We are now at, where we feared we would be

[dave mcbride]

Too many people here are forgetting the basic rule of football, which is to prioritize three things: QB (the most important, and in the Bills' case, done), defensive front seven (I fully expect the Bills to emphasize this issue on the first day of the draft), and offensive line. If you take care of those three things, life becomes a lot easier. For evidence, look to teams that do this: the Patriots (obsessively so, actually), the Chargers, and the Colts. Outside of Samuel, not one of these teams has memorable cornerbacks. An ability to pressure a QB and a secondary that can follow marching orders even if the corners aren't spectacular can go a long away to taking out an opponent's passing game.

 

Regardless of all the chatter going on here about average running backs, flawed linebackers, and a good but hardly essential CB, the key issues for 06 as I see them are these:

 

1) Continued improvement of Losman.

2) Arrival of McCargo, improvement of Kyle Williams, and continued settling in of Tripplett.

3) Acquisition of a stout young LB or two who can play run and pass.

 

For the first time since 1995 (or 1992, depending on one's assessment), the Bills are fairly set at OL. They're also deep at defensive end and safety.

 

Far lower down on the list of priorities are another CB (I'd spend a second or a third on one, depending) or a game breaking RB. That said, if Adrian Peterson is available, I wouldn't be averse to taking him. He's gonna be a helluva player.

[Bill from NYC]

Too many people here are forgetting the basic rule of football, which is to prioritize three things: QB (the most important, and in the Bills' case, done), defensive front seven (I fully expect the Bills to emphasize this issue on the first day of the draft), and offensive line. If you take care of those three things, life becomes a lot easier. For evidence, look to teams that do this: the Patriots (obsessively so, actually), the Chargers, and the Colts. Outside of Samuel, not one of these teams has memorable cornerbacks. An ability to pressure a QB and a secondary that can follow marching orders even if the corners aren't spectacular can go a long away to taking out an opponent's passing game.

 

Regardless of all the chatter going on here about average running backs, flawed linebackers, and a good but hardly essential CB, the key issues for 06 as I see them are these:

 

1) Continued improvement of Losman.

2) Arrival of McCargo, improvement of Kyle Williams, and continued settling in of Tripplett.

3) Acquisition of a stout young LB or two who can play run and pass.

 

For the first time since 1995 (or 1992, depending on one's assessment), the Bills are fairly set at OL. They're also deep at defensive end and safety.

 

Far lower down on the list of priorities are another CB (I'd spend a second or a third on one, depending) or a game breaking RB. That said, if Adrian Peterson is available, I wouldn't be averse to taking him. He's gonna be a helluva player.

 

Interesting post Dave...a couple of questions:

 

1) How do you like the Bills at RG, OC, and depth overall depth at OG?

 

2) If you think that CB is a lower priority, why would you be willing to use a 2nd round pick on another db?

[apuszczalowski]

No, we would have still had to guarantee him some money. Clements contract with San Fransisco is going to be backloaded and he is only getting 22 million in guaranteed. If you didn't know, that is what we are paying Langston Walker (the Oakland reject) in guaranteed money. Also, San Fransisco's offer shocked most of the league including us, and probably Clements. If we offered Clements around 68-70 million before free agency hit, I believe there would be a good chance that he would have taken it.

How is he an Oakland Reject?

 

Last thing I heard was that he voided the final years of his contract to get out of Oakland, and that the team didn't plan to let him go.

 

Oh wait, a bunch of Raiders fans said he sucks so it must be true. I also hear a bunch of Baltimore fans think McGahee is great (along with the coach and GM) so it must be true too. I mean, they guy put up almost average numbers last year, and the years before, How did he not make the Pro Bowl.

 

its funny how fans can sit here and cry doom and gloom before the draft/preseason about moves that have been, or are going to be made (i.e. Spikes) because some veterans, who have not brought anything to Buffalo excepts some personnal stats, are gone.

