FightinIrishBills

Honestly, I'd be curious to see the 1st down statistics, mainly in the 2nd half. It seemed that whenever the Bills had the ball on 1st, it inevitably ended up 2nd and 12 or something to that degree, with the point being that the team was unable to generate anything meaningful out of either the pass or the run (or so it seemed). It was especially painful to see Fred Jackson get stuffed on 1st down. While he's extremely talented, it made me wonder what Marshawn's power running style would have yielded.

Is that you, Buddy?

Great, great song. My nominee:

They're both stellar QBs with great careers ahead of them. The immediate choice would be Luck, but boy I sure wouldn't mind seeing Newton behind center. Don't know if you guys saw that pass he made deep down the field as he was getting chased out of bounds. Complete frozen rope with coverage all around. I let out an audible gasp just watching the replay.

She must be a damn fine woman. It would take an angel in the form of Christina Hendricks bearing a divine mandate from The Big Man to get me to switch my devotion from the Bills. And even then I'd give it a second thought.

We're sharpening our pitchforks for the next over-paid, under-performing LT the Bills bring in.

1.) Consider this: If the Bills thought that Spiller was significantly more valuable than any other player available at that point, as their draft stock of him was extremely high, then it would make sense for the team to take said player. If, however, we're talking about a scenario where the team does not significantly value that one player relative to the rest of the field, then it might make more sense to choose a player at a position that they consider of greater need. Hence, the strategy of taking the best player available doesn't apply in all situations. 2.) First off, you're right about Carrington being a healthy scratch. I was under the wrong impression and thought he was injured earlier in the year during training camp. That being said, I believe that, just as it was with the Trent Edwards situation, Gailey and Edwards are allowing the players on the roster to get a shot playing within their new system. If we're thinking of this year as a rebuilding season (which I've unfortunately resigned myself to at this point), then it makes sense that the Bills would like to see what they have to work with as they move forward. McCargo was a 1st round pick after all; I don't blame Edwards for seeing how he would look in his 3-4 scheme. I think that we'll continue to see a purging of ineffective players from this organization as we move into the future. I also believe that we'll see Carrington get his shot at live action. However, it was important for them to see what they've got talent wise. One argument may be that they have a whole off-season and game-film to evaluate these players; however, as the Trent Edwards' example has shown, a player can be a pre-season hero and then wilt when the bullets start flying. And judging the game film from last year isn't very effective when they're running a different scheme with different players. Hence, it makes sense to let the experienced players on the roster get their shot early on to see what they have to offer. Having said that, I think it's time to inject some of the younger blood into the roster, although you may not see that until the last 8 games or so of the season. And if Carrington just isn't good enough to play on the field? Then the team whiffed on that pick. However, I don't blame them for trying to find the right players to fit the new system they wanted to install. 3.) It's a really tricky business talking about draft value. Every team obviously has their own big board, every analyst has their big board, every fan has their idea of what certain players value should be (believe me, I was one of Brady Quinn's biggest partisans. And while I don't think he really got a fair shake with things, he's proven that he probably doesn't have the skill to be a viable NFL starter). So allow me to add the caveat that Spiller was the absolute best player available on the Bills' draft board, and most likely the draft boards of other NFL teams. Either way, I don't believe that the Bills valued any of the OL players available on the board enough to justify reaching with their pick over a talent in Spiller that they so highly regarded. I was mistaken in thinking that it was fairly obvious that Spiller was viewed as a rare talent. Seems as though it was debatable at the time, although my memory alone tells me that praise for Spiller seemed nearly universal before the draft, with certain analysts saying that he could be the most talented player in the draft. But credit to you for finding an article backing up your point. However, you mention that in hindsight, Oher was a top 10 pick and so was Bulaga, even though they weren't drafted in those spots. Unfortunately I think this is a case of hindsight being 20/20, despite your claims to the contrary. Teams drafting obviously work with the information that they have on hand; in that very same draft, wouldn't everyone have said that Andre Smith of the Bengals was not a consensus top 5 pick? The truth is, there are a lot of factors that go into drafting a player, and it takes a keen eye to discern which players will thrive on your team and which ones won't. Figure out which factors are the most important is the difficult part. However, Bulaga was an iffy proposition for a lot of teams. Nobody was really sure if his footwork and his upper body strength was good enough to justify drafting him higher than where he was taken, IIRC. 4.) You've made some good points, but here's where I really think you're veering off into conjecture. We're dealing with an extremely small sample size of data here in evaluating Spiller (as well as Bulaga and any of the other players out of this draft class). If, by season's end, Spiller continues to have the limited role on offense that he's shown thus far, then yes, you would be justified in saying that he was a bad pick. However, in keeping with the theme of "tryouts", I believe that Lynch and Jackson were both given their auditions both to work in Gailey's offense in real play and as showcases for other teams. While Marshawn looked strong running the ball, I believe Jackson has better awareness for finding gaps and blocking. Bottom line? There's no way right now that Spiller can be said to be a bad pick.

