DazedandConfused

If the Bills had getting the best team they could for Buffalo fans as a primary concern of their's along with (or anything more than a healthy by-product of) making the maximum amount of bucks for the corporation and satisfying Ralph's rich guy desires then I think they would have: 1. Just as the made an outstanding assessment of Peters's undrafted talents and made the winning bid to get him as a UDFA, just as they again assessed Peters's skills properly when they got him onto the team on the PS but read the market correctly to see they had to sign him to the active roster or risk losing him, again just as they assessed Peters properly given the vocal endorsement of Mouse McNally, they signed him long term at more $ than Peters had ever seen to be their starting RT. This achievement alone was quite phenomenal and demonstrated hard work and great talent on Peters part to actually go from being a UDFA TE to be a starting RT in the virtual blink of an eye in football time. Great credit goes to JMac for recognizing Peters extraordinary skills and advocating and training this high achieving hard working player into this great achievement. Where the Bills seemed to go off track and there appears to have been a change in the approach of paying Peters for real world achievement was at the point where he made the jump to starting LT. This happened roughly around the time JMac retired so maybe he was not around to work to keep both Peters and the FO plugged into reality. Who knows for sure, I do not. However, there seems to be a point where when Peters made the real world achievement of winning the popularity contest voted on by league coaches, his player peers and fans (like any business the customer is always right if you want to be a successful business) the two parties were on different pages. Peters wanted to be paid LT money rather than RT money during the life of a contract that had several years to go. The Bills on the other hand had Peters under contract and said flat out that they were not going to renegotiate his deal. There is some logic to requiring Peters to prove himself with another year (or two) of very good play before the Bills forked over an extension and raise they were under no contractual obligation to do. However, there is also the reality that the Bills had to some extent made a player worth judgment (one that has since proved pretty wrong in most outside judgments) to re-sign Kelsay when his contract came up to a huge deal. This pissed off Schoebel to some degree as here was making the Pro Bowl and Kelsay got a chunk (he did not deserve IMHO) to play on the same DL. Schoebel refused to come to voluntary workouts, generally made hissy fit rumbles and the FO caved and extended him when they were under no contractual obligation to do so (ironically his sack total dropped and he got hurt but such is life in the NFL). Peters also having made the Pro Bowl and playing on the same OL as men like Dockery and even Langston Walker whom timing had given them bigger checks than Peters wanted to get LT money now. The Bills were under no obligation contractually to do so but in the case of timing having delivered an inconsistent with performance contract to Kelsay caved in to Schoebel's discomfort and extended him when they had no contractual obligation to do so. Its simply a guess on my part, but what seems like would have been consistent and smart management by the FO would have been to extend Peters deal to something like or approximating LT money when he had in fact qualified for the Pro Bowl as an LT. Would this have been a risk for the Bills? Sure. They might have gotten burned much like they did when they took the same risk with Schobel. However, it seems to me that if they had extended Peters for even the going rate for a top notch LT at the time when he was deemed the AFC LT starter the easily could have had him for $8 million a year (and actually as $6.5 or $7 million would have made Peters turdeating happy as this would have paid him more than Dockery or Walker and been a substantial raise over the around $5 million the starting RT level contract he was playing under. The Bills took a firm line they were certainly contractually entitled to take (though in terms of reality this was a departure from how they treated Schobel in a similar situation. Perhaps having caved to Schoebel the Bills decided they would not extend Peters when he was under contract. Yet, Peters had learned the lesson of watching an FO that had caved and bollicksed the Kelsay/Schobel deal. We actually can be thankful that Peters/Parker just made their demand and shut up, because the handwriting was on the wall that the Bills would likely cave once Peters won the popularity contest again and made the Pro Bowl (undeserved IMHO but obviously I am not in charge). Overall, I think the FO really handled this case brutally bad. Even worse they set the precedent for the next Bill with little leverage to stand up to the FO and as in the Peters case they engineered things so he got a $10 million annual cap hit deal (I am not sure where you got the $11 million figure but back in real life Peter's signed for 10 and it is not hard to see how his deal price kept going up and up as he gained honors from others and also any Bills strategy that may have involved Dockery leaning on Peters did not work. Maybe you sign Peters for $7 miillion 2 years ago and he comes back and asks for $11 when he makes the Pro Bowl again. Maybe he gets hurt like Schoebel did after we caved in to him. Could be, but life has its risks. IMHO the Bills were penny wise and pound foolish in the manner they did this negotiation and unfortunately the fans may pay the price. I hope not. I hope the seemingly reluctant Walker makes us fuuggabout Peters and the rookies Wood (I think he will be fine) and LeVitre (I wonder how this will work out this year) prove miraculously good enough to make this work. I doubt it but we will see.