 

The players that have left

McGahee - Did not want to be here, was an average back that believed he was the best and made an effort only when he felt motivated - Best move of the offseason so far, GOOD RIDDANCE

 

Fletcher - Great Leader in the locker room, but his age is a factor now. He may have led in tackles, but they were not where he was supposed to be making them. In the Cover 2, the MLB should be making the tackles at the LOS, not 10 yards downfield. This was a move that was needed to be made because the team was not going to be SB contenders in the next year or 2 so they might as well get younger at that position now.

 

Clements - Was a good CB, but not the best in the league. He played badly in 2005 and had a mediocre season in 2006 (had a bad 1st half and a good 2nd half) He is not worth his current contract that the 49ers gave him. Yes he can be a playmaker, yes he is a top 5-10 CB in the league, but for the Bills to allocate so much money to one player at a position that is not a top priority in the Cover 2 is just not good buisness. If Marv would have franchised him again, it would have just made him a disgruntled player and just delayed the enevitable, unless they should have franchised him every year.

 

Spikes - This all hinges on his health, is he going to come back at 100% (or even 85-90%) of his former self? I'm guessing that since marv and DJ are looking at moving him, that answer is no, since they have a better idea how well his comeback is going then we all do. Spikes is not worth the money if he comes back like the Spikes of 2006. So getting what you can for him, and clearing cap space is a great move

 

The New Guys

Dockery - this player was rated as being the 3rd best o-linemen in FA this year and sound like a great pickup at LG, I haven't seen many complaints besides "he isn't Steinbach or the other guy everybody had hopes for" definitly an upgrade

 

Walker - Raiders fans think he's a turnstile, but who on that Raiders line wasn't? It is possible that he became a turnstyle due to his teammates and coaching staff. The Raiders were an all around horrible team, that doesn't mean everyone on the team sucked. He is a bit of a question mark, but without actually seeing him on the field with the rest of this line, its hard to say if he is as good as the Bills coaching staff believes he is. For now I will have faith in what the coaching staff and scouting department have seen in him to give him such a nice contract over some Raiders and Bills fans.

 

Whittle - This guy is signed for depth only. He will have a chance to compete for a starting job, but he is merely a depth pickup. How people can complain about that, I don't know. He came cheap, has experience with the Bills line coach, and can play almost any position on the line.

 

The rest of the moves were just re-signing so I won't really comment on those

[dave mcbride]

Interesting post Dave...a couple of questions:

 

1) How do you like the Bills at RG, OC, and depth overall depth at OG?

 

2) If you think that CB is a lower priority, why would you be willing to use a 2nd round pick on another db?

Bill:

 

Good questions, and I'll answer them in order:

 

1) At RG, I honestly don't know. It is the case that guys can develop into solid pluggers over time, and maybe that'll happen to Preston this year. At center, the Bills seem to like Fowler, but I really can't tell whether he's any good or not. He's mobile, smart, durable, likeable, and a natural center (at least according to the Bills), so maybe he's fine. Depth at guard seems alright -- they've got four or five at this point (Whittle, Dockery, Preston, Butler, and Merz).

 

Having said this, I'd be quite happy if the Bills drafted a guard or center in the second or third round.

 

2) Regarding a CB, I should have been clearer. I expect the Bills will take a CB at some point, if only to beef up numbers (today, they do appear to need an extra body at the position). I have no problem with them taking one secondary player, but only as long as it's just one. A corner is more likely given the numbers situation. If there is a corner available in the second who truly stands out and the Bills love, I think it's OK to take him. Having said that, though, I don't the Bills should prioritize their secondary.

[daquix]

Why are you so concerned about the guys we have lost or our about to lose? We have won nothing with Clements, Spikes, Willis and London.

I forgot how many playoff games Clements, Fletcher, Spikes & Willis won in a bills uni.

 

You guys are using extremely faulty reasoning. You can not conclude that just because we have not won anything of significance with these players it is 'OK' to let them go. By your reasoning it would have been OK for the Indianapolis Colts to have traded/let go of Peyton Manning after 8th season. The Chargers should have let go of Tomlinson after a few seasons of them not making the playoffs, and him being on the team. Barry Sanders in Detroit? Get out of here Barry - we want someone who can win! Your reasoning is faulty and I hope you begin to realize that sooner or later.

[daquix]

How is he an Oakland Reject?

 

Last thing I heard was that he voided the final years of his contract to get out of Oakland, and that the team didn't plan to let him go.

 

Oh wait, a bunch of Raiders fans said he sucks so it must be true. I also hear a bunch of Baltimore fans think McGahee is great (along with the coach and GM) so it must be true too. I mean, they guy put up almost average numbers last year, and the years before, How did he not make the Pro Bowl.

 

Well I tend to believe the fans who have been watching him for multiple years. The same way other fans believed us when we told them that Mike Williams was a bust. I guess we were just a bunch of idiots huh? Because were just fans.

 

As far as McGahee goes. He IS a good player. No doubt. He has an extremely bad attitude and work ethic, but in the right situation he could become a good player. Just not on the Bills. As you said - Good Riddance.

 

its funny how fans can sit here and cry doom and gloom before the draft/preseason about moves that have been, or are going to be made (i.e. Spikes) because some veterans, who have not brought anything to Buffalo excepts some personnal stats, are gone.

Peyton Manning, Barry Sanders, Frank Gore, Tomlinson, Jason Taylor ... etc. These are the players that have not won a SB or AFC/NFC Championship prior to last season. They should have been thrown out from there team also I suppose?

 

 

McGahee - Did not want to be here, was an average back that believed he was the best and made an effort only when he felt motivated - Best move of the offseason so far, GOOD RIDDANCE

 

Agreed.

 

Fletcher - Great Leader in the locker room, but his age is a factor now. He may have led in tackles, but they were not where he was supposed to be making them. In the Cover 2, the MLB should be making the tackles at the LOS, not 10 yards downfield. This was a move that was needed to be made because the team was not going to be SB contenders in the next year or 2 so they might as well get younger at that position now.

 

Excuses. Draft a good LB, and let him learn under London for a year before shopping Fletcher around.

 

Clements - Was a good CB, but not the best in the league. He played badly in 2005 and had a mediocre season in 2006 (had a bad 1st half and a good 2nd half) He is not worth his current contract that the 49ers gave him. Yes he can be a playmaker, yes he is a top 5-10 CB in the league, but for the Bills to allocate so much money to one player at a position that is not a top priority in the Cover 2 is just not good buisness. If Marv would have franchised him again, it would have just made him a disgruntled player and just delayed the enevitable, unless they should have franchised him every year.

 

I responded to this half/half arguement in multiple threads. Please look it up. This is simply NOT true, and its ridiculous how people keep posting this. He had a SOLID year, all the way through. Its simply that after midway he made plays that got him more recognized for the TV. When a CB is simply locking down his receiver and the ball is not being thrown to that receiver you dont think of that CB. Its an old saying in football "if a CB is doing his job, you wont know his name" (or something along those lines) ....

 

Spikes - This all hinges on his health, is he going to come back at 100% (or even 85-90%) of his former self? I'm guessing that since marv and DJ are looking at moving him, that answer is no, since they have a better idea how well his comeback is going then we all do. Spikes is not worth the money if he comes back like the Spikes of 2006. So getting what you can for him, and clearing cap space is a great move

 

Would you like me to list other "great moves" that teams thought they were making when shopping an injured player who then comes back to go to the pro-bowl?

 

 

Dockery - this player was rated as being the 3rd best o-linemen in FA this year and sound like a great pickup at LG, I haven't seen many complaints besides "he isn't Steinbach or the other guy everybody had hopes for" definitly an upgrade

 

Agreed. Although many believe we paid too high for him. We paid what the Cowboys paid Steinbach and Steinbach was rated higher.

 

Walker - Raiders fans think he's a turnstile, but who on that Raiders line wasn't? It is possible that he became a turnstyle due to his teammates and coaching staff. The Raiders were an all around horrible team, that doesn't mean everyone on the team sucked. He is a bit of a question mark, but without actually seeing him on the field with the rest of this line, its hard to say if he is as good as the Bills coaching staff believes he is. For now I will have faith in what the coaching staff and scouting department have seen in him to give him such a nice contract over some Raiders and Bills fans.

 

Is it possible that Mike Williams was a stud tackle and the rest of the line just stunk? Sure it is, but doubtful. Just remember. $25 million dollars. Please remember that number when he is getting plowed over (hopefully he doesnt).

 

Whittle - This guy is signed for depth only. He will have a chance to compete for a starting job, but he is merely a depth pickup. How people can complain about that, I don't know. He came cheap, has experience with the Bills line coach, and can play almost any position on the line.

 

I dont complain about this move, I just simply dont know why people list him as a "key" pickup. He isnt. As you said, he is just a depth/backup player. That is all.

 

 

This post (above me), if nothing else, proves that fans will go to any length to backup the decisions made by their beloved team. No matter how ridiculous.

[Sketch Soland]

This post (above me), if nothing else, proves that fans will go to any length to backup the decisions made by their beloved team. No matter how ridiculous.

 

It's called being a diehard fan.

 

It's one thing to fault reasoning and rationale, but you scorn someone's fervor for the Bills like you're looking down your nose. How ridiculous is that?

[Bill from NYC]

Agreed. Although many believe we paid too high for him. We paid what the Cowboys paid Steinbach and Steinbach was rated higher.

 

Correction....Steinbach signed with the Browns. If anybody overpaid it WAS Dallas, who gave the same or more money to a fat stiff (Davis).

 

I think that you don't realize just how bad this team has been at OG as of late. Dockery is an instant and HUGE upgrade over Gandy. An improved OL has the potential to change the character of the entire team.

[daquix]

It's called being a diehard fan.

 

It's one thing to fault reasoning and rationale, but you scorn someone's fervor for the Bills like you're looking down your nose. How ridiculous is that?

 

I am a diehard fan. I will go to games next season, just as I did the season before that and before that and before that ... etc. I will continue to hope with every inch of my being that they win every game or atleast enough to make the playoffs. I will continue to hope that they win in the playoffs and make the Super Bowl. And then I will hope that they win it. And I will be supporting them all the way.

 

What I WILL not do, is blindly agree with everything the front office is doing and find an excuse for everything they do. Reading comprehension my friend. I said "proves that fans will go to any length to backup the decisions made by their beloved team. No matter how ridiculous." ... I am saying that some of the teams decisions, IMO, are ridiculous and shouldnt be blindly backed up. But questioned also. But of course you say, to be a diehard fan, you must simply backup your teams decisions and go with the ride.

 

You must be one of those people who believe if you dont agree with the war then your not really being an American.

 

Correction....Steinbach signed with the Browns. If anybody overpaid it WAS Dallas, who gave the same or more money to a fat stiff (Davis).

 

My apologies. That is what I meant.

[apuszczalowski]

Well I tend to believe the fans who have been watching him for multiple years. The same way other fans believed us when we told them that Mike Williams was a bust. I guess we were just a bunch of idiots huh? Because were just fans.

Sometimes fans are right, sometimes they aren't. The difference here was that Williams was released because the team knew he was a bust, Walker wanted out because he knew he would never succeed if he stayed, they team wasn't looking at getting rid of him. On a team as bad as the Raiders (a level the Bills never reached) there are times where some good players look worse because of their surroundings. So far, the only ones saying Walker was a turnstyle were some Raiders fans, and of course some of the Doom and Gloomers from this fine board

 

As far as McGahee goes. He IS a good player. No doubt. He has an extremely bad attitude and work ethic, but in the right situation he could become a good player. Just not on the Bills. As you said - Good Riddance.

Who really knows if Willis is a good player, all we know is that if properly motivated (i.e. he gets to go against Vilma and the Jets) he looks a bit better then average, otherwise he is a below average running back with potential, atleast we agree this was a good move

 

Peyton Manning, Barry Sanders, Frank Gore, Tomlinson, Jason Taylor ... etc. These are the players that have not won a SB or AFC/NFC Championship prior to last season. They should have been thrown out from there team also I suppose?

Agreed.

No because those players were not getting to an age where their skills would start to decline. The difference is, most of those players were playing on teams that were winning and succeeding, and just not able to get over the hump to reach the next level. The Bills have not been very successful recently and losing those players will not turn us from SB contenders to fighting for 1st overall. Losing a decent/good player on a bad team is not going to have the same effect as losing a good/great player on a winning team. Manning, Tomlinson, are the reasons why those teams are successful, Spikes, Fletcher, Clements are not the reason why the Bills are competing for the SB

 

Excuses. Draft a good LB, and let him learn under London for a year before shopping Fletcher around.

Thats great, if Fletcher wants to sign a one year contract to essentially be a "coach" to a younger player. Or whats your idea, Sign him to a multi-year deal, then cut him next season? That might be an idea for Takeo, keep him around since he's already under contract and let a new LB learn under him, but Fletcher wanted a multi-year deal, and the Bills talked to him about returning and he went to the Redskins.

 

I responded to this half/half arguement in multiple threads. Please look it up. This is simply NOT true, and its ridiculous how people keep posting this. He had a SOLID year, all the way through. Its simply that after midway he made plays that got him more recognized for the TV. When a CB is simply locking down his receiver and the ball is not being thrown to that receiver you dont think of that CB. Its an old saying in football "if a CB is doing his job, you wont know his name" (or something along those lines) ....

Sorry, I forgot about your man crush on Nate. So what your saying is that because no one threw towards him or "you didn't hear his name being called" that it means he was playing lights out and was a playmaker worth being the highest paid corner in the league? Nate was not a "Playmaker" last season. A playmaker gets on highlight reels from making interceptions, and making plays, Nate was just covering his man really well. If Nate was affordable, I would have been all for keeping him, but he was not the best CB in the league last season, and didn't deserve to get a contract that made him one

 

Would you like me to list other "great moves" that teams thought they were making when shopping an injured player who then comes back to go to the pro-bowl?

I'm not saying Spikes can't come back and be a Pro Bowler, but if he doesn't do it against the Bills, I could care less. Right now, Marv is trying to gain some cap space by dealing a guy who may not be able to come back and be the player he once was, and right now, I prefer the decission to try and et what they can for him before he is taking up cap space, and is forced to be a cut where Buffalo will get nothing for him. I wish TKO would come back and be the TKO of old, but its not looking good if the Bills are actively trying to shop himfor whatever they can get, since obviously they have more of an inside info on his status then we do.

 

Agreed. Although many believe we paid too high for him. We paid what the Cowboys paid Steinbach and Steinbach was rated higher.

Steinbach was rated higher, by who? the natiopnal media, the same people that rated the Dolphins as SB contenders last offseason, said Marv and Dick had probably the worst draft ever in the history of the NFL, and the same media that said the Bills would be lucky to win 2 games last year

 

Is it possible that Mike Williams was a stud tackle and the rest of the line just stunk? Sure it is, but doubtful. Just remember. $25 million dollars. Please remember that number when he is getting plowed over (hopefully he doesnt).

Maybe Williams was a stud tackle, but he proved in Buffalo, and in Jacksonville/Tampa that he was injury prone and lacked motivation. Would I rather have a guy that could be a good RG/RT on a bad line playing or a combo of Pennington/Preston playing the Right side like last year, so that opposing teams know that we are always going to be running to the left. The only thing I can say is that Marv and DJ liked what they saw in this guy to bring him in early, and award this guy a big contract after reviewing film on him

 

I dont complain about this move, I just simply dont know why people list him as a "key" pickup. He isnt. As you said, he is just a depth/backup player. That is all.

I guess he is a key pickup because he gives us veteran depth at the o-line, and is versatile enough to play any spot on the line. Just because he is a depth/backup player doesn't mean he cant be a key pickup

[Sketch Soland]

You dont know me, so dont act as if you do.

 

No, I don't know you. Where did I claim to know you? I took issue with your summary judgment of others' in what seemed to be a very condescending manner, as if there isn't a plethora of people on this board with a plethora of different opinions and approaches to being Bills' fans. You have one approach, no more right or wrong than any other. You do not hold the keys to the kingdom. Perhaps I attribute more condenscention to your posts than you intend, and if that is the case, then I apologize.

 

I am a diehard fan. I will go to games next season, just as I did the season before that and before that and before that ... etc. I will continue to hope with every inch of my being that they win every game or atleast enough to make the playoffs. I will continue to hope that they win in the playoffs and make the Super Bowl. And then I will hope that they win it. And I will besupporting them all the way.

 

Cool.

 

What I WILL not do, is blindly agree with everything the front office is doing and find an excusefor everything they do.

 

Good for you. Yet you assume others, such as myself, do blindly follow because they do not completely agree with your criticism, i.e. your opinion. You smugly say "You don't know me" yet you are very willing to turn around and pigeon hole me as being a certain kind of fan.

 

Reading comprehension my friend. I said "proves that fans will go to any length to backup the decisions made by their beloved team. No matter how ridiculous." ... I am saying that some of the teams decisions, IMO, are ridiculous and shouldnt be blindly backed up. But questioned also.

 

Yes, I understand your opinion. There are others, however, and they do not necessarily correlate with your own or fit into the two stark categories of "Your opinion" and "Blind Faith".

 

But of course you say, to be a diehard fan, you must simply backup your teams decisions and go with the ride.

 

Let's look at my initial post:

 

It's called being a diehard fan.

 

It's one thing to fault reasoning and rationale, but you scorn someone's fervor for the Bills like you're looking down your nose. How ridiculous is that?

 

Please tell me where in the above three sentences I state that "to be a diehard fan you must simply backup your teams decisions and go with the ride". You assume that I must be saying that because I take issue with the way you express your opinion. When I said "It's called being a diehard fan", that was referring to the majority of fans who don't feel the need to deconstruct the Bills maneuvers like you do with such fervor. They're just fans and of course have their opinions but do not wear it as a badge of honor that they ridicule the "ridiculous" decisions made by the Bills. You seem to put great stock in your opinion and its ability to slice through to "the truth" of the matter. That is certainly your prerogative, but it borders on hypocrisy to say "you don't know me" and then judge me or others by putting words in our mouths and labelling us as something or another.

 

You must be one of those people who believe if you dont agree with the war then your not really being an American.

 

I rest my case.

[daquix]

No, I don't know you. Where did I claim to know you? I took issue with your summary judgment of others' in what seemed to be a very condescending manner, as if there isn't a plethora of people on this board with a plethora of different opinions and approaches to being Bills' fans. You have one approach, no more right or wrong than any other. You do not hold the keys to the kingdom. Perhaps I attribute more condenscention to your posts than you intend, and if that is the case, then I apologize.

Cool.

Good for you. Yet you assume others, such as myself, do blindly follow because they do not completely agree with your criticism, i.e. your opinion. You smugly say "You don't know me" yet you are very willing to turn around and pigeon hole me as being a certain kind of fan.

Yes, I understand your opinion. There are others, however, and they do not necessarily correlate with your own or fit into the two stark categories of "Your opinion" and "Blind Faith".

Let's look at my initial post:

Please tell me where in the above three sentences I state that "to be a diehard fan you must simply backup your teams decisions and go with the ride". You assume that I must be saying that because I take issue with the way you express your opinion. When I said "It's called being a diehard fan", that was referring to the majority of fans who don't feel the need to deconstruct the Bills maneuvers like you do with such fervor. They're just fans and of course have their opinions but do not wear it as a badge of honor that they ridicule the "ridiculous" decisions made by the Bills. You seem to put great stock in your opinion and its ability to slice through to "the truth" of the matter. That is certainly your prerogative, but it borders on hypocrisy to say "you don't know me" and then judge me or others by putting words in our mouths and labelling us as something or another.

I rest my case.

 

I retract my comments toward you.

[daquix]

Sometimes fans are right, sometimes they aren't. The difference here was that Williams was released because the team knew he was a bust, Walker wanted out because he knew he would never succeed if he stayed, they team wasn't looking at getting rid of him. On a team as bad as the Raiders (a level the Bills never reached) there are times where some good players look worse because of their surroundings. So far, the only ones saying Walker was a turnstyle were some Raiders fans, and of course some of the Doom and Gloomers from this fine board

Who really knows if Willis is a good player, all we know is that if properly motivated (i.e. he gets to go against Vilma and the Jets) he looks a bit better then average, otherwise he is a below average running back with potential, atleast we agree this was a good move

No because those players were not getting to an age where their skills would start to decline. The difference is, most of those players were playing on teams that were winning and succeeding, and just not able to get over the hump to reach the next level. The Bills have not been very successful recently and losing those players will not turn us from SB contenders to fighting for 1st overall. Losing a decent/good player on a bad team is not going to have the same effect as losing a good/great player on a winning team. Manning, Tomlinson, are the reasons why those teams are successful, Spikes, Fletcher, Clements are not the reason why the Bills are competing for the SB

Thats great, if Fletcher wants to sign a one year contract to essentially be a "coach" to a younger player. Or whats your idea, Sign him to a multi-year deal, then cut him next season? That might be an idea for Takeo, keep him around since he's already under contract and let a new LB learn under him, but Fletcher wanted a multi-year deal, and the Bills talked to him about returning and he went to the Redskins.

Sorry, I forgot about your man crush on Nate. So what your saying is that because no one threw towards him or "you didn't hear his name being called" that it means he was playing lights out and was a playmaker worth being the highest paid corner in the league? Nate was not a "Playmaker" last season. A playmaker gets on highlight reels from making interceptions, and making plays, Nate was just covering his man really well. If Nate was affordable, I would have been all for keeping him, but he was not the best CB in the league last season, and didn't deserve to get a contract that made him one

 

I'm not saying Spikes can't come back and be a Pro Bowler, but if he doesn't do it against the Bills, I could care less. Right now, Marv is trying to gain some cap space by dealing a guy who may not be able to come back and be the player he once was, and right now, I prefer the decission to try and et what they can for him before he is taking up cap space, and is forced to be a cut where Buffalo will get nothing for him. I wish TKO would come back and be the TKO of old, but its not looking good if the Bills are actively trying to shop himfor whatever they can get, since obviously they have more of an inside info on his status then we do.

Steinbach was rated higher, by who? the natiopnal media, the same people that rated the Dolphins as SB contenders last offseason, said Marv and Dick had probably the worst draft ever in the history of the NFL, and the same media that said the Bills would be lucky to win 2 games last year

Maybe Williams was a stud tackle, but he proved in Buffalo, and in Jacksonville/Tampa that he was injury prone and lacked motivation. Would I rather have a guy that could be a good RG/RT on a bad line playing or a combo of Pennington/Preston playing the Right side like last year, so that opposing teams know that we are always going to be running to the left. The only thing I can say is that Marv and DJ liked what they saw in this guy to bring him in early, and award this guy a big contract after reviewing film on him

I guess he is a key pickup because he gives us veteran depth at the o-line, and is versatile enough to play any spot on the line. Just because he is a depth/backup player doesn't mean he cant be a key pickup

 

