I'll say this for Fletcher

[Pyrite Gal]

He led this team and LBs in the NFL with interceptions with 4.

 

He scored TDs on an INT return and a fumble recovery.

 

He registered 2 sacks tieing for 4th on the team.

 

He led the team by far being credited with 146 tackles (101 0f them solo tackles which makes the complaint of some about him racking up tackles downfield a bit odd in that even if true if he wasn't there on those plays no telling how far the opponent would have gotten and this complaint strikes me as more of an indictment of a DL which was breeched so that an LB on the next level took the runner down without assistance.

 

Like it or not, folks who advocate letting him walk need to suggest how we are going to replace this production if they want their comments to be taken seriously.

 

Given that behind him on the depth chart are the too oft injured DiGregorio, and the two best LBs in the past whom folks talk about filling the role are both recovering from injuries, resigning Fletcher seems to be a flat-out priority for this team unless there is a specific plan to replace him and his production.

 

In particular since he is so underrated in the NFL (as he has never been selected to the Pro Bowl even when he tied Spielman for the record in tackles) and also may come with a bit of a discount in the market due to his age, those who would not resign him have a lot of splainin to do for this opinion not to simply be disregarded.

[generaLee83]

Okay Pyrite, I like and agree with your post. Give us your prediction now though, do Fletch and NC stay or what?

 

Does the team anty up some serious dough to retain them?

[yUKidave]

He led this team and LBs in the NFL with interceptions with 4.

 

He scored TDs on an INT return and a fumble recovery.

 

He registered 2 sacks tieing for 4th on the team.

 

He led the team by far being credited with 146 tackles (101 0f them solo tackles which makes the complaint of some about him racking up tackles downfield a bit odd in that even if true if he wasn't there on those plays no telling how far the opponent would have gotten and this complaint strikes me as more of an indictment of a DL which was breeched so that an LB on the next level took the runner down without assistance.

 

Like it or not, folks who advocate letting him walk need to suggest how we are going to replace this production if they want their comments to be taken seriously.

 

Given that behind him on the depth chart are the too oft injured DiGregorio, and the two best LBs in the past whom folks talk about filling the role are both recovering from injuries, resigning Fletcher seems to be a flat-out priority for this team unless there is a specific plan to replace him and his production.

 

In particular since he is so underrated in the NFL (as he has never been selected to the Pro Bowl even when he tied Spielman for the record in tackles) and also may come with a bit of a discount in the market due to his age, those who would not resign him have a lot of splainin to do for this opinion not to simply be disregarded.

 

Lookin @ it another way ... If we have/get better Defensive Tackles clogging the middle n gettin a bit more pressure on the QB we may get away with an alternative to him .

i would still like to see him re-sign with the Bills though

[The_Real]

I enjoyed your post and would agree with most every point you made. To play Devils advocate I think there are some things working against though. Starting camp next year he'll be 32. My guess is that who ever his agent is will ask for atleast a 4 year deal. Honestly, those numbers Fletcher has been putting up are huge. I mean seriously HUGE... and his agent knows that too. So essentially you are going to have to pay a fat contract to someone who is going to be going into his mid 30's as a middle linebacker? It's a risk.

 

Also, does London want to be here? I've not once heard him or Nate Clements be definitive about their respect in or desire to play in Buffalo. That to me means they are looking forward to free agency to see what they can get. I think both are goners and you might see Spikes get cut too.

 

Takeo Spikes is not the player he once was and his salary far exceeds his abilities. That sounds cruel even as I read it back but it's true. Just like Nate Clements is a shut down corner who will go to the highest bidder with out showing any second thought of 'hometown discount'.

 

I think the Bills did alot of things right this year and I expect to see more progression next year. With room to spend and a good draft position I think you'll see more 'character' guys come in that both Levy and Jauron will be in love with.

 

I have two questions now.

 

Does Willis get a new contract?

 

and

 

How is Coy Wire still on a professional roster?