I might look like a starting TE too if I had Tom Brady chucking throws my way.

Ha, I was going to remind you of the prolific Jonathan Paul, but I see you caught yourself. I'm only in favor of drafting a QB if his name is Luck or Mallett. Otherwise, build up that DLine however it can be done.

Now you're practicing revisionist history here. Believe me, if it weren't so hard to find articles regarding individual player's stock from the 2010 draft, then I would be able to back up my points a little better. However, Bulaga's stock was definitely falling before the draft; hence, he dropped down to #25. Meanwhile, with regards to Carrington over Jerry, you have to assume that the Bills knew they would have to re-load on defense for their new scheme. It wasn't, however, a massive gaffe as you seem to be saying, considering Carrington was injured and inactive through the first 3 games of the season. I won't even dignify the Spiller comments. We both know that you're in the wrong here.

1.) RE: Offensive tackles. Please explain to me, in detail, who you would've taken to solve the problems at OL and LT. Who would you have picked up in free agency? Flozell Adams? Who would you have taken over Spiller? The Bills are notorious for their reach picks, and yet, when they take the absolute, no doubt highest player available on the board, they're getting bashed. Fact is, Marshawn was on the outs one way or the other, with either his contract situation or his off-the-field behavior. CJ Spiller was a rare gem of a college talent, the type I believe Chan Gailey and Buddy Nix would really like to build a team around. 2.) No, we got rid of Jason Peters because he: A.)was underperforming, B.)was being overpaid with regards to his poor performance, and C.)wanted out of Buffalo. Please let me know where this mythical "Offensive Tackle University" is. If you're implying that just because Peters wasn't a stud LT coming up through the ranks doesn't mean he wasn't paid fairly for his high performance, then that's just foolish. Good players get paid. 3.) RE: Edwards. Well actually, if you remember correctly, it was the hold-out of the above mentioned LT who was, arguably, seriously detrimental to the development of Trent Edwards. Do you really think that the O-Line would have looked nearly as bad as it did 2 years ago if Peters hadn't held out? Regardless, the QB/OL debate is as old as the chicken/egg argument. A good quarterback has to be able to make plays. It was clear that in this point in his career, Edwards no longer had the vision or even desire to make plays happen here in Buffalo. Whether he's able to do that somewhere else is yet to be seen. 4.) Tell you what, I'll let you go coach a pro defense where you have to evaluate the talent at hand and then effectively implement a defensive scheme. In my opinion, the defense was going to look a lot worse this year for circumstances beyond the 3-4. Folks don't like to admit it much, but losing Aaron Schobel was a big hit for this unit. Meanwhile, injuries to key players, especially the linebacker corps, definitely hurt. I'm not particularly impressed by the defense so far, but 4 games in, I'm not going into hysterics. They hung in there with the Dolphins in game 1, and played a solid first half against the Packers. Meanwhile, both the Patriots and the Jets have proven this year to be legitimate playoff, if not championship contenders. No, it doesn't completely excuse poor performance, but forgive me if I'm willing to ride out some of the (what should have been) expected growing pains. Obviously the LBs are circumspect, but I chalk a lot of that to injury at this point. What moves would you have liked them to make? Trade Marshawn for another mediocre LB (A.J. Hawk)? The secondary has been serviceable up to this point, considering the lack of a pass rush. 5.) You're right. Put up names on a dartboard and chuck darts up there. That'll get you a 6 game winner. Yeah, it's trite and reeks of Jauron, but it's true: it is extremely difficult to win in the NFL. Honestly, a lot of it is coaching and a lot of it is luck. You can only scout so much, but you don't really know how certain styles of play are going to gel together. There have been some great individual talents, but I truly believe that nothing great exists in a vacuum. It takes a lot of moving parts to get an NFL team functioning at a high level. The Bills need to find the parts to put that together. 6.) RE: Draft picks. Well, what do you propose we do about those injuries? I truly believe that a good deal of the problem with the Jauron era fell in the realm of poor strength and conditioning. However, we only figured that out over 5 years. The sample size with Gailey's drafting is simply too small to make an adequate judgment. If you recall, however, Easley was going to be a component of the offense into this coming year. Wang was definitely going to be part of the OL rotation in some way. Danny Batten was also getting looks. And I think we'll see more of Troup as the season goes on. Same goes with Carrington. I will give you that the Bills have had a poor history with drafting this past decade, at least in the first round. But it's a knee-jerk reaction to judge this latest draft class 4 games into the regime's first season. Gailey and Nix didn't draft those guys, so at least try to judge them on their merits. If that rant made you feel better, than by all means, go ahead. But don't expect us all to buy what you're selling.

Bart: A conspiracy, eh? You think they might be involved in the Kennedy assassination in some way? Homer: I do...now.

This. I like to differentiate appropriately whenever I talk about sports suffering as opposed to real suffering. I'd rather suffer my whole life with my awful football team than to be a Jew in Germany in 1945, for instance.

