Buffalo Mike1 Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 It's kinda like meeting a hot babe, thinking everything is gonna be great- and then finding out she ain't nothing special. She actually starts becoming annoying, can't get rid of her. What is this , week seven? The funk is definitely setting in. O.K., We are rebuilding. So do you let Fletcher walk- another disaster in the making, ala Pat Williams? There are too many questions, not enough answers. Hope the Mets don't let me down tonight..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Angel Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 I think we need to keep Fletcher just for leadership, he plays hard and is a good character guy, he still has 2-3 good years. He may be our only starter with an adequate amount of playoff experiance or superbowl (considering we ever make either again) We dont know yet if TKO is going to be able to play at the level he once did (cant pay him what we are if he's not going to play better than average) So I believe we'll need Fletcher so our LB talent isnt wiped out . Clements will most likely be shown the door as his CB skills seem to have been lost and Mcgee seems to be covering #1 recievers more and more so I think we should keep london to have a quality veteran on the Field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 How can we not have false hope when we're treated to media stories like these... "Turnovers have plagued the Bills. Buffalo has 11 giveaways in three losses, and has not turned the ball over in any of its three wins. Quarterback J.P. Losman has accounted four five of the team's eight turnovers -- four interceptions and a fumble -- in the last two games." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kipers Hair Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 It's kinda like meeting a hot babe, thinking everything is gonna be great- and then finding out she ain't nothing special. She actually starts becoming annoying, can't get rid of her.What is this , week seven? The funk is definitely setting in. O.K., We are rebuilding. So do you let Fletcher walk- another disaster in the making, ala Pat Williams? There are too many questions, not enough answers. Hope the Mets don't let me down tonight..... 809411[/snapback] Excellent analysis...I almost feel you pain, the despair and dread of another Sunday making it's way to us. Thank God for Tivo - I no longer have to waste an afternoon on this team and need to spend only 1.5 - 2 hours of my time on the game... We are indeed on a rebuilding course, I say give me a reason to watch again, give Yobouty some playing time, let JP improvise a little on offense, (dare I say...turn him loose?), etc.. What we get now on any given Sunday is a dreadfully bland team that simply does not have the horses to execute the game plan. No O-Line, too small on the D-Line, No playmaker at receiver... Hopefully, the team spends it's small fortune of cap money next year wisely...until then, I say let the kids play and let's see what what Marv has in the cupboard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 So do you let Fletcher walk- another disaster in the making, ala Pat Williams? This is a valid question. However, one which must be put into it's proper perspective. Here's my thoughts. If you're 11-5, I think you have to make an honest effort to keep him if it doesn't upset the cap situation and ultimately handcuff you. But, if you're 2-4 (2-5 after this w/e), you're going nowhere fast and this team looks like it's going to end up 6-10 with a lot of luck. So, how could it be another diasater if we're already in the center of a disaster? Is it the difference in being 6-10 and 2-14? I doubt it. Looking ahead to next year, what does a 32 yr. old somewhat undersized LB give your team. Keep in mind that this is the 2nd youngest team in FB... with Vincent gone it makes them younger. And, this is with guys like Fletcher's and Villarial's ages factored in. Then look at this team. The Bills just didn't get a new HC, they got a new GM too. So, whatever the last regime did, like the regime prior, they want to put their signature on this team. A lot of the guys that Donahoe brought in are slowly getting purged. And, it's my guess that London will be among them at season's end. London still has a lot of gas in his tank and will end up with a championship team next year if he doesn't get too greedy (let's be real here... Rosendick is is agent). When you have a new coach, new GM, and a young team, a few veterans like TKO and Fletcher aren't going to do much for you... except take snaps away from young players that will ultimately make up the new core. Just like the great Bills teams of the 90's, the seeds were sewn in the late 80's with a lot of young guys. They had to fight the fight themselves and learn that way... not from vets that no longer were in their prime telling them how it should be done... young guys tend to tune out on that stuff real quick. We don't know what this team will look like in two years, but based on the new guys being brought in (not the ones that were already here), it seems like the theme this team is being built on is speed and character. London still has both and a lot of class, but I think his salary and age will spell his doom with the Bills. Another thing to consider is "does London want to be here"? If you were him, would you? At his age, playing with a bunch of grasshoppers? He deserves better and I think he'll move on his way and on his terms... I don't think it comes down to the Bills making the decision... it's all London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillWalton Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 London still has both and a lot of class, but I think his salary and age will spell his doom with the Bills. ... I don't think it comes down to the Bills making the decision... it's all London. 809542[/snapback] It's a lose-lose situation for the Bills management. If they decide to resign him to a deal, fans will realize in a year or two that London has lost few steps, and blame the Bills for resigning a clearly aging player. If they let him go (the tough, but smart decision in my opinion) then fans will say it's the same old "Cheap Bills." The MLB, perhaps more than any other position on this defense, needs to be extremely fast and athletic. I know most people will point to his amazing INT a couple of weeks ago as a sign that London still has it, but reality says he's going to be 32, entering his 10th year in the league, and won't be cheap. He racks up tackles, but so does every single starting MLB in the league. I'm guessing we do the wrong thing and resign him for "leadership" and "credibility" when we'd be better off spending the money shoring up the oline with veterans who can play immediately and drafting a MLB (which is a very deep class) that can have an immediate impact. I've heard of plenty of rookie LBs who enter the league and tear things up immediately (Vilma, DJ Williams, Karlos Dansby, etc.) but even most "stud" olinemen take years to develop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts