Specifically what are folks complaining about...

[Pyrite Gal]

This mantra from folks siting Fletcher for getting too many tackles 3 (and even some claim 5) yards downfield is a common one among those who say let F-B walk.

 

Even if this were a true problem (which I actually don't think it is, but lets assume it is for this discussion) there are a number of different reasons why this could occur and I'm not sure that letting Fletcher walks solves a lot of these issues.

 

1. He does not fill his gap responsibility because he is not a good tackler.

 

The theory fits as a reason why an MLB is not good enough to stop the run. However, this reasoning does not fit with the numbers. A lack of tackles to his credit from this Bill who actually holds the record for most tackles credited to a Bill and leads the team in tackles every year does not seem to fit the theory that he gets run over in the gap all the time.

 

2. He does get into the gap such that he does make contact, but he is a weak tackler who gets carried for gains.

 

Again this theory is a reasonable explanation why an MLB would not be good against the run, but the numbers do not indicate this is what is happening. If he was merely a speed bump who slowed runners down but could not stop them without help, then one would expect that F-B's tackles would actually be for a disproportionate number of assists as he hangs on to the RBs shoelaces while another defender joins in to bring him down. On he contrary, F-B's Bill leading tackles to his credit run a nout 2 solo tackles for every assist.

 

In addition, if the problem was that he was a weak tackler, one thinks we would see specific complaints and several examples could be specifically sited of RBs dragging F-B along or breaking from his grasp for big gains.

 

3. He plays too far back and hits runners after they get upfield.

 

If this were the case it sounds more like a problem with how the coaches are positioning him rather than his play persee. If F-B could stand to hit RBs sooner then the coaches should play him nearer the LOS in the gaos he is responsible for.

 

4. The problem is regardless of where the coaches play him he recognizes the play to slowly to cover the proper gap.

 

This theory neither fits the general talk about Fletcher in terms of how folks view his experience or what we have seen him do. Specifically, F-B calls the D signals because he is considered someone who knows and understands the game. We saw a good example in the last game against the Ravens of how he seems to understand what is going on in plays in an almost uncanny. His INY came on a play where he was covering an RB and he picked off the McNair pass as though McNair was throwing to Fletcher rather than the RB. Fletcher went right to the spot where McNair was doing a quick release to rather than simply covering the man in his zone. F-B's job in the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2 we play is that he splits the field in 3 with the two safeties, having the ability to diagnose the play is what alot of this about.

 

5. He is on the wrong side of 30.

 

Definitely true, but this old in the tooth LB not only led the entire Bills team in INTs (more than NC or McGee or the safeties) but in fact he led the NFL in INTs by an LB.

 

All in all, its not simply important that folks think him getting credited with tackles too far downfield is a problem, but WHY do folks think this is happening and what is F-Bs shortcoming that leads to this? If anything, to me this would really be an indictment of our DL or of our scheme if it were true. Quite frankly he should be getting more assists or less tackles overall because folks are being at least slowed up or in fact simply stoned by Triplett and Williams (or whomever is in at DT as Fletch closes in to help them bring the RB down or to stand over his already tackled carcass. if anything, it seems like the RBs are finding holes in the line so they get into the second tier untouched and then F-Bs hits them and brings them down.

 

Stats tell one little conclusively but they do tend to indicate what the reality is and the stats and my observations of the games do not reveal a big problem with how Fletcher plays the game.

 

The real story here to me is that if in fact he walks, I'm not sure the Bills have any alternatives but to buy the best LB they can find as I doubt many or any drafted rookies are going to step in and play the Tampa 2 MLB spot well diagnosing whether it is a run they need to pinch in for or a pass and they better drop back and cover like a safety.

 

Its possible a talented FA might be able to produce field production which equals Fletcher, but he also would need to replace him being the D captain, a respected leader in the locker room and though F-B is certainly shorter than the norm he is a ball hawk and has such superb ball handling skills he not only led the team in INTs (another indicator the coaches use him as much in pass coverage as in run stopping) but eben has worked as a short kickoff return guy instead of the usual RB or DB where the team sacrifices bulk for ball skills.

 

F-B is not a perfect player in any regard, however, I think the roles he fulfills for the Bills will be difficult to replace if he leaves.