 

 

The Real

[jester43]

He led this team and LBs in the NFL with interceptions with 4.

 

He scored TDs on an INT return and a fumble recovery.

 

He registered 2 sacks tieing for 4th on the team.

 

He led the team by far being credited with 146 tackles (101 0f them solo tackles which makes the complaint of some about him racking up tackles downfield a bit odd in that even if true if he wasn't there on those plays no telling how far the opponent would have gotten and this complaint strikes me as more of an indictment of a DL which was breeched so that an LB on the next level took the runner down without assistance.

 

Like it or not, folks who advocate letting him walk need to suggest how we are going to replace this production if they want their comments to be taken seriously.

 

Given that behind him on the depth chart are the too oft injured DiGregorio, and the two best LBs in the past whom folks talk about filling the role are both recovering from injuries, resigning Fletcher seems to be a flat-out priority for this team unless there is a specific plan to replace him and his production.

 

In particular since he is so underrated in the NFL (as he has never been selected to the Pro Bowl even when he tied Spielman for the record in tackles) and also may come with a bit of a discount in the market due to his age, those who would not resign him have a lot of splainin to do for this opinion not to simply be disregarded.

i've been critical of fletcher pretty much since the day he showed up here, but even i have to give him credit for some of the beautiful INTs he made this year. and when he gets his hands on the ball, he is FAST. this leads to the occasional defensive touchdown, which is a good thing.

 

but as far as this being a reason to keep him, it is fools gold. how many superbowl winning teams do you hearken back to and say, "yup, the so-and-sos really were a championship team because their middle linebacker made a few acrobatic interceptions and was really fast running them back...fumbles too."

 

most superbowl teams (fletcher's rams being a notable exception) win because they punch you in the face when you try to run. not because the mlb got some picks that year. and it's not like fletcher is hawking a half-dozen balls every year for us.

 

the issue of fletcher's tackles is not such a big deal to me either. his tackle number may be as high as spielman's, but it would be nice if a few of them were within 2 yards of the line, as 54s usally were. i know the bills' defensive tackles were much better then, but i am pretty sure that if spielman was on this team, he wouldn't be yielding dozens of "falling-forward-for 3-yards" type tackles...the way fletcher did this year and ALWAYS has. and you also have to admit that a huge reason fletcher is making all those tackles is because our tackles can barely get a paw on someone as they fly by.

 

i also concede that he makes some nice plays moving laterally that other linebackers wouldn't make. but i don't think he's superhuman or irreplaceable in this regard.

 

i do not advocate cutting him just because he doesn't look like the sam cowart of 1999, but i do think he can be replaced. you asked, how do the bills make up for this production? you hope mccargo is the real deal and you hopefully find one other better DT in 07. we are just so bad here it is embarrassing. this allows the bills to fill the MLB position with a bigger stronger player, who may not be as fast, but will keep us from being humiliated week in and week out by 8-minute drives.

 

this would also allow the d-ends to tee off a little bit more, improving the pass rush and resulting in more interceptions by other players.

 

simple eh?

[I 90]

He led this team ...

 

He led the team by far...

 

Like it or not, folks who advocate letting him walk need to suggest how we are going to replace this production if they want their comments to be taken seriously.

 

I am almost surprised that he was worth every penny of his current contract. His effort was wasted during this dark era of Bills football and now he is 32 in addition to being undersized. I will be pulling for my favorite Bill to cash in elsewhere.

 

Expect another defense heavy draft from Marv.

.

[Pyrite Gal]

Okay Pyrite, I like and agree with your post. Give us your prediction now though, do Fletch and NC stay or what?

 

Does the team anty up some serious dough to retain them?

 

MY (and quite frankly all the fan predictions) are pretty worthless as they are dictated by Ralph's seemingly sometimes Alzheimer like responses and what I think is logical from a football point of view is certainly not done.