From an agents perspective, the Bills have demonstrated with the way they caved in to Peters' demands that it pays to simply stick to your guns with the Bills FO. One of the more hilarious opinions that I have seen on TSW is that of folks who somehow seem to feel that we stood up to Peters by trading him. Actually, Peters demands were clear. He wanted a long term deal which gave him huge upfront bonus he had no right to under his existing Bills contract and a long term deal which paid him at a rate of a double digit annual salary. By trading him the Bills gave Peters everything he wanted. I know if I were an agent I would be hardpressed not to hold out until the last minute against the Bills who have demonstrated that they are so focused on saving a nickle up front they are not tough enough to risk committing a dime of future money. Since they would not commit to giving Peters a dime he quietly held out and was rewarded by getting a whole new deal with Philly that paid him a whole quarter. I think the Bills are going to being paying for a while with agents by demonstrating they are more than willing to be pennywise and pound foolish.

Not at all. In today's NFL due to injury and also to keep some contractual leverage with each player it is critical that a team not have only 1 player who can fulfill a particular role but both a plan A and a plan B in case the starter goes down. My sense is that the Bills plan to use the unusual and somewhat mutant rusher skills of Maybin in critical ways. However, if the Bills have no other player who can fulfill that role, it simply telegraphs to the other team what we are going to do when the role player comes in. We also are seeing right now Maybin's agent turn the screws a little on the Bills because the Bills will likely have little alternative but Maybin in the defensive scheme we are going to employ. I hope Ellis does well with the designated pass rusher skills he seems to have since if he can both play that role and also not be a liability as a DL player against RBs rushes then this greatly increases the flexibility of Farrell to run his scheme without being totally dependent on a particular player. We outside observers often get too locked into the notion that only a single player is going to be able to fulfill a single role. Not so. Just as it only makes sense for the Bills to risk drafting a Willis MaGahee when you already have a Travis Henry on your roster or for Philly, Vick coming to town does not mean the end of the commitmentt to Donovan McNabb, because in fact the only way that a team could risk taking on an idiot like Vick is if you already have a starting QB who is firnly ensconced in that role. Likewise, this same type of roster thinking applies to Ellis/Maybin. In large part it was because the Bills had plan B talent available in Ellis it made taking Maybin a smart lower risk thing to do.

I have not reviewed the tape yet but a cursory look showed: the Bills better press the pedal to the metal with the no huddle and 3 WR pressure as the young OL was still victimized by or had trouble with stunts or complex rushes, for example the blind side sack of TE happened in part as the young OL players got confused as to whom had who in a specific rush package. Wood looked good and went deeper in the game to get reps than others. LeVitre was reported to have struggled (again). Bell looked like a very young player and stupidly false started at least once. mcKinney also got his name called in a negative way a couple of times. Walker did not look bad to me out there (but I need to look again so we will see). The run calls were interesting as the Bills seemed to concentrate more on running inside than outside with the play calls (perhaps fearing the pursuit of Briggs and not wanting to test lateral mobility of Urlacher so they ran right up the gut. Overall, Trent had reasonable time to throw and it was reflected in a 10 for 10 performance. Tasker/Bentley remarked on tempo of no huddle being slow and OL was part of that as well (but play calls where WRs had to switch sides of field and them not lining up aggressively was big part of this slowness.

