scribo Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 It seems Fletcher is gone. I have to presume several teams, including a couple with good playoff potential, will be interested in his leadership, durability and nose for the ball. London has made several comments that make it clear that he is disappointed with the playoff drought. He sounds like he feels under appreciated. He knows starting every game for five-plus years is very impressive and valuable. He knows he was the glue this year on the defensive side of the ball. He knows his tackle count ranks right among the top of the league, as does his number of interceptions for a linebacker. But he didn’t get a contract extension last off-season, and he took that personally. "I used to play in St. Louis. They call that the 'Show Me State,"' Flethcer told The Associated Press a couple of weeks ago. "They have to show me they're serious about extending me, just don't tell me." He even hired Drew Rosenhaus last year, saying he made the move just to facilitate an extension. He obviously wanted to get this done then, but for whatever reason, that didn't happen, and I cannot blame him for taking that personally. "Things have changed because that was prior to the season," he told AP. "The scenario has changed." Are the Bills showing enough interest? I don’t think so. Not publicly, at least. Jauron said a few nice things about Fletcher after the Pro Bowl snub, but the main comment coming out of the clubhouse from a coach was from Fewell. He said re-signing Nate was more important. What the hell? Yes, that very well may be the case, but it is not something that should be verbalized by the defensive coordinator in the media. That would be like a parent announcing who his/her favorite child is. "Those guys are hard to come by," Fewell said of Clements. "If you've got a really good corner like that, they're invaluable. You can't find guys like that each and every year, especially with the experience he has and the knowledge he has. That would be a big blow. To me, that would be the biggest piece to replace on our defense." Really, the only ringing endorsements of London I’ve read from the Bills have all come from the players rather than the coaches. London is also still miffed about not making the Pro Bowl. Remember that one of the reasons Takeo Spikes left Cincinnati was that he wanted to go to Hawaii, and he didn’t think that was likely to happen playing for a team losing all the time. Of course, maybe Fletcher can look at what happened for TKO. Yes, he made the Pro Bowl after switching teams, but if he had shown a little more patience, TKO would still be playing for Cinci, now a much higher profile team than the Bills. If London comes back, it will be because of the potential he sees in Buffalo. Meanwhile, the losing season after losing season apparently has worn on Fletcher. "It's been hard on me," Fletcher said. "I'm tired of going home on Sundays and feeling bad. "As far as the wins and losses go, losing, you can't really be happy about losses and not making the playoffs during my five years here. That makes me unhappy," The bottom-line is that Fletcher has been a rock for us, but he has continually been overlooked by the national media, has had to deal with way too much losing, and the team didn’t care enough to extend him last year or give him a ringing endorsement now. “It's a situation where once the season is over you have to look and evaluate everything," Fletcher said. "They'll do some evaluating and if there is something where both parties feel that it is best that I return, then we will try to get something done." But I don’t think his “party” thinks returning is best.
1billsfan Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 After reading Fletcher's recent comments to the media, I won't be shedding any tears when he goes. As with Eric Moulds, it seems like Fletcher isn't on board with the Bills rebuilding plan. Someone should tell him that Bills fans are tired of watching other team's runningbacks skip through the middle of the defense on Sundays. It makes us feel bad. If your hearts not with the program then see ya, wouldn't want to be ya Fletch.
Frez Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Flecther has been very good for us but in the end I wouldn't mind seeing a young faster LB replace him. It's time to cut ties with some of the older players, it happens every year. Just remember, speed can be a major factor to make this team better all around. I'd rather keep Nate Clements if it was up to me.
coltrane34 Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Listen the Bills will be 40 million under the cap next year. They didn't want to negotiate with Fletcher or clements until the season was over to see how they would fit in to the new defense. Now they both could be signed and still leave a ton of money under the cap for them to extend players like JP, willis, and evans. Hopefully after signing all of these players there will still be 8-10 million left to sign a free agent and all of their draft pics. If they make the right moves everyone will be happy next year.
RunTheBall Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 London Fletcher has been the captain of a defense that has consistently underachieved during his 5 years here. He is king of the tackle 5 or 6 yards down the field and is unable to get off blocks when anyone larger than a slot receiver blocks him. I can think of more game changing penalties on London's part than game changing good plays. The thing that bothers me most about this defense over the years is that when we absolutely needed a late game stop, they came up short 9 out of 10 times and London didn't do anything to help that. "Heart and soul of the defense" means "high motor" if you're not a white second round defensive end pick. London saw the writing on the wall when he wasn't getting a contract extension. Marv is continuing to show that he knows something about the game of football by recognizing a needed upgrade in the middle of the D. Signing Nate and Kelsay would be higher priorities in my opinion. RTB
dave mcbride Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 I would not be shocked at all if a MLB is drafted in the first round. How many times has Marv brought up that Shane Conlan draft pick war story, anyway? He can also probably see that a guy like Jonathan Vilma is a better player than Fletcher.
Mr_Blizzard Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 L.F. has been a warrior for the Bills. A key ingredient when they had one of the best defenses in the league. But a lot has changed over the past couple of years thanks to the shambles that T.D. left for Marv and Co... The middle of the defense needs an upgrade. L.F. isn't getting any younger and if this team truly is going to be a contender, it may be time to draft a stud MLB or sign a F.A. who has his best years ahead of him. If L.F. could be retained for a reasonable cap hit I would be ok with it but it sounds like he wants out... March will be interesting.