 

However, though I see little consistency in what Ralph and the Bills do, I do have my own fact-challenged opinions of what they should do.

 

1. I think they shold resign Nate.

 

A. He has produced in a lot of areas.

B. There is no one of the roster who can produce the same amount at MLB even if you think he sucks.

C. It is incredibly doubtful that a draft pick will give you the same production at MLB (if you think so then please name the person).

D. An FA vet pick-up can likely do the job, but this acquisition likely involves a total remake of the teamto whatever extent the vet needs to learn the Jauron/Fewel D which will depend alot on this centerpiece.

E. Even if you acquire a new centerpiece you are wholly dependent on this one player remaining healthy which is a tough bet given that we have seen two LBs end up on IR these last two seasons.

F. He actually can be relatively cheaply signed as he is underrated by the NFL having never made the Pro Bowl and he is an older player that no team can build around. He has value as the missing piece for a team for a run next year, but little future as a building block.

 

In summary, he has value for the Bills he does not have for others as there is no learning curve time for us that he would have for a new team. Also, while it makes little sense to plan on him being there for several years, it is workable for him to counted upon to provide us with two years. We would draft/acquire his replacement in the off-season and he is there to break-in or cushion this your acquisition and year after next we phase the other guy in and phase him out.

 

I suspect the Bills will want to and have to do this, however, the additional wild card is that he is an FA and will have a major shared say with the Bills as to whether he returns. I think he will like to come back despite his not saying much about his future situation as Fletcher seems to be motivated by other things such as his seminary commitment rather than the typical sports achievement motivation.

 

He hired Rosenhaus and may well go elsewhere, but its hard to imagine this is the understanding between Ralph and Fletcher given the two apparently have a close relationship personally and the Bills really have made themselves quite dependent on him coming back OR really investing heavily for a replacement.

 

2. I also think they go after NC to come back as doing this solves a lot of the Bills problems in terms of setting the D up. If they re-acquire NC then we are essentially set at CB with two former Pro Bowl starters at CB, Youbouty in the wings as the likely nickel and heir apparent in case of injury with potential first round talent and we have a host of other folks like Greer, Thomas.

 

If instead we let NC go, all of these guys in the wings are asked to step up which maybe they can do but maybe they can't. if we resign NC then we are not only set at CB but even can deal if the injury bug happens to strike. Alternately if we let him go then the whole situation is uncertain.

 

Overall, with both these players, it involves paying them salaries which seem to be higher than their output on the free market, but it looks like we will have the cap room to get 'er done.

 

I hope the Bills do this, but to me they already should have extended them if the followed this logic so it seems like something else in the offing.

[Pyrite Gal]

Lookin @ it another way ... If we have/get better Defensive Tackles clogging the middle n gettin a bit more pressure on the QB we may get away with an alternative to him .

i would still like to see him re-sign with the Bills though

 

I agree with the theory, but after the Bills commited a chunk of value to buy FA Triplett and draft/use Williams/McCargo it hard for me to see them devoting the huge salary cap value we have again on the DL (though we need it there).

 

I think it makes sense for us to resign are own NC and Fletcher but the acquisitions after that probably go to making sure we have through the draft or by an FA acquisition we get Fletcher's replacement in place.

 

I think the models are we look for a late first day pick at LB along the Crowell line to train as heir apparent at MLB for 2008 or 09 at the latest. My sense is we would have to get a young vet LB at FA who does not expect that he will be an immediate star at MLB (if he does then why sign behind Fletcher) but has definite prospects in our opinion so he is worth getting (the next Bryce Paup for example).

[jester43]

MY (and quite frankly all the fan predictions) are pretty worthless as they are dictated by Ralph's seemingly sometimes Alzheimer like responses and what I think is logical from a football point of view is certainly not done.

 

However, though I see little consistency in what Ralph and the Bills do, I do have my own fact-challenged opinions of what they should do.