Actually its not just the size of the boat which is a key to productivity here its the motion of the ocean that counts. TO is most effective from what I have seen (mostly the highlights and a view of the stats since I have not made a habit of seeing Cowboy or Philly games) not so much in jump ball situations but in running slants and positioning his body to get the ball in the RAC. He is great at this but not what I tend to think of as big red zone (or green zone as the marketeers last night seem to want to confusingly dub it) weapon, but more of an open field potential deep strike threat. The key to the Nelson TD last night was that the Bears DC did not adjust to the Bills lining the rangy Nelson out as a WR and they let the young short CB try to guard him 1 on 1 when not only was he overmatched but did not play the obvious jumpball fade throw well at all. In a real game, I suspect the DC would have either put in a coverage package that anticipated this now obvious mismatch. or called TO when the mismatch became clear from the set-up. Worse comes to worst, the CB should have tackled Nelson and took the half the distance or even the endzone foul penalty rather than set up a situation where he ended up looking lik a shih tzu nipping at the burglurs ankles. ACL says Hardy likely will need a walker to run routes for a while. You are right the match-up problems presented are intriguing, but they simply reculate what can be done and still leave the same problem that Turk, Fairchild, the Bills back in the Marv days post Butch Rolle, the team has not called plays that seem very imaginative or well designed in the red zone. The last time the Bills simply invested a lot in size was when we had by far the weightiest OL in the league. This mutant demographic was nice but did not amount to much given the play deficits of this unit and the lack of imaginative implementation by Turk/Fairchild.

Given the quality of some of the recent TSW chatter and the tenor of the national discussion on health care I wouldn't bet that will be the case.

I wpo;d not go that far but clearly there is potential here for this to be the relatively stable cupboard of QBs we want. #1- Edwards- He has been very impressive for a young QB so far. He has shown very good accuracy with his throws and of great import after PatPat Bledsoe and run for your life Losman the quick decision making and quick release are a welcome boon (particularly with the challenge of a very extremely young OL). I think the complaints by some about his arm strength are reduced to simple whining and bleating by him doing fine in upper body strength tests at the combine. He has not established himself as a longball threat but I attribute this to bad footwork many young QBs have rather than some ability problem. Simply getting more snaps and practice should solve this problem. He has demonstrated more mobility than advertised and I think we have to be pleased the escapability he has shown do far. The negative though is whether he is actually injury prone (which I define as losing PT to injury 3 times in a 2 year period. In his two years Edwards has lost PT to an arm injury, to a concussion, and also a pre-season game due to an unreleased injury. Sort of meets the standard but sorta not. His history of injury in college makes the injury prone fear a real one so the jury is still out. #2- His pretty lengthy and credibly adequate job starting a bunch of games as a sub for Palmer indicates he is the real deal as a back-up. The job he did last night simply confirms this thought, We need someone who can step in and be credible for three games or less if needed. I am pretty comfortable with Fitzpatrick meeting that standard. Ironically, the best thing about him is that he is not a credible alternative to be a #1. The media and some vocal whining Bills fans have demonstrated they are not mature enough to deal with having two credible longterm starters at QB. Fitzpatrick is not a credible alternative as a long term starter. #3- Hamdan was perfect tonight. This football fan hopes we never use the disaster QB, He handled the team wekk leading us on a longish drive for a TD. The good news is that his one INT was so bad it will likely nip in the bud any future psychosis of Bills fans and let the coaches use him for the disater QB he is, To early to declare victory but the QB situation looks good,

Exactly! Many observers seem to focus on how a player will contribute as a position player, but unless this rookie is gonna beat out McGee or McKelvin (not! is the answer to this question) or the vets Youboity and Florence and one year guy Corner he is not going to contribute to this team in any way but on ST. The INTs were great (mostly because it shows him responding under pressure- the tip drill INT was most impressive) but if anything it gets him a spot on the PS. If he wants to make the active roster then ST and practice performance is what will get him on the roster or not.

No, it does not mean that. Much like the lead post in this thread drawing that conclusion would mean going off the deep end on a single piece of information and probably a faulty piece of info if one somehow concludes that Rhodes fumbling a punt means Parrish is a goner.

My sense is that the Bills might try to defend themselves by saying that you and they have difference in drafting philosophy. They might describe your approach as yes being a correct assessment of individual player skills, but the difference is they are not simply drafting talented individuals but they are drafting a team. What this means may be two things that speak to picking a player like Byrd when he is available. 1. Particularly for the early rounds where players like Maybin and Byrd were taken team need trumps the issue of contract leverage for an individual, As far as safety goes the Bills likely saw themselves as relatively thin at this key position in the Cover 2. Sure they could pick Brown and get good leverage at DE, but this likely leaves them with starting a player like Scott who surprised with his play last year, but the face he was a surprise to do as well as he did shows we are lacking the game breaker in the longer run we need there, 2, Also as far as DL goes we actually probably have full house even with the use of a rotation and McCargo disappointing so far. We're still a year away from declaring him a bust. If he sticks this pre-season we likely are cutting two players who made the roster last year (Ellis and Bryan). Add into this the heavy Bills emphasis on ST and having another safety capable player is more likely to provide ST help than Brown or a DL type player and the desire to build a team pushes the admitted greater contract leverage fpr a talented individual down on the priority list. I think this is actually sound thinking the Bills problem has not been the strategy but actually the implementation and not picking the right team overall.

You do a good job of stating exactly why Maybin is in a contractual position to maximize his take from the Bills. Of course some may wish that he took a more Bills oriented approach than a self oriented approach. However, taking such a collectivist stance would be un-American in our society which values individual rights over what Newt Gingrich called taking a communal view which he finds ideologically problematic. Maybin seems to clearly be practicing the Golden Rule, which under our economic system means he who has the Gold rules. The NFL overall seems to be rejecting the good ol American way where every owner approached life as an individual. However, beginning with the post mid-80s lockout when the old union heads led by Ed Garvey got their butts kicked, the NFLPA pursued a more socialistic system and threatened to simply decertify themselves and force the owners to pursue individual contracts with athletes. The owners read the handwriting on the wall and ran kicking and screaming from a free market approach to make the players essentially partners in the CBA which relied on a designated gross being free from sharing with the NFLPA. The last CBA saw the vision expressed by Gene Upshaw (and to some extent by Pete Rozelle) come to fruition and the players arguably became the majority partners of the NFL with the players receiving just over 60% of the total gross receipts in salary. Perhaps Maybin will suddenly go all communistic on us and sign his deal with the Bills to show he values the collective more than himself. However, I doubt this and Maybin will likely continue to be a good American and try to get all he can economically from his contract.

I think it is great if Vick actually does take actions to be a positive influence for kids. As a football fan, I do wish he would not mess up the entertainment vehicle of football to do what he feels are positive things. What Goodell and the Iggles have done in my view is take a perfectly wonderful sport and allowed the soap opera of Michael Vicks life to intrude further on this great game. I for one may watch the first general report they do on ESPN or in some pre-game about Vick, but I probably will not. I find the competitive spirit and the game itself entertaining and fun to watch. However, I find Vick's actions so brutal and inhumane that for me it takes away from the entertainment value of the product. I am overjoyed the Bills did not sign him because if they did, reminders of his inhumanity might well cause me to simply stop watching the team I love. maybe that is mere testimony to me not loving the team enough. Actually, I think it speaks more to how offended I am by the inhuman actions Vick profited from and reveled in. Forgive? Maybe under some circumstances. Forget? Never because of the brutal inhumanity of his actions. The NFL is marred for me by any mention of Vick and a reminder of his inhumanity.

