarterback for any beleaguered NFL roster would have a dramatic effect on the balance between winning and losing.

 

In a best-case scenario where Marrone wins Coach of the Year and the Bills rookie QB is Rookie of the Year, this team can be in the playoffs.

 

Do I expect it to happen? No.

 

Can it happen? Absolutely.

[White Linen]

Took the other 4 teams mentioned in the article off your list for you. You're welcome.

 

So, you are either being sarcastic and actually think the Bills are more loaded with talent than Arizona, Carolina, Cleveland, St. Louis, and Tennessee or you are just a troll. If it is the former, back it up with an argument with a dram of substance.

 

 

 

This comes a little closer to something subjective. You may be right that Carolina escaped the list because of Cam Newton. On the other hand, the article does not solely focus in on QB. It clearly refers to other positions. It also does not mention Arizona or Cleveland. which are two teams that, like the Bills, are considered to be totally desperate for a QB upgrade. So, saying the article's list focused exclusively on QB and missed all the copious stockpiles of talent on the roster is rather specious.

 

You keep referring to the article as if it's gospel. I merely pointed out it's inadequacies and contradictions. Clearly the article is lazy and picked out teams that are void of an answer at QB. If they would have stopped there they would have been correct, but that's where the article went wrong for me. They tried to spin it as if they did research and actually looked at the entire roster. I'm merely following suite of this ridiculous article and if they want to pretend QB is not the reason for their evaluation then they couldn't be more wrong about the Bills.

 

You keep using words like "stockpiles" of talent. Why? I never even came close to making such claims, yet you keep on with your sarcasm of which you're so quick to accuse.

 

Lastly Sir, do you really find it necessary to call me a troll? Can we not have a debate without the innuendo? I edited my response twice because I started to do it back, but good Lord man we are Bills fans. I'm disagreeing with an article that is bashing my team. I find it counterproductive to argue with a fellow Bills fan especially when you're trying to mock me.

Edited March 29, 2013 by Triple Threat

[Sisyphean Bills]

You keep referring to the article as if it's gospel. I merely pointed out it's inadequacies and contradictions. Clearly the article is lazy and picked out teams that are void of an answer at QB. If they would have stopped there they would have been correct, but that's where the article went wrong for me. They tried to spin it as if they did research and actually looked at the entire roster. I'm merely following suite of this ridiculous article and if they want to pretend QB is not the reason for their evaluation then they couldn't be more wrong about the Bills.

 

You keep using words like "stockpiles" of talent. Why? I never even came close to making such claims, yet you keep on with your sarcasm of which you're so quick to accuse.

 

Lastly Sir, do you really find it necessary to call me a troll? Can we not have a debate without the innuendo? I edited my response twice because I started to do it back, but good Lord man we are Bills fans. I'm disagreeing with an article that is bashing my team. I find it counterproductive to argue with a fellow Bills fan especially when you're trying to mock me.

 

No, I'm not mocking you at all. You stated that the Bills had "a lot of talent." Then you stated that they "not as loaded" as a list of other bad teams. That makes no sense to me. So, you are being sarcastic, made typos, don't know what your position is, are just flip-flopping around, or who knows? And whatever the case may be, I'm not mocking you at all. You're completely entitled to your opinion and can express it however you want here (within the rules obviously).

 

I refer to the article because it mentions various things that you totally dismiss in your claim that the author was "lazy" and didn't "actually look at the entire roster" and was only interested in the QB position. See, when you claim that the article is wrong, I would sort of expect that you'd have some football reasons for saying that. It's easy to say the Bills have "a lot of talent" and give no reasons to support that feeling. It's not mocking to ask you what exactly convinces you to conclude that the Bills are clearly and unarguably more talented than 5 or more other NFL teams. But then again, maybe you were actually agreeing that the Bills are one of the 5 worst teams as far as talent, but are trying to suggest that adding a QB to the roster would make the overall roster much more talented. See, I'm sort of lost on what you are telling us at this point.

 

And, yes, we are Bills fans. I respect that you didn't like the article and/or the opinions the author has. No worries, bro. It's all good.