 

1. I think they shold resign Nate.

 

A. He has produced in a lot of areas.

B. There is no one of the roster who can produce the same amount at MLB even if you think he sucks.

C. It is incredibly doubtful that a draft pick will give you the same production at MLB (if you think so then please name the person).

D. An FA vet pick-up can likely do the job, but this acquisition likely involves a total remake of the teamto whatever extent the vet needs to learn the Jauron/Fewel D which will depend alot on this centerpiece.

E. Even if you acquire a new centerpiece you are wholly dependent on this one player remaining healthy which is a tough bet given that we have seen two LBs end up on IR these last two seasons.

F. He actually can be relatively cheaply signed as he is underrated by the NFL having never made the Pro Bowl and he is an older player that no team can build around. He has value as the missing piece for a team for a run next year, but little future as a building block.

 

In summary, he has value for the Bills he does not have for others as there is no learning curve time for us that he would have for a new team. Also, while it makes little sense to plan on him being there for several years, it is workable for him to counted upon to provide us with two years. We would draft/acquire his replacement in the off-season and he is there to break-in or cushion this your acquisition and year after next we phase the other guy in and phase him out.

 

I suspect the Bills will want to and have to do this, however, the additional wild card is that he is an FA and will have a major shared say with the Bills as to whether he returns. I think he will like to come back despite his not saying much about his future situation as Fletcher seems to be motivated by other things such as his seminary commitment rather than the typical sports achievement motivation.

 

He hired Rosenhaus and may well go elsewhere, but its hard to imagine this is the understanding between Ralph and Fletcher given the two apparently have a close relationship personally and the Bills really have made themselves quite dependent on him coming back OR really investing heavily for a replacement.

 

2. I also think they go after NC to come back as doing this solves a lot of the Bills problems in terms of setting the D up. If they re-acquire NC then we are essentially set at CB with two former Pro Bowl starters at CB, Youbouty in the wings as the likely nickel and heir apparent in case of injury with potential first round talent and we have a host of other folks like Greer, Thomas.

 

If instead we let NC go, all of these guys in the wings are asked to step up which maybe they can do but maybe they can't. if we resign NC then we are not only set at CB but even can deal if the injury bug happens to strike. Alternately if we let him go then the whole situation is uncertain.

 

Overall, with both these players, it involves paying them salaries which seem to be higher than their output on the free market, but it looks like we will have the cap room to get 'er done.

 

I hope the Bills do this, but to me they already should have extended them if the followed this logic so it seems like something else in the offing.

not saying there's not a number worth paying for him, but we're never going anywhere with him as our mlb.

[Pyrite Gal]

not saying there's not a number worth paying for him, but we're never going anywhere with him as our mlb.

 

I think you made a key observation here when you posted above:

 

the way fletcher did this year and ALWAYS has. and you also have to admit that a huge reason fletcher is making all those tackles is because our tackles can barely get a paw on someone as they fly by.

 

You are right that the tackle numbers are not necessarily the major basis we should assess the quality of an individual player on as this number is greatly indluenced by the scheme a team plays, the quality of his teammates and also is a subjective judgment as to who gets credited with them or not.

 

I think much more impressive for F-B is that this past year even moreso that his other years as a Bills shows objective indications of the diverse production which he brings to the field looking at objective indicative stats like INTs, TDs and sacks. Either a player tackles the opponent behind the LOS or not (and F-B even though being asked to bear a lot of downfield pass coverage responsibility in the Tampa 2 tied for 4th place on the team with his 2 sacks.

 

Either you scored TDs or you do not and F-B according to Bills.com returned an INT for a TD and recovered a fumble for a TD.

 

Either you intercept the ball or do not and F-B got more INTs than any other LB in the game and led the team in INTs (more than Clements for example).

 

I'm not making this stuff up. The facts are what the facts are.

 

You are also right that the question of where are we going with him at MLB is a key one as the proof is in the pudding and results ultimately matter.