I agree with the other negative reaction to this post stated above. In addition to that perspective, I also see this situation being quite different from the alcoholic in that this diseased person made a bad decision to drink and reduce their decision-making ability and even much worse someone else paid the penalty for their mistake. However, in Vick's case while the alcoholic did not set out with the idea in mind of killing or hurting someone or something, he destroyed his decision making ability and hurt someone. vick on the the other hand with all the mental and emotional decision-making he could muster decided to hurt and brutalize other beings for money and whatever perverse pleasure this gave him. I am quite willing to forgive someone for making an error that had the unintended effect of hurting someone AFTER or in conjunction with them paying the dictated penalty for their crime. However, Vick did not make a "mistake" which led to him doing unintended inhuman things. Vick specifically decided repeatedly to do inhuman things. To a significant degree I am not willing to simply forgive him even after he pays for his crime There is some additional punishment based in him feeling the shame from society which I think is more than appropriate in addition to the penalties he has served with loss of his freedom. I am content with society not punishing him by denying him freedom and imprisoning him more (though mere months in prison strikes me as a pretty light sentence for the inhumane acts he created- 10 years more in prison seems like a fair sentence to me for what he did but that is another issue). However the idea that he like all others who made mistakes deserves a second chance strikes me as wrong. He gave away his rights to a second chance by the sheer intended brutality of his acts.

Its too bad because in the end, the NFL is about entertainment through watching football. Its hard for me to see how anyone who cares about football finds watching the psychodrama very entertaining. This is particularly true it seems to me if you care about football.

A key to rational use of a poll as an indicator is not only found in having a reasonable sample (and internet poll is not a rational sample as one really has little idea what the sample really is) but in addition in the interpretation of the polling result. The report using this poll is double stupid both as the sample making up the poll is essentially unknowable. The untruth indicated by this unknowable sample is then further abused by the simply bizzare claim that it is some accurate claim of the opinions of Eagles fans. A well designed and well used poll can actually be a reflection of the views of some group Iggles fans, the general publics views could actually be well measured by a scientifically valid poll, but this one seems double stupid in its uncontrolled amd unexplained sample and the overstatement made as to what it shows.

My sense is that beating the Jauron dead horse seems silly since replacing him would in essence be done by the guy who set the tone and employed the team that hired him in the first place. That's Ralph who needed to go back to Marv to help him rectify the mistakes he made when he was rushed to hire TD after mangling the Butler situation. The attacks of Jauron simply are reduced to bleating and whining unless the at least acknowledge the causation of hiring Jauron is clearly Ralph and how he has mangled relationships with good folk back to the firing of Polian. Further he clearly has inserted himself (as is his right as owner) into personnel decisions such as his demonstrable poor assessment of how much Kelly had left which forced him into his cap flaunting walkaway payment of Jimbo of a million due to his rule flaunting handshake deal. Ralph deserves total credit for keeping the Bills here when there was a lot of money to be made if he had moved or sold them. However, reality mandates that one also recognize how badly he has mangled personal relationships with good football guys and thus mangled this team. Whining about Jauron (who contractually almost certainly will not be fired as Ralph has a clear history of underpaying HCs and trying to wiggle out of contracts he rightfully owes canned HCs like Wade. Calling for Jauron's ouster without even an acknowledgment that Ralph would need to totally change his stripes in hiring a new HC is just silly.

I would be quite surprised if even under the best individual performance circumstances for a rookie that his coverage role would be to cover Evans one on one straight up. The base of the Evans game is speed and simply cries out for a dt run over and under with a player marking him tight underneath thus heightening his chances that a single good fake of a stop is going to allow Evans to go and be open. If Butler looks good, then I would have little problem giving him the underneath and no he is likely gonna get fooled a couple of times by the vet but I have my deep cover guy watching him closely and ready to come over the top when my underneath guy got beat. If Butler is having problems though, I still might utilize him alot as the deep cover guy in the dt on Evans. The problem that the Bills have created though by acquiring TO is that if he is even remotely on his game he also demands a dt which marks him tightly because he can be so devastating with RAC after a quick slant. If both Evans and he require dts, it really demands a lot from opposing D as they know are allocating 4 players to the Bills base O that is forcing the opposing D to put a real premium on rushing the passer to give Edwards as little time as possible (and he will not need much if his first looks are to see if the CB on Evans is positioned to be vulnerable to the stop and go and/or the CB on TO is going to need to muscle him quick to stop the slant. This is why I argue that the Bills should put the pedal to the metal and actually go 3 WR as their base O because if Parrish is lined up in the slot the opponent has almost certainly had to assign their two strongest cover guys to watch whther Evans is stop and go or simply cutting off the pattern for an easy gain and also dueling with TO for body positioning on the slant. I am not bothered at all by complaints of lack of route discipline by Parrish because if the base O is forcing the opponents 3rd or 4th best cover guy on Parrish one on one, i would take that match up all day. The Bills are likely setting up to really push as the no-huddle seems to be our our base O. Opponents now are not only likely forced to zone up immediately reducing the pass rush to the base 4 DL, but they have no time to choose intricate stunts and run blitzes designed to take advantage of our very young OL. In fact the main choices Turk may be asked to make are when he is gonna go empty backfield and bring in Reed who simply was asked to do more than he is capable of to be a #2, but should simply chow down on LBs if he is in as our #4 WR. The alternative is likely even worse for the opposing D because with Lynch (Jackson or former starter Rhodes) in as the lone RB he now gets to face a spread D which has 5 opponents already moving backwards in pass D. This leaves our OL 5 on 4 with their blocking duties and leaves Lynch who almost never goes down with the first hit, one man to beat and then he can roll. I agree that TO is an idiot overall, but his MO in his past three stops has been that he is a great guy to all his first year and only after winning the hearts and minds of most teammates and fans he then begins to act like a legend in his own mind. The first year I am not worried much at all about TO and team cancer fears. Considering the Butler situation pretty quickly leads me to see that the individual play of an opponent is not the critical thing when considering the Evans/TO possibilities. The critical thing is how the opponents play as a team against a Bills base O that brings a bunch of weapons to bear.

Its a lot a cost/benefit analysis the player, the team, and their docs are making. Players can sometimes do some astounding things proximate to an injury and surgery, but will do them if they need to (witness McGahee who not very long after a massive series of injuries and surgical repairs was actually able to don the sweats and do an impressive public workout to demonstrate he was draft worthy). However, though this public showing and whatever private conversations between Bills and MaGahee's docs convinced TD to make him a 1st round pick, TD and the Bills still made the choice to hold WM out of his entire first year of potential play in order to give the knee the maximum time to heal without game day rigors. The bottomline from this singular example is that how a player looks and how his rehab is handled can be two very different things. MaGahee, Rosenhaus, and his team did a good job having WM do much more than expected in his first public workout (after the injury and resulting surgery I think us outside uninformed observers would not have been totally shocked if he needed an amputation and the fact he looked good working out was quite a surprise). However, just because he looked better than expected, as it turned out that the critical thing was that the Bills docs were convinced by whatever, that he had clean tears to non-weight bearing tendons and joints that a first round expenditure was justified (the Bills cost/benefit was also likely informed that they knew first hand and unlike anyone else in the NFL such as the team that traded a substantial draft pick to get him that he was likely in the road to prison after qualifying for the Pro Bowl as an alternate). So in essence, I think the Bills are in a situation where they likely fell little need to rush Hardy a long since arguably even a healthy Hardy is probably dueling with Johnson for the #5 or #6 WR role on the team (and ironically folks like Felton Huggins are being impressive in camp). Probably the main pressure felt to see Hardy play is from Hardy himself who though he is likely uncuttable is seeing other WRs really establish roles or themselves in our new no huddle O.

Again the Vick choice is one of upside versus downside. Upside- 3 years ago he was clearly one of the best athletes in the game and was quite capable of doing things on the field few or no others could do. He is quite entertaining to some Downsides- That was three years ago and it is quite difficult or impossible to say without signing him or at leasr bringing him in for a serious look what impact age and disruption of investigation. trial, and prison had on his play. If a team signs him they will be met with some mix of indictment and support. The bad thing is you definitely get this controversy and MAYBE you get the upside of good play IF he has something left AND you figure out how to use him well. He is negative entertaining to others The bottom line is that a gets a definite negative for signing him and a potential (but far from certain) positive if he produces. I do not see Ralph doing this

Thanks

You ask the right question at the end which is to wonder how Maybin fits in and ask will his talents make a difference. Particularly on the 3rd and 1 play the evil folks completed for a gain of 14, I could see Maybin either taking the role Kelsay had lining up as an LB and either pass covering the TE (despite his rushing chops a role he played some in college) or more likely having him play the Denney role where the successful chop block on him was a key to completing the pass. I know some folks will react with simple anger at Maybin for not signing, and just want to right him off. However, even if you want to consign him to football purgatory and question his on field skills die to this off-field issue, one has to recognize that the is a likely upgrade over Kelsay playing the LB role or over Denney as a passrusher. As with most players the question is not simply whether he is good but whether he is better than what we got at a particular role in the scheme and also how good is our plan B if he cannot play.

Amidst this barrage there actually are a number of points which I think there may be profit in discussing the football: 1. Modrak has actually demonstrated to me a pretty good ability to evaluate individuals, but from the top down (starting with Ralph) the Bills have shown an inability to build a successful team. On need only look at the last few draft selections were second day picks who should have not even turned out to be adequate players have turned out to be mediocre but passable contributing talents 5th rounder Williams is the archetype example. Where the evaluation has not been adequate has been in an inability to get an earthbreaking leader from any draft or through trade. Its disappointing that the Bills have not found the next Brice Smith, Jim Kelly, or Thurman in the draft or thru trade, but is anyone in the world surprised by this? I do not think so. The Bills have shown no ability to make a once or twice in a decade choice for the last decade or so. Regrettable, but hardly the grounds to declare the entire crew or DJ horribly bad. They are simply intensely medicore. The attack on McKelvin seems actually pretty nuts. My expectation is that a player drafted in the first round stands in reality a little more than a 50/50 chance of even being a starter after his first full season. The conventional wisdom that a first rounder should be a starter his first year is certainly doable and a clear wish. Here in the real world though it tends to break a little more than half of first rounders are actually starters by the end of the their first year (and the heavy bias is for top 10 picks with them being elite players chosen by bad teams as being the lead factors. McKelvin actually looks like a pretty good choice when one looks at objective criteria. he clearly is a proven contributor due to his demonstrated abilities as a return guy. And actually, due in strong part to the Bills being weak in CB elite talent (Clements flew the coop to a beyond market value contract and starter Greer also FA[ed his way out of town, McKelvin is also likely to meet the mark of being a starter in his second year. Your declaration of him as bust as a starting CB seems pretty outlandish if you base this on one pre-season game and totally want to ignore his return game. One place the conventional wisdom is right is that a player needs at least 3 full seasons before a credible bust accusation. McKelvin is far from a bust by any reasonable objective measures. Agreed he is not a top 10 talent but why is this a surprise as he was not drafted in the top 10. As far as the Bills other recent first round picks McKelvin- too early to tell but so far so good as he clearly contributes on ST and actually will likely start in 09 though this is by default as is the case with most mediocre teams Lynch- made Pro Bowl as an alternate in his second year- schitzy personality problems are the major reasonable indictment of him as a player. Not Thurman yet but after only two years one has to acknowledge two pretty solid on field years along with the outside the lines idiocy. Whitner- a reach for an S at #8, but given that he has performed better than the safety taken at #7 and the clear Bills needs at SS given their overarching mismangement I think he did not have the breakout year the storybooks would have wanted last year but its hard to mark this down as a bad tactical evaluation it is simply failed strategy which starts at the top and wends an awful course through Brandon and TD before one can lay fault on Modrak or DJ. McCargo- failed pick, but a recognition of failure here must be accompanied with a recognition of a good pick in rounf 5 finding a medicore talent to replace the McCargo failure 2006- No first round pick though it was traded away for JP, Here the failing is equally or more largely IMHO bad player development coaching rather than bad evaluation in getting Losman. If not Losman who would you have picked to be our next starter at QB? The bottomline is that Modrak has not produced a winner here in Buffalo, but I think it goes a bit beyond reality to lay the record at his rather than at Ralph's door. 2. The switch to Hamgartner to find a new savior at C looks like a longshot to me as well, but I think there are way too many changes going on with two rookie guards and non-full year starters at best in the two tackle slots (at best since it was actually youngster Bell rather than out of place vetersn Butler at the RT slot. Yet, given all the changes it still is way to early from one game to declare this try a failure though I doubt it will ever be the answer to all our issues. The comparison to Fowler is interesting if only that the complaint about Fowler (as said in a post above at least get the name right) was that he was a bit light and here is Hamgartner even lighter. The proof in the pudding will be seen over multiple games in whether the Bills can get any positive push on short yardage with an even lighter Center and if they do it will likely be because Hamgartner proves himself to be a refuse to lose leader who gets the most out of Walker and Butler/Bell and leads Woods/LeVitre to be the right kind of player. i doubt this will work but actually have more faith in Woods being a quick study at C than Hamgartner answering all fears and questions. 3. I for one do not see us profiting from adopting a BB approach with out BB himself there to lead and cheat his way to glory. If the Pats pick-up fits into their team its a good one. If he does not fit into the way they operate he may be a very good player but it would be a bad pick-up. Likewise with the Bills, just because a player performs well elsewhere does not necessarily mean he would be a good get for us. 4. Again it is way too early to declare Schobel toast. In fact coming off a season ending injury last year I actually would demand that he go slow and take it easy in his first exhibition game back. Unfortunately we need to see how he performs in the real game before making a sane judgment. 5. Evans has not demonstrated the productivity yet to merit being treated as definite Pro Bowl talent. Yet, it seems willfully ignorant to me to deny his speed (which he has) and also deny that he has in fact shown a little bit of a good nose for the ball. He needs to breakout at some point soon if he really is that good, but it strikes me as fairly foolish if the Bills media and fan fall into this as a either TO is great OR Evans is great. The opportunity here is that if both make each other more productive players. I think it is pretty clear that part of Evans problem last year was that the #2 WR be it Reed, Hardy, or the old version of PP offered little threat, The thing most impressive about Evans numbers last year was the he pulled them off facing dts and without the opposing D being distracted at all. Likewise TO, he pulled off what he did last year with the Boys having Witten at TE as the most credible alternative threat so TO produced what he produced without the Boys having an effective #2/ Now their old #2 is their #1 and we will see how they do. Unless Evans and TO are teammates they are both screwed. 6. I also think the Peters trade was simply a sign of poor player realtionship development and management by this team. Even if you argue that Peters was always a putz then this is an indictment of the team for going out of their way to attract as a UDFA a putz. Also as far as you as a poster. You do raise a number of interesting issues, but as far as your commentary about these interesting issues, don't let the door hit you on the way out. Good bye and good riddance.