 

PS: I think the article was far from perfect, but it wasn't so wrong either to be contemptuously blown off. The roster Nix has assembled is talent poor. They have a few pieces, but the roster is getting torn down yet again and has many holes overall. Add that the Bills have been standing on the sidelines watching free agency, and it is an open and shut case that they haven't added talent to the overall roster. At least, not yet.

[eball]

Articles like these are, in my opinion, big heaping piles of horse manure. The Bills are viewed as less talented for one reason and one reason alone -- no QB. When that issue is resolved, all of sudden they'll be considered one of the "young and talented" teams in the league. Mark my words.

[JohnC]

 

PS: I think the article was far from perfect, but it wasn't so wrong either to be contemptuously blown off. The roster Nix has assembled is talent poor. They have a few pieces, but the roster is getting torn down yet again and has many holes overall. Add that the Bills have been standing on the sidelines watching free agency, and it is an open and shut case that they haven't added talent to the overall roster. At least, not yet.

 

How many times have we seen this same cycle of futility of building it up to then tear it down again to be in the same position of starting over again?

 

What is odd, if not disturbing, is as you noted the offseason passivity in the free agent market. I not worried about the organizatiion not participating in the top tier free agent market but I am puzzled with us not seeming to be very much involved in the second level market where the value/quality ratio is high.

 

One GM I highly admire is Ozzie Newsome of the Ravens. He has lost a slew of players to the free agent market and retirement. He has recovered a lot of lost talent with players such as Dumervil and Huff for a lesser price than the players he lost. When you compare Nix matching wits with Newsome you walk away with the sensation that you don't stand a chance against the big boys.

[JohnC]

Articles like these are, in my opinion, big heaping piles of horse manure. The Bills are viewed as less talented for one reason and one reason alone -- no QB. When that issue is resolved, all of sudden they'll be considered one of the "young and talented" teams in the league. Mark my words.

 

You are correct that securing an impactful qb changes the dynamic of a franchise and the perception of how a franchise is viewed. A number of serious roster flaws can be overcome with an upper tier franchise qb. When the Packers won a SB with Rodgers as their qb they had no running game and a questionable defense. When the Saints won a SB with Brees taking the snaps they didn't have much of a running game and had a problematic defense. You don't have to be a professional analyst to recognize that securing a good qb is a necessity for success.

 

Now let's assess the Bills situaiton. They haven't had a legitimate franchise qb since the Jim Kelly era. That is literally a generation ago. I don't want to rehash the Nix approach to building a roster because that issue has been worned out. But you can't avoid the obvious that has so much crushed this franchise. What should have been a top priority from the start was put on the back burner until the roster was bolstered. During his tenure the team's record was 16-32 with an inability to beat teams that had winning records. His passive approach to finding a franchise qb never made sense.His lack of urgency (until now) never made sense.

 

What is most aggravating with the qb issue for this very troubled franchise is that there was a number of opportunities to address the most critical issue for any franchise. Nix played it cool and waited for the perfect situation to materialize. It never did. And now he and the franchise are desperately scrambling to make amends for something that should have been on their agenda right from the start. It's simply another example of stark incompetence that has handicapped this lackluster franchise for a very long time.

[dave mcbride]

How many times have we seen this same cycle of futility of building it up to then tear it down again to be in the same position of starting over again?

 

What is odd, if not disturbing, is as you noted the offseason passivity in the free agent market. I not worried about the organizatiion not participating in the top tier free agent market but I am puzzled with us not seeming to be very much involved in the second level market where the value/quality ratio is high.

 

One GM I highly admire is Ozzie Newsome of the Ravens. He has lost a slew of players to the free agent market and retirement. He has recovered a lot of lost talent with players such as Dumervil and Huff for a lesser price than the players he lost. When you compare Nix matching wits with Newsome you walk away with the sensation that you don't stand a chance against the big boys.

 

What Newsome is also doing is letting free agents go and not signing free agents who completed their contracts in return. He's signing guys who got cut. What does that mean? It means that he'll likely 2-3 comp draft picks next year, probably 3rd and 4th rounders. The Patriots do this as well. It builds up their draft pick stock year after year after year.