 

I am happy if we do get another MLB who will take us to the promised land. However, the simple question is WHO?

 

What F-B has done is simply set a statistical standard which this new savior should beat (if he truly is as good as you want). This player not only will have to make a bunch of tackles at the LOS as you want and say F-B does not do, but he will have to do with another Bill being our team leading INT guy since F-B will be gone.

 

The new guy you want will need to raise up our D so that it gets TDs and sacks from other folks or he produces them himself to replace F-Bs production.

 

Regardless of how one judges his play subjectively, who is this player than you envision creating the measures of production which F-B produced, this inquiring mind would love to know and I fully embrace him coming here if we can pull this off.

 

Instead, since I am not informed enough to say exactly who this wunderkind is, whae I do advocate is that I think it is quite possible that we can extend the contract of F-B himself (if he allows it) and actually since the rest of the NFL rates him as not being a Pro Bowl quality player we should be able to get him at an affordable price given that it looks like we will have a good chunk of cap room.

 

I do not argue at all that we will get to the SB with Fletcher or even the playoffs (we have not so far). However, i do argue that rather than producing nothing we can be measured as some do (despite the fact this is counter to the facts) that he can be extended relatively cheaply and this will allow us to spend the far larger part of our cap on the players that will make the D perform better.

 

How 'bout if we made a little investment in a DL that in fact can get a PAW on a rusher so that in fact Fletcher's tackle numbers drop. It seems like what you advocate in that we spend a chunk of change to get a better MLB is that this new player will also have a large number of tackles as our DL continues to fan on rushers who pour through the gap and get to our MLB.

 

It seems what you are advocating is that we will get a replacement MLB who makes a bunch of tackles 4 or 5 yards downfield rather than 5 or 6 yards if that is what folks feel Fletcher does.

 

Actually, to the extent this is true, the question is why? I submit that this occurs not because he is a weak player who cannot get to the point of attack closer to the LOS, but that our scheme the way we run it calls for Fletcher to cover an area downfield.

 

Its called the Tampa 2 and the MLB in the Tampa 2 has the deep pass coverage responsibility with the two safeties. Fletch simply did what he supposed to do and actually did it quite well as he led the team in INTs. The D fell apart in several areas:

 

1. Our rookie safeties had a number of issues early in the season recognizing when WRs were running the fly pattern down the sideline and got over late. The irony here is that McGee often got blamed as the WR simply seemed to beat him flat out on the fly. However, my sense was that yes McGee did not do the right thing in not recognizing how late and out of position our young safeties were and thus he could not sit on routes inside as the Tampa 2 calls for him to do in theory as the CB really only has the short outside zone coverage. If Whitner is not there or Simpson is late, the vet mcGee is supposed diagnose that and not let the WR go. After some very bad outings against MN, DET, and HE the second time we seemed to rectify this.

 

2. We got shredded on the run but actually this was not F-Bs prime responsibility in the Cover 2 we run (everyone is ultimately responsible for tackling the runner so F-B like other fails as a team when the team gets run on). However, in the Tampa 2 his primary responsibility on potential passing downs was in deep and mid-zone coverage and he deserves kudos for doing that job to the extent he led the team in INTs.

 

He is an LB and obviously has LOS responsibilities and occaisional blitz work since throwing change-ups is always important to combat an O. However, to the extent Fletch got some sacks and FRs the indicator is he did this job as well to the extent he was a team leader in these other objective categories.

 

My sense is that complaints about fletcher making tackles downfield is simply a side effect of our DTs being ineffective against the run at the LOS too often and us running a scheme which mandated that he hold that middle area where he is accused of making late tackles.

 

My sense is that if he were detailed to play more at the LOS and get earlier tackles that the offense would simply say thank you very much and instead throw short passes to the midzone left uncovered by F-B coming to the LOS or more screens which would either induce him in on a rush and the QB throws over him or multiple blockers are out there to attack him or another line pinching player.