I asked myself the same question when YOU turned this into a political thing by describing the pro-Vick over discussion of this issue as a liberal thing. If one wants to make inaccurate political statements about this, describing pro-Vick forces as conservatives like Dungy or folks who argue for a free market rather than the liberal group PETA's anti-Vick position would seem to be a closer to the truth inaccuracy than you making it a political thing by describing the motivation as liberal. Political views are definitely an important motivating factor for folks actions. The problem for ideological commentators and idiots like the Fox News folks is that they seem to forget that politics is far from the only (or even the main) motivator in most folks thinking. Vick is repugnant not due to ideology but because his actions were reprehensible and many liberals and conservatives are repulsed by them and do not find them entertaining. This lack of entertainment value is the most likely reason I think he may not get a contract offer.

Liberals are dead set against Vick as reflected in the position of groups like PETA who flat out want to see Vick barred from letting the free market determine whether they want to root for Vick or not. Do you support the free-market position of letting Vick back into the league or instead support the code pinkish liberal stand of group like PETA? The problem here is that reality is just a different thing than the simple left vs. right or liberal vs. conservative views that the simple minds who run the media want to cram their viewers into.

The posters misread on who got the INT actually underscores the point he was making that the key thing on that play was not which Bill made the late non pretend pretend game INT but the fact that it was someone with the Mortenson name who threw. If it was in fact a horrible pass all the better as the blame squarely is on Mort and no great play was required to send this pretender to the booth where folks who seem to know little about the game roam around collecting big paychecks.