I agree with nearly everything you said. To answer your Nate Clements question: no I didnt just assume because his name wasnt being called. I WENT to the games and singled him out and watched him most of the game. If you go back through the archive, I have been doing this for a while. Nate was solid all year long. That has nothing to do with a "man-crush"

[apuszczalowski]

I agree with nearly everything you said. To answer your Nate Clements question: no I didnt just assume because his name wasnt being called. I WENT to the games and singled him out and watched him most of the game. If you go back through the archive, I have been doing this for a while. Nate was solid all year long. That has nothing to do with a "man-crush"

I don't know, you did admit you singled him out every game

 

So if you were watching Nate most of the game, how can you judge the rest of the defence then?

 

I'm just busting your balls about this. As I said, Nate is a good corner, top 5, but not the best, and he priced himself out of Buffalo. If Buffalo was running a more conventional defence, maybe they would have tried harder to re-sign him, but having a shut down corner is a luxury for this defence. And if it means having a shut down corner, and another mediocre o-line, or a corner that suits the scheme, and some decent o-linemen, I'll take the re-worked o-line.

[daquix]

I don't know, you did admit you singled him out every game

 

So if you were watching Nate most of the game, how can you judge the rest of the defence then?

 

I'm just busting your balls about this. As I said, Nate is a good corner, top 5, but not the best, and he priced himself out of Buffalo. If Buffalo was running a more conventional defence, maybe they would have tried harder to re-sign him, but having a shut down corner is a luxury for this defence. And if it means having a shut down corner, and another mediocre o-line, or a corner that suits the scheme, and some decent o-linemen, I'll take the re-worked o-line.

 

Faulty wording on my part I suppose. I didnt necessarily not watch the rest of the game. Nate's job was over in about 3 seconds or less.

[apuszczalowski]

Faulty wording on my part I suppose. I didnt necessarily not watch the rest of the game. Nate's job was over in about 3 seconds or less.

Freudian Slip?

[Cornerville]

Just take the best back available in the 7th round. As long as he has eyes that can see a hole that opens up and legs that can run through it, he's an upgrade.

 

Also make sure the Bills new RB can resist plugging other 'holes' and create rather then procreate

[Sketch Soland]

I retract my comments toward you.

 

No worries, we're all Bills fans in the end, that's all that matters

[The Jokeman]

McGahee's average against teams not named the Jets was 3.3. Again to counter your "a rookie would need to get more than 70 YPG" argument, I said it would be a RB-by-committee. And again, the O-line has been upgraded.

 

The Bills had their chance at Rod Hood and either didn't want him or he didn't want them.

Ironically enough A-train's average against teams not named the Jets was 3.3 last year so by your logic we could have expected him to gain the same amount of yards we got from McGahee last year if he were to receive the same amount of carries that Willis got which I doubt would happen in a real world scenario. Let's not forget that Addai was able to rush for 67.6 per game in a RB by commitee with Dominic Rhodes but did get the majority of carries in terms of total carries which I assume you're expecting our rookie RB to do? If not then the 2nd best rookie in terms of Rush per game would be Marcus Jones-Drew averaged for 58.8 yards per game who split time with Fred Taylor who averaged 76.4 yards per game with more carries. Yet again I don't see A-train averaging what Taylor did last year so again it might be moot. I will agree that the LG position has been upgraded with the signing of Dockery but question if Walker is an upgrade at RT. Yet for sake of arguement will say the O-line has been upgraded yet the question as to how much a difference Dockery will make. As Clinton Portis averaged 65.4 yards per game but I know someone will argue that he was injured in the preseason so let's instead look at Ladell Betts' average of 72.1 but of course one could argue that's on the low end as he didn't start the full season yadda yadda yadda. The truth is we could argue things at nausium and use stats any many ways to make an arguement I see the combination of our new line, Anthony Thomas and any rookie not named Adrian Peterson likely lesser than our O-line last year, Willis McGahee and Anthony Thomas until proven otherwise.

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I don't. Assuming that the rookie RB learns the playbook.