[papazoid]

nothing changes until you get a Franchise QB.

 

 

drafting the "best available player" only works if you already have your Franchise QB.

 

 

take last years team, I would argue that if Peyton Manning was our QB, we would have made the playoffs. where as, if we added an All_pro player at any other position on the team, we would not have made the playoffs.

[JohnC]

What Newsome is also doing is letting free agents go and not signing free agents who completed their contracts in return. He's signing guys who got cut. What does that mean? It means that he'll likely 2-3 comp draft picks next year, probably 3rd and 4th rounders. The Patriots do this as well. It builds up their draft pick stock year after year after year.

 

Newsome is simply one of the best GMs in the game. What he and the other top shelf GMs do is assemble high quality staffs. That is why their evaluation of players is so much better than third rate (Buffalo) organizations. In general, their drafting approach is simple. They usually take the highest rated player on their board. In Flacco's draft year they didn't take him with their first first pick because he wasn't rated at that level. So what they did is after their first round pick they maneuvered back into the first round to select Flacco at a lower first round point. Do you think that Nix is capable of pulling off that type of manuever?

 

Teams such as the Steelers, Packers and Ravens understand the complexity of the cap and how it impacts teams now and in the future. They not only make decisions for the now but also for the future. The Bills are playing a different game. Nix is playing checkers while the competition is playing chess.

[mattsox]

It's rebuild time, hopefully they get it right this time. Low expectations, mean less stress for the fans this year. With some of the moves already, Marrone now owns whatever happens next.

 

They haven't yet with the same people in charge. So I'm sure it will go great this year!

Edited March 29, 2013 by mattsox

[paupmvp1995]

People on both sides of this debate have done a good job. Those making the case that the Bills roster is epically weak have stated their case very well.

 

And yet I'm with Biscuit, Voice of Truth and Triple Threat to a very large degree. Here's why.

 

Having a legitimate upper-echelon QB would have a huge positive effect on the team in terms of actual play as well as the confidence and the belief needed for success.

 

In terms of the perceived talent level on the Bills, the other factor which I believe no one has mentioned is coaching.

 

There's a popular fallacy that winning and losing is all about the level of player talent and yet after nearly a half decade of watching sports, it's clear to me that one good coach has way more effect than any player.

 

Moreover, when you see the annual "worst to first" stories, they are almost invariably caused by a coaching change.

 

I think that everyone's perceptions about the talent level on the Bills would be very different if they had a good quarterback and a good head coach.

 

Suddenly the players have a belief that they can win. They fight harder. They don't lay down like they did in several games last year. They find themselves with a chance to win at the end of games and they learn how to win.

 

Suddenly the team is more often playing with the lead. The defense can be aggressive and rush the passer. The offense can be aggressive and take shots downfield. The 3-4% uptick in performance might as well be 30-40%.

 

People tend to view improvement from winning to losing as a linear curve and nothing could be further from the truth.

 

The difference between winning and losing in sports is razor thin.

 

A good head coach and quarterback for any beleaguered NFL roster would have a dramatic effect on the balance between winning and losing.

 

In a best-case scenario where Marrone wins Coach of the Year and the Bills rookie QB is Rookie of the Year, this team can be in the playoffs.

 

Do I expect it to happen? No.

 

Can it happen? Absolutely.

I like your opinion San Jose. I think the coaching will be dramatically improved this year. I expect us to be much more difficult to play against as well. Gailey was not a motivator in the slightest. I thought the effort (especially on defense) was piss poor last year. I don't believe that Marrone will stand for that from any player, including Mario Williams. Sure there are lots of holes on the roster. But I am sure that Marrone and co. have a solid plan to get the most out of the parts he will have at his disposal.