JStranger76 Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 I love Fletch, but if I could only keep him or Nasty Nate, I keep Clements.
keepthefaith Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 It seems Fletcher is gone. I have to presume several teams, including a couple with good playoff potential, will be interested in his leadership, durability and nose for the ball. London has made several comments that make it clear that he is disappointed with the playoff drought. He sounds like he feels under appreciated. He knows starting every game for five-plus years is very impressive and valuable. He knows he was the glue this year on the defensive side of the ball. He knows his tackle count ranks right among the top of the league, as does his number of interceptions for a linebacker. But he didn’t get a contract extension last off-season, and he took that personally. "I used to play in St. Louis. They call that the 'Show Me State,"' Flethcer told The Associated Press a couple of weeks ago. "They have to show me they're serious about extending me, just don't tell me." He even hired Drew Rosenhaus last year, saying he made the move just to facilitate an extension. He obviously wanted to get this done then, but for whatever reason, that didn't happen, and I cannot blame him for taking that personally. "Things have changed because that was prior to the season," he told AP. "The scenario has changed." Are the Bills showing enough interest? I don’t think so. Not publicly, at least. Jauron said a few nice things about Fletcher after the Pro Bowl snub, but the main comment coming out of the clubhouse from a coach was from Fewell. He said re-signing Nate was more important. What the hell? Yes, that very well may be the case, but it is not something that should be verbalized by the defensive coordinator in the media. That would be like a parent announcing who his/her favorite child is. "Those guys are hard to come by," Fewell said of Clements. "If you've got a really good corner like that, they're invaluable. You can't find guys like that each and every year, especially with the experience he has and the knowledge he has. That would be a big blow. To me, that would be the biggest piece to replace on our defense." Really, the only ringing endorsements of London I’ve read from the Bills have all come from the players rather than the coaches. London is also still miffed about not making the Pro Bowl. Remember that one of the reasons Takeo Spikes left Cincinnati was that he wanted to go to Hawaii, and he didn’t think that was likely to happen playing for a team losing all the time. Of course, maybe Fletcher can look at what happened for TKO. Yes, he made the Pro Bowl after switching teams, but if he had shown a little more patience, TKO would still be playing for Cinci, now a much higher profile team than the Bills. If London comes back, it will be because of the potential he sees in Buffalo. Meanwhile, the losing season after losing season apparently has worn on Fletcher. "It's been hard on me," Fletcher said. "I'm tired of going home on Sundays and feeling bad. "As far as the wins and losses go, losing, you can't really be happy about losses and not making the playoffs during my five years here. That makes me unhappy," The bottom-line is that Fletcher has been a rock for us, but he has continually been overlooked by the national media, has had to deal with way too much losing, and the team didn’t care enough to extend him last year or give him a ringing endorsement now. “It's a situation where once the season is over you have to look and evaluate everything," Fletcher said. "They'll do some evaluating and if there is something where both parties feel that it is best that I return, then we will try to get something done." But I don’t think his “party” thinks returning is best. Drew Rosenhaus is his agent. He's as good as gone.
bizell Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 I would not be shocked at all if a MLB is drafted in the first round. How many times has Marv brought up that Shane Conlan draft pick war story, anyway? He can also probably see that a guy like Jonathan Vilma is a better player than Fletcher. that's laughable. if you think fletcher is the king of the downfield tackle, then vilma is the emperor.
Frez Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Say goodbye to London and say hello to Patrick Willis with our #1 pick!
Rubes Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 I also thought it was interesting that Fewell went to the media and basically said, "Clements > Fletcher > Kelsay", but truth be told, he's right and I can appreciate his honesty. I love Fletch as well and would love to see him stay for consistency's sake, but I'm not sure it will happen. I don't begrudge him his feelings, but I also think that he will be sign-able and once the contract is signed these rough feelings will melt away. And if he's not signed, then that's too bad and I'll miss him, but we can replace him.
jahnyc Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 I think Kelsay will be back, but NC and Fletcher will leave. It will be a shame to lose them, particularly NC. He is young, healthy and physical (helps in run support). The Bills may be able to replace Fletcher, who has played extremely well, but the bottom line is that it will be nearly impossible to fill NC's spot with a comparable player next year. This will be a big loss for the Bills.
JStranger76 Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Would be great if Patrick Willis became our new MLB. Sure, it would take a little bit to get comfortable, but wouldn't it be cool going from a 5'9 guy to someone about 6'3? Pass coverage ( how many times have we seen London have good coverage but be too short to stop the pass) will be better. Fletcher was one of my favorates but he has his weaknesses. Anyways, we need to shore up the DT position or it won't matter who is playing MLB for us next year.
JimBob2232 Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Its better to let him walk now, a year or two early, than let him walk a year or two late
BuffaloRebound Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Fewell's comments are very interesting. You would hope the coaches and front office are on the same page. If that is the case, it looks like Clements is the #1 priority and although they'd like Fletcher back, perhaps he won't be as important next year as he was this year with a significant number of rookies playing. If Fletcher is all we lose, we get a stud LB in the 1st round, and sign some lower level FA's with Nate being our big ticket item this offseason, I'd be happy.
bbfan54 Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Fletcher is overrated. He makes a lot of tackles but all middle linebackers do.
scribo Posted December 30, 2006 Author Posted December 30, 2006 I agree with everyone that Nate needs to be re-signed and that Fletcher can be replaced with some one with more upside. My point is that the Bills' actions and London's comments seem to state that is exactly what is going to happen. Incidently, I also think it is good that Fewell understands Nate's value and how hard it would be to replace him.
Coach Tuesday Posted December 30, 2006 Posted December 30, 2006 Why not move Crowell to MLB, with Ellison and Spikes as the OLBs? That would give us one of the fastest LB crews in the League.
scribo Posted December 30, 2006 Author Posted December 30, 2006 Why not move Crowell to MLB, with Ellison and Spikes as the OLBs? That would give us one of the fastest LB crews in the League. How is Ellison-Crowell-Spikes faster than Ellison-Spikes-Crowell? Do you think Crowell would be a better MLB than Spikes?
Recommended Posts