[ofiba]

If he was truly worth re-signing, he would spot the running backs coming through the garage door size hole, pick them up, and carry them back to their endzone. From there he has 2 choices that will both result in a new contract. He could either take the ball from them and score a touchdown, or he could drop them, allow them to run a few yards on their own to negate the forward progress, and then tackle them for a saftey. His signing bonus will be determined by which option he chooses.

 

Until he does this, he is just an undersized MLB who has no place in the league. Right?

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

I like London Fletcher I think he's a fine player. However I would not break the bank for a 30+ year old lb. I dont have an issue with where he makes tackles. Most mlb's generally make tackles past the los. For as much flak as he takes for being a liability against the run, which I think is unwaranted, he's a good coverage backer. He's good in space, and is a good team player and mentor to have around who has a few solid years left in him.

 

 

However being that we play in a defense geared around speed, and being of the premise that you shouldn't overspend for players past their prime I'd let him walk. The eagles do this consistently rarely breaking the bank for players past 30 years old. The only vet player I can recall them going hard to retain is dawkins and bringing back trotter 2 years after they let him go. We can't rely on fletcher forever, and it's something that needs to be addressed. He gave us a few good years, but I'd prefer to see a lb with more size who wont be handled as much as fletcher is at the point of attack.

[Pyrite Gal]

The simple questions are who do you replace him with and what do you lose and what does that player bring in his skills that replace and surpass F-B?

[Steven in MD]

Just like Zach Thomas he is agile enough to get to the runner 5-8 yds downfield. He makes a high number of tackles because the secondary plays off the line so he covers the region between the DL and secondary. He has high tackles totals because the DL sucks and does not slow down the runner.

[BoondckCL]

The simple questions are who do you replace him with and what do you lose and what does that player bring in his skills that replace and surpass F-B?

 

Angelo Crowell or a draftee.

[inkman]

It sounded like he was pretty upset about not being offerred anything during this season. I would suspect he wouldn't come back here even if the Bills wanted him.

[bluv]

That is just some BS to dis credit LF-B. I mean he has played great for us since he has been here. I mean the years we had 2 good run stuffing DT in front of him we were top in the league against the run! And even when the D hasn't played good overall he has been one of the few bright and consistent spots as he has been the heart and soul of our D! Now I wouldn't pay a 30 plus LB a big time contract but that being said don't just diss LF-B just for sake!

 

This is just another example of fans on this board trying to find a reason to hate on player once there is a chance he is about to leave the organization. Unless you retire as a Bill or time has healed all wounds you will be regarded as over rated or going downhill on this board. If you want proof just look at the board 2 years ago when most ran TH out of town and proclaimed WM god; now some the same ones bash WM and wish we had kept TH even though TH has truthfully had only a few good stretches the past 2 years himself. I won't even mentioned those who thought Pat Williams was just fat, over rated and easily replaceable!

[tennesseeboy]

This is another facet of building a team from the safety to the line of scrimmage and passing off the weakness up front onto the linebackers DB's. The problem...everyone knows it...is we can't stop the running game. The run up the middle is the accepted way to break the cover 2, and we aren't going anywhere until we control the line of scrimmage. Can a certain type of middle linebacker help? sure..so can a certain type of safety...The main people to stop the run at the line of scrimmage though are the players who line up at the line of scrimmage...and we aren't getting that done. Hence the need for Defensive Tackle. More than a wide receiver, more than a young MLB (assuming we re-sign Fletcher), more than a tight end, more than anything else. Blaming Fletcher for our failure to stop the running game before a 3 or 4 yard gain is a bit disengenuous.

 

I only say this because I think there are two areas where we need to improve to get to...and perhaps well into...the playoffs. Stopping the run and better pass protection. We have to put our resources into those areas.

[1billsfan]

The simple questions are who do you replace him with and what do you lose and what does that player bring in his skills that replace and surpass F-B?

 

All signs point to Patrick Willis in the first round. If not the first round then a second round LB will be used as Fletcher's replacement. This team is smack dab in the middle of a youth movement and it looks like the team would rather train a rookie than resign someone as old as Fletcher. I think Fletcher will continue to play well in a place like New England where they're in a maintain, not a rebuilding mode. I think the logic is why resign someone who'll need to be replaced any year now. Though he showed flashes of brilliant play, overall it looked for most of 2006 that Fletch is on the downward slope. That slope is far quicker for a middle linebacker than other positions.

[Pyrite Gal]

All signs point to Patrick Willis in the first round. If not the first round then a second round LB will be used as Fletcher's replacement. This team is smack dab in the middle of a youth movement and it looks like the team would rather train a rookie than resign someone as old as Fletcher. I think Fletcher will continue to play well in a place like New England where they're in a maintain, not a rebuilding mode. I think the logic is why resign someone who'll need to be replaced any year now. Though he showed flashes of brilliant play, overall it looked for most of 2006 that Fletch is on the downward slope. That slope is far quicker for a middle linebacker than other positions.

Willis is certainly a good prospect as he won the Butkus award as the nation's top LB player. However, the fact he that the nation's top LB is likely to be available when we draft at #12 (and it appears many have him lower than that but any final decisions or rankings prior to the Combine particular given the Bills emphasis on character and the all important Combine interview when the Bills get to look him in the eye all rankings are not fully informed and are way premature) speaks volumes that like any human being there are some limitations here.

 

Even if we got him and he turns out to be the athletic stud we all want, while he it is to be hoped would have the physical capabilities to make plays I doubt (and I think anyone who understands the game would also doubt) that even a talented rookie will be able to do everything that F-B did for the Bills this year.

 

Specifically:

 

1. F-B by all signs is a team leader and a good locker room guy. Rookies are correctly busy learning how to become NFL players and having what probably their first legal consistent paying job since they were paperboys.

 

My sense is that F-B really did do some important things for the Bills as I suspect for example no Bills stupidly came to Eric Moulds defense when the team suspended him last year for throwing a hissy fit in a game. My sense is that given that even the Eagles were divided over the team disciplining idiot Terrell Owens for his outlandish acts, the fact the Bills were pretty united on this (given there were lots of good reasons for opposing MM and TD even if Moulds was an idiot was a tribute to good locker room leadership from guys like Fletcher and Vincent.

 

There is simply no way Willis can or should be asked to fill this role and the question for the Bills braintrust is if F-B goes then who steps up to be a locker room leader in his stead?

 

2. In addition, to the gap created in locker room leadership, the loss of F-B creates a gap in on field leadership which again no rookie can fill and the question for Bills partisans is then who on the D fills this role. One of the neat things for this fan to watch in terms of Flether-Baker was in the disputes with the refs which happen in almost every game, it was clearly F-B who seemed to be the guy in the refs face pleading the Bills case before he got shooed away and often F-B seemed to go to the correct ref (different refs have different responsibilities thought the umpire makes the ultimate call or communicates it to the stadium) and it was fascinating for one paying too much attention to football to watch F-B at work. One wonders who will fill the role as D captain.

 

3. F-B simply had more INTs than any other LB in the NFL and led the team in INTs when turnovers are the lead statisitical factor in determing who wins and who does not each week. I expect Willis to start for the Bills immediately if drafted #12, but I am not foolish enough to expect the will lead LBs or the team in INTs thus almost certainly if he takes F-B's spot we are going to see a reduction in performance in this area.

 

4. One of the reasons why F-B got so many INTs (and scored 2 D TDs) is that he has taken so many snaps and seen so much he has great experience as a pro. Again we are going to see a drop off whrn/if F-B goes elsewhere in this regard. I hope/expect a rookie MLB starter like a Butkus winner to be more physically talented than F-B but I am not under the illusion that there would not be some horrible to watch bad moments for Willis or any rookie in 2007 as they learn the game.

 

5. I do not expect a rookie to do the playcalling F-B did and given we have took first year safeties which is generally the position which allows a player to see the whole field and yell out the calls, whenn/if F-B goes a problem is going to be created that no rookie will fill and I wonder what we will do if the plan is to draft an MLB. Actually drafting a top notch OLB and having Crowell move to MLB makes more sense and I know Willis was a great ILB but I do not know enough about him to know if this translates to him playing OLB while he learns the game.

 

6. We will need to replace a unique skill set which F-B brings to the table as someone who clearly is not only fast enough to play the safety role of the MLB in the Tampa 2 but has shown extremely good ball handling skill over the years with his kickoff return job and with INT totals.

 

Willis may be a great player to get, however, there seems to be no way that his greater physical skills than F-B would not mean we still have a lot to replace when/if F-B goes.

 

The basic lesson here was that if we suspected we were not going to resign F-B we should have made an investment in his replacement last year.

[jester43]

This mantra from folks siting Fletcher for getting too many tackles 3 (and even some claim 5) yards downfield is a common one among those who say let F-B walk.

 

Even if this were a true problem (which I actually don't think it is, but lets assume it is for this discussion) there are a number of different reasons why this could occur and I'm not sure that letting Fletcher walks solves a lot of these issues.

 

1. He does not fill his gap responsibility because he is not a good tackler.

 

The theory fits as a reason why an MLB is not good enough to stop the run. However, this reasoning does not fit with the numbers. A lack of tackles to his credit from this Bill who actually holds the record for most tackles credited to a Bill and leads the team in tackles every year does not seem to fit the theory that he gets run over in the gap all the time.

 

2. He does get into the gap such that he does make contact, but he is a weak tackler who gets carried for gains.

 

Again this theory is a reasonable explanation why an MLB would not be good against the run, but the numbers do not indicate this is what is happening. If he was merely a speed bump who slowed runners down but could not stop them without help, then one would expect that F-B's tackles would actually be for a disproportionate number of assists as he hangs on to the RBs shoelaces while another defender joins in to bring him down. On he contrary, F-B's Bill leading tackles to his credit run a nout 2 solo tackles for every assist.

 

In addition, if the problem was that he was a weak tackler, one thinks we would see specific complaints and several examples could be specifically sited of RBs dragging F-B along or breaking from his grasp for big gains.

 

3. He plays too far back and hits runners after they get upfield.

 

If this were the case it sounds more like a problem with how the coaches are positioning him rather than his play persee. If F-B could stand to hit RBs sooner then the coaches should play him nearer the LOS in the gaos he is responsible for.

 

4. The problem is regardless of where the coaches play him he recognizes the play to slowly to cover the proper gap.

 

This theory neither fits the general talk about Fletcher in terms of how folks view his experience or what we have seen him do. Specifically, F-B calls the D signals because he is considered someone who knows and understands the game. We saw a good example in the last game against the Ravens of how he seems to understand what is going on in plays in an almost uncanny. His INY came on a play where he was covering an RB and he picked off the McNair pass as though McNair was throwing to Fletcher rather than the RB. Fletcher went right to the spot where McNair was doing a quick release to rather than simply covering the man in his zone. F-B's job in the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2 we play is that he splits the field in 3 with the two safeties, having the ability to diagnose the play is what alot of this about.

 

5. He is on the wrong side of 30.

 

Definitely true, but this old in the tooth LB not only led the entire Bills team in INTs (more than NC or McGee or the safeties) but in fact he led the NFL in INTs by an LB.

 

All in all, its not simply important that folks think him getting credited with tackles too far downfield is a problem, but WHY do folks think this is happening and what is F-Bs shortcoming that leads to this? If anything, to me this would really be an indictment of our DL or of our scheme if it were true. Quite frankly he should be getting more assists or less tackles overall because folks are being at least slowed up or in fact simply stoned by Triplett and Williams (or whomever is in at DT as Fletch closes in to help them bring the RB down or to stand over his already tackled carcass. if anything, it seems like the RBs are finding holes in the line so they get into the second tier untouched and then F-Bs hits them and brings them down.

 

Stats tell one little conclusively but they do tend to indicate what the reality is and the stats and my observations of the games do not reveal a big problem with how Fletcher plays the game.

 

The real story here to me is that if in fact he walks, I'm not sure the Bills have any alternatives but to buy the best LB they can find as I doubt many or any drafted rookies are going to step in and play the Tampa 2 MLB spot well diagnosing whether it is a run they need to pinch in for or a pass and they better drop back and cover like a safety.

 

Its possible a talented FA might be able to produce field production which equals Fletcher, but he also would need to replace him being the D captain, a respected leader in the locker room and though F-B is certainly shorter than the norm he is a ball hawk and has such superb ball handling skills he not only led the team in INTs (another indicator the coaches use him as much in pass coverage as in run stopping) but eben has worked as a short kickoff return guy instead of the usual RB or DB where the team sacrifices bulk for ball skills.

 

F-B is not a perfect player in any regard, however, I think the roles he fulfills for the Bills will be difficult to replace if he leaves.

 

none of your 5 guesses are the correct answer, and i can explain without writing 1000 words: when he collides with a ball-carrier, he goes backwards, and the runner consistently picks up extra yardage. HE IS TOO LIGHT IN THE PANTS.

 

i don't see why this is so hard for some people to understand.

[Pyrite Gal]

none of your 5 guesses are the correct answer, and i can explain without writing 1000 words: when he collides with a ball-carrier, he goes backwards, and the runner consistently picks up extra yardage. HE IS TOO LIGHT IN THE PANTS.

 

i don't see why this is so hard for some people to understand.

 

I guess that I assumed from the deep import that folks seem to giving it in terms of assessing how well he plays that they were not actually reffering him simply being too light or even getting consistently knocked back for an extra gain of yardage before he makes the tackle because if that is what folks are refering too, its actually a not abnormal and relatively minor point in terms of assessing a players play.

 

From my watching the game, it is actually a relatively rare thing for a defender to hit a runner and consistently or even usually drive the runner back. RBs run as their profession. Usually they are the ones initiating the contact and the defender is doing a good job when he merely stops the forward progress of the offensive player.

 

Certainly one sees cases in every game and with virtually every runner that they do get knocked backward by a defensive hit, but this is not the rule and most defenders are knocked back and the runner falls forward even when he brings them down.

 

Certainly, I would judge that F-B also does not usually stone runners for no gain after contact, but I do not see from my watching the game that he routinely gets overwhelmed on every hit and certainly is not dragging as he is hauled for extra yardS by runners routinely.

 

In fact, this is clearly not what people are maintaining when they complain about Fletcher, they are saying not that he is a weak tackler who is dragged along, but they are complaining that he makes his initial hits downfield.

 

Again if he was little more than a road bump for the runner, one would expect that he would get no credit at all for tackles if he is so light in the pants as you say he is vrushed aside, or at least if he is so light in his hits that he needs help bringing down runners then it is more than reasonable that one would see this at least somwhat reflected in him having a disproportionate number of assist vis a vis solo tackles.

 

My post are overly verbose and I am the second to admit it, but just because a response is different in that it is shorter does not also mean it is different because it is correct.

 

It may require too many words for you to substantiate your claims, however, it does not seem unreasonable to ask for even some hint of objective evidence that would INDICATE that the view he is a "light" tackler is correct.

 

An indication of this for example would be a disproportionate number of assists rather than solo tackles by him, OR him not getting many tackles.

 

On the contrary, he consistently and easily has led the Bills in tackles credited to him and while this stat is not conclusive it certainly is a better indicator than the typical fact free opinion. In addition, he is far more often credited with solo tackles rather than assists. Perhaps one might be able to do a statistical analysis to show that his 2:1 solo/assist ration is low for an MLB. I do not kow and think this analysis might take more time than I am willing to spend on this since the indicators on the face of them are in F-Bs favor. This is an area of research I would hope someone would take the time to do this who offers their contention without any objective support at all. The numbers I see all indicate he is a pretty good player.

 

However, far be it from me to insist anyone take the time to do something I would not do and if folks are happy to conclude he is a stiff based on their fact free views then so be it.

[Matt in KC]

Thank you, Pyrite Gal, bluv and tenesseeboy. I think you all make good points.

 

One of the few things I know about the cover 2 is that the MLB is responsible for the deep third of the field in coverage. For this reason alone, I think the criticism of LFB not making more plays at/behind the LOS is absurd, especially when paired with the speculation that the Bills are looking for someone bigger (not faster).

 

Affirming jester43's observation, I have seen that Fletcher and TKO are the two defenders most likely to prop up an opponent and let the next defender try to strip the ball. This often leads to the player squirming for another yard or two (falling forward), but unless a first down is at stake, it's probably worth it.

 

Fletcher's speed and tackling looks the same as it has for years. What has changed is the defensive scheme and the players around him ...and he has stopped taking stupid penalties.

 

I personally think the leadship loss will be huge if he goes. Only if the coaches think that Fletch is NOT making the right D calls, is this a non-issue, and I have not heard a peep from anyone saying this was the case. Replacing him will not be easy or cheap. I cannot see any realistic way the Bills D avoids a drop-off next year if they let Fletcher walk.

 

The tea leaves seem to indicate Fletcher will be gone, but I cannot understand why. Maybe he will pick up an insane contract in FA, or told the Bills he's looking for $$$ they know is out of whack with the market. With our available salary cap space, I can't image why we wouldn't want to sign one of the NFL's top 10 MLBs.

[BoondckCL]

God damn, long posts are contagious.

[jester43]

I guess that I assumed from the deep import that folks seem to giving it in terms of assessing how well he plays that they were not actually reffering him simply being too light or even getting consistently knocked back for an extra gain of yardage before he makes the tackle because if that is what folks are refering too, its actually a not abnormal and relatively minor point in terms of assessing a players play.

 

From my watching the game, it is actually a relatively rare thing for a defender to hit a runner and consistently or even usually drive the runner back. RBs run as their profession. Usually they are the ones initiating the contact and the defender is doing a good job when he merely stops the forward progress of the offensive player.

 

Certainly one sees cases in every game and with virtually every runner that they do get knocked backward by a defensive hit, but this is not the rule and most defenders are knocked back and the runner falls forward even when he brings them down.

 

Certainly, I would judge that F-B also does not usually stone runners for no gain after contact, but I do not see from my watching the game that he routinely gets overwhelmed on every hit and certainly is not dragging as he is hauled for extra yardS by runners routinely.

 

In fact, this is clearly not what people are maintaining when they complain about Fletcher, they are saying not that he is a weak tackler who is dragged along, but they are complaining that he makes his initial hits downfield.

 

Again if he was little more than a road bump for the runner, one would expect that he would get no credit at all for tackles if he is so light in the pants as you say he is vrushed aside, or at least if he is so light in his hits that he needs help bringing down runners then it is more than reasonable that one would see this at least somwhat reflected in him having a disproportionate number of assist vis a vis solo tackles.

 

My post are overly verbose and I am the second to admit it, but just because a response is different in that it is shorter does not also mean it is different because it is correct.

 

It may require too many words for you to substantiate your claims, however, it does not seem unreasonable to ask for even some hint of objective evidence that would INDICATE that the view he is a "light" tackler is correct.

 

An indication of this for example would be a disproportionate number of assists rather than solo tackles by him, OR him not getting many tackles.

 

On the contrary, he consistently and easily has led the Bills in tackles credited to him and while this stat is not conclusive it certainly is a better indicator than the typical fact free opinion. In addition, he is far more often credited with solo tackles rather than assists. Perhaps one might be able to do a statistical analysis to show that his 2:1 solo/assist ration is low for an MLB. I do not kow and think this analysis might take more time than I am willing to spend on this since the indicators on the face of them are in F-Bs favor. This is an area of research I would hope someone would take the time to do this who offers their contention without any objective support at all. The numbers I see all indicate he is a pretty good player.

 

However, far be it from me to insist anyone take the time to do something I would not do and if folks are happy to conclude he is a stiff based on their fact free views then so be it.

 

honestly...just forget it. you and i aren't watching the same games.

[obie_wan]

none of your 5 guesses are the correct answer, and i can explain without writing 1000 words: when he collides with a ball-carrier, he goes backwards, and the runner consistently picks up extra yardage. HE IS TOO LIGHT IN THE PANTS.

 

i don't see why this is so hard for some people to understand.

 

maybe this visual aid will help describe how a LB should fill the hole.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bM4sEmaFLQ

[34-78-83]

none of your 5 guesses are the correct answer, and i can explain without writing 1000 words: when he collides with a ball-carrier, he goes backwards, and the runner consistently picks up extra yardage. HE IS TOO LIGHT IN THE PANTS.

 

i don't see why this is so hard for some people to understand.

 

Because that is not accurate at all. That's why. Although his weight certainly has something to do with it.

 

The problem is that he is unable to fend off many of the blockers who get out to the LB level and gets pushed out of position. This problem is magnified for a MLB when his DT's are not occupying blockers whether by scheme or by physical limitatiions.

 

Fletch does NOT get pushed back often at all when contacting the runner. He is a very solid tackler. Squares up well and usually drops guys in their tracks.

 

If you're gonna rip on Pyrite's long post, you might want to be more accurate with your conclusions.

[jester43]

i don't have his whole career on tivo, but i have seen him get pinballed more than any bills lb in the past 20 years...except maybe brandon spoon. that is my empirical observation and i am standing by it. and evidently marv agrees with me.

 

i KNOW he's fast.

i KNOW he gives 100% every day.

i KNOW he's a great guy.

i KNOW he's made some big plays in his time here.

 

and i'm NOT saying he should never play for the bills again! but he doesn't deserve a raise, either. and i PROMISE you we'll never win a playoff game with fletcher starting, and i've been saying it for the past 3 years. i do not buy the argument that he looks bad against the run only because our tackles suck.