 

It has been so long since we have had a competent coaching staff (circa 1998-2000 Wade Phillips) that I think most of us on this board have no conception of what a solidly coached football team is supposed to look and feel like. The ONLY thing keeping me going with any optimism for this season is imagining how our team will look playing under a tough, motivating, tactically smart head coach, who will not accept anything less than 110% every day on every play. (Marcel Dareus better be ready, because if he doesn't change his lackadaisical play, he won't be long for this team-a lot of you want to blame his lackluster play on the death of his brother. Sad thing, but when you put the pads on, between the lines you block everything else out. Just look how Torrey Smith played after his brother was killed at the beginning of the season)

 

I root bigtime for the Michigan Wolverines. Under Rich Rodriguez from 2008-2010 we were a garbage team with no heart. We brought in Brady Hoke in 2011. Complete change of attitude in the program. With some better play at QB (Denard Robinson was a runner, not a passer) we will be challenging for National Championships for years to come. I expect nothing less from the Bills once Doug Marrone puts his stamp on the program. We have to find hope somewhere.

[brenty]

You could say you have 3 different types of head coaches

1: Ones that can't do anything to a team, no matter where they go, they will never have success.

2: Coaches that can win with great players. You have all the right pieces and they know where to put them. (marv)

3: Coaches that can get undrafted kids, no name talent and make them talent. That they know how to work the system and make a great team. (belicheat)

 

Now you really can't tell what a coach is like (besides 3) until they get fired or they cut a "great"/crappy player and they get picked up.

Great example. Maybin. Sucked on our end with 2 coaches, then when to Rex's team and well did a little bit better. A buffed turd. So honestly you could say our coaching staff was a little weaker than the jets coaching staff.

Fitzy, well he was better on our team than cinnci. So i could say our coaching was better than theirs.

You can easily point out that patriots coaching was a lot better than KC because look at Matt C.

 

My point is, yes we might have no name players or we might have the most rookies starting next year... HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW HOW OUR COACHING STAFF IS GOING TO BE?!?!?! Stats?! Shove your stats up your ass, and let the guy coach a damn game before we are ranked anywhere.

[BuffBill]

Articles like these are, in my opinion, big heaping piles of horse manure. The Bills are viewed as less talented for one reason and one reason alone -- no QB. When that issue is resolved, all of sudden they'll be considered one of the "young and talented" teams in the league. Mark my words.

You are quite delusional if you think that not having a QB is the only reason this team is considered a very bad team. Is not having a QB the biggest problem, no doubt, but what about all the other holes? Heck, we have one NFL receiver on the roster. One of the worst defenses in the NFL over the past 3 or 4 seasons got weaker since the 2012 season ended with the players that NIx released. You can put Tom Brady on this roster and it might go from the 4th worst roster in the NFL to maybe the 9th or 10th worst roster in the NFL-still a long ways from competing for anything.

[tennesseeboy]

After Jauron left and for the first year or two of Gailey we were often rfecognized as on the verge of a breakthrough...a darkhorse to do something in the playoffs. We have grossly deteriorated since those days to the point where we actually pick number 8 but are recognized as one of the five weakest rosters. How the mediocre have fallen...

[eball]

You are quite delusional if you think that not having a QB is the only reason this team is considered a very bad team. Is not having a QB the biggest problem, no doubt, but what about all the other holes? Heck, we have one NFL receiver on the roster. One of the worst defenses in the NFL over the past 3 or 4 seasons got weaker since the 2012 season ended with the players that NIx released. You can put Tom Brady on this roster and it might go from the 4th worst roster in the NFL to maybe the 9th or 10th worst roster in the NFL-still a long ways from competing for anything.

 

You are wrong.

[Mr. WEO]

 

 

You mentioned we got beat by San Fran and Seattle. Would you agree that they are super bowl contending teams? I simply put that connection together with you mentioning them specifically. You're talking about records and I thought this whole discussion was about rosters. Yes record isn't conjecture but you changed the topic. So my opinion is that the argument is Teams that make the playoffs have their QB situation solved. I'm arguing that our roster is good and better than teams mentioned in this article and others and better than we as a fan base give our FO credit for. Agreeing or disagreeing with that is conjecture. Therefore it's my opinion. For example the Panthers have Cam Newton so they have a huge advantage but their roster is awful and they are in salary cap hell, yet they don't make the list and the Bills do. To me it's clear why we are on the list. We don't have a QB. I just don't think that's a fair assessment of our roster as a whole.