I don't really read Peter King's weekly columns other than to see the hilarious write-ups of them on the Kissing Suzy Kolber blog. But I just checked his weekend pickoff, and he has the Jags over the Bills by a score of 20-9. Sorry Peter, I know the Bills are a bad team right now, but if this team puts up only 9 points on the 30th ranked defense in the league, then I think we really are sunk. In the meantime, this is just an asinine prediction by a guy who really doesn't know that much about football. I'm not saying that we'll win, mind you. But our offense was able to do a good job against a porous NE defense and then got shut down by a championship caliber Jets defense (I don't count Trent Edwards' games in regards to evaluating the offense, for obvious reasons). I don't like to dabble in absolutes, but there's no freaking way we only score 9 on the Jags. Link: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/10/07/weekend.pickoff/index.html?eref=sihp

I honestly could not imagine who we could get rid of that would upset the fans that much at this point. Lee Evans? Didn't really make the case for himself with those awful drops. IIRC, this was a problem in pre-season and training camp with Evans. Paul Posluszny? I doubt he would be missed too much. Only young talented players like Jairus Byrd and CJ Spiller would cause a much-deserved uprising/mass suicide.

Or, in less moralistic tones, Marshawn didn't fit the offensive scheme Gailey has in mind moving into the future. In a lot of ways, Marshawn was somewhat of an albatross for this organization. Yes, he has those off-field issues hanging over his head. But as a player, Marshawn had to be get time on the field. You don't let a first round pick ride the pine. I'll even give you that so far, he looked like the toughest back out there. But if having to game-plan to play Marshawn is detrimental for the development of the rest of Gailey's offense, then it's time to let him go. Also consider his contract situation and his desire to leave Buffalo (compounded by his unhappiness at having to split carries 3 ways). At least this isn't a Willis McGahee situation. I have no illusions that this year will be anything more than a rebuilding season, but I'll give Chan the benefit of the doubt--for now. Let him develop his team the way he sees fit.

I do agree with your overall point, but Jay Cutler would like to have a word with you about bad O-lines.

I live in Buffalo. Point not taken? I'm sorry, Ralph Wilson maybe foolish and not able to properly run a football franchise, but give the man just a little credit. He could've left Buffalo YEARS ago. I'm not old enough to remember the '70s or mid-'80s, but I do know this team was bad. Very bad. Just because a team is bad doesn't mean the owner is trying to strip anyone's pride.

Haha now I'm pretty sure you're just trollin'.

No. Toronto isn't Buffalo. I root for the Bills because they're my home team. The Bills are integral to this city's identity. It just wouldn't be the same. I would watch the NFL for the exciting players, but forget about any incarnation of the Toronto Bills (it makes me sick just typing those two words together).

Wow. Now you're talking about my old hood. NEVER thought I'd see that mentioned on a message board. Weeeeiiiiirdddddd.

I just read a really interesting interview on the Buffalo Rumblings blog with one of SB Nation's draftniks, Dan Kadar. Like many other people who scout college players, he admits to having rated Locker WAY too high. In fact he claims that the only blue-chip QB prospect out there is Andrew Luck. My question is, if Luck isn't available, in which direction do the Bills go with their 1st round pick? What's really interesting is that, so far, there are no demonstrably elite offensive tackles this year; in many of the mocks I've seen, there's not an OT taken until late in the first round. If the Bills are in a high enough position, I would love to see this team take DE/OLB Robert Quinn out of North Carolina. The guy's a pass rushing monster, which is obviously an area of huge need. I wouldn't mind Georgia WR AJ Green either to give some kind of spark to our offense. Any thoughts? Here's the link to the Rumblings article, by the way: http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/10/2/1724169/rumblings-draft-scouting-kadar-interview-week-5-preview#storyjump

Don't forget all of the hype about the QBs that were part of this recent draft class. Bradford, Clausen, McCoy, Tebow, Pike, LeFevour, Snead, etc. were being talked up ad nauseum. Time will tell, but with the exception of Bradford and the unexpected Tebow move, it appeared that teams weren't as high on that crop as the media was.

Have you been watching the team this year? Right now I think just about any TD should be cause for excitement.

Then your thread title is highly misleading, because it leads one to believe that the reason that Locker would go 4 for 20 would be to avoid an unfavorable situation in Buffalo. And I'm really not sure what you mean about chilling out the rhetoric. While I'm a huge homer and big-time optimist, I think a lot of fans have a right to be upset with the team. Nobody expected this team to be barn-burners but it can be really disheartening to see that this is basically a rebuilding year, a song and dance we all know too well out of OBD. Bottom line--these guys are elite athletes. They've been dealing with criticism all of their lives. In many cases it's probably what drove them to prove their critics wrong and push their game to the next level. You don't get as far as the NFL by being thin-skinned and afraid to be called out. Trust me, there's only one way to end the constant parade of critics; to quote the great/scary-looking Al Davis, "Just win baby."