Coach55

SKOOBY, I am with you. From a talent perspective, we should be firing on all cylinders. It appears at OTA's, they have been using Jackson at WR as well as RB. If Turk can find a way to spread the offense and get the top 5 Offensive Threats on the field at one time consistently (Lynch, Jackson, Evans, Owens and Nelson) while working in Parrish, Reed and Rhodes, this offense could be absolutely explosive. The onus is on Turk. Trent will deliver. As for your comparison of Trent to Warner, I actually think Trent will ultimately be a better QB than Warner. Warner really only had 4 quality seasons over his career and was 28 when he hit his stride. Trent is entering his 3rd season at 26, which is typically the breakout season for young quarterbacks. Has a quick release, pocket presence, leadership skills and passing accuracy. If he can push the deep ball (he has the ability, just hasn't used it), we could definitely see some fireworks this season.

I would like to think that DJ has learned from his mistakes. The talent on Bills is definitely playoff material this year. If the coaching is there, they are in the playoffs. Coaching cost us at least 3 games last year (Cleveland, Jets, San Francisco) and will probably cost us 1-2 again this year. The question is - is the team good enough to overcome the bad calls. I think so.

But the problem is that once again the Bills have an offensive line that has never played together before, and only one starting lineman has ever blocked for Trent Edwards before and that is Langston Walker. This guy has no credibility. I guess Brad Butler either doesn't start or hasn't blocked for Edwards...

Agreed. And 0-16 is worst case scenario.

Agreed. You win some, you lose some. If coaches/management were that good a judge of talent, Tom Brady would have been a 1st round pick and Mike Williams would have went undrafted.

I wouldn't compare Hardy to Reed. Reed was an absolute phenom. Marques Colston was also a 7th rounder who was an opening day starter. I am not saying it can't be done, but the further down you go in the draft, the less likely you are to get playing time in light of ability.

There are definitely examples - but Hardy needs to show us something to stick around.

Below are all of the WR 2nd round picks from 00-05. I have rated them the following manner: 1. All Pro 2. Quality Starter 3. Weak Starter or decent #3 4. A player that for some reason overstayed their welcome in the NFL 5. A bust Dennis Northcut 4 Todd Pinkston 4 Jerry Porter 4 Quincy Morgan 4 Chad Johnson 1 Robert Ferguson 2 Chris Chambers 2 Jabar Gaffney 3 Josh Reed 3 Tim Carter 5 Andre Davis 4 Reche Caldwell 4 Antwann Randle El 3 Antonio Bryant 3 Deion Branch 2 Taylor Jacobs 5 Bethel Johnson 4 Anquan Boldin 1 Tyrone Calico 4 Devery Henderson 3 Darius Watts 5 Keary Colbert 5 Reggie Brown 3 Mark Bradley 5 Roscoe Parrish 3 Terrence Murphy 5 Vincent Jackson 2

My point was to show that WR drafted in the first 2-3 rounds get the benefit of more playing time in their early years. Cris Carter, for example, is a player that did not produce his first year (5 rec, 84 yds), but he was 4th rounder significantly hindering his PT early.

Johnson was not highly touted which made it more difficult to obtain playing time. When on the field, he showed good route running and play making ability. If you looked at his numbers with respect to the amount of plays he was on the field, his stats would prove to be dramatically better than Hardy. As for being a pro bowler, I am not stating you need to be a pro-bowler or be cut, however in my opinion your #5-6 receivers should either be a special teams player or a young player who has the potential to blossom into a starter. I feel based on what Hardy has shown, at best he will be a #3/situation receiver. I am also not saying that he will definitely get cut, but if I had my choice between him and Johnson, I would take Johnson every day of the week.

Also, I would like to see your list of players that are pro-bowlers and HOF players that did not produce in their 1st year AND were not drafted in the first 3 rounds.

I am not stating that a WR should be set and polished after their first year, however a player should show glimpses of quality (i.e. Steve Johnson). Hardy failed to produce in pre-season last year, nor was he able to take advantage of his huge physical superiority due to his poor route running and lack of body control. I agree that players take several years to develop, but rarely does a top rate WR have as poor a first season as his. He only had 9 receptions for 87 yds. You may be able to develop him into a #3, but I doubt he will ever be even close to pro-bowl material.

He proved nothing in the 14 games he was there. On top of which, now he is hurt, further impairing his ability. Just because he was picked in the 2nd round doesn't mean he deserves to stay. Should we have kept Erik Flowers because he was a 1st, how about Tavares Tillman - he was a 2nd. Bucky Brooks? Todd Collins? John Parella? People get too caught up with the fact that Hardy was a 2nd rounder. Getting drafted high doesn't mean you're good. It is more likely that you are good, but doesn't mean you are good.

Right now Hardy is #6 on the depth chart. Assuming they keep 6 receivers, there is chance that Justin Jenkins will be kept for Special teams purposes putting Hardy on the hot seat. Given his injury and the 1 year nature of TO's deal, I would expect the team to put him on the PUP list and develop him with the practice squad. It gives them optionality, if he starts to develop, to activate him midway through the season.

Drayton Florence James Hardy - if they don't put him on the PUP list. Nic Harris - will go to practice squad

Sterling Sharpe - possibly the best ever had injury not shortened his career.

Here's the deal. IF, and I mean IF Turk is a decent coordinator, this line should gel and be an immediate wrecking crew. In order for them to do so they need to strip down the blocking complexity by streamlining the playbook. If you keep things simple and have the players execute you will be fine. If you make things complicated, mistakes are made, plays are busted and TE gets hurt. One reason why the early 90's Bills line was so good is the blocking complexity was about as simple as it comes. The offense had a simple playbook that was all about execution. If you properly execute, the defense can even know what you are doing and you can still make progress. The key is for Turk to put them in a position to properly execute...

I don't like the concept of both teams being required to touch the ball. By allowing both teams to be required to touch the ball, you eliminate the sudden death concept. Football is the only true "team" sport, where there are players who play who never touch the ball and every player has a specific role and thus you are only as strong as your weakest player. Unlike other team sports where a strong player can carry a weak team around him. (A good pitcher, strong shooting guard, good goalie, etc). Your defense/special teams will need to perform to get the ball back, not rules. If both teams score on their first touch, do they both get the ball at least 2 times? The format doesn't work.

Don't know. Anyway to reach him?

Another thing you can do is have the Week 1 game be a rematch of the Super Bowl the year before.

Another hotbed topic with the Owners is how to handle Overtime. Currently, the team that wins the coin flip wins most overtime games and people are very irate that the game should not be decided by the coin flip. Interesting point of note - this did not become an issue until they moved the kickoff back from the 35 to the 30. Prior to the move is was about a 50/50 split on who won overtime and the coin flip was never an issue. The reason they moved it back in the first place was to "increase excitement on the kickoffs" and "increase scoring", which worked. Although it is only 5 yards, from a field position standpoint it is huge. If the move the kickoff in OT back to 35 (not all the time), it would effectively level the playing field and solve the OT woes without any major format changes.

The owners are in constant discussions to expand the season to 18 games, eliminating 2 preseason games. I have a better idea. The league should consider eliminating 1 preseason game and increasing the season to 17 games. Each team would then play 1 non-divisional game at an international destination (so each team would have 8 home, 8 road and 1 independent). 2 games would be played each week from week 4 through 10, with 1 game in week 1 and week 11. Each team that would be playing in an overseas game would be either coming off or going into a bye week to allow for the extra travel time. Adding an international game would help the league in so many ways: 1. It will increase league revenue by having a 17th regular season game 2. It will increase the NFL's world exposure (NFL Europe failed because the level of play sucked) 3. The players would enjoy the overseas game (many of the players have never travelled outside of the US and it would benefit them both socially and culturally) 4. It will allow US Expatriates to enjoy the world's greatest game live Just think you could have annual games in London, Paris, Berlin, Barcelona, Madrid, Mexico City, Prague, Rome, etc. Basically any major city that has a soccer stadium with capacity of 75,000+. You would need to contain to destinations less than 8-10 hours away (i.e. Asia wouldn't work unless it was 2 west coast teams).

I remember back in the day when the Bills were hurting with injuries back in the early 90's and Walt Corey converted the defense into a 2-5 to get the best players on the field.

I completely agree. It doesn't matter what defense that you run, it matters about exploiting the talents and hiding the weaknesses of the players you have. Great coaches build a system around the players. Crappy coaches force their players into a system. Practically every team in the NFL has the talent to be a playoff caliber team. The problem is coaches don't know how to exploit their players.

Agree - I just thought it was interesting commentary, however didn't feel it warranted a new topic.