Teams that make the playoffs have their QB situation "solved"?

 

The Broncos won a playoff game with Tebow. The Jets made it to the AFCC game with Sanchez. Twice. In his first 2 seasons.

[kasper13]

Here is an updated depth chart. 59 players under contract. 6 draft picks to add. 65 players. They will have to find 25 additional players just to have the training camp max. Going to play some sort of hybrid 3-4/4-3 Defense. OK. 3 DE's, 6 DT's and 8 LB's on the depth chart. Guess some LB's will line up at DE and DE will play LB. One LG and 5 RT's. It's a big, giant mess at this point. They will have new starters (not any better, just new) at QB, WR and LG. To use college terminology, they will basically be returning 18 starters from a 6-10 team while trying to replace the QB position, the #2 WR spot and LG. McKelvin couldn't get on the field at CB last year but all of a sudden he is a starter? Please. I see next to no "rebuilding". I see no depth. What happens when a few starters get injured? Happens every year. Sign some budget friendly players = not very good. Even if they hit on all 6 draft picks this year and all 7 next year, they just aren't going to be any good for two to three more years minimum and that all depends on the next QB. .

 

RB-Spiller, Jackson, Z. Brown

FB-Dickerson

WR-Johnson, B. Smith, Elliott

WR-Graham, Easley, Hogan

TE-Chandler, L. Smith, Caussin

LT-Glenn, Welch, Sanders, Grant

LG-C. Brown

OC-Wood, Snow

RG-Urbik, Ke. Williams

RT-Hairston, Pears, Young, Scott, Eckerson

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DE-M. Williams, Bryant

DT-Dareus, Ross, Gilbert

DT- K. Williams, Carrington, Troup

DE-Anderson

LB-Bradham, White, Lloyd

LB-Sheppard, B, Smith

LB-Scott, Moats, Lawson

CB-McKelvin, A. Williams, Butler

CB-Gilmore, Rogers, Heath

SS-Byrd, Silva

FS-Searcy, Brooks

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P-Lindell

K-Powell

LS-Sanborn

[C.Biscuit97]

 

 

People on both sides of this debate have done a good job. Those making the case that the Bills roster is epically weak have stated their case very well.

 

And yet I'm with Biscuit, Voice of Truth and Triple Threat to a very large degree. Here's why.

 

Having a legitimate upper-echelon QB would have a huge positive effect on the team in terms of actual play as well as the confidence and the belief needed for success.

 

In terms of the perceived talent level on the Bills, the other factor which I believe no one has mentioned is coaching.

 

There's a popular fallacy that winning and losing is all about the level of player talent and yet after nearly a half decade of watching sports, it's clear to me that one good coach has way more effect than any player.

 

Moreover, when you see the annual "worst to first" stories, they are almost invariably caused by a coaching change.

 

I think that everyone's perceptions about the talent level on the Bills would be very different if they had a good quarterback and a good head coach.

 

Suddenly the players have a belief that they can win. They fight harder. They don't lay down like they did in several games last year. They find themselves with a chance to win at the end of games and they learn how to win.

 

Suddenly the team is more often playing with the lead. The defense can be aggressive and rush the passer. The offense can be aggressive and take shots downfield. The 3-4% uptick in performance might as well be 30-40%.

 

People tend to view improvement from winning to losing as a linear curve and nothing could be further from the truth.

 

The difference between winning and losing in sports is razor thin.

 

A good head coach and quarterback for any beleaguered NFL roster would have a dramatic effect on the balance between winning and losing.

 

In a best-case scenario where Marrone wins Coach of the Year and the Bills rookie QB is Rookie of the Year, this team can be in the playoffs.

 

Do I expect it to happen? No.

 

Can it happen? Absolutely.

 

Well said & I agree 100%.

[Fan in San Diego]

I heard Pat Kirwan say something interesting yesterday. Teams that draft 20 to 32 have a good QB. Teams picking 1 thru 10 need a QB. It's simple, you have to have a good QB.

Edited March 30, 2013 by Fan in San Diego